0
$\begingroup$

This is my question. How can improve it? What is it that makes it bad?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

3
$\begingroup$

Questions tend to be received better when they show some of the background understanding that a poster has and have a clear focus on a particular concept.

With your question, it's clear you're confused, but not really clear where you're confused. As a result, answering your question is less like answering a specific question and more like explaining an entire topic of biology. Your textbook probably already contextualizes this information, and it's not clear what help it will be to re-state that same content that's already in your textbook.

I think you probably need to do some more reading and attempting to understand on your own before asking. Perhaps go back a few pages in the textbook and make sure you're following each step. Some key words you probably want to look for might be "chromosome" and "haploid/diploid". You may also want to check your understanding of the word "homologous" and which chromosomes this word relates to. Alternatively, you may be confused just by the mathematical concept of what 2^(some exponent) represents, which would need a very different explanation. So, try to understand some of the surrounding information to help narrow down where you're stuck.

Edit:

This comment

This is not what I am wondering about, but it is related. See my edit. My textbook claimed what it did as side note to exactly this.

is exactly what we'd like to avoid. If someone can clearly answer your question to the extent anyone would guess is the answer you need, and then you come along and tell them it doesn't answer your question, that means your original question was asked poorly and didn't explain your problem. I think it is rude to waste the time of people who you are asking for help.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I already answered this in a way in my comment. For me, any question that relates to the interpretation of text must include the following:

  • The exact text (as text, not image). Including the surrounding sentences is also advised as it provides context.
  • The details of the text: author, title, edition — a link to the publisher or reseller’s site can be helpful.
  • The chapter and section title, if applicable.

This is because it is very easy for a reader to get an idea into his head about what a section text means, whereas another reader can spot the misinterpretation, given the precise text and context.

Of course, in this case it turned out there was a problem that the original text was in Norwegian, which is not a widely understood outside Scandinavia. With some other European languages it would be worth giving the original as well as a translation, as the translation may be the problem.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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