-1
$\begingroup$

EDIT

I have streamlined a bit my original question, now it should be clearer. The very helpful comments that convinced me in opening the present question are here.

This question (which is not mine but only contains an answer of mine) have been migrated from aviation.se to drones.se.

According to this Community wiki: "It is perfectly possible for a question to be a good fit on more than one site. It is also possible for a question to be a better fit on another site than the one it was posted on. However, those are not reasons to migrate it elsewhere, unless the author specifically requests it. As a general rule, if someone asks a question here, and it's not a bad fit here, it should stay here." (emphasis mine).

That wiki also report the following diagram which, applied to this specific case, brings to the orange box (i.e. if anything, to the deletion of the question):

migration tree

So my question: is this particular migration correct?

Furthermore, on aviation.se there are many other questions (like this one, or this one or this one just randomly chosen) related to drones or model aircraft which have not been migrated/questioned/deleted/closed even if they have nothing to do with aviation.se: why are they still there?

Please understand that I truly do not care where that (or any other) question (or answer) should be: mine is just a basic process-related doubt.

$\endgroup$
7
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I don't see why that comment would have to hold any water, given that is basing itself on a faulty assumption. We can debate whether the question is on topic here (better here than the comments under the question), but I would not skip the discussion just based on that comment. $\endgroup$
    – Federico
    Sep 22, 2022 at 10:36
  • $\begingroup$ Also, the migration gets reverted only if the question gets closed on the other site, afaik. $\endgroup$
    – Federico
    Sep 22, 2022 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ Why faulty assumption? See here $\endgroup$
    – sophit
    Sep 22, 2022 at 11:33
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ FWIW if i follow your flowchart I get the orange box. And frankly it was at risk of deletion. $\endgroup$
    – Jamiec Mod
    Sep 22, 2022 at 12:46
  • $\begingroup$ @Jamiec: then we agree. Next question then: why/when a question should be closed/deleted? May you also answer the other 2 questions of mine? $\endgroup$
    – sophit
    Sep 22, 2022 at 13:07
  • $\begingroup$ @Jamiec: and if "it was at risk of deletion" it shouldn't have been migrated in the first place but just deleted $\endgroup$
    – sophit
    Sep 22, 2022 at 13:37
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @sophit why waste a good question? if it is at risk of deletion here it does not mean it should not be migrated. $\endgroup$
    – Federico
    Sep 23, 2022 at 8:11

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

I disagree that this migration should be reverted, and I definitely disagree the reason should be because of some lost internet points.

That question was off topic on aviation, and was likely to be closed.

$\endgroup$
0
2
$\begingroup$

That question should not have been migrated; it was good fit here.

I was preparing an answer for which I continue to do research because I have a professional interest in this topic. (coincidentally this question is 100% related to the work I am currently doing to allow heavy e-VTOLs to operate in an urban environment, and I am very sure I work in the aviation industry).

I made the following comment below the question

This is not off-topic. This is rotorcraft performance calculation. We know the weight, we know the diameter of the rotor. And so we can calculate the flow through the rotors, and so we can make reasonable assumptions on the efficiency of the lift propeller system and the engines, and so we can calculate required power, and so we can calculate the endurance of the aircraft. Some aviators seem to think unmanned aerial vehicles are not part of aviation. They share the same airspace, and abide by the same laws of physics, and even the legislation is being harmonised. This is an aviation question.

That comment received multiple upvotes before the migration.

Furthermore, the question was closed and had subsequently been reopened. Clearly there is support for this question within the community.

I don't understand why the mods decided to go ahead with migration in this case.

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ I read your comment on the original question and I elaborated an answer to the question exactly based on momentum theory. If the question comes back to aviation (as it should) I'll post my answer again. P.s. @DeltaLima: based on your current position, you don't work in the aviation industry, you work in a start-up ;-D $\endgroup$
    – sophit
    Sep 23, 2022 at 6:34
  • $\begingroup$ @sophit I sometimes wish that there was a bit more of a start-up mentality around me :-) But for the sake of safety, there is a healthy amount of conservatism where I work. $\endgroup$
    – DeltaLima Mod
    Sep 23, 2022 at 7:25
  • $\begingroup$ @sophit if the migration is rejected the answer will be auto-undeleted, afaik, so you don't need to repost anything. $\endgroup$
    – Federico
    Sep 23, 2022 at 8:14
  • $\begingroup$ @DeltaLima "the question was closed and had subsequently been reopened. Clearly there is support for this question within the community." by the same measure, it got closed and was being closed again, so there is also clearly support for not having this question in the community. The "drones belong to aviation" topic has been touched multiple times here on meta. I will never be against revisiting it if needed, but imho, comments are not the way to revisit it properly. $\endgroup$
    – Federico
    Sep 23, 2022 at 8:17
  • $\begingroup$ @Federico: which is the way then? This very question of mine on meta is also not bringing anything although the community wiki clearly states that the original question should have stayed where it was i.e. on aviation $\endgroup$
    – sophit
    Sep 23, 2022 at 8:26
  • $\begingroup$ @Federico, I believe my comment below the question was exactly where it should have been. Regarding the discussion here on meta about drones, allow me to quote you: "I feel the various posts about quadrocopters a bit borderline, if not off-topic for this community, particularly when not asking about our core topics: regulations, aerodynamics, flight dynamics, and so on.". I want to point out that endurance calculations belong to the field of aircraft performance, which is one of the core topics on this site. $\endgroup$
    – DeltaLima Mod
    Sep 23, 2022 at 8:37
  • $\begingroup$ @DeltaLima on the question topic of this discussion I have not espressed myself. I have not voted to close/reopen and I have not migrated. I see the reasons on both sides and I do not know exactly where I stand. I was hoping that the community would have had a clearer view, but all I see is that a close war was starting $\endgroup$
    – Federico
    Sep 23, 2022 at 9:13
  • $\begingroup$ @sophit like this: aviation.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4359/1467 $\endgroup$
    – Federico
    Sep 23, 2022 at 9:23
  • $\begingroup$ @Federico: thanks for opening that post but... was it needed? The migration policy as given in the community wiki is frankly quite clear: "if someone asks a question here, and it's not a bad fit here, it should stay here". I truly don't understand the need of further continuing this discussion and I'm out of it from now. 🖖 $\endgroup$
    – sophit
    Sep 23, 2022 at 10:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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