2

We have quite a few questions on why visas got refused. I don't think we've ever taken a stance on this, but I feel this is a category of questions which should be closed as a standard.

My rationale is the most visa refusals - as long as all requirements are technically met, i.e., all documentation asked for is submitted, proof of funds given et al are all very dependent on the individual situation / risk profile of a person as assessed by a visa officer. It's a subjective and opaque process that is up to the discretion of a visa officer.

It could be because somebody's risk profile is high (very subjective), how an application behaved in a visa interview (which we don't know about), the mood the visa officer was on a given day (who knows)...

Hence, I feel that questions about why a visa got refused are subjective and opinion-based and should be closed. What do people think?

4
  • 3
    Visa refusals or visa rejections? We have two different categories... :/
    – Mark Mayo
    Feb 11, 2015 at 23:09
  • 1
    Yeah, let's make clear that you target visa refusals (when the visa officer said no) and not visa rejections (when requirements are not technically met) as the difference has recently been clarified.
    – Vince
    Feb 11, 2015 at 23:26
  • @MarkMayo: No we don't - we have one category. We had two tags waiting to be synonymized for a short time but I believe we just had an editfest that left us with just a single tag again. In any case not all questions using such tags are about "why", some are about "what to do next" and I suppose others are possible. But I'm not against a policy to close a very specific type of question. I'm against a policy closing every question using a tag without thinking though.
    – hippietrail
    Feb 13, 2015 at 2:04
  • 1
    No looks like I'm wrong. We now stupidly have two tags that will be misused. Tag synonyms are not thesaurus synonyms guys. )-:
    – hippietrail
    Feb 13, 2015 at 2:06

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6

I don't think we need any more rules of this kind. We already have a clear focus, sound principles and a stable community that should be able to deal with all this.

If a question is not answerable, we can easily close it as “unclear” (very often the main problem with these questions IMO) or “subjective” (your main rationale if I am following correctly).

On the other hand, if something of value that we haven't envisioned comes around, we would be arguing about the letter of this new rule for no good reason.

You must log in to answer this question.

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