I'd like to draw your attention to this question:
My concern is that we're rather quick at jumping to serious conclusions:
Firstly, the etiquette
Civility is required at all times; rudeness will not be tolerated
but even more important, I see harsh judgments (e.g. this answer but also in the comments of @krammer which I cannot link) for which I do not see proper grounds based on the available information. This is not only rude, but it is IMHO also bad scientific practice.
The 2 judgments are:
bad supervision: While I think it perfectly reasonable to ask about clarification whether the OP has discussed the question with their supervisor, and also to state in calm words if there is a smell of bad supervisor, IMHO
- it should be respected if the OP explicitly states "My question does not ask for your opinion about my supervisor."
- And I actually think that this statement is a symptom/follow-up reaction of the comments beeing rude.
- There is at least one rather obvious and perfectly harmless situation that could have lead to the OP's question:
The supervisor may have told the OP (or didn't need to tell because the OP knows) to update the working title of the thesis to a final title, and the OP has trouble formulating this title. Which is a perfectly reasonable task towards the end of the thesis, and a perfectly normal difficulty.
Thus, I don't see objective grounds for the exclusive judgement that it is the supervision that is bad. IMHO there is a huge difference between stating that the supervision is the problem and that problems with the supervision is one possible underlying reason.
the thesis does not deserve the grade: This is an extremely serious judgment.
In a cursory search, I could not uncover the OPs real name and the papers. Noone else so far stated that they actually know the papers, not even after asking (besides the fact that the thesis may be long-form, and thus may have considerably more content than can be judged by us right now).
Yet we have statements that "set of loosely connected papers [...] would be called outcome of a good literature survey at my university." (Which may or may not be true, but in fact we don't even know whether the papers are just loosely connected) and "It will depend on the institution, but at the institution I work, you would not be two months from completion. You'd be two years from completion."
Again, there are perfectly harmless possible explanations, e.g. as @adam.r pointed out in the comment to @MHH's answer: "Sometimes, a student is so absorbed in his work that it all seems obvious, and the student does not recognize how advanced his work really is."
I think the underlying concern that we need to behave ourselves better is related to @badroit's concern with the "bad supervisor meme" at Don't walk. Don't run either