1

My question was put on hold, and then closed, as falling under the category, primarily oppinion based. The question was about the proper usage of articles in a statement, which is a topic welcomed here. An answer to it could not be just a matter of opinion, for the usage of the articles in the statement could be either correct or incorrect, calling for at least an yes or no answer. Could someone clarify the subject matter of my concern? Here is the link to my question.

| |
9

It's not a very well-written question. I found it to be a little hard to follow.

I think the most troublesome part of your question is this:

the so-called problem of perception is not generated by perception itself but by an irrelevant way of thinking about it.

For people who have not been studying the problem to the degree you have, that's confusing. At least at first glance, your question seems to essentially boil down to:

I want to write a paper about X. Have I picked a good title for it?

And that's why it was closed as "opinion-based". We don't know enough about the topic to help you decide if it's a good title.

I don't know what the close voters were thinking when the cast their votes; I can only speculate. However, the five people who voted to close your question are some of the most active, experienced, and well-respected users on the site. Therefore, I don't think I'm too far off the mark when I say that your question seemed to be too much about "Is this a good title?" and not enough about "Am I using these articles correctly?"

I would try reformatting your question with the following recommendations:

1) Put the title on its own line in a block quote. The way it wraps onto a second line makes it hard to follow.

2) Spend a little extra time giving us more background about what your paper is actually about. Evidently, one sentence is not enough.

3) Spend more time explaining why you think the articles might be used wrongly. People who ask "Is this right or wrong?" or "Is this good or bad?" seldom get highly upvoted questions unless they do a good job of explaining what research they have already done, and why they are still confused, puzzled, or unsure about the issue.

| |
  • Do you mean that it is hardly possible to assess how well the articles do their job of supporting the explained meaning in the title in that the meaning itself is not enough clearly explained? On this assumption, I will elaborate on it in my question. I, too, will try to follow your recommendations there and would be thankful to you if you inform me if the edit makes a difference. – Giorgi Apr 21 '17 at 12:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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