Skip to main content
7 votes

Proposing to add a custom close reason for rock-identification questions that are lacking in sufficient detail to be useful and answerable

100% yes. A perfect next step to addressing the problem, avoiding going to extremes. And really seems to offer hope of solving issues because it makes it more straightforward to close. Honestly ...
JeopardyTempest's user avatar
4 votes

Proposing to add a custom close reason for rock-identification questions that are lacking in sufficient detail to be useful and answerable

I totally agree... I fear that a lot of people don't even read the guidelines for rock id. They shoot some badly lit and out of focus pictures with their smartphones and only have in mind that they ...
JulPal's user avatar
  • 734
3 votes

Are individually-composed "because it belongs in" a proper off-topic close reason?

In a comment, you wrote in response to Andrew T.: I feel like you are saying "maybe it is, maybe it isn't, and I don't want to take a firm position". I think the nuance you read from Andrew's ...
hichris123's user avatar
  • 1,920
1 vote

Shark tooth ID question on topic?

I think we should keep it offtopic. First of all, it is a rock. The fact that it is biogenic does not matter. Second, a reason for making the rock-id questions off-topic is that they are unlikely to ...
Gimelist's user avatar
  • 23.2k
1 vote
Accepted

Proposing to add a custom close reason for rock-identification questions that are lacking in sufficient detail to be useful and answerable

This is no longer relevant. All rock identification questions are now off-topic. As of 2019-07-30, Rock ID questions are off-topic or Earth Science Stack Exchange. See this meta post for more ...
gerrit's user avatar
  • 11.7k

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible