2 deleted 12 characters in body
source | link

I believe this is a pretty similar question to If a claim is commonly accepted, does questioning it require a notable counter-claim?

My proposed answer there I think applies here too - in summary:

TL;DR: We should only demand evidence of notability in one direction, and accept genuine disbelief of the claim by the OP as being sufficiently notable in the other.

Looking at your example questions:

  • Proof that the earth is round? was closed because the notability source was a humour site, rather than for being off-topic.

  • Proof that the earth is round?Is the Earth flat? was edited by two mods, and re-opened once by a mod (me), before being closed by 5 members of the community. Interesting that the mods think it is on-topic but the community doesn't. (I want to take a lesson from that, but I haven't yet.)

  • Is the sky blue? Under my proposal, the OP would be asked to why they are skeptical, to see if the question has been asked in good faith, and if so, should be on topic. [Aside: Using "The sky is blue" as an example of an obvious fact has always struck me as hilarious. It is often black, white, red, pink, yellow...

  • Do Dutch parents really drop their kids in the woods? Seems on-topic, but one where the simplest of Google searches would address it. [Aside: I would already be editing out the "really" before I had finished reading the rest of the question.

  • Do American kids really sing to the flag? It would be clearer if the question had a scope - ALL US kids? SOME US kids? In 2019?

I believe this is a pretty similar question to If a claim is commonly accepted, does questioning it require a notable counter-claim?

My proposed answer there I think applies here too - in summary:

TL;DR: We should only demand evidence of notability in one direction, and accept genuine disbelief of the claim by the OP as being sufficiently notable in the other.

Looking at your example questions:

  • Proof that the earth is round? was closed because the notability source was a humour site, rather than for being off-topic.

  • Proof that the earth is round? was edited by two mods, and re-opened once by a mod (me), before being closed by 5 members of the community. Interesting that the mods think it is on-topic but the community doesn't. (I want to take a lesson from that, but I haven't yet.)

  • Is the sky blue? Under my proposal, the OP would be asked to why they are skeptical, to see if the question has been asked in good faith, and if so, should be on topic. [Aside: Using "The sky is blue" as an example of an obvious fact has always struck me as hilarious. It is often black, white, red, pink, yellow...

  • Do Dutch parents really drop their kids in the woods? Seems on-topic, but one where the simplest of Google searches would address it. [Aside: I would already be editing out the "really" before I had finished reading the rest of the question.

  • Do American kids really sing to the flag? It would be clearer if the question had a scope - ALL US kids? SOME US kids? In 2019?

I believe this is a pretty similar question to If a claim is commonly accepted, does questioning it require a notable counter-claim?

My proposed answer there I think applies here too - in summary:

TL;DR: We should only demand evidence of notability in one direction, and accept genuine disbelief of the claim by the OP as being sufficiently notable in the other.

Looking at your example questions:

  • Proof that the earth is round? was closed because the notability source was a humour site, rather than for being off-topic.

  • Is the Earth flat? was edited by two mods, and re-opened once by a mod (me), before being closed by 5 members of the community. Interesting that the mods think it is on-topic but the community doesn't. (I want to take a lesson from that, but I haven't yet.)

  • Is the sky blue? Under my proposal, the OP would be asked to why they are skeptical, to see if the question has been asked in good faith, and if so, should be on topic. [Aside: Using "The sky is blue" as an example of an obvious fact has always struck me as hilarious. It is often black, white, red, pink, yellow...

  • Do Dutch parents really drop their kids in the woods? Seems on-topic, but one where the simplest of Google searches would address it. [Aside: I would already be editing out the "really" before I had finished reading the rest of the question.

  • Do American kids really sing to the flag? It would be clearer if the question had a scope - ALL US kids? SOME US kids? In 2019?

1
source | link

I believe this is a pretty similar question to If a claim is commonly accepted, does questioning it require a notable counter-claim?

My proposed answer there I think applies here too - in summary:

TL;DR: We should only demand evidence of notability in one direction, and accept genuine disbelief of the claim by the OP as being sufficiently notable in the other.

Looking at your example questions:

  • Proof that the earth is round? was closed because the notability source was a humour site, rather than for being off-topic.

  • Proof that the earth is round? was edited by two mods, and re-opened once by a mod (me), before being closed by 5 members of the community. Interesting that the mods think it is on-topic but the community doesn't. (I want to take a lesson from that, but I haven't yet.)

  • Is the sky blue? Under my proposal, the OP would be asked to why they are skeptical, to see if the question has been asked in good faith, and if so, should be on topic. [Aside: Using "The sky is blue" as an example of an obvious fact has always struck me as hilarious. It is often black, white, red, pink, yellow...

  • Do Dutch parents really drop their kids in the woods? Seems on-topic, but one where the simplest of Google searches would address it. [Aside: I would already be editing out the "really" before I had finished reading the rest of the question.

  • Do American kids really sing to the flag? It would be clearer if the question had a scope - ALL US kids? SOME US kids? In 2019?