43

I recently had a problem and looked for a solution here on Stack Overflow.

I found a similar question asked by someone else, but with almost no details, which might be the reason why no answer has been provided yet.

Now I have two possibilities: write again my own question with the risk of a duplicate or improve the question.

But by improving the question I have to add a lot which harbors the risk that this might not reflect the intention of the original author anymore.

Since they didn't provide a code example, there might be a different root cause to the problem then with my problem but with the same (error) effect as a result.

The contribution in question is the following: How to prevent JAWS screen reader from reading page title on button click

What should I do, or more in general, until when is it useful to improve a question of someone else?

8
  • 34
    Because it isn't answered, i think you'd be fine asking it separately if you do in fact provide a better question that may attract an answer. Once you have one, you can flag/vote the other as a duplicate of yours.
    – Kevin B
    May 3 at 17:54
  • 38
    In general, questions cannot be closed as a duplicate of unanswered (no upvoted/accepted answers) questions, unless a mod closes it (which is usually exceptional), or it's a self-duplicate. So, in your case, there's a very little/no risk of having it closed as a dupe.
    – Andrew T.
    May 3 at 17:56
  • 8
    Instead of saying "the contributing in question", just give in and say "the question in question" :P
    – user17242583
    May 3 at 20:31
  • 4
    But by improving the question I have to add a lot which harbors the risk that this might not reflect the intention of the original author anymore - and this is why the only people who should be allowed to edit questions are the asker and moderators. Because as a third party you cannot be certain that you haven't made the mistake of changing the fundamental thrust of a question. If it's so bad that it needs to be edited for someone to make sense of it, it should be closed - full stop.
    – Ian Kemp
    May 4 at 14:37
  • 1
    @IanKemp Agreed. I've seen this happen.
    – Menasheh
    May 4 at 19:38
  • 16
    @IanKemp That statement ("only OP and mods should be able edit questions") is throwing the baby out with the bath water if ever I've seen it. Stack Overflow would be a far worse place if users couldn't edit others' questions.
    – TylerH
    May 5 at 13:37
  • Not sure if it helps, but on Arqade we had a relevant discussion on this topic: On ending chronological oppression with respect to the matter of question duplication, specifically around duplicate direction - if a newer question is very obviously 'better' in every sense, then the old question can be made duplicate of the new. That was for 'accidental duplicates' though, in this case it would be pre-meditated.
    – Robotnik
    May 6 at 3:57
  • @Robotnik We've long since done that on SO, too; while age plays a factor, what's more important are the answers, as well as the views (because they indicate the SEO of the title and contents). Although I don't know that it's often been applied in cases where someone hasn't asked the newer question yet... usually it's someone with a gold tag badge who finds two existing questions and has to decide which one to close.
    – TylerH
    May 6 at 18:05

3 Answers 3

37

Don't change the intent of the author, full stop, barring abrasive or harassing language. In the latter case, still edit the offending content out and then flag the post for moderator attention, making sure to explain the situation. Note that removing superfluous language is okay if it does not contribute necessary information to the core of the question (which "rambling", etc. arguably shouldn't be the intent of the post anyways).

In the case of cleaning up grammar, etc. you have a little more leeway. But if English is broken to the point you can't definitively decide what the author's intended point is, my position is to leave a comment asking for the author to clarify, and if left unanswered, I'd vote to close as Needing Details or Clarity.


However, there are no positively scoring or accepted answers on that question, therefore is it not a suitable dupe target. So asking a new question would be appropriate here, and once you either accept the answer or it gets a positive score, you can vote to close the other question out.

38
  • 4
    Including link to the existing question without answer would be a good way to "demonstrate research". May 3 at 20:04
  • 7
    This is not only bad advise, but bad advice that needs to die. If you can salvage a question by editing it, JUST DO IT! I've done it several times, the authors haven't reverted any of them.
    – Braiam
    May 3 at 20:27
  • 34
    @Braiam I disagree. If you edit a question that is four years old to include completely new information from your own question, that maybe wasn't even part of that person's original problem - it not only changes their intent, but it's still very unlikely to get new answers - being a 4-year-old question and all.
    – nzifnab
    May 3 at 21:52
  • 4
    @nzifnab and who cares about that specifically? We went from "question that should be closed" to "question that probably generates good info". That's an absolute win for the site and the thing we should be caring about.
    – Braiam
    May 3 at 23:14
  • 4
    @Braiam: I agree with you that taking a reasonable guess at the details a question meant to include can be a good thing. (e.g. generating your own [mcve] on your own machine from their rough description.) But that usually applies to turning a question with good answers into a good canonical (especially removing other bugs from the code in the question that weren't related to the title question that answers focused on, and stuff like that, but also wording a clear description of the problem the answers are answering) May 4 at 17:14
  • 7
    @Braiam: But not in this case where someone has run into a problem themselves, and is worried about writing a new question vs. editing their details into an old unanswered question, apparently in hopes of getting an answer. Best to start fresh, IMO, so they can accept the answer that works for them. The new question should link the old one (at least in comments) and mention that it's unclear, so it can get duphammered once the new question is answered, or just downvoted / deleted as soon as a better written version of the same question exists. May 4 at 17:16
  • 11
    @Braiam Strongly disagree. Better to have a new, vastly better question and dispose of the older one that wasn't useful to begin with. Both leave the site in a better state than it started, but a new question is more helpful to the author and to future readers. For one thing, a user who actually found the old question is more likely to maintain a new one than the user who wrote the old, crappy one.
    – jpmc26
    May 5 at 1:46
  • 6
    @Braiam this is exceptionally toxic advice. in what world is completely rewriting a 4-year-old question with no answers better than writing your own question?
    – mjr
    May 5 at 16:04
  • 3
    @Braiam On a Q&A site where each question should focus on a single problem only, "intent" and "meaning" should overlap. This isn't editing an article or blog post. Changing the context of what the OP asks could invalidate any existing answers under it, and miss the problem OP was trying to solve in the first place.
    – codewario
    May 5 at 16:15
  • 3
    There is a case where this can be okay though; flagging the question for moderator attention and asking that it be converted to a community wiki would be appropriate in the case where the answers wind up outgrowing the question. On a non-community wiki post, I feel this is inappropriate. Otherwise, just ask a new question with your specific problem. If the answer isn't covered in the other post, answer it yourself or wait for someone to answer. Even if it's resolved in the other question's answers, it can serve as an effective signpost as a good duplicate should.
    – codewario
    May 5 at 16:17
  • 6
    @Braiam 🤦‍♂️ You're the only one reading this answer in terms of absolutes. Lighten up. The only "absolute" here is that you shouldn't change a question in a way that turns it into a different question than the one the author asked, and that is just a general principle (and a good one). When the question is so unclear that you can't even tell if you're doing that, then it's much better to err on the side of caution and just start fresh. What is even worth trying to salvage when that is the case?
    – jpmc26
    May 6 at 2:28
  • 2
    @PeterCordes I would suggest that "taking a reasonable guess" is something you should do in an answer or comment first, and then you may improve the question to match once you have confirmation that your guess was correct (via a direct response or an accept). Yes, it's a bit more work, but it leaves the door open wider if people have other guesses or you end up being wrong.
    – jpmc26
    May 6 at 2:33
  • 2
    @jpmc26: "Don't change the intent of the author, full stop, barring abrasive or harassing language." seems to imply not making any meaningful changes. Maybe I'm misinterpreting why they thought rude language needed a special exception if preserving the intent was already interpreted broadly enough to cover what I'm describing; using standard terminology, framing the title in a way that mentions the key detail (when one knows the answer), maybe even adding a Godbolt.org link for the code, etc. May 6 at 3:55
  • 2
    @Braiam That's a list of resource requests. I have no idea what it has to do with questions where the problem is unclear.
    – jpmc26
    May 7 at 2:10
  • 2
    @PeterCordes I agree that if the information is there, then you are always free to substantially reorganize it if it improves the question. I feel like you're conflating things. I think the fundamental distinguishing factor is whether you are adding new significant information, particularly if that information narrows down possible answers, based on assumptions rather than just working with what's already there. You could deduce something that necessarily must have been the case based on what you're given sometimes, but I wouldn't take that too far without confirmation from the asker.
    – jpmc26
    May 7 at 2:13
33

Improving existing questions is not a goal in its own; it's a means to achieve our goal of high quality Q&A. If the best way to achieve that and attract answers is to edit the old question, then edit it. If the best way is to ask a new, better question, then do that.

The latter seems far more likely in this case, so I would ask a new question, and then add a link to the old question. That way, in case you ask a better question and get answers, we can close the old question as a duplicate to the new one.

1
  • 8
    Agreed that it is a case-by-case decision. The fact that the original question is downvoted makes it sticky, for one. The fact that it is a couple of years old makes it stickier. There is no rule that prevents you from just writing your own better question so I would say people should have the complete freedom to make that decision when dealing with stickiness.
    – Gimby
    May 4 at 9:22
3

Usually people approach this question narrow-minded, dwelling on petty concerns such as "author's intent" (even if the author forgot long ago about the question and the entire Stack Overflow) or finding the correct bureucratic procedure to follow.

But once one remembers the purpose of this humble site, which is providing answers to questions, especially for people looking for them from Google, the answer manifests itself at once.

The question in question has several hundred views. Which means several hundred people were looking for the answer. So we can suppose another several hundred likely would do the same. And Google will promptly direct them to this page. Where they won't find any answer if you post another question, being shy of touching the contribution of some obscure dude, even given they didn't show up for several years. And given they already gave up their contribution for the community after signing up to this site.

1
  • 2
    Let me - respectfully - disagree here. You argue that by editing the other user's question it would increase the chance that other people would be helped. And while that may be true, I assert that they might be helped more by a fresh question being asked. If the fresh question attracts an answer (which the old one for whatever reason did not) then the old question CAN be closed as a duplicate, referencing the new, answered question, leading answer seekers to there. All the while avoiding the shoe-horning of a new question into the old one by editing it.
    – CharonX
    May 6 at 11:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/417833/should-i-improve-rewrite-an-existing-unanswered-question-or-ask-my-own-near-dup/417834
meta.stackoverflow.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2022-49
172180
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:DSTMSFRAAB477FPFM23RUZVMIHVLQEHH
<urn:uuid:445ad968-7ae5-4f58-badd-8969cd42a38e>
2022-11-29T20:54:39Z
151.101.1.69
text/html
sha1:FNM4BHFL7NWTVKSFSKFOYT6DTDVXYN4B
<urn:uuid:895ed521-5fb6-44a4-a62a-9bf5fbd53ddd>
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/417833/should-i-improve-rewrite-an-existing-unanswered-question-or-ask-my-own-near-dup/417834
response
<urn:uuid:298ad361-ba32-499d-aa5e-237b0c848ec7>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-49
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for November/December 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-199
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/