A few weeks back, there was a question posted on meta Why is it marked as duplicate?
From the title, it asks why the question is marked as a duplicate of another question. But when we look into the body, there is nothing as to what is the point of the meta discussion. Just a link to the question and a statement saying it is not a duplicate.
The so called original question is nothing as duplicate.
Besides this, there is nothing written in the question. This question looks really ambiguous and has many interpretations.
Is the point of the discussion to reopen the question?
Is it what to do in the next step to get it reopened?
Is it a meta to ask why this question is closed as a duplicate?
Is it a meta explaining the reasons why it is not a duplicate?
After reading this meta question, what are we supposed to do? Answer it saying it is a dupe or not? Vote to reopen it?
Since I got these doubts, I asked the OP to edit info why and how the question is not a duplicate and what steps should be taken to improve existing question in the comments. But there was a response that the question in main is clear so the question should be reopened. Due to this response, I voted to close as "Unclear what you are asking" because meta discussion lacked context and unclear without a question in the body. But the question seems to be open now and received an answered yesterday. This question is just an example and not a targeted question at the OP of the question or meta.
Meta also works as main site in terms of Q&A and they also have close reasons just like main site questions. Don't the questions here need context and body on what is the point of the discussion?
Do we have a quality standard in questions on meta? Or are we going to allow questions with a title, a link/image and statement that action taken is wrong?
As an honorable mention, should we be okay with editing with what they understood from such ambiguous and unclear questions and then comment
Hi OP! I have edited your question. If you have a problem, rollback to previous revision.
This approach may result in "First come First edit" and waiting for the OP's decision forever without considering the point of clarifying the meaning of a post without changing it according to help center article on editing.