How to improve 'Software that will print everybody - related and unrelated'

Question

I've closed a question: Software that will print everybody related and unrelated -- what should I look for? that is a 'shopping list' question as it stands, although I think it stands a good chance of being improvable, if the OP responds with her real problem. I'm hoping this will make a good test of our capability to close-improve-reopen questions, so please don't pass over it on the assumption that it's closed so it's unsalvageable.

Edited to add: One reason I've taken this approach is that I've noticed that the community seems to have stopped casting 'close' votes. It's one of the important mechanisms for maintaining quality around here, so I'm curious why we're not using it.

---

Also edited to add the exchange of comments on the OP (which I've now deleted so as not to confuse the OP):

@ColeValleyGirl I'm curious about the closing of this question. Did you want to give the OP a chance to improve upon it first? – fbrereto

@fbrereto, I've closed it (as per my comment) to give the OP a chance to improve it with my and others help. As soon as it's not a 'shopping question' I'll re-open it. – ColeValleyGirl

@ColeValleyGirl While I understand that intent, there is a sense of finality to closing a question (especially to someone browsing the main page) that restricts the attention or editing that it may need to become a valuable question. I defer to the decision you have made, but am reserved about how closing the question will contribute to making it better. – fbrereto 53 mins ago

@fbrereto Shall we take this to chat or meta? – ColeValleyGirl

---

Edit again to add: After changes by lkessler (Thank you!), I've re-opened and tidied the comments up. Also made a suggestion to the OP that -- if the updated Q doesn't address her real problem -- she raise a second Q that focuses n what she's trying to do, not software selection.

Answer 1

Yes, I agree with @fbrereto that closing a question, especially to a new user who doesn't understand, simply sounds like their question was rejected. They may never return.

Even with all my experience on StackExchange sites, I still get offended when one of my questions is closed. It's a natural reaction. Closing should be something delayed until necessary.

Better would be if you, as a moderator, (or anyone else) add a comment stating to them that this is a "shopping list" question which is not acceptable for this Q&A forum, and that they'll need to change their question to try to solve a problem they're having, or their question may be closed by the other people on the forum.

Of course, she did state her problem. It's that she's "looking for a software package that will list/chart/print "Everybody" that she has entered in her database ... Any advice appreciated." Well, that does not have to be a shopping list. Rather than just listing specific programs, advice can be given on what TYPE of programs to look for, what features it should have, and why a large chart is actually not useful.

Also, none of the 5 reasons for closure is truly appropriate for list questions. You used the best one, "Not Constructive", but there is nothing in that says the real reason why it was closed was that it was asking for shopping list. The reasons of that closure don't apply to a shopping list. A shopping list is made up of facts, references, and it takes expertise to know about some of the sites. Links don't generate debate or arguments or polling any more than answers to any other question would. So the reaction to closure for that reason is: "Huh??? This site is dumb."

Answer 2

Perhaps unique in genealogy, most of us joyfully welcome a newcomer--it means another family history will likely be memorialized. There is a general notion that many will benefit down the road.

For me, this meta touches this issue.

One of the really great things about Genealogy.SE is that we don't all bring the same expertise and perspective to a question. Especially in the case of those new to genealogy, this means that often some community members will understand the residual elements of a question better than others.

Duck.

1. Every soul posting as new to genealogy would get a 36 or 48 hour pass in my world.
2. Those experts who think they "get" the question ought to use that grace period to try to edit the question for clarity or take a stab at answering the question as they understand same.
3. During that grace period, others in the community are welcome to comment on the question and seek clarity from the poster. (One day we'll have a great blog post about this too.)
4. After the grace period has passed, regardless of whether answers have been posted, if the question has not been improved for quality, all bets are off. In other words, after the grace period has ended, votes to close (preferably with comment) are welcome.

In the case of the question that triggered this meta, I wouldn't take a stab at the answer because I really wasn't sure what Heather was after. Ala, my notions of an answer ranged from something as simple as a gedcom text output (sans sources and citations), to an elaborate unconnected series of hourglass charts.

P.S. Another reminder, too, that for some of us, English is a second language. This may influence how questions, and answers, are initially written.