We all love Salesforce Stack Exchange, but there is a whole world of people out there who need answers to their questions and don't even know that this site exists. When they arrive from Google, what will their first impression be? Let's try to look at this site through the eyes of someone who's never seen it before, and see how we stack up against the rest of the 'Net.

The Site Self-Evaluation review queue is open and populated with 10 questions that were asked and answered in the last quarter. Run a few Google searches to see how easy they are to find and compare the answers we have with the information available on other sites.

Rating the questions is only a part of the puzzle, though. Do you see a pattern of questions that should have been closed but are not? Questions or answers that could use an edit? Anything that's going really well? Post an answer below to share your thoughts and discuss these questions and the site's health with your fellow users!


Good to see a self-evaluation again. I'm currently working on it. After doing the first one I was thinking that it would be useful if the evaluator had the chance to briefly explain his or her choice. I voted for Satisfactory for the first question (the one about the order of the multi select picklist), but only for it's findability. I really think it is a good question with a good answer (unaccepted unfortunately), but I voted for Satisfactory nonetheless, and I think it would be useful to be able to give some more feedback.

Another thing; during the last evaluation I asked this question: What happens with the site self-evaluation results. Though it has an answer; I never found the automated post. Could someone point me in the right direction?

  • That evaluation predated the automated posts, so it doesn't one. You're looking at and participating in the automatically-posted discussion thread for this evaluation. :) Now that the evaluation is complete, we (the community team at Stack Exchange) are reviewing the results as well as the discussions here on meta. – Adam Lear May 29 '13 at 23:25

I just ran a query related to the first question that came up in the queue I was asked about (rollback on DML). Number 6 in the list that came back was this post: Question on Salesforce rollbacks on dml operation. The only non-SF doc that came up ahead of us was a Jeff Douglass Blog post from 2010. In retrospect, I personally think that particular rollback post was a duplicate of the one that came up in my search and also could have been improved (or vice versa, not certain now which was created first). But then, I also misinterpreted the original post we were questioned about because of the way it was phrased or written.

I should add that the next 4 posts that came up were all posts from here, but not the post we were asked about. Perhaps I didn't use the right search words? (Salesforce all or none DML)


I've finished my review of all the posts.:)

During my review I came across one post, where during a Google search, I found what seemed to be something worth contributing to it. The post was about multi-picklists with the same items not appearing in the same order. Like others, I didn't come up with anything that documented this was normal behavior, only comments that said it was normal. But, I did find very clean Formula code which I added to the post. It wasn't entirely clear in the post exactly what kind of code they wanted, so I thought having Formula code would be good to add to it, esp for someone who might come along and read it later.

What I noticed more than anything, were the number of posts where the originator never accepted an answer, or where someone walked them through debugging their code, then the person wrote up the final working code as the answer and finally accepted it as their own. I thought this didn't show very good "sportsmanship" (I think that's the name of the tag used here) or more accurately, displayed poor manners and appreciation for the assistance they'd received.

I also saw posts where the originator (the OP) asked a very specific question, was given references to documents that essentially told them "it either can't or shouldn't be done that way" and additional information along the lines of "here are some alternate ways of accomplishing your intended purpose". I thought those were well done, especially when the OP responded with "but that wasn't what I asked!" with you jerk being implicit. I saw a great deal of patience and restraint exhibited in posts like that which I think is highly commendable.

It seemed to me that some of the questions still had a fair amount of vagueness to their quality when I reviewed them. That may be in part be why an answer was never accepted in those particular cases. At the same time, on many of those, there were comments asking for clarification that I'm not certain if they were ever responded to. If they were, in cases where the responses might have been through edits, it wasn't totally apparent to me; presumably because I don't have enough points yet to view the edits??


Final Results

You must log in to answer this question.

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