Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

On Programmers (and other sites, too!), we get a lot of honeypot questions that attract low-quality answers and are eventually closed. These answers then show up under the review tools.

While the review page is right to show these answers because they are indeed low quality, they aren't very actionable in their own right:

  • Many (most?) of the questions have little chance to be reopened, so a reviewer editing, flagging, prompting a user to revise their answer is pointless at best and borderline sadistic at worst.
  • In the cases where the closed question is savable, the community would want to revise the question before any of the answers anyway.

There was a previous suggestion to just avoid showing posts attached to closures or migrations, but I don't think it needs to be that drastic: a simple [closed] attached to the end of the question title would suffice. random's suggestion in the comments to provide a closed question filter would be also welcome.

This way, reviewers can look to deal with the questions to which these low quality answers are attached without having to waste a lot of time improving answers when the core problem hasn't been fixed yet.

How about it?

share|improve this question
What are you not doing to these answers that you would be doing if their parent questions were still open? – Pops Nov 18 '11 at 19:17
@PopularDemand Generally commenting to tell them that we expect more from answers than a single line, or in rare cases, improving the answer myself. Prompting people to expand an answer to a question that's just on its way to eventual deletion is a bit sadistic. – user149432 Nov 18 '11 at 19:19
@MarkTrapp What about questions that are closed but aren't earmarked for deletion? As the theory goes, reopening closed questions is not out of the ..uh.. question. – Adam Lear Nov 18 '11 at 20:46
@AnnaLear That's a good point, although I think that's an even stronger motivator for a [closed] designation in question titles: we want to revise the question that the low quality answer was posted to moreso than just revise the answer. – user149432 Nov 18 '11 at 20:49
Would like a filter for posts on closed questions, so those under 3k can focus first on those still open – random Nov 18 '11 at 20:49
@MarkTrapp True. I agree that having [closed] in the title would be handy, but I also think we should avoid using that as an automatic "you can ignore this answer" pass. – Adam Lear Nov 18 '11 at 20:50
same for answers as well? – waffles Nov 21 '11 at 1:00
@waffles yeah, that'd be the primary use-case, actually. When reviewing, I want to know when an answer is attached to a closed question. – user149432 Nov 21 '11 at 1:03
up vote 1 down vote accepted

a simple [closed] attached to the end of the question title would suffice.

True, this got me a few time, added to both the expanded and non expanded views for answers.

share|improve this answer
to be deployed today – waffles Nov 21 '11 at 23:58

You must log in to answer this question.