I found this answer while searching posts, and noticed it was nothing but a link. As such, I flagged it as NAA (because I couldn't flag as VLQ). However, it was quickly declined with the following:


While I could understand the rest of my declined NAA/VLQ flags, I don't see how this answer would fit any of the link-only exceptions. So why was this declined?

  • 5
    because... they felt the answer shouldn't be deleted (i'd guess...). I tend to agree with that in this case. Does deleting that answer really make this site a better place? Does it improve the question? does it make it easier to find the best answer? (is it the best answer?) – Kevin B Dec 20 '16 at 17:45
  • 6
    Even if the link goes bad, or is removed, the text contains enough information to find the answer. – Heretic Monkey Dec 20 '16 at 17:52
  • @MikeMcCaughan An answer on SO is expected to answer the question, not to tell you how to find the answer to the question. That doesn't just mean web links, any answer that merely indicates where you can go to find the answer, rather than being an answer isn't an answer, which would apply to the title of an external publication just as much as it would a web link. – Servy Dec 20 '16 at 18:24
  • 4
    Also, it's from '09, and if everybody went through posts that old, the mod queue would be at about 375k. Don't bother asking mods to look at something over five years old unless it's truly egregious (spam, rude, vulgar, etc). Feel free to use your votes and your close/delete votes where appropriate. – Will Dec 20 '16 at 18:31
  • posting just a link as an answer isn't helpful. Perhaps suggesting an edit that gives some context to a link would be better than deleting it outright. – Marshall Tigerus Dec 20 '16 at 18:49

It's pretty borderline, but it does contain enough information to be of some utility without the link: the IETF RFC number. There's also a bit of descriptive text. Unlike the contents of URLs, it's extremely unlikely that we'll lose track of an RFC, which takes care of one of the two big complaints about link-only answers.

The other complaint, of course, is that answers which are naught but a link don't actually answer the question; that is, they're not self-contained, but rather require the reader to visit another place in order to find the answer. That problem still exists here.

This presents a quandary, since clearly a good many people have found the RFC a useful and sufficient answer; the simple solution then is to edit it to comply with our usual standards by adding a short excerpt from the linked RFC that suffices to answer the question, leaving the link as both a source for the quote and further reading for interested readers. I've gone ahead and done this. Of course, you could have done this as well.

As a general rule, moderators are reluctant to delete answers which have proven themselves useful if that utility is still present. If there's even a little bit of useful information, there's a decent chance the flag will be declined, since by far the most expedient way to fix these is to edit them... And of course, anyone can edit them.

See also: Cleanup 500 old terse answers that either have hidden value or indicate awful questions

  • Was that answer part of the cleanup effort? – Braiam Dec 20 '16 at 19:02
  • 1
    No, @Braiam. If you increase MaxBodyLengthWithoutUrl on that query to 45 it'll pull it in (the values chosen for that cleanup were meant to hit primarily answers that would've been blocked had they been posted a few years later). – Shog9 Dec 20 '16 at 19:34

You must log in to answer this question.

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