Every community in the Stack Exchange network has a single objective: create the world's highest quality, most complete archive of information in whatever topic the site is about. The quality and integrity of the information compiled by this community is the reason this site is here.
Titles should be optimized for clarity, ease of understanding and ...
Personally, I reckon:
This is SE, not a clickbait site like Buzzfeed.
Titles should be as clear and searchable as possible.
Clickworthiness is no valid criterion for question quality.
There's no rule against tag info in titles.
There's no such thing as "misleading in a good way". Misleading is bad, always.
The amended title is deliberately, consciously bad....
The rules are fine as-is.
Should questions about sex and other adult activities be off-topic?
What's our tolerance for adult content?
But phantom, there are so many arguments!
Hey, I didn't say that the whole situation is good - just that the rules are fine. Let's back up.
Based on the existing guidelines, adult content and topics are OK.
I see absolutely no reason why you couldn't, provided you can remember enough details to make it a good question. As far as I'm aware, there's no requirement to have read a book or seen a movie to ask questions about aspects of those works.
Since the edit (if done properly) would not change the fundamental basis of the question, I see no harm.
The OP clarified his question in a comment
I am questioning why he was even given a leadership role given his poor emotional control. The good leaders I have met have good emotional control.
Why was he appointed captain of DS9 given ...
Yes, you can ask a question about material you have not read/watched/listened to.
However, that does not exempt you from any of our other rules.
General reference is still general reference. You can't claim "I didn't read the book, so it isn't general reference to me".
Questions that demonstrate a lack of research should still be downvoted. Posting a ...
Disclaimer: I'm far from a regular visitor here.
I saw this question in the HNQ, and my interest was piqued, so I clicked on it. I imagined a Skeptics-style question, but in different context, but not so narrow as just Interstellar. On second thought, perhaps what I imagined as being asked would be more suited to World Building.
And then I saw it was ...
The idea that if a technology exists in the real world questions about it are automatically off-topic is just bizarre. As William Gibson has said, "The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed." Of course the idea that science fiction is about futuristic technology is equally problematic...
Questions about technology may or may not be ...
To get an updated answer
There's a bounty reason for that:
To get the OP to review acceptance
There's no certain or by-design way of doing this. Just ping them in a comment (assuming they're still an active user and likely to see your ping, which in this case the OP is).
Alternatively, if there's already an accepted answer and not a new answer reflecting ...
This reminds me of how the hostile atheists flooded the Christianity.se site asking the dumbest questions. (Don't get me wrong, they weren't all dumb. The ones I'm talking about were there with the express purpose of being rude, disruptive, and disrespectful. Some very smart atheists frequent the site and keep it interesting in a good way.)
I don't think ...
I'm pretty sure posting a screen shot within a question is fine. You just need to make sure the question you are asking is appropriate for the site.
Something like, "What are they thinking for this shot" is probably NOT an example of an appropriate question.
Yes, it's fine.
Good answers explain themselves. Often our story ID answers omit this bit, but that's a fault of existing answers, not a justification for future ones. A good answer to this question will carefully justify itself, talking through the querent's points and explaining how the suggested story meets those points.
This lets voters make informed ...
From what I can see, you really have two separate concerns:
Should question titles be "clickbait-y", with an eye towards improving view/vote count?
I have thoughts on each of these, but I'll handle them separately.
I don't see a problem with this; askers are welcome to choose whatever title they want (within reason). If ...
It's one of our first meme, inspired by a local troll : Rondo.
This user appeared on day asking of list of movies about time traveling robots.
His post got closed pretty fast because questions calling for a list of works are off topic as per our FAQ, but he came back with variant of the same question until he got suspended.
Since that, he keep pooping up ...
Yes, in rare specific mostly objective circumstances.
Content that is in violation of "be nice" policy (that can't be edited to remove violation)
Content that is in violation of other policies (spam, mostly)
Answers that objectively add zero value (not simply low quality, but really can't be fixed). Note that this doesn't apply to questions - ...
To comment on one piece of your question:
I don't know if this makes my question "general reference"
TL;DR: A book is NOT a "standard internet reference" so the answer is "NOT GR"
The official wording from GR is in this meta post by Jeff Atwood (sourced from his SE blog post):
This question is too basic; it can be definitively and permanently ...
In my humble opinion, your Avatar question was always going to suffer from downvotes.
You're essentially asking for an atomic-level scientific explanation of something that's only really explainable by saying "it's magic". Elements aren't real and when you dig too hard into any fantasy universe, you'll inevitably come up short.
That's almost certainly why ...
I think this question is kinda loaded, since I don't consider the title to be click-bait and only "misleading" as a sunday newspaper comic joke. That is to say, it's a slight misdirection, in that your first reaction to such a statement is to say "WELL OF COURSE WE LANDED ON THE MOON". This title plays on reactions, but isn't lying to anyone. The context is ...
I think there are quite a few misconceptions around your question, so lets get to them:
Your assertion that the title it "clickbait" is misleading. The generally accepted meaning of "clickbait" is a title that is designed to attract attention to a post at the expense of quality or accuracy. There was nothing inaccurate or low-quality about the post in ...
When you spot an obvious error, you should absolutely correct it, ideally as soon as possible in order to prevent the OP from suffering from drive-by downvotes (from users who've stopped by to downvote the error rather than the question itself).
In this instance, I've changed the word "Captain" (which is a glaring error, Sisko wasn't made Captain until much ...
Adult content is on-topic, but does need to treated with more scrutiny.
I think the question body here hits on the two points I agree with most... Notability and Good Faith.
To see what I think the policy should be, skip to the bottom
The two ideas really go hand in hand. If you can show even a small amount of research as to why you are asking the ...
The downvote tooltip states:
This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful
The edit in question was removing:
I've searched both google and the site but looks like this hasn't been asked yet.
Whilst not terribly informative it is telling us what research they have already done and is also hinting at the question not ...
No, you don't.
However, the Upvote/Downvote alt tips indicate that the level of research you put into a question should guide voting.
I've never heard this theory before, and, without any supporting claims to provide a reference, it does seem completely unfounded and out of the blue.
Peer reviewed literary analysis seems like overkill as a requirement ...