0

Wie behandeln wir die Schäckern-Frage?

Die Schäckern-Frage ist fast ein Jahr alt, aber poppte kürzlich wieder in ihrer falschen Schreibung auf Seite 1 vor. Spontan korrigierte ich die Schreibung, und gab einen kurzen Kommentar ab, dass die Schreibung falsch war, und die Übersetzung sich mit richtiger Schreibung trivial finden läßt.

Danach bemerkte ich, dass die Frage schon 2 Antworten hat, die aber die falsche Schreibung thematisierten, während die Frage war, was schäckern bedeutet, nicht wie man es schreibt.

Erst war ich erbost, dass die Leute erst antworten, bevor sie die Frage zu korrigieren versuchen, aber dann sah ich, dass die Frage uralt ist, und die Leute die Frage gar nicht korrigiert haben, was ja auch die Auseinandersetzung mit der Falschschreibung konterkarieren würde.

Die richtige Vorgehensweise, meinem Verständnis nach, wäre gewesen, die Schreibung, insbesondere in der Überschrift, zu korrigieren. Dann wäre aber eine triviale Frage übriggeblieben, die jedes Wörterbuch beantwortet.

Tatsächlich schlägt dict.leo.org sogar die richtige Schreibung vor, wenn man nach 'schäckern' sucht.

Die Frage gehört also abgewertet, weil sie keinerlei Bemühungen zeigt, und sie gehört, gemäß der Regeln, geschlossen.

Jetzt ist das Kind in den Brunnen gefallen, und Personen haben massig Reputation geerntet, und mir ist nicht sehr wichtig, ob wir über den Regelverstoß hinweggehen oder nicht.

Ich wollte nur die Frage diskutieren, wie wir in Zukunft mit Fällen umgehen, in denen Schreibfehler (aus welchen Gründen auch immer, außer Absicht) in der Überschrift stehen, aber die Diskussion ging völlig in die falsche Richtung - niemand will es mit mir diskutieren, sondern alle wollen den Schäckern-Fall diskutieren.

Bitte tut das jetzt und hier, und zieht Eure Off-topic-Beiträge aus dem Spelling mistakes in question Thread ab.

Damit es hier aber etwas kontrovers losgehen kann vertrete ich die Falkenposition: Der Schäckern-Thread gehört, nachdem man die Überschrift korrigiert, geschlossen, weil er eine triviale Übersetzungsanfrage darstellt, und damit unseren Regeln widerspricht.


How do we handle the schäckern question?

The schäckern question is about a year old. It gained fresh attention recently and appeared in its wrong spelling on page one. I corrected the spelling immediately and commented, that the spelling is wrong, and how easy a translation can be find.

Then I realized, that the question already had 2 answers, which talked about the wrong spelling, while the real topic was, what the meaning/a translation would be, not what the right spelling is.

In the beginning I was angry, that the people answer, before correcting it, but then I realized, that the question is pretty old, and the people didn't intend to correct it at all. Well, correcting it would have rendered their comments on the spelling useless.

The right way to handle the case would have been, IMHO, to correct the spelling, and close the question as a trivial translation request.

Indeed, dict.leo.org suggests the right spelling, if you ask for the wrong one, so the question deserves down voting, since it doesn't show any research effort, and then, according to the rules, closed.

But now, the answers have happened, people gained reputation, and it isn't that important for me.

But I liked to start a discussion about the question, how we handle spelling mistakes in questions, especially in headlines, but the discussion instantly left the topic, and people discuss the schäckern case, not my question.

So this question here is a kind of fly trap. Please discuss the details of the schäckern question here, and move your off topic answers away from my question about Spelling mistakes in question Thread .

To have a controversal starting point, I take the hardliner position here: Close the schäckern thread, after correctiong the headline, because it is a trivial translation request, and has never been about the right spelling. It violates our rules.

  • I'd like "insufficient research" as a close-reason. The only closest close-reason would be "off-topic". – Tim Feb 4 '12 at 19:14
  • According to the FAQ Questions that are not a good fit for this site may be voted closed by experienced community members. and later too localized: This question is unlikely to ever help any future visitors; ... Simple translation requests are a common pattern of too localized on language pages. And: Questions that are extremely off topic, or of very low quality, may be removed at the discretion of the community and moderators. Low quality is IMHO, what is described by a tooltip text for down voting: does not show any research effort. – user unknown Feb 4 '12 at 19:33
2

My answer is not off topic there, it addresses both this case and future cases, but I'll re-word my thoughts here.

If the typo/mistake/whatever is the central point of the question, i.e. the OP is asking about it, you try to understand his/her research effort and:

  1. ...if it is sufficient, we don't edit then we answer the question saying something like "look, you researched but the spelling is wrong, X is the right word. [...]". This is because since the research was done and the OP is asking about that word, if you edit it, you'll change the question content and the original intent of the OP.

  2. ...if it is not sufficient, I suggest we don't edit, post a quick comment and vote to close. Because even if the edit is a central point, it doesn't matter, the OP didn't make enough research. Why not edit? This way future visitors will see the comment, they will understand the spelling is wrong and go on.

If the spelling is not central and it's in the body, simply edit it.

  • The central point of the question, if there is an unconscious spelling mistake, is not the spelling. As in above example, it might be the central reason for the question at all, but the content of the question was, what the meaning of the word is - not what it's spelling is. The original intent is to find the meaning of the word. – user unknown Feb 28 '12 at 13:27
2

I think you're right that low quality question which result from incorrect spellings should be closed or at least corrected if they contain some other interesting part.

For example, some words changed their orthography or had multiple valid Schreibweisen. For example, the author of the question could have found it in an old book:

https://www.google.com/search?q=sch%C3%A4ckern&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1

or German words that native or non-native speaker often misspell.

  • Maybe I'm unable to express myself clearly. Your answer seems to me more like an contribution to a general answer, how to handle such and similar errors - not this error in particular. So it would be a better fit for my other question. This here is the honeypot, to keep the other question free from too specific discusions about the shäckern question. Or did I understand you wrong, and you believe, the schäckern-Question was influenced by an old book, or is a typical spelling mistake? – user unknown Mar 15 '12 at 1:02
  • 1
    @userunknown I asked myself why the OP misspelled the word. My guess is that it's a common misspelling or that the spelling had changed in the course of time. So, while here it seems to be a clear case (the correct spelling was always schäkern - I closed the question now), we have to be careful. There might be cases where a question would make sense and other people on the Internet could search for such answers. – splattne Mar 15 '12 at 6:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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