There are always some questions in math.SE that contain a huge image as a major part of the question, which is known to be problematic because they cannot be searched or be piped into a screen reader. People usually down vote them. However, among them there are some that showed great research effort and are helpful questions. Should one flag them as "very low quality", which is intended to be used on questions with serious formatting issues (but those questions are somewhat high quality)?

One may suggest to edit the question and replace the image with MathJax. However it is not always a option - good luck converting more than 10 lines of equations, each with a length of at least 30 characters and most of them are Greek letters/special symbols/fractions!

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ "very low quality" is not specifically designed for posts with "images" linked or embedded, or when there is no mathjax formatting. It is used that way, but it is also a flag designed to be used for very poor posts, in general. When it is a new user, I'm far more lax on whether they link an image or fail to use mathjax. Personally, I'm far more interested in whether there is context or effort shown by the newer asker. $\endgroup$ – amWhy Apr 28 '20 at 0:18

"Very low quality" should generally be interpreted as "of such poor quality that it is unsalvagable." For example, VLQ is for unintelligible grammar, horrible/unreadable formatting, trolling, or content that makes no sense whatsoever.

It shouldn't be applied towards posts whose only problems are with equations being images (unless the image meets the above criteria), or bad (but salvageable) LaTeX, and most importantly it is definitely not for PSQs / questions with context or effort issues. These may subjectively be very low in quality, but that isn't what the flag is for. Remember, downvoting and voting to close are still available options in these cases.


You must log in to answer this question.

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