Should content the from a Buddhist POV or Perspective or presented in relation to Buddhism

Question

This answer is more generic advice than Buddhist specific advice, as it was originally written. In the comments the OP ties hard to rationalise by making an analogy (similar to writing an essay about a fly when asked about a fish, citing that flies come a fish market) after the the post was make.

I feel it should:

• rewritten from a Buddhist perspective or POV
• if the above does not happen, deleted

Having a Buddhist POV does not necessitate citation though this will be good, but should be that a beginner reading will see relationship with this and a Buddhist Concept. A reader should feel, "Yes. This is a Buddhist answer.". If a reader feels this is a Buddhist answer then it should be "on topic" (related to Buddhism, about Buddhism, from a Buddhist POV or perspective). Again this has nothing to do with being: strict or not, having quotation of not, citations or not, providing or not providing links. It is more how it is presented. E.g. (this may not the the perfect examples and hope it does not lead to more diversions from the issue at hand) It is like layman's terms and technical terms. (This does not again imply content should be full of technical terms, there should be enough parallel to relate this to a Buddhist concept.)

Put it another answers should not be like something put together through general knowledge, or other form of domain knowledge, alone, i.e., not expert answer. What I mean here as expert is someone with some domain knowledge vs not domain knowledge on relative basis than someone with little domain knowledge vs deep domain knowledge. (Aside from this: when leaving comments some demonstrable research may be warranted as update additional information will require attention and effort. Also people may lose faith in the site when trivial or things taken for grant is asked.)

Answer 1

Something like "guarding the sense door" was one of the motives I had in mind when I was writing the answer, especially as detailed in this previous answer.

Even if the OP can't control thoughts, maybe they can control what they physically do and see.

Isn't that useful and practical? Even if, in this answer, I don't try to tie it to theories like 12 nidanas?

In their question the OP wrote,

I have read many related answers from all time favourite “Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena“, but regarding this answer all answers sounds very theoretical

So in this specific answer I tried to avoid theory (e.g. referencing suttas) and to give a more experiential answer. Do you think that makes the answer off-topic on this site?

---

I'll add that I think that other users are not averse to "practical" topics being considered on topic. E.g. Andrei liked "challenges one faces in one's practice", and Lanka wrote "my approach has always been founded in the practical/insight-meditational aspect of Buddhism and not in the scholarly/intellectual aspect".

I'm not claiming mine is a good answer or as good as theirs would be, but I think it is within the bounds of what might be considered on-topic for this site.

Also since other users are able to give expert answers, I try to be helpful by giving less-expert answers (and this one was especially anti-theoretical, to try to match the OP's question).

Because it proved useful to the OP (and upvoted), though I don't want to cause trouble I'm reluctant to delete it only because you consider it too generic or too "blatant" etc. I don't think I'd delete it if another user had written it (I'm think I'm quite timid, and permissive about not deleting other users' answers).