New custom closure reason "General nutrition or dieting" now live

Question

Update 11/17/2022: Now live

Given the relatively clear consensus of +4 (+5 for / + 1 again) we have implemented the closure reason. You can find it on the flag / close vote dialog box under "Needs improvement > A community-specific reason > General nutrition or dieting".

Thanks to everyone who weighed in with their votes.

---

Our community receives a number of questions about nutrition which are off-topic according to the help center. Should we create a custom close-vote reason to cover nutrition questions?

Background

Each Stack Exchange network site can have three custom question closure reasons. We currently have two: personal medical advice and lack of research. That means we have room for one more custom closure reason. Moderators can define a new custom close reason by providing the guidance documented in five separate text fields: brief description, usage guidance, post notice close description, post owner guidance, and public guidance.

As described on the main Meta site, custom close reasons should:

• Identify a specific topic considered inappropriate
• Explain why a given topic is not allowed
• Provide resources that will aid askers in solving their problems: either instructions for asking the question in a more suitable fashion or links to a different site where the question may be considered on-topic
• Be as concise as possible

Problem

We receive a number of off-topic nutrition questions each month. A custom close reason makes it easier for community members to vote to close questions that are off-topic for a common reason. It also standardizes the feedback that users receive from the post notice.

Proposed Change

We propose to create a new custom close reason about nutrition. Below you will find two community wiki answers. One contains an initial proposal for the wording for the close reason for the five text fields. Please edit the proposed close reason to improve it. The other contains a statement that no custom close reason is needed. Up-vote one of the answers to express your support.

Answer 1

Yes, we should create a custom close reason for nutrition questions.

Here are the five fields for a custom close reason we should implement:

1. Brief description. (100 character limit)

General nutrition or dieting

2. Usage guidance - this tells close voters when to use this close reason. (500 character markdown limit)

Use this close reason if the question is about general nutrition or diet outside the context of medical treatment. Examples of question topics about nutrition that may still be on-topic include nutritional deficiencies that cause disease or scientific questions about nutritional management of disease.

3. Post notice close description - visible to all users. (500 character markdown limit)

Closed. This question was closed because it is about nutrition or diet outside of a specific medical context. It is not currently accepting answers.

4. Post owner guidance - this additional information appears in the post notice but only for the asker of the question. (500 character markdown limit)

This question appears to be about general nutrition or dieting. There are currently no Stack Exchange sites that are appropriate for general nutrition or diet questions. If you think your question is on-topic here, you can edit the question so it is about a nutritional deficiency that causes disease or a scientific question about nutritional disease management.

5. Public guidance - this additional information appears in the post for other users. (500 character markdown limit)

This question appears to be about general nutrition or dieting, which is off-topic here. There are currently no Stack Exchange sites that are appropriate for general nutrition or diet questions. If you believe the question is on-topic here, you can edit it or leave a comment to clarify.

Answer 2

No, we do not need a custom nutrition closure reason.

We do not receive enough questions about nutrition or dieting to require a custom closure reason. The benefit of standardized guidance is not enough to justify its creation. We can rely on the community and our moderators to provide guidance in comments.