<p>Consider writing your own question that will get at the underlying issue in the clearest and most concise manner, then answering it yourself.  (Be open to others contributing an answer as well, though.)  This could become a canonical thread for this topic, and could serve as a duplicate target in the future.  </p>

<p>For some examples, on the main site @Sycorax has done the sort of thing I'm advocating here: <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/352036/what-should-i-do-when-my-neural-network-doesnt-learn">What should I do when my neural network doesn&#39;t learn?</a>.  On meta.CV, he has discussed doing this sort of thing here: <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5519/do-we-need-a-canonical-thread-about-stock-trading-what-would-it-address">Do we need a canonical thread about stock trading? What would it address?</a>  </p>

<p>In the future, you could write a smaller, perfunctory answer to the specific question (e.g., backpropagation in CNN), link to the canonical thread, and vote to close as a duplicate.  That way the OP would get some information specific to their situation, and a pointer to the more general and detailed solution.  If there were subsequent questions that were essentially the same (e.g., backpropagation in CNN again), you could just immediately vote to close as a duplicate of the former.  Note that you can flag closed questions to have moderators add additional duplicate targets, so that thread could end up with both the prior more specific and the more general threads listed.  </p>
