8

Recently, we've had a fair few questions come in that all relate to mis-handling of assemblies and references. Mostly in conjunction with upgrading, but not exclusively so.

They don't really make for good questions for this site and should be closed; but we have no well-defined reason on our list of "reasons to close" that fits this scenario.

A few examples (not all of them clear-cut out of scope, but borderlining):

In case anyone is wondering why these should be closed at all, the reason is: These questions rarely (if ever) fit our format for What Makes a Good Question, they don't often give an option to provide a meaningful good answer other than "check your assembly references/configs/etc" and they often rely heavily on Q&A in comments before any conclusions can be reached.

And if we consider the longevity of the Q&A; "Issue with Glass Mapper/WFFM/SPE or whatever in 8.1" - well, often, there was no issue with either product or tech - just some basic mistakes or oversights on OPs part. We end up closing these after-the-fact.

So. Should we add a custom "vote to close" reason to help with these types of questions? And if so, any suggestions on wording would be highly appreciated by this non-native English speaker ;-)

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
7

I think that this is a really good meta topic. I agree that there should be a 3rd VTC option for these types of cases. I also want to be sensitive to the person asking the question, because in many cases, they are dealing with a live fire (from their POV) and looking for assistance.

But the case remains that the format of this site is not sufficient or suitable for that type of support.

So I vote YES for a Third Option.

As for the text. let me see...

  • This question is in regards to the mishandling of DLL's or references, generally related to an in-progress upgrade or similar scenario. These types of questions generally involve lengthy troubleshooting in order to identify the root cause, which makes the question unsuitable. Try using chat or visit Sitecore Slack to find assistance.

Something along that line. The point being, we should make sure we direct the user to some channel where he can possibly get help.

4
  • 1
    My thoughts exactly! I was even thinking that we should suggest alternate mediums, like Sitecore Slack.
    – Zachary Kniebel
    Commented Feb 2, 2017 at 17:14
  • 1
    I like that wording, we don't want to put people off from using the site by being rude, but I think that says it in a nice way and points them to where they can get help from.
    – Richard Seal Mod
    Commented Feb 2, 2017 at 18:18
  • 1
    I've added the reason. Pending approval by the other mods, it will start showing up shortly. I had to abbreviate your text slightly Pete due to length restrictions. We can always amend if it doesn't feel quite right.
    – Mark Cassidy Mod
    Commented Feb 3, 2017 at 23:59
  • Sounds good, Im sure it will be good.
    – Pete Navarra
    Commented Feb 4, 2017 at 0:01
1

I still want to help these people however.

Given the broad troubleshooting nature of questions like these, is it viable to perhaps cook up a list of troubleshooting steps they should always take?

Am thinking along the lines of a Community Wiki post where we list up the 10 or so (or whatever) steps that will likely take care of 80% of these questions. If we manage to get this right, we can avoid shutting cutting these people off from getting help and link to said Wiki in the close reason.

It requires someone to step up and actually author this thing, however.

You must log in to answer this question.

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