<p>My concern about the thread in question is that by allowing apparently minor variations  (such as &quot;rigorous&quot; versus &quot;for scientists,&quot; which arguably already implies some form of rigor) of marginal questions (such as requests for lists of books) we will accumulate a series of confusingly similar threads that, because of their proliferation, serve nobody well.  I simply ask anyone who is considering posting a request for a list of books/resources/references that they first research similar questions on this site and carefully consider whether their needs are so different that a genuinely new list is needed.  <strong>I also ask the community in its voting to favor fewer, rather than more, such threads on this site.</strong></p>
<hr />
<h3>Background</h3>
<p>Normally requests to reopen questions should appear in comments to the question, where they will be addressed (in good time) by moderators and high-reputation community members.  Because of the unusual appearance of a request here in meta, I feel obliged to provide some background information about the circumstances.</p>
<p>In comments to the original question, user @whuber requested an explanation of how the <em>answers</em> to the apparent duplicate question were insufficient.  OP's reaction was a series of increasingly loud comments culminating in challenging @whuber's understanding, followed by posting the present question here on meta.  This is known as an <em>ad hominem</em> attack: it is inappropriate anywhere on StackExchange (and anywhere else civil discourse is valued) because it improperly shifts attention from the <em>discourse</em> to the <em>discussants.</em></p>
<p>In the present instance this is not a problem, because @whuber is a moderator and part of that job is putting up with the bad as well as the good.  I would like to take this opportunity, though, to direct the OP's attention to the &quot;Be Nice&quot; section of the <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/help/behavior">site policy on behavior</a>.  My request is that all users, even avowedly new ones, review this material and strive to comply with it.</p>
