Difference between “poor answer” and “answer does not attempt answering the question”

Question

This question is based on this answer.

The corresponding question basically says: I want to draw this picture in tikz.

The answer basically says: Do not use tikz, but another program and then import it.

Consequently, I flagged this answer as low quality since I thought it does not really answer OP´s question and does not meet his requirements using tikz. He also does not answer why tikz would be more trouble than it's worth in this case. Just recommends another program.

On the other hand, it technically solves the problem (like any other “draw it with this program and import it” answer would do). It may be just a poor answer, because it ignores OP´s requirements and the technical feasibility in tikz.

It is like recommending Excel (or any other open software) when someone wants to make a table in LaTeX.

Since this flag is pending for a while I thought that maybe some reviews have the same considerations.

So are question which propose another program and do not meet OP´s requirements considered “poor answers”, “an answer that does not attempt to solve the question” or is it a “legitimate answer”?

EDIT: A small edit to the question to make my question more clear.

This is a Q/A site about LaTeX and TeX. So I assume questions posted here should primary solved using LaTeX (including its many packages, tools like matcha and macros like PSTricks). Recommending another program if the reason is comprehensible is a valid answer. I have no problem with that. Like recommending R for statistics.

The problem here are answers that address the problem and provide an actual solution by recommending another program (want to draw that -> use a drawing program) even if it is completely and easily solvable in LaTeX.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Example Question:

I want to draw a red rectangle in LaTeX. How can I do that?

Answer one 1:

Use tikz package:

\documentclass[border=1cm]{standalone}
\usepackage{tikz}
\begin{document}    
    \begin{tikzpicture}
        \draw[red] (0,0) rectangle (1,1);
    \end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

Answer 2:

Use paint (or any other drawing software), save it as a png and import it.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Both answers address the problem and both solve it.

Are such answers ignoring what LaTeX can do valid in a LaTeX Q/A site? Should they be flagged?

Answer 1

In my opinion, that answer should be a comment. I flagged it.

It's also arguable that Inkscape is easier than TikZ. It depends on which one you know better.

Eventually, reproducing a logo is against the trademark laws. I think also the question should be deleted. I also flagged it.

Answer 2

As long as the answer addresses the 'core issue' of the question (here: add a specific logo to a document) then it is a real/legitimate answer.

If the answer does not follow the requirements in the question then it may be a bad answer, but still a real answer. It may very well be that an approach outlined in such an answer is actually better than the approach that the OP had in mind. However, if you don't think the OP or anybody else will be helped by the answer then you can consider downvoting it, in line with the standard Stack Exchange model (or leaving it at 0, more in line with the custom on TeX.SE). Flagging or reviewing as 'not an answer' should be reserved for actual non-answers that do not address the question under any reasonable interpretation.

Here on TeX.SE we have a high standard for answers, with a full MWE, often a screenshot, and some explanation. Therefore answers with alternative approaches that are not fully developed/demonstrated, or that use an approach not based on code, are maybe quick to be judged as 'should be a comment'. However I don't think this judgement is always reasonable. If an answer contains an idea that adds something new to addressing the question, or that improves substantially on a solution already given by others, then it should be able to stay as a separate answer.

Answer 3

I would say that the actual question is "how can I include the logo in a latex document" Tikz is just a suggested solution in the question. Ignoring suggested solutions in questions is the norm rather than the exception for answers on the site.

For logos especially, the correct answer here is almost certainly to download the logo from

https://www.ifgoiano.edu.br/home/images/REITORIA/Imagens/2017/Jan_2017/logo_Rio_Verde.png

and then use \includegraphics{logo_Rio_Verde} which uses essentially the same non-tikz latex code as the inkscape answer that you flagged.

Note that it is not just concerns about trademark infringement that may lead to suggestions to use alternative tools than the one suggested.

Draw an aircraft with Tikz

Explicitly asks for tikz in the title, but has some answers using tikz, some using other non-tikz latex code, some using external tools or fonts. That seems natural for any of these type of drawing questions that are on (or past) the boundary of where it makes sense to have a purely tex soultion.