<p>I have no problem with your question being reopened. </p>

<p><strong>Meta answer:</strong> </p>

<p>I feel in the need to give you some explanation as I have participated in this subject, and this is just my opinion.</p>

<p>I got your question on the first post review queue and I flagged it as a duplicate because even that you have used the word "rigorous", in my first opinion there were two arguments in favor of duplicate (the subject, and the background in statistics) and one against (to be an elementary and rigorous book).<br>
I thought not only there were more arguments in favor to mark the question as duplicate, but I also interpreted the word "rigorous" as being subjective.</p>

<p>I decided to remove the duplicate automatic comment which appears beneath the question, because a experienced user (Nick Cox) argued in favor about the rigorous argument. Then, one of our moderators (other experienced user) ended up marking it as duplicate.</p>

<p>Basically, book recommendation questions are subjective and they carry a side of being opinion-based (far away of being 100% opinion-based, though), and because of that some think they are on-topic (and so far they are!!), some think they should always be set as community wiki posts, and some think they should be off-topic (for the latter two opinions see this <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1593/should-all-book-recommendation-questions-be-classified-as-community-wiki">thread</a>).</p>

<p>Maybe you can edit your question to specify more about what you are looking for (explaining even better what you mean with rigorous) and giving emphasis about how much different it is from the "duplicate" question. Then, it will go to the "reopen queue" and users will vote if it reopens or stays the way it is.</p>

<p><s><strong>Remark</strong> (not Meta)</s></p>

<p>Edit: removed this answer part, as the thread was reopened on main site and it received satisfactory answers.</p>
