This question was put on hold for being off-topic: Which anime are these images from? The question is a story-identification question with no details that make it on-topic, so putting it on hold was a solid decision.

However, the answer (which I wrote in a comment) is a video game with a fantasy setting. So the question as such is not on-topic, but the answer is kind of on-topic.

Can the question somehow be edited to be on-topic now that I know it could be? Can I rewrite it to make it seem like the person who asked knew it had a fantasy setting? Is that allowed?

  • (And because someone will ask: I did not know the answer myself, but consulted my wide array of friends knowledgeable in questionable genres.)
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 25, 2017 at 21:36
  • Just because I'm curious, what was the game called?
    – user57650
    Jan 25, 2017 at 21:51
  • @EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ Senran Kagura: Estival Versus: youtube.com/watch?v=Kghk7WRxa0Q
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 25, 2017 at 21:54
  • @EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ That video doesn't contain any fantasy elements, but that's where the images in the original question were from. The story does, though: senrankagura.wikia.com/wiki/Senran_Kagura:_Estival_Versus#Story
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 25, 2017 at 22:04

1 Answer 1


The best thing to do is to click the "reopen" button (which shows up if youve got over 3000 rep and puts the question into the review queue) and post a comment explaining that the story-id is on topic, then wait for the community to reopen the question, allowing you to post an answer.

If you're the impatient sort, or lack sufficient rep to start the reopen process, you can always hurry things along by posting a meta question (like the one above) and/or nipping into chat (where you'll invariably find higher rep users at all times of day) to cast around for a few upvotes to get it reopened.

You may wish to note that the question is currently on 4 votes to reopen and will likely be opened again within a few hours.

Since the question has now been reopened, this is a pretty solid confirmation that the steps outlined above do actually work.

What you shouldn't do is edit the question to make it closer to the answer. This post relates to retroactively editing tags, but the principle is very much the same.

  • There's a "reopen" button? I can't find it. It says underneath the question that I should reword it to fit the rules if possible, which is why I asked specifically about editing. But if I shouldn't edit it, like you say (and which makes sense), how would it be reopened?
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 26, 2017 at 8:33
  • Ah. Looks like perhaps I would need 3000 reputation for that button to show up.
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 26, 2017 at 8:40
  • @tobiasvl - I cast the last reopen vote, enjoy! Jan 27, 2017 at 8:56
  • @Gallifreyan Haha, thank you! Time to watch the rep roll in for this obscure softporn game.
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 27, 2017 at 9:38
  • I'll accept this answer (I also upvoted it, but seems someone else downvoted), but I have to admit I think it felt a bit complicated to have to go into chat and beg for reopen upvotes for a question like this. But if that's the solution for us low-rep plebs, than that's the solution, I guess!
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 27, 2017 at 9:40
  • @tobiasvl - The problem with poorly trafficked tags is that you sometimes need to "prime the pump" to get stuff reopened. Now if it had been a Star Trek or LOTR question, it would have had fifty views in the first hour, leading to a swift community consensus on its merits.
    – Valorum
    Jan 27, 2017 at 10:05
  • @tobiasvl - I suspect your rogue downvoter may have wanted to take me to task for not pointing out that you need 3000 rep to put something into the review queue. I've edited it now and hopefully they'll return in future to undownvote.
    – Valorum
    Jan 27, 2017 at 10:06
  • @Valorum Sounds likely. And like you say in your edit, yes, your procedure worked, so it's a good answer (which is why I accepted it). With my previous comment I meant exactly what you say: That the procedure itself leaves something to be desired for low-traffic tags like this. Your last paragraph about not editing questions to make them closer to the answer was what I was really wondering, anyway :) (Editing questions to fit answers is obviously wrong in principle, but this seemed like an edge case, especially when it was how the site told me to get it reopened.) So thanks!
    – tobiasvl
    Jan 27, 2017 at 10:17
  • We have a precedent for this: scifi.stackexchange.com/q/117078/4918 What creature has spokes in its eyes, a beak, and strands of hair coming from the very tip of its triangular ears?
    – b_jonas
    Sep 23, 2018 at 15:28

You must log in to answer this question.

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