0

Are questions like What is the Atacama Humanoid? okay?

  • If so, what is the notable source making the claim that should be linked to in this case?

Or must all questions be of the form "Is [the claim] true?"

  • If so, what should we do with questions that don't challenge a claim?
| |
  • I don't see how this question is significantly different from your earlier one about the same subject – Mad Scientist May 22 '13 at 15:54
  • @Fabian The other one got voted down with no explanations, so I assumed it was about my particular criticism and points for improvement about the example question. This one strips those out and just asks for "what should we do" rather than for judgement about my suggestions. This one is just a question with no suggested answer, so hopefully it is neutral enough to not be downvoted. I've voted to reopen this. – user5582 May 22 '13 at 15:55
  • If you want, I can close them the other way around, if you think this version will be more productive – Mad Scientist May 22 '13 at 15:59
  • Yes, could you please do that? – user5582 May 22 '13 at 15:59
  • Downvotes on Meta mean “I disagree with the opinion voiced here”, not necessarily that it was a bad question. – Konrad Rudolph May 22 '13 at 16:00
  • @KonradRudolph I know, so I tried to remove opinion from this question. – user5582 May 22 '13 at 16:00
  • I don't get why you pick so much on that question. It's a fairly weak question, sure, but it's passable(just barely though). – Wertilq May 22 '13 at 17:45
  • You're making new questions about it, where you're questioning if it's useful. This meta question is centered around it, so is the other one. If you wanted to be neutral then either bring a bunch of questions, or don't use a question as an example. – Wertilq May 22 '13 at 18:37
  • You've made 3 meta questions already about the question pretty much. – Wertilq May 22 '13 at 21:10
  • The number of times you think I've asked something is off-topic for comments. – user5582 May 22 '13 at 21:46
3

I am trying to properly understand what aspect of the Atacama question is causing concern.

It seems to be that rather than two competing hypotheses (i.e. X is true versus X is not true), there are many (i.e. X1 is true, X2 is true, X3 is true, or none are true.).

Yes, this is fine.

There should be notable claims for all bar one of the competing claims (where the exception is the (hopefully most prosaic) variant claim that the OP believes, if there is one.)

In the example Atacama question, all of these options are listed as possibilities in the two given references.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.