Proposal: First wants to be about historical "firsts".

That's one thing History.SE is for.

+1 While I don't agree with your premise it is great question, thanks for asking :) – James Jenkins Nov 16 '16 at 15:49

That was my first impression.

If Requests for trivia or basic historical facts are off-topic... on History SE, we're getting into that realm of sites based on a type of question rather than a subject to build a community around.

If History SE considers anything that isn't a basic Wikipedia lookup on topic, I don't see how this proposal can go much beyond "Stuff History SE doesn't want."

That's just my early take on this.

In fact, many sites accept "what was the first" as part of their scope... M&TV, for example, has a "first-appearance" tag. – Catija Nov 16 '16 at 17:39
In all honesty, it sounds like what-if all over again – Zizouz212 Nov 17 '16 at 0:21

I am not sure it is. A quick look finds the closed question. When did the majority of Americans stop living on farms? with the close reason:

"Requests for trivia or basic historical facts are off-topic if they can be easily answered by looking up the relevant topic on Wikipedia. We're trying to complement common historical references, not duplicate them."

While not a question about first, it would not be in scope at firsts, but it does highlight the issues. This appears to be custom close reason. Almost everything at "First" would fit in the category of "trivia or basic historical facts". Which appears to be specifically out of scope at

The link I gave to History.SE is a search for "first". There are 3600 results - many of which seem to be open. Truly trivial questions ARE typically bad fits for the SE model - but non-trivial "firsts" seem to be quite on-topic at History.SE – warren Nov 16 '16 at 15:48

You must log in to answer this question.

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