Update: Since this is an old post, I would recommended to go through the deleted answer first, which I have edited to make it more objective.
I followed below post (low quality but not 1 liner):
Please stop flagging (instantly) questions/answers as low quality if they are one-liners
Update 2: Original answerer is inactive for more than a year. It seems that my edits which are helpful - are getting rolled back again & again. Probably a Mod doesn't want to undelete it for philosophical differences.
"Why is this answer not deleted yet?"
After re-reading the answer carefully, I am not sure, if the answer should be really deleted. The question is about:
Where does the Padma Purana declares SadaShiva to be the originator of Brahma, Vishnu and Maheswara?
The premises of the Qn implies the superiority of SadAshiva & that's already answered by Tezz. Now let's see some part of the other answer:
And the Padma Purana also states: ... Shiva replied,"Those Persons who,deluded by ignorance,describe any other deity being superior to Vishnu, The Lord of the world, are said to be Pasandis.
Which means, the answerer is probably challenging the premises of the question itself by showing apparent contradiction. Means, if "Vishnu" is the supreme then there is no question of "SadAshiva" creating him.
[Note: Personally I am not bothered, who is supreme. May be all are supreme.]
If I were a moderator, then I will let the answer remain, because it cites scriptures & relates to the question. Yes, the formatting is bad and needs improvement. May be I will downvote it & ask the user to reduce the length and remove irrelevant parts.
Since the answer is already deleted by moderator, I would generalise your question. According to our site criteria, we delete the answers which are without [proper] scripture sources. For example, the answer discussed in this meta post.
So the Qn can be: Why the answers listed in below query are not deleted yet!
SearchQuery: cite sources.
Typical reason given is: "those answers are not flagged yet". But that reason is Not substantial. Because,
- Such excuse is presented as of all flags are always accepted! :-)
- Flag provides help to identify the link to the problem. In above query, all the links are readily available. Why to wait for flag?
This idea was already proposed in the discussion of above linked meta post. Mods only can answer it.
"And,in any case, when Tezz has precisely answered the question there was not any real need for adding another answer"
Not so right.
In technical SO, where one plus one is two, people come up with different ideas.
Then in philosophical websites, it's more important to present different POVs. If it's wrong then downvote it or comment it. Even if a question is answered very perfectly, a new person should be encouraged to answer with his/her thoughts.
For example, in below post, multiple answers are giving same contents with different POVs:
What is the duration (Timeline) of the four "Yugas"?
Or in below post, the accepted answer stands wrong, from other scripture POV. But all answers should be retained because we don't who is right & who is wrong:
What was the age of all Pandavas during the Mahabharata war?