Is this really not a 'low quality' answer?

Question

I've flagged this answer as 'low quality' because it has no sources and the way it is phrased, the author of said answer seems unsure of what he/she is saying. Here's the full answer, which I'll try to breakdown and explain why I flagged it:

Well i thought in most counties they dont say weekend instead they say holiday and in japan i thought the week is six days long only sundays (holiday) is the day they get off hence Miss All Sunday (All Holiday)

Follow up comment of his/hers when asked to elaborate:

I dont really know anything thing about other countries work week but i have only meet someone from napal and heard mention on a netflix from a (trevor noah) special

1. Well i thought in most counties they dont say weekend instead they say holiday... I don't know how it looks to other people but for me, this is an assumption without mentioning the basis. He/She assumed it immediately as true and concluded this might be the case, without presenting anything as support. If the sentence was phrased like 'I thought that this is the case because I read/saw in this particular reference that...' or something similar, it would not be so.
2. in japan i thought the week is six days long only sundays (holiday) is the day they get off hence Miss All Sunday (All Holiday) Again, another assumption that 'Sunday' is called 'holiday'. Also, a week can never be 6 days, unless he/she is referring to the days where you work.
3. I dont really know anything thing about other countries work week but i have only meet someone from napal and heard mention on a netflix from a (trevor noah) special This entirely contradicts his/her answer. He/She first mentions of what he/she knows about other countries' work week then later on admits he/she doesn't really know anything and that his/her basis is someone from Nepal (not from Japan, which is what is in the answer) and 'heard mention' from a Netflix show without mentioning the exact episode.
4. The previously accepted answer already confirms that this is not a holiday but rather, the mangaka himself stated that it refers to the happiest events, not necessarily holidays, of the year. The question is about One Piece and the mangaka himself answered the question. There is no better source to clear up misunderstandings or questions in the manga than the one who made it himself/herself.

Some might argue that the low quality flag can only be raised if the answer is not salvageable, and that it can still be edited. The formatting and grammar can be edited, yes, but the main idea of the answer was already contradicted, and by the mangaka himself. Isn't an answer that is already proven wrong by a reliable source (in this case, Oda) not salvageable anymore? I hope someone can enlighten me. Peace.

Note/Clarification: This is not an attempt to insult the one who answered the question or to the one who declined the flag. I am just trying to clear things up because this particular matter confuses me, that's all.

Answer 1

As the one who handled your flag, let me clarify a bit as to why I rejected it.

If I'm not comfortable outright deleting a post, I'm likely to decline the VLQ flag. In this particular case, the OP was new and asked to improve their answer in the comments already. And should be given the chance to do so. Given that at the time of rejection, their comment (your point 3) was not yet present.

I like the way Jeff Atwood defined the VLQ

VLQ means the flagger thinks this post is beyond saving -- no amount of editing or polishing will turn this particular turd into gold.

Looking at the answer, I do not think it is beyond saving. As mentioned above, the OP had been requested in the comments to clarify their sources and reasoning. And given time, this could turn into a reasonable answer, all though possibly a wrong one.

As for the wrong answer part, I tend to follow Adam Lears reasoning

• Wrong and unrelated? Delete
• Wrong, as in bad ideas/practices? Downvote
• Wrong, as in it doesn't answer/solve the question, but tries? Downvote

It does seem I fat-fingered the decline reason. As I originally meant to use the following:

flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer

Off course it is also worth to note, that if a OP is requested to update his answer, and this did not happen in a reasonable time (give or take 4 weeks). I would accept a custom flag mentioning something like the following: Op requested to update answer. Did not happen. Asking for deletion