-5
$\begingroup$

This question Is an ideal finitely generated if its radical is finitely generated? on commutative algebra was down-voted, "Removed from Network Questions" (not sure what it even means) and closed by moderators as off-topic.

I asked and answered plenty questions on algebra and I'm sure that in this case the question is so basic that it doesn't require any additional context. Its content, meaning and motivation is clear to any student of commutative algebra. Not to mention, I would add details were I asked a specific question in comments.

In a question asking for a counter-example, failed attempts to construct one are irrelevant as they don't add anything to the question. Clearly, it is not a homework question. So, recommendation of "showing your work" is not applicable in this case.

I've got two answers before the question was closed and now I know two beautiful counter-examples. I found hard to come up with such counter-examples if you don't know where to look. In one of the examples the ring is obviously coherent, a detail I wound very important for some reasons. It is possible that other people know more counter-examples, and that counter-examples satisfy some additional technical assumptions, but it is not possible to answer closed questions.

So, I don't think that closing this question without any comments is based on its content, but rather on some formal signs, and it is also apparent disservice to the community as new answer with other counter-examples can't be added now.

$\endgroup$
8
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Your second paragraph comes off, I'm sure unintentionally, as very arrogant. If nothing else, telling us that you could have added details to make it more than a PSQ but had no intention of doing so unless asked for them really makes it seem like you feel the rest of us are just here to serve you. $\endgroup$
    – postmortes
    Mar 4, 2021 at 8:58
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ The question as posted reads as if it were copy-pasted from a list of exercises in some textbook or homework assignment (I'm not saying that's what it is, just that from the way it's written it's reasonable to come to that conclusion). Many users feel such questions shouldn't be answered. The context the question requires is, for example, some indication that you understand the meaning of the terms in it. $\endgroup$ Mar 4, 2021 at 9:00
  • $\begingroup$ @postmorters Clearly, that is not what I meant. What I meant, is that question can be stated in the first lecture in a CA course or first chapter in a textbook, there is no context yet, since it only involves one definition, which I included. $\endgroup$
    – Alex
    Mar 4, 2021 at 9:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I find this closure unsatisfying because this question is math-related, fact-based, and has little visible deficiencies than other questions. It seems that, in this case, the guidelines of an acceptable question is rather opaque instead of clearly stated. $\endgroup$
    – fantasie
    Mar 4, 2021 at 12:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Lack of context in questions is a severe roadblock in learning here. Things are fine for those who already know the stuff, but for beginners the situation is different. Including some context and motivation really really helps. Request everyone to do their bit here. It's not just about homework or efforts, rather making the learning process smooth and enjoyable for everyone (including but not limited to asker and answerers). $\endgroup$
    – Paramanand Singh Mod
    Mar 5, 2021 at 14:58
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ “There is no context yet.” The context is, precisely, “This was given in the first lecture of my Commutative Algebra course”, or “I was reading book X on commutative algebra, and it gives this exercise.” It would then be followed with some indication of why you are asking the question: did you start it and got stuck? Did you think about it but have no idea how to get started? Did you not understand the terms in the question? That is the kind of expected context for such a question. So the claim that “there is no context yet” is incorrect. $\endgroup$ Mar 6, 2021 at 23:44
  • $\begingroup$ @Arturo Magidin You implying that to ask a question one need to invent artificial context. My motivation was computation of Fitting ideals of one concrete module. Not only this context is completely irrelevant to the question it also contains notions much more advanced compared to the asked question. So, including any honest relevant context is unreasonable in this case. $\endgroup$
    – Alex
    Mar 7, 2021 at 6:43
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I’m not saying you have to “invent artificial context”. I’m saying that context goes beyond “what is the mathematical antecedents of this item”. Telling people why a bare problem statement is being brought up is not artificial. You seem to think that “context” refers exclusively and entirely to the mathematical content of the question, while I’ve always seen it as also including information about how the questioner comes to be asking the question in the site in the first place. There is nothing about “inventing” anything artificial, so please don’t put words in my mouth. If I’m unclear, ask. $\endgroup$ Mar 7, 2021 at 11:12

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

I believe Gerry in comments got it right. There's a certain phrasing that many problem statement questions (PSQs) have. Some PSQs are of course very hard (e.g. big open problems) and some are e.g. people trying to cheat on homework, or insert other reason for closing such posts.

Since post reviewing is not always done by experts in your field, it IMO would be easiest if you avoided tripping this false-positive wire by adding something other than the mere problem statement. A mild amount of "not a robot" would help a tiny bit. Noting that e.g. certain "obvious" naive steps fail to construct counterexamples would probably help a lot. Or perhaps that many natural objects are not counterexamples. I personally wouldn't know, I forgot what a ring is. (Not really, but not too wrong either...)

Regarding

I'm sure that in this case the question is so basic that it doesn't require any additional context.

If you browse the history for the Close Votes queue you might find (if you survived say, an undergraduate degree in mathematics) that the majority of posts closed are "basic". From what I've observed, we actually require more context for these posts. It seems that the complexity of some questions counts a little towards "context".

If you have not edited the post since it was closed, you could edit the post taking the above into account and it will automatically be placed in the Reopen Votes queue. Otherwise, after editing, you may try posting an answer in this math.meta post.

PS "Removed from [Hot] Network Questions" is not so important and not easy to explain why, you can search math.meta for "Hot Network Questions" to learn a little if you are interested. And a moderator did close as off-topic but he was one of five votes.

$\endgroup$
7
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I will point out that from the link you've given to the history of close votes review, users below 10k will only see their own reviews. Access to the full review history is a privilege granted at 10k reputation points. Any user can get to the review queues using SEDE, here is an example of such query, more queries can be found here: Find posts that were in a specific review queue. $\endgroup$ Mar 4, 2021 at 10:45
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak huh, news to me. Thanks for the info. OP will have to take it on faith then, at least for now $\endgroup$ Mar 4, 2021 at 10:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ To me, “context” would be something like: “This was given in the first lecture of my Commutative Algebra course”, or “I was reading book X on commutative algebra, and it gives this exercise.” It would then be followed with some indication of why the question is being asked: did they start it and got stuck? Did they think about it but have no idea how to get started? Did they not understand the terms in the question? That is the kind of expected context for such a question. So the claim that “there is no context yet” is incorrect. $\endgroup$ Mar 6, 2021 at 23:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Arturo sure, something of the sort. But I don’t see such things in the post at this time, so why is ‘there is no context’ a false statement? $\endgroup$ Mar 7, 2021 at 0:45
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @CalvinKhor: I’m talking about the OP claiming that “there is no context” that could be put into the post; not about the post lacking in context. OP wrote (in a comment): What I meant, is that question can be stated in the first lecture in a CA course or first chapter in a textbook, there is no context yet, since it only involves one definition, which I included. $\endgroup$ Mar 7, 2021 at 0:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Oh, I understand now. Thanks for the clarification @Arturo $\endgroup$ Mar 7, 2021 at 0:55
  • $\begingroup$ ill note that context has been added to the question and I am happy to see it reopened (after it was undeleted!) $\endgroup$ Mar 10, 2021 at 6:09

You must log in to answer this question.

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