I was involved in an edit war at EE.SE earlier this year, over this answer. The following meta discussion is here.
Based on this experience, IMO if a particular edit is rolled back once by the OP, no further edits in that vein should be made, ever, except by the OP him/herself (or by someone who has their unambiguous blessing).
The spurned editor then has ...
I mostly agree with MARamezani, just because questions are popular it does not mean they belong to the site or should not be closed.
In this specific case, however, I would argue differently. Just because a question is based on a wrong premise, it does not mean it is not worth asking. The wrong premise must come from somewhere. I truly believe that ...
I thought long and hard whether or not I should comment, but because the post reads like that the moderating team enforced this edit war, which is simply not true, I think it is necessary to clear up a few things.
First and foremost I agree that this kind of disagreement over the state of a post should be avoided at all costs as it transports the wrong ...
At this time, your question has three close votes as "too broad". This is probably because you've asked about more than one topic (pi bonding in coordination compounds and synergic bonds), and possibly also because either one of these topics by itself may require an extremely long answer.
First, I would ask about pi bonds and synergic bonds in separate ...
In your specific case, I'd go with a synonym of "help" and add some specifics from the body of the post:
What are point groups and how can they assist me in predicting physical properties of molecules?
What are point groups and the benefits of using them?
What are point groups and how are they used?
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. In this case, I personally don't see an urgent need to do anything. On your part, you just need to downvote and/or flag and/or vote to close, as with all low-quality questions. On our part, the duplicates will be subject to merging and probably also deletion, but that isn't a super urgent process.
Mods are busy ...
I do not have the knowledge to judge what is right or wrong with the answers and I did not downvote your post.
However, I can offer some tips to avoid such a scenario.
Do not whine about it either on the main site or on meta. I edited out a portion of your answer earlier. Text that simply complains about being downvoted helps you gain neither sympathy nor ...
There's no rule saying that everything must go. It's simply because "help" tends to appear in a lot of non-descriptive titles, and therefore it makes for a good search query.
Personally, I'm ambivalent towards the edit. I don't think the old title was bad, but I also don't think the second part ("how can they help me at a low level") was really needed. If ...
As I keep telling everyone everywhere, the real reason someone, or a group of people, downvoted your post is something only they can confirm. We can only say why a post like yours might or might not get downvoted. That said, here are my two cents.
Your question's first revision isn't the worst I've seen, but you (1) forgot to enclose ...
In general I would say the handling of this situation is not ideal; and, the resolution is somewhat uncommon.
From the timeline of your question I see that answers were posted and up-voted before you included your follow-up question. This is strongly discouraged, as it (at least partially) invalidates the existing answers, and may lead to a lot of confusion ...
Regarding the question itself, I saw it yesterday, and I agree that it should not have been closed, so I have reopened it.
In cases like these, a substantial edit can and will go a long way towards reopening. I would encourage everybody to do this as a first step towards getting the question reopened (or equally, preventing it from being closed!).
Questions about dimensional analysis that do not refer to a specific chemistry question or problem should be closed. They can be migrated to mathematics.se as they allow such kinds of questions in their homework policy. For example:
I have left you a comment on your question:
While I do not understand the question itself, I have a strong feeling, that if I understood it, I would say it is on topic here. However, I have troubles with 'delocalised with respect to position' - Is there any other delocalisation? Then I don't quite get what 'some space' is. All in all, this question reads ...
Questions on illicit drugs have been and are always difficult on this site, which is fine.
I do not share Todd's opinion in points (1) and (2) of his answer, but he made his concerns perfectly clear, which I appreciate!
I wasn't involved in closing the question but I'm among those who downvoted it. I do not intend to revoke it, neither do I think that ...
I voted to close that question for several reasons. Unfortunately, the menu of options for reason to close are limited so I went with the medical option. Here are my reasons for doing so.
(1) The question is (broadly speaking) one concerning how to adulterate an illicit and very dangerous drug. There is a finite chance that a person wishing to experiment ...
I think the main problem with this question is that you are targeting the wrong audience. The main user base here is either professionally involved in chemical research/ development/ engineering, or on its way into this direction (starting as early as high school).
You are basically not asking about the chemistry involved in etching, but instead have an ...
Indeed, ft-ir has been applied to questions that are about infrared spectroscopy. That still is - in my opinion - no reason to remove the spectroscopy. In general we don't remove broad tags just because there are more specialised versions; that may be a discussion for another time.
I suggest to rename the tag.
First I thought ir, analogous to the current ...
Leaving the tone of the question aside there is a series of misconceptions or misinformation that I wish to point out.
As a moderator, one might think that I am biased, but I will let the community judge what I write.
Here's a quick recap [...] A moderator deleted the second phrasing of the question.
(1) I was the first editor of the question. At the ...
The reason is very simple and documented on mother meta: question views do not count towards the arbitrary hotness points formula that is used to determine whether a question is ‘worthy’ of making the HNQ list.
The only metrics that influence HNQ are:
cumulative answer scores
question age in hours
The formula is documented on ...
I had to look the term "Xene" up to understand what exactly the question was about.
It appears to be introduced fairly recently (around 2015–2016) and first textbooks including this term were published in 2019 (e.g. 1, 2).
The things get more confusing:
"X" is usually used to denote group 17 elements (halogens), and here it's used for the materials made of ...
I remembered Martin's earlier question (on doubts) and the list of (meaningless) buzzwords from earlier campaigns.
I took that as an invitation to change and improve the situation. Consequently, I edited some of the questions. Apparently, one was yours.
If you think that the edit vandalized your question, please feel free to revert :)
Having been the deciding vote on this, I'd like to expand a little on my reasoning.
While I can see that the question could be considered broad, there is an interesting concept behind it. Additionally it does not ask for a list of chemicals that do the trick - that was something that came up in them damn comments all by itself - but rather if it was ...
Editing the question was the right route here. It did get put into the review queue, but the responses were mixed:
Edit and Reopen
I think that the "tie" of the votes went to it being closed.
Rather than override the community's decision, I have given it an edit just now, which will bump it up ...
I must admit I'm not really enthused by this question, as it stands.
The knowledge of the molecule with the most number of atoms is perhaps of passing interest ("oh, cool") but is not particularly useful to anybody.
Perhaps more importantly, I assume we are only counting species that have been documented in literature — otherwise it would get out ...
I was the idiot that broke the answers up. It just seemed logical to me. If I had it to do all over again, I'll still break the answers up, but I'd
(1) Select "Community Wiki" from the start when I posted the answer. That would hopefully avoid the ire that I was trying to game the system for more reputation points.
(2) I'd also add a thumbnail of each ...
I personally do not agree with the verdict of the jury. I think the two questions are sufficiently different. I would reopen it; but I am not overturning the community decision.
On what factors does the true reaction Stoichiometry depend when there are multiple valid options?
This question in principle deals with the problem how to find the correct value ...
If it’s too broad, it’s too broad. If it’s HNQ I don’t care.
Since we can all agree that it is too broad (it violates the one (related) question per post rule) we can happily drop close votes. I’d rather see good questions in the HNQ list.
As a side note, because there were like eight answers to the eight questions was one of the prime reasons how the post ...
For me, the first is a duplicate of the second question.
The third question is a little bit different, as it might not be specifically about the principles of HSAB stuff, but needs to be answered with it. So for the third question, I would think of commenting, that the second question has an answer about HSAB and could be used to get some informations about ...
I originally voted to leave it open primarily because Jon and Max had commented in a manner that I felt could result in the OP amending the query to refine the question in a suitable way. I voted to close the second time it came up for closure because, in my opinion, the question remains quite broad and the OP did not come back with criteria that would allow ...