I don't want to spoil some fun posts here, but I see a certain pattern where a couple of interesting questions are followed by a slew of rather similar ones. In my opinion, it's getting old pretty fast. Take for example:
- How can this confetti code be improved to include shadows and gravity?
- How to make an inkblot?
- How to create animated snowfall?
- How to find circular objects in an image?
- Image Processing: Isolating areas of an image with internal irregularity
- Recovering data points from an image
- How can I extract data points from a black and white image?
- Help find a bright object on Mars!
- How to peel the labels from marmalade jars using Mathematica?
- Detecting grid lines in a raster image
- Finding the centroid of a disk in an image
Some questions are very well asked, clearly show effort and have excellent answers that really add new knowledge to the pool. Others are just more of the same and don't show any effort. Case in point: the Draw a X-mas Tree question, launched within days of the Snowfall question. Nobody doubts that Mathematica could draw a tree; we have all the necessary graphics primitives on board. There's no difficult problem to be solved, no conceptual issue at stake. It's just plain work. And the OP wants us to do it.
This is the first X-mas tree, so I suppose no Close As Duplicate then? Or can we extend this close reason to incorporate any "Draw X" or "Detect X" question? If so, I feel we should develop some clear criteria.
But perhaps we want fun contests without restrictions whatsoever, the more the better? If so, we should update the FAQ which states you should only ask "practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face".