I believe all sites should be available in the closure UI.  Then when a site is not actually available for automatic migration, other options should appear.  What appears will depend upon the site and/or why the site is not available for automatic migration.  (This question was added using the mobile site, and so without the benefit of suggested existing questions, or a preview.)  I originally thought this when a code-golf-like question was posted on Stack Overflow itself, and, accessing the site from a mobile, I wanted to quickly suggest that's where it should go. The current UI leaves you with a list of available migration sites and no further possibilities. You have to start over and try to choose the 'correct' option.
122440
Possible Duplicate:             At the moment, when you vote to close a question when it's off-topic, you can only vote to move it to one of these sites:  meta.stackoverflow.com   serverfault.com   superuser.com   webmasters.stackexchange.com   programmers.stackexchange.com     But sometimes the question is really a good one, but it would fit some other Stack&nbsp;Exchange site. And new users rarely know the difference. For example:  http://codereview.stackexchange.com   http://math.stackexchange.com http://scicomp.stackexchange.com http://cstheory.stackexchange.com http://android.stackexchange.com http://webapps.stackexchange.com   Anyway, I think giving the whole range of Stack&nbsp;Exchange sites in the off-topic option will help reduce the load on Stack&nbsp;Overflow and direct people to right sites.
46426
There's a sad little loophole in the suspension/question-block system: migrations.  Example: Let's say you've been suspended on MSO, but you really, really want to post a question here now. All you need to do is:   Go to any other site and ask your question.  Chances are good that a moderator there will automatically migrate it here. If not, request it. Success! Your question is now on MSO.   Can this be fixed? The best approach, imo, is to check if the user already has an account at the destination, and if they do, if they're allowed to post.
52895
Perhaps the site's question mechanism can learn the characteristics of previous migrations (keywords in title, tags etc.), and suggest that the user migrate their question prior to publishing it, or ask it at the better suited SOFU site, according to a history of questions with similar tags or titles previously migrated.  A short message like below can be helpful in the process.     Consider asking this question on , which discusses server related issues rather than programming questions.   The link will open the same question (including title and tags) in the new site. If the user isn't logged in to the other site, a profile copy should also be suggested.  This could save time, and route questions to the appropriate site more efficiently.  What do you think?  UPDATE: Following your answers and comments, I do believe that tag analysis is the right way to go. In my opinion, this message should appear just after typing the tags, near the Post your question button.
30014
Note: I am aware that the site switcher  of the page. This isn't a case of me clicking the wrong icon, it's a case of the site-switcher itself being a link to stackexchange.com (which is  behaviour, and ) for no good reason.      My browser can be pretty slow sometimes, and I often find myself in cases where I want to use the site-switcher . When I do, the site-switcher button acts like a normal link to stackexchange.com.  This is almost exactly never where I want to go when I click that button; pretty much every time I'm clicking on the site-switcher, it's because I want to access&hellip;   &hellip;the meta for the site I'm currently on &hellip;the chat for the site I'm currently on &hellip;one of the other sites I frequently use   These are all things that the site-switcher is great at doing. I'm happy, you're happy, everyone's happy. , on the other hand, doesn't really give me convenient access to any site metas, any chat rooms, or even really any other sites.  Sure, sometimes maybe I want to go to check out the hot questions feed, but if I was going to do that there's now a big "Stack Exchange" logo on the top left of the page that takes me right there (and much more intuitively). Having the site-switcher point there by default might've made sense in the old top-bar before there was a dedicated link, but right now it's just redundant and ultimately only exists to cause pain and frustration for all involved.  If you must have that icon point to somewhere, maybe a page that basically duplicates the site-switcher functionality (Even  would be better; at least that's actually "A list of all 171 Stack Exchange sites" like the mouseover text indicates).  Otherwise, I'd be pretty happy if that button just does nothing at all until the magic site-switching menu code I'm actually expecting actually loads up (which is already how the inbox, achievements and help icons behave when their javascript doesn't load).
53331
I just found  , and I must say I found it very useful; however, it was closed as "Off topic". Now, it hasn't generated all that many page views, but I would have loved it if it was open, in case something new came up in the past year it was closed.   The "Off topic" specification doesn't exactly explain what the problem is with the question; I see the point for Stack Overflow, given there is no actual coding problem discussed - but a user in that post points out:     (That aside, prepare for your question to be closed, it's a bit too close to "please provide me a list of", which isn't muchly appreciated)   Now, the thing is, a lot of times I actually would appreciate greatly a "provide me a list of" question, like in this case - however, I can see the point in this posting in particular not being on-topic for Stack Overflow.   My question then is - is there a place where such "listing" questions about computer software in general can be asked? I don't think it would fit in programmers.SE, and one may think superuser.com would be appropriate - but then again, its purpose could be understood as specific questions about how to do more advanced stuff with existing software, thereby excluding again listing questions.   If that is so, then where do such question belong? If Super User on the other hand is appropriate, wouldn't the referred post be better off moved to Super User, and opened for contributions there - instead of sitting on Stack Overflow closed?
8147
Sometimes a question gets closed as off-topic (not-migrated) while there is another site where the question is on-topic.  If a moderator wants to migrate the question, the moderator needs to reopen the question and then reclose it as off-topic and migrate the question.  It would nice if a moderator can migrate questions closed as off-topic without going through this process of reopening/reclosing.
87586
See also:   Many of the newer sites have a certain degree of overlap. With the creation of Chem.SE, I noticed quite a few questions on Physics.SE which could have benefited from the chem community and vice versa. There also are a few that could benefit from bio.SE.. Now these questions don't warrant a migration. They can be double-posted, but this doesn't lead to a smooth experience. Even when cross-linked, changes to either post (new answers,new comments,etc) aren't effectively relayed to the other site, and the two questions are just that-- two, separate questions. One solution that came to my mind was a &quot;soft migration&quot; option for mods. By this, a question on site A stays on site A. But, it appears in the site B question list as well. Edits/answers should bump it. Basically, there will be a placeholder item in the questions list of site B. It shows the votes/views/answers of the post on site A, along with the tags (maybe stylized differently). These should be an unobtrusive way to quickly identify what the site is. The post should also be bumped whenever the post is bumped on Site A, and it should display the rep/time/etc of the bumping user as usual. Here's a quick mockup of what happens on the site B question list:  Without being obtrusive or in-your-face (stuff like [migrated] is sort of in-your-face), the post is elegantly shown to be on Physics.SE (well, if you know the icon, anyway). The tags are italicized to show that they link to a different site tags, and the &quot;bumping user&quot; (me) has his/her rep on that site shown. We can also add an indicator on the question on site A () that shows that it was soft-migrated. We can use tooltips as well on the icons to tell us why they're here. After all, half of SE documentation is in tooltips.  Now I know that these issues will probably be raised:  Rep: An avid user on Site B gets no Site B rep for giving a good answer on Site A. Frankly, I don't care about this to much, but others may.  Implementation: It may get complicated. Internally, I'd propose that none of the question data is copied, rather Site A pushes the vote/bump data whenever a vote/bump happens. The easiest way to then implement the soft merge would be to have a table of questions soft-merged &quot;to&quot; site B on site B itself, with columns for all the vote/etc data. The questions table should have an extra column for &quot;soft-migrated to&quot;--that way Site A can determine where to push new data to on every vote/bump. Now, all Site B has to do is take the JOIN of the questions table and the soft-merge table and display them in the new questions list (or any list, for that matter). With some extra formatting, maybe. Of course, I may be oversimplifying this and I don't really know what I'm talking about ;-)  Is there a need? : Yes, I would say so. Such questions can get awesome answers is both the communities participate, but our don't-cross-post-much policy deters this. In the end, this will result in better post quality, making the Internet better. Also, as area51 grows, we will see this problem more and more, and this will become more and more necessary.   Thoughts? Any better ideas? Waffles?  Update: Another use case for this would be to soft migrate all MSO  questions over to child metas, effectively solving
44816
After reading , I think it might be useful to have a separate question for this subject.  Let me quote a part of :     SU and SF are generally not great places for WAMP questions...   Particularly when asked on SO, these nearly always involve someone   working with their development or testing setup (rather than, say, a   home or production server environment). If you see someone   recommending SF or SU for such questions, politely correct them.   So the argument is that since  is closely related to development, it belongs on Stack Overflow.  My concern is twofold:   It being development is irrelevant, issues appearing while using WAMP can also appear in a production environment. There might be more expertise on the subject over at .   Perhaps not many people will support my view, but it's worth asking so everybody knows how to handle such questions: what does the community think?
71621
A significant amount of migrations are rejected by the target site, the most problematic being migrations from SO to Programmers.SE. Rejected in this case means the question is closed also on the target site, either for being off-topic or generally not being a good question (NarQ, not constructive, ...).   A failed migration like that is very confusing to the user asking the question in the first place, and also unnecessary work for the moderators of both sites, as they have to coordinate to clear the migration history and delete the migrated question.  I think it would be useful to provide direct feedback on failed migrations. Obviously, a perfect SE citizen would be observant enough to notice when his migrations are rejected often, but I would guess that most users don't closely monitor the state of questions they voted to migrate.   Instead, a rejected migration should either cause a notification in their global inbox, or at least an entry similar to declined flags in their profile.  It could be something like this     You recently voted to migrate [Question X] to [site Y], where it was closed as [close reason]. Please familiarize yourself with [FAQ of target site] to see what kind of questions are on-topic there. Don't migrate low-quality questions, close them  directly using the appropriate close reason.   Educating users is the first step, it might be necessary to go further if users consistently migrate bad questions. After a certain number of failed migration to a specific site, the user could also be blocked from migrating there.
81677
If it's available, I can't seem to find it on the site. If it's not, can someone please link me to as much information as possible so that I can track progress on developments? Thanks.
98486
The old "too localized" closing reason included "questions that are unlikely to help future visitors".   , that if a question resulted from a typo in the OP code those questions should be closed with "too localized" reason.  The current off-topic reason does not cover that.  Should these questions remain open now, as they do not really fall into any current closure category?  UPDATE  I marked  for diamond moderator attention to be deleted as Robert Harvey hinted below, only to get the flag declined as "declined - flags should only be used to make moderators aware of content that requires their intervention".  Can you confidently tell me that this is a useful question that helps the goal of SE?
89321
was closed as "Not constructive" a little while ago by CasperOne. I'm not here to argue about the closure; in fact, I'm forced to agree that, as it stands, the question is explicitly a polling question and eligible to be closed for that reason.  I'd like to see it preserved, however; it's got a fair bit of useful in-depth information for ObjC/Cocoa developers on the "singleton" topic.* It's also (possibly more importantly) a great duplicate target -- have a look at the list of linked questions. I want to try to stave off deletion, and hopefully get it reopened.** (I did vote for reopening, but it expired.)  My thought is to edit the question itself into a "constructive" form, but after spending some time pondering how to do so, I'm not crazy about any of the ideas that I've come up with. Essentially they all involve reworking the question to fit the answers:   Rewrite the question so that the accepted answer fits exactly. "I've got this singleton implementation, but I really want the creation to happen earlier in my app's execution. How can I make that happen?" This is artificial and (in my opinion) doesn't make a particularly good question. Make the question still general, but more concrete and focused on the implementation give in the body. "What are the pitfalls associated with this singleton creation procedure? Are there other features that my singleton should have?" This is still skirting the border of discussion->NC, and none of the answers really respond to this exactly. Remove the implementation from the question and just ask for the "best" implementation. This obviously requires coming up with stringent criteria for "best", and, while it would preserve the relationship between the Q and A's best, might not even move it out of NC territory.   I'm looking for suggestions of ways to re-write this so that it can stick around. Alternatively, if you think I should just be advocating for a historical lock, say so.   If you think my basic premise is faulty and don't think the question should be preserved at all, I respectfully request that you just downvote me instead of answering -- I'd prefer not to turn this into an argument about the merits of the question, and I definitely don't want it to become a(nother) "deletionist"/"inclusionist" skirmish (and I am not infrequently ).    *Quite a bit of it unfortunately in comments.  **Historical locking would also be an acceptable solution to me, but it doesn't seem to fit the "controversial" criterion.
39448
have already been created through .  have already completed their beta stage and are waiting for launch.  are in public beta stage.  are in commitment phase in   proposals are listed in   Now it is really confusing to find a suitable site to ask a question. As an example - I host a blog using . Now I have a question about this hosting. I want to post it in a . Where will I post? I have 2 options available now.     Are developers trying anything to solve this confusing matter?
110226
I posted  that was . My original answer included a destination URL on TeX.SE and was therefore not automatically converted to it's title equivalent. However, now that the post has been migrated, the automatic conversion has still not taken place.  Interestingly, editing the post reveals an updated, converted title-form of the URL. Migrated post (now on TeX.SE):        Rendered post during an edit:        Is there a way to have these URLs automatically update across networks? Or, upon conversion (without a visible alternative/source), be updated?
29549
I have noticed there is a Stack Overflow in language differs from English which is global and mostly used by programmers.  I think there is no need for a site in other languages. Otherwise we will end up with 127 StackOverflow sites. I am afraid that we will lose the amount of people sharing data.
19245
Attempting to use the site with a Nexus 4.  I came across a question that was a duplicate, so I found the dupe and voted to close.  The only problem:  the button is at the bottom of the modal.  While in mobile view, that means lots of painful scrolling all the way through the question and its answers.  On the normal site this isn't an issue:    ...but on the mobile site...    Here's an example:    This definitely affects usability while on mobile.
90989
What should we do with Stack Overflow-specific questions on Meta Stack Exchange?  .  , as long as it meets some (underspecified) conditions.  Whose advice should we follow?  If it's Tim's advice, what exactly are the conditions for flagging (preferably in quantifiable terms - not sure what "undecided" means)?  If we shouldn't flag them, or just some of them, what should we do with them then (or the rest of them)?  Should we close (and eventually delete) them all?  Note - by "flag", I'm exclusively referring to flagging for migration.  My opinions:   In the case of completed requests, isn't it worth keeping them around for the sake of reference? And if we're going to keep them around, shouldn't it be on the correct site? In the case of uncompleted requests, if we close and/or delete these, why do so, just to have them show up on Meta Stack Overflow some point down the line (minus all the discussion and votes should approval / disapproval)? And is there really such a big difference between something posted on 15 April (pre-split) versus something posted on 20 April (post-split)? Why treat them so differently? Isn't that just us being blinded by the rules? Or is migrating them really such a massive deal?