46
$\begingroup$

The purpose of this thread is to help focus the attention of the community on posts that may require reopen and undeletion votes. A request should be posted as an answer below (one request per answer).

Some guidelines:

  • Please be polite, and respect the many different viewpoints in our diverse community. This goes for the person making the request as well as those commenting on it.

  • There is a reopen queue. Please wait until a post has gone through this queue, before posting here. Notice that the first edit after the question is closed pushes the question into the reopen review queue if the edit is done within 5 days of closure, and so does a reopen vote. (If the review has already been finished, it is shown on the timeline of the question.) When in doubt, wait 24 hours after the last substantive action.

  • To inform readers of the current (and past) states of the targeted post, please add the information Reopened or Undeleted at the start once the request has resulted in some action. (If the action is undone, add this too, like Reopened, Reclosed.)

  • Do not only post a request, like "request reopening of link". Instead, make a case for your concern. Yet keep in mind that it can be easier to get your request handled if you try to frame it in a way that takes the feedback the post received into account positively rather then seeking confrontation. Also, try to improve the post before posting here.

  • In case of "small" requests, like one missing vote, it can make sense to ask in chat instead of posting here. The room CURED is a reasonable place for such requests. The same guidelines apply there.

  • If you are involved in the thread which you post about (e.g., you asked the question or you answered it), please disclose this.


Earlier versions of this thread that served as a model:

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I edited the post inspired by a concern expressed in a comment. $\endgroup$
    – quid Mod
    Jul 19 '20 at 23:49

189 Answers 189

1
3 4 5 6
7
-3
$\begingroup$

May I request to reopen this question Prime factor of $A=14^7+14^2+1$ so that everyone can see the beautiful answers?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ No, it's written that viewable only to members who have the close and reopen vote facilities and the OP $\endgroup$ Aug 6 '20 at 15:17
  • $\begingroup$ That sentence refers to the list of close voters, not to the post itself. $\endgroup$
    – user279515
    Aug 6 '20 at 15:20
  • $\begingroup$ @Brahadeesh If a question is closed, there are always risks of being deleted (which might be a bit harder for this question due to the vote counts of the thread). $\endgroup$ Aug 6 '20 at 15:32
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ And to @ShubhrajitBhattacharya, I think it will be easier to get it reopened if you add more contexts into the question. Right now it is a plain PSQ. $\endgroup$ Aug 6 '20 at 15:35
  • $\begingroup$ @ArcticChar I agree, but that was not what Shubhrajit meant by his words: see his first comment for clarification. $\endgroup$
    – user279515
    Aug 6 '20 at 21:03
  • $\begingroup$ It's too late to save this question. This question is from 4 years ago, and there is no way to recover the context from the comments like you can do with some questions. This is why we provide an incentive for questions to have attempts or working shown. $\endgroup$
    – Toby Mak
    Aug 10 '20 at 12:02
-3
$\begingroup$

The post: GRE Subject Test - Past Papers, Books, Advice

Hello I was told about this by hardmath here. (I guess hardmath refers to this thread)

but if you want it reopened, there is the canonical thread here on Meta to ask for that.

hardmath mentions how the question post now may be different from when the question post was 1st closed. however...not sure if it's a very good question. actually the point of the question was really just for the sake of the answer. like sharing knowledge Q&A style. I just wanted to be helpful to fellow GRE takers...

Please re-open if you think the question post deserves to be re-opened. However, if you don't, then how could the question post be improved (and I think we'll have to work under the assumption that it's a question created for the sake of the answer)?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I replied with a couple of Comments on your earlier Meta thread about improving the Question linked above. If you like I'll post an Answer to your Meta post with more detailed advice, but I'm not arguing it should be re-opened as is. $\endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Nov 26 '20 at 17:12
  • $\begingroup$ @hardmath yes please $\endgroup$
    – BCLC
    Nov 27 '20 at 2:30
-3
$\begingroup$

Tricky Calculus Problem This question should be reopened because I can not substitute a trig identity to solve the problem. I am doing a non-circular trigonometry problem, and doing so makes the solving of the problem null. I would need to know how to find the algebraic function that represents tangent in the form of: $$\tan(x)=\int_0^xf(t)dt.$$ That is inherently where I am stuck at.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your Question makes no sense. You "edited" in a postscript in which $\tan(x)$ gets replaced by $tan^{-1}(x)$. I don't get what "a non-circular trigonometry problem" means, at least in the present context. Either you want the derivative of tangent or the derivative of arctangent, and in either case a calculus book tells you the facts. $\endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Dec 14 '20 at 23:07
  • $\begingroup$ @Hardmath Non-Circular geometry means that you can not use trigonometry to define the principles that are being investigated. $\endgroup$ Dec 15 '20 at 1:18
  • $\begingroup$ @hardmath A calculus book does not tell me $f(t)$. $\endgroup$ Dec 15 '20 at 13:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your Question, at least in some revisions, shows that you know $f(t)$ is the derivative of tangent. That certainly is covered by calculus textbook, and other references. Perhaps there is some unhappiness about tangent and its derivative being "circular trigonometry" functions, but the nature of the tangent function can't be changed. $\endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Dec 15 '20 at 16:27
-4
$\begingroup$

Undeleted

Please undeleting this post: How to prove that $\frac{e-1}{2e} \le \int_0^1 \frac{e^{-x}}{1+x}dx \le \ln 2$

OP did have his/her own attempt. This is not a zero-effort trivial question, which should not be deleted.

$\endgroup$
-5
$\begingroup$

Undeleted, deleted, undeleted, reopened

Minimize a+b+c+d given LCM(a,b,c,d)=1000 [closed]

$\endgroup$
46
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ The relevant rule is this: "Before voting to delete, please check whether there are any good answers; [...] We don't like to lose great answers!" By voting to delete the question, you violated this rule. $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:00
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I disagree with the way Xander disagreed: "I see no reason to undelete this question in it current form". I disagree with the deletion as I would disagree with (potentially possible) close/deletion of this question Xander answered: math.stackexchange.com/q/2414862 $\endgroup$
    – user9464
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:16
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Jack I have no problem with the closure of the question to which you linked. I do find your targeted citing of that question interesting, and would note that when I answered that question, I had been active on MSE for a grand total of 2 months, and had not yet learned the norms. If I saw that question newly posted today, I would likely very quickly vote to close. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:28
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Normally when posting here, one is expected to put in an explanation for why this question should be undeleted, reopened, etc. The boldface line on the top is meant to indicate the status changes after posting, and not be a part of the request. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:28
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @XanderHenderson: "I have no problem with the closure of the question to which you linked". Sorry I do. I would disagree with closing the question you answered nicely I linked and in particular I would strongly disagree with deletion of that linked post. I do not think there was/is a "norm" for deletion so far for the site except the general rule peterh quoted in a comment. $\endgroup$
    – user9464
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:30
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @quid I was impressed on them. It is subjective. But their score is objective. $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:45
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ For moderator who keen on different opinions/ideas from his/her own by MSE users: "Please don't abuse your power to stir discussion up when users disagree with your (possibly not so wise) idea of deletion and 'and respect the many different viewpoints in our diverse community' ". $\endgroup$
    – user9464
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:51
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @peterh: I don't see how that situation on server fault is "similar". And again, I'd ask you to avoid using inflammatory language. It helps no one, except perhaps you, to release pent up anger. It's inappropriate, and deteriorates the remote option that anyone is going to have a discussion. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:54
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Jack so how about you respect others views or at least the rules of the site. $\endgroup$
    – quid Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:54
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If you think that this is somehow similar, you should spend a bit more time trying to learn the underlying software, the system of privileges, and what is the job of the moderators. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 17:57
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @peterh the discussion is on-going since years. Just this morning I spent an hour with an other user to analyze data about this. Users (as opposed to moderators) are severely rated limited as concerns deletions. That you are miffed because three of your posts were deleted, does not mean that there is some problem. Yes, some users are against deletions, but again that's true since years. Maybe focus more on following rules regarding questions quality, then the issue regarding deletions will be of much less relevance. Don't cherry pick rules. $\endgroup$
    – quid Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 18:15
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @quid It is your decision, what will be a mod issue. I need to notice, too, this sequence of events: 1) one of my old posts is deleted, in my opinion, falsely. 2) I complain on the meta. 3) The post gets an undelete and a reopen. 4) 2 of my old posts are deleted. | I think, the nicest possible interpretation is that my meta post attracted some attention to my old main site posts. The lesser nice, but maybe more likely interpretation is that these were revenge deletions for my complains. $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Jun 1 '19 at 18:44
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @peterh the short questions are not blindly deleted but they are reviewed for potential deletion. Well your question has 0 score [correction: -2 now], which leaves use were exactly. Five users thought they want the question closed. Maybe there view also should count for something. Of course they did not all bother to dv in addition, but there opinion seems to be clear. Kindly stop the cherry picking and the quoting of half-sentences. However you want to frame it, the thread is not good. Also the high score is a high quality is a gross over simplification, as everybody knows. $\endgroup$
    – quid Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 20:04
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @peterh people evaluate your post and find it lacking. Of course you can pretend it's for other motives, but then way back then it was already closed. That some users upvoted the answer does not change that. It's well-known that often almost obvious stuff is especially well received because there are enough voters that can easily make sense of it. Again the answer is not good in the way I believe good is intended there. It's a correct yet completely standard answer to simple and contrived question. The site is better without that thread. $\endgroup$
    – quid Mod
    Jun 1 '19 at 21:53
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I have edited the post (revisions, the version after my edit) in order to add at least some context. I have not case my undelete vote - I'll wait first to hear whether you are satisfied with the edit and leave some time for you if you want to edit it further. $\endgroup$ Jun 3 '19 at 5:16
-5
$\begingroup$

Undeleted,reopened

+6 question with thousands of views and with two, +18 answers. Created in 2016, deleted last week.

Found by the SEDE query Suspicious question deletions from the last week.

$\endgroup$
10
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Standard solve-my-problem-without-me post, and nothing spectacular about the answers. I oppose undeletion. $\endgroup$
    – user296602
    Jun 3 '19 at 10:29
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @T.Bongers To me, it is absolutely non-trivial, if the sum of a singular and a nonsingular matrix is always nonsingular. The example in the accepted answer was catartic to me. Your attitude would be probably acceptable on the MO, but that is another site. Here sub-phd, maybe even pre-grad level questions are allowed, and you should view the quality and usefulness of a question on the level for which it is written, and not on yours. $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Jun 3 '19 at 10:38
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I have no idea at what level the question was written (and neither do you), because the asker never bothered to say anything at all beyond the statement of the problem. This is not a do-my-homework site, regardless of how little quality control some users want. $\endgroup$
    – user296602
    Jun 3 '19 at 10:44
  • $\begingroup$ @T.Bongers Maybe the user 1) is enough educated to be able to think about, is the sum singular and nonsingular matrix always nonsingular 2) But he is not enough well educated to know its answer? Is it enough narrow to know, who is he? Hm? Or should he have attached his CV to his question as well? $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Jun 3 '19 at 10:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This isn't a case for some hyperbolic slippery slope argument, and you know that. If the question had context, it could be appropriate for the site. $\endgroup$
    – user296602
    Jun 3 '19 at 10:51
  • $\begingroup$ @T.Bongers The required "context" what you would want so strongly, is clearly visible in the post. And you know that. This is a typical case of the dark direction what you made from this once so friendly and open site. $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Jun 3 '19 at 10:54
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I disagree with T.Bongers's comment: "Standard solve-my-problem-without-me post..." In what "standard", if exists at all, for a site "that is for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields"? I disagree with the deletion in a way that I would strongly disagree with (possible in the future) deletion of this and this "standard" exercises (created 2016 and 2018) T.Bongers answered (nicely!). $\endgroup$
    – user9464
    Jun 3 '19 at 11:55
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Jack Thanks for bringing those posts to my attention; I agree with your judgement of the first one (but not the second), and have started a close vote. I would delete my answer if I could, but it was accepted. Of course, it's clear that your comment is a disingenuous off-topic attempt to poison the well by calling me a hypocrite. So it goes. $\endgroup$
    – user296602
    Jun 3 '19 at 12:15
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @T.Bongers: Thank you for your message. "it's clear that your comment is a disingenuous off-topic attempt to poison the well by calling me a hypocrite." Please don't put any word into my mouth that I did not say at all. I am sorry that you think it in that way. I do mean what I said and I do NOT mean to be sarcastic at all. Since we are talking about "deletion", I don't think my previous comment is off-topic. And yes, if you or others were going to vote to delete the linked posts that you answered, I would disagree and vote to undelete. $\endgroup$
    – user9464
    Jun 3 '19 at 12:48
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I'd like to remind everyone to keep it civil. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Jun 3 '19 at 15:17
-5
$\begingroup$

Please undelete and reopen this elementary post:
How to find the value of the expression $\log_3(a)+\log_3(b)+\log_3(c)$ given that $a$, $b$, and $c$ are the roots of $24x^3 - 121x^2 + 87x - 8 = 0$?

I answered question in this post, and I do not consider it missing context at all. OP summarized his/her attempt succinctly in the post: "Finding the roots seems complicated." (If one can find the roots $a$, $b$ and $c$, one can of course plug them into the expression $\log_3(a)+\log_3(b)+\log_3(c)$ to find its value. This is a natural attempt. OP did not notice that one does not need to solve the cubic equation in order to solve this problem.) Such attempt is by no means "I tried to solve this problem myself, but it seemed complicated."

$\endgroup$
3
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I will reiterate the comment I left before the question was deleted: I have read the question. The comment you cite does not seem to provide much context. Nearly any question on this site could be finished with the line "I tried to solve this problem myself, but it seemed complicated." Appropriate context would be, for example, a description of where this problem comes from, and what the asker is studying right now. A presentation of potentially relevant theorems and definitions would also provide context. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Sep 30 '19 at 19:00
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Moreover, the question has also been negatively received (while I don't usually consider voting on a question to be terribly compelling, it is a factor which should be considered), and neither of the answers is terribly compelling (J.G.'s answer has the advantage of being concise, while Jack's answer seems like overkill to me---why invoke Vieta's formulae (the question appears to be a question one might find in an elementary algebra class, though that context is missing; Vieta is, to the best of my knowledge, not generally taught in these kinds of classes). $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Sep 30 '19 at 19:06
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Finally, @Jack, you insist that the question has context because the asker stated "Finding the roots seems complicated." Let us grant, for the sake of argument, that this is context. I do not see how it is sufficient context. Better context would be an indication of what the student is studying and and what level; a reference for the problem; a discussion of what theorems, definitions, or other results they know; etc. The point of asking for "work done" is to get an indication of the level of the student. In this case, knowing that they tried to find the roots doesn't give much insight. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Sep 30 '19 at 19:11
-5
$\begingroup$

Undeleted, Deleted, Undeleted, Reopened

This question on Laplace Transform has been deleted for no real reason. OP has showed some of his work. So there is no reason to delete this topic. Vote to undelete. Thanks.

We still need a single vote to undelete. Thanks in advance.

Laplace Transform $\left(\frac{\cos \sqrt t}{\sqrt t}\right)$

$\endgroup$
5
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ (1) The user presented two problem statements, not a single question. (2) The user did not (contrary to your assertion) demonstrate any work---they claimed to have done some work, but did not actually demonstrate any of that work. (3) The user provided no other context, such as a source for the problem, basic definitions... anything, really. (4) Finally, it is poor form to ask for undeletion of a question which you have answered without disclosing your interest in the problem. You are not an impartial third party, as you stand to benefit from the undeletion. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Apr 5 '20 at 3:33
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Op said he used power series to solve one of the question but couldn't solve the second one . Both questions are related as I have shown in my answer. @XanderHenderson $\endgroup$ Apr 5 '20 at 3:36
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ (1) "Serie" is not a word. (2) The user claims to have done a thing. That doesn't mean that they have demonstrated that thing. Claiming to have done a thing does not provide any context for the problem. (3) So what if the problems are related? The user did none of the work necessary to demonstrate that relation. The "question" is presented as two isolated problems. It is the job of the asker to explain how the problems are related; it is not the job of the answerers to provide that context for the asker. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Apr 5 '20 at 3:39
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I meant OP used power series. I hope it's more clear. $\endgroup$ Apr 5 '20 at 3:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No. The user claimed to have used power series. A 2-year-old also can claim to use power series just because their big brother said so. Notice that you refused to address any of the 3 points @XanderHenderson brought up. $\endgroup$
    – user21820
    Apr 27 '20 at 3:55
-8
$\begingroup$

Ratio problem for aptitude exam in India [closed]

None of the questions was eligible for a deletion, and also their closure reason is highly problematic.

$\endgroup$
0
1
3 4 5 6
7

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .