Why is link only answer flag declined?

Question

I came across this link only answer in review queue, and marked it as VLQ. It now has downvotes and similar comments that it's link-only.

However, it is declined with the following response:

declined - User has attempted to answer so any issues with the quality of that answer should be addressed using comments, edits and/or downvotes rather than flagging.

This logic is confusing at best. Most link only answers attempt to answer. And my impression with SO is that they should be flagged.

Should we not flag link-only answers?

Answer 1

My advice on how Very Low Quality flags are assessed is in my answer to your earlier question of Why is " Very Low Quality" on this question declined?:

The way I assess Very Low Quality flags is to see whether:

1. the poster has attempted to answer or ask a question and just done so poorly. If so, I think this is a low quality post and should be addressed using a comment, edit and/or downvote. I decline such flags.
2. the poster has not attempted to answer or ask a question and has instead posted something akin to jibberish. This is Very Low Quality and I mark such flags as Helpful.

That answer was endorsed in comments on it by two other moderators.

Your question here is about a slightly different case of an answer which is not much more than link-only by a new user. However, exactly the same two criteria are used to assess the flag you are asking about here as a Very Low Quality answer.

To understand more why I think such answers are not Very Low Quality, see the answers to Should all link-only answers be considered very low quality?. In particular:

They are low-quality, they just don't always meet the criteria for the Very Low Quality flag.

---

Link-only answers can lead you to information that answers the question ... If you're not willing to downvote an answer, you shouldn't flag it as NAA or VLQ. Those flags are cues to moderators to remove an answer. If the link isn't broken already, just downvote and leave a comment.

---

The reason why we want you to comment is that flagging is getting us nowhere.

Flagging does not provide feedback to the user that there's a problem with their answer. At best, their answer gets deleted and they raise a meta question. At worst, they don't notice and so they keep doing it.

Communicating with the user let's them know this behavior is not encouraged, and more importantly, tells them how to improve. That's what's going to improve the site.

Link-only answers can be improved, and all users with comment, editing and downvoting privileges can do much to assist in that effort without flagging.

Answer 2

I agree that the linked 'answer' is not an answer. Remove the link (which can become broken anytime) and there is nothing left. By not being an answer, it is not salvageable, hence very low quality.

From this Meta Stack Exchange question (which is linked to the FAQ) What does the "very low quality" flag mean in regard to answers?, here is what happens with VLQ flags:

Severe formatting issues: ... Otherwise, you can use the VLQ flag to indicate that the post is not salvageable. The post will be sent to a community review queue, where users can review to delete the post if it is of poor enough quality. They may also comment on the post with the reason for reviewing to delete, in hopes they may edit and undelete (or vote or flag for undeletion). (If the post has already been reviewed in the queue, the flag will be sent to moderators instead.)

Commenting to OP and voting accordingly (specially commenting) are activities which should be encouraged, but by no means invalidate flagging.

---

Responding to PolyGeo's comment about link-only answers being potentially salvageable while the link is active. From the answer flag dialog (emphasis mine):

very low quality. This answer has severe formatting or content problems. This answer is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed.*

_{*viewable on posts up to first 7 days.}

It is not about having a minimum chance of being salvageable (hence, potentially salvageable), but the real chances this will happen, which is unlikely. Remembering that deleted posts can also be edited and then, undeleted.