11

An excessively complex question deserves a comment suggesting that it be distilled. It might even attract a downvote for being a poorly formulated question. However, it does not deserve to be closed. If some intrepid reviewer decides to take it on anyway, why should the mob prevent it? Conversely, if the question languishes, it's the poster's own fault. ...


9

"...that will appropriately cover everything there is to cover..." Well that's the thing isn't it, we don't need to cover everything in our answers. For questions of excessive length, finding just two or three things to improve would be good enough. If they improve those things then they can post a new question later with those things improved (and ...


8

It is my opinion that the first two off-topic reasons are very similar. In fact, the first reason is a 'subset' of the second: Questions asking for code to be written to solve a specific problem are off-topic here as there is no code to review. Your question must contain working code for us to review it here. For questions regarding specific problems ...


7

This is in no way a full answer. One of the types of questions on which I tend to vote UWYA are the ones that have a generic title, no explanation of the problem and sometimes consist of nothing more than a code dump. This is Code Review. Without a purpose statement we won't know if the code is good at what it's supposed to do. Asking for a review (which ...


4

From What is a Code Review?: Does this code actually do what it is supposed to do under normal conditions? This is the key to why code only questions are "unclear" in my mind. Without a plain English explanation of what the code is intended to do, we only know what the code actually does. It becomes impossible to perform the most critical function of a ...


3

code not written - how come this doesn't fall under the pseudo/hypothetical/stub code reason or the "include code to be reviewed" reason? I certainly wasn't around when these are put up (:p), so I'll have to infer. Could it be merely a simple defense mechanism against one-liner questions like the following? I need help to solve Project Euler #1. Thanks!...


2

The formatting has been improved as per the suggestion. However, the This question belongs on another site in the StackExchange network close reason cannot be changed as it is universal across all StackExchange sites.


2

Just what I was wanting for a while now. :-) If they already became aware of CR, they may keep it in mind for the future. We need that kind of exposure as we try to get out of beta. I just hope that every new user sees this first, otherwise our occasional game of "hot potato" with SO will continue.


2

We don't need the "Unclear What You're Asking" close reason. Are you kidding me? At a minimum, the questioneer needs to describe what the code does, and preferably with example inputs and expected outputs. This becomes more and more important to enforce as the site continues to grow. We require that the code in the question work. If the code in the ...


1

I think we should edit the answer to add the clarification that it has to be code that you own OR maintain, and that the reasons for that are that you should be able to explain WHY the code was written in the way it is and WHY you need the code to do what it does and WHY you can't use X, Y or Z.


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