Post History

I already read the help/papers doc you pointed out. And that's why I think a part of the papers are very far from the description there (except the "to educate" clause, at the most). As far as I understand, this category is intended to  
* "presenting useful information to the world",
* be "much like research papers published in scientific journals",
* be an "Idea for a new method of doing something you have tried and found to work"
* be "A neat trick or circuit you developed that was useful"
* be an "Extension to existing theory"
* "A survey of scattered information" etc
* (two more clauses that will be discussed below)

In what sense the papers "What are voltages inside resistors", "what are voltages in circuits", or "Where do currents flow in circuits?" fit these clauses?

It's true, there are two other clauses:
* A case study.
* Report of original research or an investigation you personally performed.

BUT: both clauses immediately specify that 
* The problems you encountered and solved should be ones that **reasonably competent electrical engineers** might also encounter
AND
* the result should not be obvious to a **reasonably competent EE**.

And that suffices to invalidate the aforementioned papers, unless you extrapolate the meaning of these clause at the extreme.

It should of course be possible to extend the scope of the paper category, updating it, but I think this category is nice as it is and is actually well thought. It would be a pity to extend it more than that. 

That's what I think a category "insights" is required.