10

I'm glad this has been asked on Meta, as it's a much more appropriate place to discuss how to approach such issues - comments or chat are limited in their usefulness. My view is that this is shouldn't be about whether a question is based on evidence presented on "certain YouTube channels", but about whether the question itself has value. So what is "value"...


7

If I was to guess why the downvoters downvoted, it's because user30007 is repeatedly bringing up the issue with little meaningful discussion coming of it and has garnered a bad reputation. Examples of contributions criticising the IAU definition of a planet 1 2 3 It's a case of the boy who cried wolf. The user has repeatedly made an issue of it and now ...


6

I can't say that I'm particularly familiar with the concept and practice of sealioning, but from what I can tell, no, your comments were not unreasonable. They seem to me to be sincere enough, and they're not rude. Your comments appeared constructive to me - and I hope that most folks can agree on that. Asking for clarification on an answer is never ...


6

I don't agree with the close vote on knowledgeseeker's question. I also don't think the duplicate marked is the same question as the original. The accepted answer to the 'duplicate' is a great answer to that question, but doesn't answer knowledgeseeker's question at all. I think this nuance is very important. I would like the chance to put up an answer of ...


5

In my view it is a question about something that could not happen, but I would not vote-to-close purely on that basis. From your list, that applies to (I think) 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Some of them, particularly 8, 9, 10 are salvageable by changing the question to be more general rather than about our Solar System (since there are so many other "solar ...


5

When a question is off topic, a duplicate, or is of very poor quality (for example, needing clarification) the BEST thing to do is put it on hold quickly, so people do not waste effort answering a question that may need to be significantly revised, or will be closed. Putting on hold is a very good thing. Especially when we have new folks who don't yet know ...


5

I see no reason that such a question couldn't be asked here since our relevant topics include: Setting up, using and maintaining your astronomy related equipment Software could be viewed in a sense as virtual equipment. Of course, if the software package were not astronomy specific it would not be on topic. There is the risk that the answer to the ...


5

amateur-observing (used December 15-21, 2013) Wikipedia on Amateur astronomy Amateur astronomy, also called backyard astronomy and stargazing, is a hobby whose participants enjoy watching the sky, and the abundance of objects found in it, mainly with portable telescopes and binoculars. Even though scientific research is not their main goal, ...


4

astrometry (January 5-11, 2014) Astrometry is the branch of astronomy that involves precise measurements of the positions and movements of stars and other celestial bodies. The information obtained by astrometric measurements provides information on the kinematics and physical origin of our Solar System and our galaxy, the Milky Way. This tag ...


4

I have now added a comment explaining my downvote. When I receive a downvote, I try to learn from it. That's easier if a reason is offered, but sometimes I don't get one. That's life. This site is for learning and teaching, not for influencing opinion. The distinction between major, dwarf, and minor planets would be nice to clarify, but the people who could ...


4

I think that I am quite OK with having SETI and METI questions, having already asked a question related to SETI (with 2 upvotes ). While to some it may seem that SETI questions are usually not well-received in Astronomy SE (it did to me when I joined), if one takes a average of all the votes the seti tag has received quite average vote count of ~2.21 (yay! ...


4

I agree with the answers posted by James and David Hammen, but there are some facets I don't think have been discussed yet or stated explicitly: The analogy you draw isn't great. Higgs and Englert - as well as the host of other folks working on the same problem - were theorists, and made predictions which were subsequently confirmed by the LHC. Hulse and ...


4

This was a poor question and appropriately closed. I downvoted and commented (however Prof Rob's comment was the same as mine so I deleted my comment). The downvote was for "Lacking research effort", as minimal research would have shown that the Hulse and Taylor were credited, in the most public way possible, by the award of a Nobel prize for the ...


4

When closed because of duplicate, a question has a clear link to the original question: This question already has answers here: [Link to original question] So had he came after closure, the 'Sky and Telescope user' would still have been able to post his answer, but under the original question, which is actually better. After all, it is the goal of closing ...


4

I am just one member of the community, but in my opinion, closing questions for correct reasons quickly is always desirable even in the rare case that the duplicate linked question has a wiki answer. In my opinion, the risk of discouragement to new users is not a sufficiently good reason to delay closing clear duplicate questions. As @uhoh notes above, the ...


3

You don't like closed questions, period, @uhoh. Other people don't have a problem with closure. I looked at the question multiple times before I decided to join the herd and vote to close. Closing poorly asked questions can improve the quality of a site. As an extreme example, the Earth Science SE was getting inundated with "Identify this rock!" ...


3

You should be able to see it, even though it has been roomba'ed as you thought. If you have a link, you can always see your own deleted posts, and we both have enough reputation to see all deleted posts (as long as we have a link to it). Anyway, the link is working for me, so I saved the body of the question as a GitHub gist now.


3

Astronomy.SE Help gives no guidance as to whether SETI questions are on-topic or not. SETI is at least a respectable pursuit these days, although it was not always so. The question that you are referring to seemed to be a bit "UFOish", which is why I voted to close it. Maybe there is a case for re-opening it. However, there is a big difference ...


3

You have two questions here, and I have opposing answers to them: I agree with you that good SETI questions should be on topic - but the definition of Good here is key. METI on the other hand - so far I haven't seen any good (from a site perspective) METI questions here. Those two you highlight, I would firmly class in "not good questions" despite ...


3

There's a proposed reason for closing the answer that is certainly sufficient. I don't think there's any need to find out if this was the exact reason or not in order to say that the answer should not be undeleted. @MikeG's comment: Copying the text of an IAU Circular violates CBAT's terms of use. Mods tend to do things for good reasons. Other ...


3

My opinion is yes, change the title, but don't remove Sifter from the text post. Just add some language that it was originally phrased that way.


3

milky-way (used December 29, 2013 - January 4, 2014) Nothing more fascinating than learning about our place in the universe and how our galaxy is nothing more but one in billions, nothing partuclar about it. The Milky Way is the galaxy that contains our Solar System.Its name "milky" is derived from its appearance as a dim glowing band arching ...


3

spectroscopy (used December 8-14, 2013) Astronomical spectroscopy is the technique of spectroscopy used in astronomy. The object of study is the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation, including visible light, which radiates from stars and other hot celestial objects. Spectroscopy can be used to derive many properties of distant stars and galaxies, such as ...


3

You could add a bookmark, 20 people already did so with this question. Then you'll just have to go to the bookmark tab in your profile to find it. Of course it could get tricky if you had hundreds of bookmarks, but you can sort them by vote, and since this question is at +35, it would probably show near the top. Also, once in your bookmarks you could narrow ...


2

There is NO prohibition against homework questions here at Astronomy. StephenG's comment that he was voting to close for suspicion of homework was ill-advised and had no basis in site policy. JanDoggen then made reference to "some guidelines across the network" but this is a red herring. Most experienced users will be aware that each SE site is at liberty ...


2

I agree it to be mainly geoscience; Moon and Sun trigger tides, but the physics implied is much more complex, and may trigger a couple of follow-up questions in Earth Science clearly off topic in Astronomy. Leaving it here (in the meanwhile) is ok for me.


2

The original comment was seen as being too confrontational, and I could see where they were coming from. The new one looks fine.


2

The questions and answers are extremely correlated to the degree I would feel uncomfortable unilaterally reversing a close action, but I agree both discussions seem helpful. Just keep tabs on it, and it if gets closed cast a reopen vote. Duplicates don't go away anyway.


2

In this case since it is a year old and the user appears to be no longer with us, I would advise strongly against making substantial edits to the question. If you would like to reopen, please cast your vote based upon the current form of the question.


2

I think there might be two possible reasons for the downvotes. I am, however, not a psychologist, so these are just my guesses. The topic has been discussed before often enough. Some people are "fed up" with discussions about the definition of a "Planet" and might think that this question has been answered before on SE or the information is easy to find ...


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