@gimusi It's now been reopened.

@TheSimpliFire Thanks, I think that the asker deserve that.

@user170039 @user334732 @TheSimpliFire @JoséCarlosSantos What is your advice about that one OP. The asker looked for a duplicate but can't find anything, I gave a suggestion to use Approach0 without success. I've asked also to improve his question and he did it. I only was looking for a hint. Should we undelete that and suggest some kind of improvement?

Here another new contributor who seems really and genuinely interested to get involved and learn. We could help him. I've already add a hint. I think he is stucked on the definition of $\arcsin x$. I gave also the wiki reference. Do you hve some other useful link to suggest? Thanks

@gimusi Concerning the first question, I don't think that there's room for improving this question. Besides, Yves Daoust has already observed in the comments that this limit is of the type $0/\infty$. Therefore, it is equal to $0$.

@gimusi Concerning the second question, I don't intend to help someone who writes “I haven't really done anything like this before”, when the question is so basic.

@JoséCarlosSantos Thanks for your observation. For the second one indeed my aim is to give to the asker some suggestion in order to study that. Not of course help with a solution.

@gimusi That's nice of you. I think that the link that you provided is appropriate.

Another question here from the same user. I think that curret time for closure and deletion do not allow the hel the asker in a constuctive way. It is a brutal force method which can't give any good result.

I mean the same for that other question here02. In that case the asker improved the question with his own work after some constructive help.

I mean we need to proceed with closure and deletion but ony after we have try with the constructive way.

We shoukd deserve closure and deletion only for users not interested to improve their way to formulate questions.

@gimusi Hi Gimusi, welcome and let's see how it works! I spend much less time on here in general than you so it will only work if we can rope in others. Also, as I think Martin Sleziak pointed out, you need 20 rep before you can chat! So this may be an issue for users new to the network.

@gimusi also, we could do with an admin / user with high enough rep to see deleted questions. Do u know how much rep is needed?

@JoséCarlosSantos Hi Jose, are you interested in becoming an admin of this room?

@user334732 You need 10k reputation to see deleted question.

@user334732 Thank you, but no. I've been spending too much time here on MSE and I don't want to add another task to what I already do here.

@user170039 Moderators (and other users with diamonds) can indeed grant access even to user below 20 reputation points. But it does not work for a regular user (even if they are room owner).

@MartinSleziak this is probably what @quid meant when he said he could provide technical support but in truth I can't see us asking a diamond mod to grant access every time a new user wants to chat

You can test it by creating a temporary account if you want to make sure. The closest to some official documentation of this was what I found in a rather old answer: Chat: can I grant write access to a unregistered user?

> Users with less then 20 reputation cannot talk in chat unless a moderator gives them access (I've done that [temporarily] in this case). We're still looking at ways to allow high-rep users to create temporary passes, but that's not in yet.

I vaguely remember that something like that was done by a mod on occasion - but I'm not sure whether I'd be able to quickly find such an instance. But I do not think that mods would be willing to grant many low-rep users access to a specific chatrrom. (And I am not really sure whether it would be wise to do so.)

In any case, if you think that possibility to invite low-rep users to chat is useful, you might upvote the relevant feature(s), like this one: Invite low rep users to participate in chat.

@MartinSleziak I agree and it would be unreasonable to ask or expect them to do so.

But not all new MSE users are new to Stack Exchange, and they don't have rep 1 for long.

@user170039 by the way are you aware you have a twin ^^

@user170039 I agree that as the question is presented it is not in the best form, but as I have already explained in my opinion we close and delete questions too rapidly to permit to the asker to improve that. If after a while the question is not improved then I agree to proceed with deletion. And in the cases a usesrs continues for a long time to post poor questions witout any kind of improvement I agree with account deletion.

@user170039 I think that we should be kind at first also tolerating some lackness and explaining how things work here (possibly without closing nor deleting) but also without give full answers for free. If the asker understand and react positively we all are happy otherwise we can proceed with deletion. After 3/5 consecutive questions without any improvement or good reaction we can proceed to delete the account.

That's the way I'm propossing to deal with such kind of questions.

The current way we deal with that is completely useless and not effective nor to increase the quality of questions nor to involve new contributors.

@user170039 That's fine, I've asked for an adive about that and I've explained my point of view. The asker here is not a new contributor then I can understand partially your point of view. Thanks

@user170039 yes

but whose user number is actually 170039 ???

@user170039 For that one Sergey02, for example, I totally disagree. Closure and deletion within 4 hours are not useful to help a new contributor to understand how things work here. It seems that the aim is invite them to go out of there. It's wrong, really wrong.

I can understand closure but not downvoting and deletion.

@gimusi @user170039 rapid deletion is a very unkind act in my eyes. It's designed to take the democratic power to reopen out of the hands of the majority of users.

@user170039 @gimusi @MartinSleziak how would you feel about an appeal on Meta for high rep users to support un-deletion of rapidly deleted questions? As I think this is sometimes an antisocial act and something I can't take action against myself without help from others.

Hmm. I rarely undelete a PSQ but seeing their history I might give this one a go. But if the OP doesn't improve the question sufficiently I'll vote to delete it again.

@user334732 Isn't this exactly what was discussed here: Is deleting a question while it is still on hold too quick?

@user170039 Same, I can only delete a question after 2 days. I've left a further comment in hope of the OP responding.

@user170039 @user334732 @TheSimpliFire @MartinSleziak Thanks to all. I repeat when a new contributor doesn't not seem inetrested to improve questions and get involved I totally agree with the deletion and when the this behaviour continue in time I will proceed also with the account deletion/suspension.

@gimusi What do you mean when you say "I will proceed also with the account deletion/suspension."? AFAIK only mods and Stack Exchange staff can suspend users.

@MartinSleziak SOrry I mean of course: "I agree that the community will proceed..."

or "I would like that..."

@gimusi You left useful advice on that question:

... but only after you posted an answer. Which means that the question author got a solution, and there is no incentive anymore to improve the question. – I doubt that answering a question and then asking for improvement is very efficient to educate new users.

@MartinSleziak yes, looks like it. I'm talking about a specific appeal for new members who might be interested in becoming active in this room to make new users feel more welcome.

@MartinR Good point! Please refer also to that other question for the same user Sergey01. Here I also gave a guide and Sergey then solved the problem updating his question. I think that give a guide can help to open a discussion with the new contributors, whereas simple downvoting and deletion don't help so much.

@MartinR The point is that we should be kind and tolerant at first with new contributors and give something more than what the strictly would deserve (not sull answer but guide and hint). If a users seems not intereted to improve quetions but only to get answer for free then I agree with cdownvoting, deletion and permanent suspension. But we should change our way to establish the first contact in my opinion.

@user170039 fine by me

@MartinR that's a pretty cool hat you got there

@user334732 Read that by Bill. True words!

@TheSimpliFire @user334732 @user170039 Good reaction for "Sergey2"HERE