<p>The question <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/69674/gaussian-kernel-density-estimation-with-fixed-covariance-with-python?noredirect=1">"Gaussian kernel density estimation with fixed covariance (with python)"</a> was incorrectly migrated to StackOverflow.</p>

<p>Can we have it restored to Cross-Validated?</p>

<p>Based on <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1514/what-standard-should-be-applied-in-deciding-whether-a-question-requires-sufficie">this meta question</a> it does not appear as though the original post exhibited the negative criteria listed in the highest-voted answer:</p>

<ul>
<li>The question includes tags for things besides a programming language.</li>
<li>The question could be easily re-stated in English (with no computer code) since the idea that there is just a simple programming option to enable a full covariance-like bandwidth parameter to KDE is not a coherent criticism (there is no such simple programming option and it would involve novel research to create one.)</li>
<li>The question is not <em>purely</em> mathematical, since it is about data-driven or otherwise covariance based choices in modeling data with KDE process and presumably applies to actual data given the programming references.</li>
</ul>

<p>Along these lines, from the meta-question I linked above we have: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Something to notice about most of these examples is that their titles contain technical statistical terms. The presence of such words does not imply the question itself is on topic!"</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I am curious if there is community support for the analagous claim: "The presence of programming-language-specific words, tags, or phrases in the title of a question does not imply the question itself is off topic!"</p>

<p>The question does involve a programming language, but as I interpret it, the question asks about a method to employ a more "covariance-like" notion of bandwidth within the Kernel Density Estimation framework. </p>
