Then do us the same courtesy
If you don't care about our political opinions (and you shouldn't; this isn't Politics.SE!), then please ensure that we're not being asked to care about (or silently tolerate) yours.
This answer makes a good case in point. A diamond mod has:
Taken it upon themselves to completely rewrite the original (and already accepted) ...
I just wanted to add a counterpoint to the other answer:
I think the moderators have been doing an exceptional job keeping things on track under difficult circumstances. (I do not envy them this job.)
Let's note that there is a dictionary definition for this word:
not false or copied; genuine; real:
an authentic antique.
having the origin supported by unquestionable evidence; authenticated; verified:
an authentic document of the Middle Ages; an authentic work of the old master.
entitled to acceptance or belief because of agreement with known ...
I'm not one of the (current) downvoters on any of those questions and I can't speak for all of the downvoters, but based on comments I've seen on your questions there are a few reasons you could be receiving the downvotes:
In two of the three questions you linked here, you have only provided various videos and articles containing a number of claims, rather ...
One of the sites you link in the comments gives useful advice. I propose we follow it.
Advice for digital media
Apply extra vigilance when using online sources for
a suicide story. Speculation about a death or the
circumstances surrounding a person dying can easily
be misreported or wrongly repeated as fact. The
instantaneous and ‘viral’ ...
I think most of the ISIS questions are getting good-quality answers.
Did Snowden reveal that ISIS is a USA-Israel tactic? has received three answers. One with 20 upvotes and +75 for bounty (unawarded?), one with 5 upvotes and an acception, and one with 3 upvotes from a user with a history of so-so answers
Is ISIS beheading children in Mosul, Iraq? has one ...
If a meme is generally circulated and is accepted as a fact or true by a significant number of people then, yes, it should be acceptable as a notable claim. For example, if Jon Stewart makes a joke about something on The Daily Show and the audience believes it, then it would appropriate for this site to have a question asking if that claim was actually true, ...
As agreed in that answer, it is essential that a claim be notable. It is important, but not essential, that the claim be represented with an example.
For all the reasons you give, and more, it is important to have a notable reference:
Makes the question more specific, which in some cases it's necessary
Helps identify strawmen, where the OP has ...
I think this is a special case of what was once called "Too localized." That is to say, the evidence available in determining the answer changes rapidly. What appears to be the correct answer today may be proven wrong by information discovered tomorrow.
Would it therefore be appropriate to put a ban on current events questions? Of course, that would ...
Certainly yes! Add the question, and, if you will, the answer, supported by references.
Etiquette for answering your own question
Just post your answer immediately after you post the question. Like you say, phrase it as a request for comments to improve your solution. Your intentions are clear --- I wouldn't think you were trying to generate reputation. ...
Ooh, tricky one!
Let's go back to our motivations for the rule here, to see if they help.
One reason for asking for notability references is to demonstrate it isn't just a speculative idea of the poster from the equivalent of a drunk discussion in a bar. The problem with those types of questions is:
(a) there is an infinite supply of them. If we accepted ...
I was the moderator who did the "major" edit. I am sorry to hear you were unhappy with it. Let me explain some of the edits, in more detail than would fit in a comment, so you can see they were made in good faith.
The title was "Hinduism and the Sun becoming a red giant" which had three separate issues. Each was minor, but together they triggered me to edit ...
Wow. I am normally in a distant timezone to the bulk of our users. This affords me the luxury of editing slowly. In this case, I was awake at an unusual hour. I didn't realise there would be so much activity!
I was browsing on my phone, on the way to my desktop, when I first saw the question. I put the first version of the question on hold, and planned to ...
I have some guesses as to why the community might be reacting this way, and some suggestions, but please just take them as guesses and suggestions, not mod directives.
You have been very active, with lots of questions over a short period. I think that's great - and the velocity of your reputation growth is impressive.
However, I fear some of ...
I believe these to hold truth:
The comments are disabled because rejected migrations are automatically locked. This is an entirely automatic system.
Further to that: closing the question here sends it back to Politics, where the comments are still present and active. There's no point having the same stuff over here
Trump is the object of the claim, in other words what the claim is about, and this means that the tag is appropriate.
If Trump were the subject of the claim, in other words the claimant, then the tag should not be used.
Trump said that the Earth is flat (DO NOT USE)
Is trump a reptilian? (USE)
Trump said he is a reptilian, is it true? (USE)
Compare with ...
We should use the units more familiar to an international audience. Wikipedia claims "SI is the world's most widely used system of measurement"
However, units in quotations from other sources should be left alone to preserve their integrity. Conversions to metric units can be provided outside the quotation.
The relevant FAQ entry about motivation questions is here and the discussion about it is here.
Personally, I don't have a problem with your question, but if it is causing people to (mis)read it as question about motivations, you could tweak it to replace:
Can anyone shed some light on whether or not it is actually banned, and if so, what the actual ...
In general, yes.
Don't ask questions which are theoretically unanswerable.
Don't ask question which contravene the site rules.
There are other (on-topic) questions which are difficult to answer. If you think they're impossible to answer then you won't be disappointed if they're unanswered, still you may sometimes be pleasantly surprised, that someone is ...
The question has already been reopened.
We already have a rule not to put on hold questions which are obviously about notable topics, and to tell you more, "obviously notable" is defined as: "a quick Google search finds many results asserting the claim".
Clearly the mod in question must have not found much. It happens. In these cases a couple of more users ...
In this topic I asked whether it's necessary to post a reference with every question:
Must every questioned 'notable claim' include a referenced citation with a quote?
The accepted answer to that was "no": that a reference is often useful, but that sometimes there can be a (well-known) "notable claim" without any specific reference.
I thought your topic ...
No, this would not be on topic on either meta or the main site.
You may have a valid question on Cross Validated, a Stack Exchange site "for people interested in statistics, machine learning, data analysis, data mining, and data visualization". I suspect such a question has been asked before and you could likely find it with some searching.
Don't forget that there are other Stack Exchange sites!
Skeptics prefers controversial questions where there is an active dispute, with proponents on both sides of an issue. But many of your questions are not like this—there is no active controversy over the issue, so what you have is a plain question of fact in "skeptical" disguise. You can attempt to ...
They are certainly not off topic as long as they are notable - believed by a lot of people. There is nothing preventing those claims to be relevant enough to be interesting here.
The comment was a pseudo-answer and I deleted it - comments should not attempt to answer the questions, of course.
The list of questions that might already answer the question is important to find duplicates, I would not want to remove that one. It is certainly not perfect, but it works reasonably well in my experience. The huge number of questions you see in your screenshot is a known bug that was reported a while ago, that one obviously wasn't fixed here on Skeptics.
The distortion of the original article by the media, or even the authors themselves, is part of the question, and we can't just remove that aspect. When a question asks about a recent study mentioned in the media, there are actually several questions that have to be answered:
Is the paper represented correctly in the media?
Is the paper itself reliable?
I think in this case the OP just chose a bad notable claim, but the question is a valid one. Ive read enough pop sci books to know that the whole subject of bycycle stability is one that comes up time and time again.
I would say no, obviously not: if the claim isn’t serious, then neither is it notable.
But Cracked.com isn’t (solely) a website of satire and humor, and the claim is actually a serious one (and surprisingly at least partially true – see the comments). I wouldn’t say that a Cracked.com claim is necessarily less notable than from, say, Daily Mail.
First, I am not a moderator or other official represntative, but after hanging around a while I would offer the following answer:
No, I would say that posting on the Skeptics site will not, in general, enable you to collect research into current trends of internet privacy and regulation. It is not a general research or Q&A site.
However, if during ...