I was originally going to leave this as a comment on the question that prompted this, but it was a little chatty - and the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to have larger implications for the site as a whole.

The question "The garden in Parfum Palace" as originally worded might be asking one of a few things:

I want to know about the garden of the Parfum Palace in Pokemon Y. I know the 3 type mazes in the garden but the fourth one is a mystery please tell me thank you.

  • For one, when viewed from afar, three of the 'mazes' are clearly pokemon. A Solrock, Chandelure, and Pyroar. But is the fourth representative of anything?
  • Alternatively is the question the one that ended up getting an answer; How to solve the Furfrou puzzle?
  • Or it it asking something else entirely? The question was vaguely worded regarding what exactly the user wanted to know about the 'fourth' maze. Heck, even I'm assuming that the user is asking about the top-left maze - as it is the one of the four that is the most dissimilar to the other three and is associated with the main-quest.

So I voted to close the question as unclear, and four others agreed. But there was an answer that interpreted the question to be the second option above. After the answer was discussed a bit in the comments, this was said:

At the end of the day, OP is not asking a question. If you think there is a question, and in your perception it is quite obvious, you are free to edit it in. Put "added obvious question to prevent closure" or similar as the edit summary, and post a comment saying "i think it is obvious you meant to ask , so im adding it in to prevent the question being closed. Feel free to rollback the edit, but make sure you add your intended question, or this question is likely to be closed"

So the question about how to solve the Furfrou puzzle was edited into the question, and is currently up for re-open votes (which is how the question got back on my radar).

So my meta question is:

Should we be adding the question to otherwise unclear and completely vague questions? At what point in our attempts to clarify an asker's question have we assumed too much?

  • 1
    I would say absolutely, unequivocally no.
    – Dallium
    Dec 12, 2015 at 19:21
  • Im going to have to go searching, now, but this was discussed already, on meta. We favour keeping the question alive over automatically closing, when we are confident that was OPs intentions. OP can rollback, if they like.
    – user106385
    Dec 12, 2015 at 21:05


Browse other questions tagged .