Does LASSO suffer from the same problems stepwise regression does? is a well-received cromulent question I asked in June. The question has received several helpful comments pointing to insightful texts. However, none of these comments would serve as proper answers.

@mkt has converted the question to a community wiki under the rationale that "We have a dramatic gap between answers and questions." I disagree with this conversion and with the motivation for it. Our help center policy says "Community wiki posts have been donated to the community in hopes that others will edit them to keep them up to date, to add useful information, and generally improve their quality." Three months seems a short period of time to consider a question (and it's lack of answers during that period) in a niche topic "out of date."

Can this shift to community wiki be reverted?

  • 7
    $\begingroup$ You are mistaken: the question is not CW; only mkt's answer is. Everyone has a right to make their answers CW: why should we even want to override that? $\endgroup$ – whuber Sep 11 '19 at 16:01
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @whuber Thank you! I find community wiki to be somewhat opaque, and did not realize it applied to answers and questions separately. I have learned something, and see my error. :) $\endgroup$ – Alexis Sep 11 '19 at 16:03
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ CW is a bit of a vestige of earlier days. Our site has tolerated certain kinds of questions that require lists of answers (quotations, jokes, etc) that have long since been wiped out of SO and some other sites. Making those questions CW is one way to preserve them while making it clear they are exceptional. Making a question CW automatically makes its answers CW. Making answers, but not questions, CW is rare. This capability was intended to encourage community participation in the ongoing curation of an answer. $\endgroup$ – whuber Sep 11 '19 at 16:13
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Alexis On the Math SE, I've made 2 community wiki answers where I've just taken question comments, that basically answer the question but where the person has chosen not to write an answer (even in some cases where they've been asked). I've done this since the credit belongs to the commenters, not to me, so I don't think it's appropriate for me to receive reputation for the answers. In both cases, the answers received at least one up vote, so the posts are no longer part of the unanswered posts list, which is quite large (as I write this, it's 261,482 questions), so I try to help reducing it. $\endgroup$ – John Omielan Sep 12 '19 at 3:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JohnOmielan That's cool. As an aside to my CW misunderstanding here, answer provided in no way answers my question satisfactorily according to community guidelines: it's essentially a list of links with no explanation. $\endgroup$ – Alexis Sep 12 '19 at 4:06

@whuber points out a mistaken assumption in my question: I had falsely assumed that community wiki applied to questions and answers together as one piece, not separately.

I suppose, in the fashion of Zen, the acceptable answer to my question is mu: unask the question.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ But this answer applies only to the specific case, which is a misunderstanding. What about the question in general 'Is it possible to revert community wiki status?'. $\endgroup$ – Sextus Empiricus Sep 12 '19 at 13:41

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .