2
$\begingroup$

My question has been put on hold as unclear. I can't understand why. I think I gave sufficient definition of my question and of its purpose.

Some further explanation of why it appears unclear would be most welcome, as otherwise I don't see any way of improving it.

Maybe it depends on my being rather novel in SE (7 months) so that I perhaps have not yet fully understood its policy and spirit?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ To me, it feels like you're "too close to the metal" to see the question in isolation - you know what you wanted to say, and you provided an answer, so it presumably makes sense to you. But the question needs to make sense in isolation - it needs to be clear what the core question is and what kind of answer would fit the bill. To be honest, while it's improved since I voted, it doesn't quite make the bar on that account. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Mar 15 at 17:43
  • $\begingroup$ Moreover, it would be good if you could spend less than 100% of the body on admin, and more on the actual question ;-). Which is to say: where this imaginary asker is coming from, what the background is, and why this imaginary asker wants to stay away from certain tools. Self-answered Q&As are tricky, and it isn't always possible to fit "this is what I want to say about physics" into that format. ( ...said a guy that's tied for first place on most self-answered Q&As.) $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Mar 15 at 17:51
  • $\begingroup$ @EmilioPisanty Thank you for your comment which gives me the opportunity to explain the full history. where this imaginary asker is coming from. Not imaginary: [here] (physics.stackexchange.com/questions/464631/…). The question was closed as duplicate. I didn't agree and voted for reopening but without result. $\endgroup$ – Elio Fabri Mar 15 at 20:39
  • $\begingroup$ Please read my comment dated Mar 12 at 18:32 where I announced an answer. I wrote: "I'm writing an answer of mine but I'm not yet finished. If when I'm done your question is still closed I'll post a novel question and answer it." why this imaginary asker wants to stay away from certain tools. The not imaginary asker explained in his question he is a 12th grader and very clearly explained that he knows only of integral form for Maxwell equations. $\endgroup$ – Elio Fabri Mar 15 at 20:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe I was wrong not to inserting in my question a link to the closed question. Another error - of a different kind - I'm ready to admit is of having overestimated the care and depth that are exercised by those who hastily vote against a question. It isn't the first time I noted that. This time I've made up my mind to raise the issue. $\endgroup$ – Elio Fabri Mar 15 at 20:43
  • $\begingroup$ All of that context is missing from the question - as far as its readers are concerned, the asker is either you or imaginary. As I said, the question needs to read as on-topic and clear in isolation from everything else. If self-answered Q&As are hard, it's much harder to re-post someone else's question and make that stick. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Mar 16 at 6:53
  • $\begingroup$ I also don't really see the need for reviving that thread - the fact that the system attributes the closure as a duplicate to the Community user means that OP themself actively clicked on a box that said "yes, the duplicate answers my question". If it was a normal closure I'd reopen it and tell you to post your answer there, but I'm extremely reluctant to reopen a thread that got closed by its OP. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Mar 16 at 6:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .