@user202729 can you add some details to your reopen-pls request? The question doesn't seem to have recent activity, can you tell us why should we vote to reopen?

hmm... interesting, the link from the message I just replied was automatically appended to my reply. I don't remember seeing this before, is it a new feature?

→ 17 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

erm, what link?

seems one of the userscripts inserted that link... I thought it was the chat itself...

so it might be a new feature of the SOCVR userscript :)

@Cristik Is there a requirement that it should have recent activity? I just think it is not off-topic for the site (cf. 1 2 )

@user202729 no, I don't think recent activity is a requirement - I only mentioned this as recent edits might've give clues about the reasons for why the question should be reopened. We usually add (short) descriptions telling why is worth to close/reopen/delete a post, without that we're left to guess :)

one more thing - it's not the best approach to defend a closed question solely by giving examples of similar questions that are not closed. there are plenty of questions that are worth closing, but are not yet, due to various factors. I'm not saying that the question doesn't worth to be reopened, just that it's not the best strategy to use comparisons like this :)

→ 20 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

numpy scipy Can anyone decipher this answer , which was brought up by SD? I removed some redundant code (same code posted twice, unformatted and formatted) but aside from that I don't know if the text makes any sense. I'm not an SME.

@jps I'm not a Numpy/Scipy person but the question doesn't ask about matrix sort and the code seems to do something quite different than the OP asked about

→ 16 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

@tripleee The variable matrix with the wikipedia text is not even used. Considering the rest of the post I come to the conclusion that this is just nonsense.

@tripleee yes, right and that's why I asked here and wrote I don't know if the text makes any sense. . Seems that nothing makes any sense in this answer.

@tripleee I am a numpy person. It's gobbledygook.

→ 16 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

@khelwood A question that you closed in 2019 is discussed on meta

Can tag burnination be considered "new activity" and valid for requests to close questions here, even if the individual questions haven't received new-activity?

Morning

→ 13 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

@NotTheDr01ds I remember from other burninations that there was a status page about the burnination process and also a link to it here in the room. And generally, people who want to help with the burnibation can just visit the CV queue and filter by the tag that is to be burninated. But then it helps to not edit out the tag before voting to close.

@jps Right, but we should be both closing and removing the tag in cases where such actions are appropriate.

It's "new-activity" in that case, but sometimes new activity that I originated (although sometimes not). Seems odd to only be able to bring the ones that other users have gotten to first here.

Then again, the number of requests would probably be too much for SOCVR and might be better just through the burnination room.

Then it might be better to remove the tag after the question got closed (if it's not going to be deleted anyway). And your own activity doesn't count as recent activity according to the room rules.

@jps "And your own activity doesn't count as recent activity according to the room rules." - Exactly why I'm asking. My own activity doesn't count, but I can bring questions here for closure that have had the tag removed by anyone other than me. I was just wondering if there's an "exception" for burninations since they aren't "business as usual" for question closure.

In chat.stackoverflow.com/rooms/253110/cv-pls-old-questions you're on the save side, but please don't flood it with tons of requests. But again, it's IMHO better to not edit out the tag if you want the question to be closed, because only then people can filter them in the queue.

@jps Thank you - Wasn't aware of that chat.

Welp, clear plagiarism flag declined... another day that ends in Y...

→ 10 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

@TylerH I can't say why it was declined, but assuming it was your last one, why couldn't a simple edit to make the attribution explicit suffice?

@Cristik It looks on-topic to me and to their credit it indeed is not mentioned anywhere in the docs or the source code.

I see more than a few where the citation isn't clear but it's there. A simple edit can fix some of those

The connect tag is being burninated: Open Qs - Close Queue - Meta CW

@Machavity maybe it could, but it's not clear when I should do that vs mod flag because some mods work very hard to keep plagiarized images deleted even with attribution

@TylerH FWIW, I would delete that as well. The image is useful, but it's also basically the entire post. There's another similar answer that's just a copied image. We also remove posts for being entirely copied content, cited or not

@Machavity Burninations are running agin? gasps and falls over

@aynber And by Zoe. Who is apparently no longer on strike.

@Machavity It's impossible to stay away ??

Don't we always get sucked back in?

o/~ He just couldn't stay away, away, away o/~

Give it a couple of months, and we'll have Cody back 'n'all

?? ??

@Machavity unfortunately in this case it's also objectively the single most useful artifact in the world on SQL joins, so deleting it kinda runs counter to the SO ethos

FWIW, Cody hasn't been on the site in any form since Dec. Getting concerned he's gone for good this time :(

@Machavity :/

But Cody being away for a while is somewhat usual.

Here's hoping it's just one of those periods.

The catch is that Cody usually just goes quiet. He still does a thing or two behind the scenes, which keeps him from being inactive. But he's still on the site in some fashion, even if it's just to poke around and leave. This time is different.

After 6 months of inactivity they can pull your diamond

@TylerH You make a good case, I've asked the CMs to look at it. If they do what I suggest, we can undelete it.

I'd be happy to add text explanations to the post if that helps solve issues. I just recall when it got deleted a lot of the discussion surrounded attribution being lacking and the mod not being swayed by an edit to add it

@Machavity Can I connect 4?

@Machavity PS, does that mean this post is also qualified for deletion since it's image-only? stackoverflow.com/questions/38393317/… Or does the preface count as enough content

@TylerH The issue in the first one was that the entire post was copied content. I don't see a problem with the second post because the OP claims to have made the image

@TylerH One of my less popular answers

btw, I retracted the re-flag on that other post and left a comment and modified the post to add quote formatting and attribution

I am betting all of it was copied but the pages it was copied from have been updated and I don't feel like doing a further deep dive after spending a lot of time finding the source of that image already

@Machavity holy crap, why did anyone think that tag should not be burninated

sigh

@Machavity Image-only posts are not accessible to all users and should be considered NAA by mods (and LQA reviewers)

the non-image content in that post is essentially "I made this image that shows the lifecycle". (see miken's comment above ^)

which is not particularly useful, IMHO

→ 4 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

Is this answer nonsensical enough to warrant a flag? Create an index of the content of each file in a folder

I think that answer is very low quality

though at this point a 3rd del vote is probably sufficient

That's a fair point. An image by itself isn't as useful in most cases

Still, the provided image does answer that one question

@Machavity For users that can see it

@miken32 The OP explicitly asked for it tho. I tend to follow the Shog9 guidance of (my paraphrase) "If the Q is bad, don't take it out on the answers"

Q definitely needed closure

Re: the connect four burnination post, there are actually fewer than 50 questions so it doesn't need to go through the normal burnination process. Just needed a trusted user to agree

(of course, I don't know if there were more than 50 questions when the post was originally made)

→ 7 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

Going through the burnination questions I'm seeing a few qt question tagged slots . Should this tag be merged with signals-slots ? Looks like it to me based on the tag wikis, but that is well out of my area of expertise.

→ 10 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

→ 4 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

→ 7 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

→ 6 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

^^ is that on-topic? There's even code mentioned: and how to write its code? I retracted my CV, as I'm not sure.

I'm leaning towards needs focus

I came upon this question in the close queue. The answers seem to be on-topic but everything in the question after the first sentence sounds like a resource request, which explains the close vote. Would it be silly to delete everything except the first sentence in the question, so that it can remain open as a 'how to' question (assuming it doesn't get closed anyway as Needs Focus)?

@DavidBuck Hmm. I think the last sentence can be deleted but asking about built-in 'libraries' seems OK(-ish). Not sure that 'libraries' is necessarily the best term, though. In C and C++, there are 'Standard Libraries' and asking about components of those is acceptable, if the consensus of those who follow those tags counts.

→ 8 messages moved to SOCVR Request Graveyard

Maybe something like this for the second sentence: Are there any built-in UI elements that I could leverage... But I'm not a Swift guru, so I'm not sure about best terminology.

@AdrianMole I'd be very happy if someone that could reword it appropriately would do so. Otherwise the close queue may well close it.

@DavidBuck I made an attempt and cast a "Leave Open" vote in the CV queue.

@AdrianMole Thanks. That looks less closable. I've cast a "Leave Open" as well.

NAA of the day: "I gave this message to chatgpt and followed him until I solved it. I don't know why that's happening but it's working now!"