12

In general specific questions are better than very broad open-ended questions (even when they're not too broad to stay open). "Add to my understanding" is not usually a good question. In particular it's better to try to make a question that would be useful to the next person as well as yourself, even if a good answer ends up repeating some things you ...


10

A reference request could be too broad. For example, some reference requests would run into the "too many possible answers" criterion for being overly broad. As such, askers of such requests should take care to do what they can to narrow the scope of their question (e.g. make it clear what they know and what they need, for example, so that a book of about ...


10

I think it is debatable whether this Q is "primarily opinion-based" (our closing reason) or not, but it seems to me that it is clearly "too broad". It asks about classical statistics vs machine learning, then about frequentist statistics vs Bayesian statistics, and then about book recommendations on "good" statistics. A poor question that should be closed. ...


9

This is StackExchange. However you might feel about it, it's a little different than an ask-anything-you-want site. Our help is clear: Focus on questions about an actual problem you have faced. Include details about what you have tried and exactly what you are trying to do. When questions of a more diffuse or extensive nature appear, we request that ...


8

The question is pretty much answered in the comments (and complemented in the brief exchange in chat), but I'll compile all that here just to make sure the question isn't left unanswered. Basically, we're not the best place for open-ended discussions. As the tour points out, our model is best suited to "[a]sk questions, get answers, no distractions" and ...


8

Like Peter I sometimes wish we had less generalized closure reasons because the description that comes with "too broad" seems very catch-all. However, that can sometimes be useful when dealing with questions which actually demonstrate several of the listed problems! I think the remedy if the close-reason text seems (however ironically) unhelpfully broad for ...


6

Yes, this is too opinion based for CV. A blog post would be more reasonable.


5

Waiting for someone else step in and provide a complete answer there, when such answers already exist, but in different posts seems unlikely, besides a little bit counterproductive. Alternatively, you can accept the answer to your main question, i.e., the question number 1, which is more closely tied with the question's title and; simultaneously edit that ...


5

One option is to provide a list of potential approaches and a corresponding set of general resources in meta - much as we do for questions about software (one package with links per answer); in this case one methodology with resource links per answer. Then when we go to close as too broad we can point directly to that assistance. It's a fair bit of work to ...


4

[Trying to rectify my frequent mistake of posting comments instead of answers] I think it's both an interesting topic of discussion and completely unsuitable for CV, unfortunately. How one ought to deal with this would differ not just by field, but also by type of study (experiment/observation), possibility and cost of obtaining new data, nature & ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible