What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 127 Stack Exchange communities.

This question is an exact duplicate of:

The size of the close-votes queue is 55k questions. 2,331 review were made today, It is decreasing but it really need some speed as it may take few years to match other review queues.

I have some suggestions:

  1. Review queues only contains the post which have already two close votes (and asked in the last seven days, but older post should be considered with one vote), as one close vote can not always be correct (some users cast vote just because they do not get the post).
  2. Privileges to close the post directly should be at a level where more users can avail it. (Obviously at the level where community can trust them).
  3. Three votes of users with more than 5000 reputation points should be enough to close the post.
  4. A pre-filter apply to the review queue for the users on the basis of tags they are most active in (If I am active user of jQuery give me list of it, so I don't need skip).
  5. Increase the threshold to review the queue from 40 to 60 (or somewhat more suitable)
  6. Highlight the close link for more visibility so more users can cast close vote directly from a post.
  7. Anti-close votes like Leave Open should be on the post itself, gets visible if a close vote is cast, so a wrong misleading vote can be ignored directly from the post without being reviewed in a queue.
  8. One reputation point over 10 reviews (or 10 points over 100 review) will motivate more users to review.

Feedback and more suggestion are required for this issue from you friends.

Edit

Today 24th of October 2013 its count is approx 87K. It needs quick and serious attention.

In 10 days it raised to 90k

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by animuson Nov 21 '13 at 16:20

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

7  
Rather than change all of the closing rules just to knock this queue down, I'd be in favor of a one-time query that deleted a bunch of these questions. Maybe the ones that are more than 1 year old, with a score of zero or less, and no posted answers. –  Robert Harvey Jun 13 '13 at 16:40
5  
@RobertHarvey that could kill a lot of questions on less active tags (this may be a good thing... but it would definitely hit a good percentage of my SO questions; none of these are negative score) , unless you mean only ones which have 1 or more close votes as well. –  enderland Jun 13 '13 at 16:47
2  
@enderland:Yes, that's what I mean. The ones that are already in the close queue. –  Robert Harvey Jun 13 '13 at 16:47
    
It's only about 1,000 questions @Robert. data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/120387/…, hardly seems worth it. –  ben is uǝq backwards Jun 15 '13 at 15:51
    
+1 Yes I agree that close vote queue needs attention. And from last few days I am fully using my close votes on queue. Also I think filters is a great tool for speeding the process. meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196015/… Where I have requested a new feature to exclude some tags, so that less skipping is done in the process. –  Narendra Pathai Sep 13 '13 at 6:25
add comment

3 Answers

To address each of these individually:

  1. Review queues only contains the post which have already 2 close votes, as 1 close vote can not always be correct(some user cast vote just because they do not get the post).

    This suggestion makes it difficult to close old questions. Close votes bleed away after a certain amount of time (under certain conditions), and often, one close vote should be enough to bring it to peoples' attention.

  2. Privileges to close the post directly should be at level where more user can avail it.(Obviously the level where community can trust them).

    There aren't all that many people within the 2K-3K range who would be willing to review posts, and who would do so well. There's also a reason close voting is a 3K privilege, and I don't think that should change.

  3. 3 votes of user with 5000+ reputation should be enough to close the post.

    I would not be opposed to giving higher reputation users slightly more weight, but this does cause a problem. If it takes less people to close a post, then there is a higher chance of error. This is why it takes five votes to begin with - not because the users are lower rep (we clearly trust them (mostly); we're giving them these privileges), but because people make mistakes.

  4. Pre-filter apply to review queue for the users on the basis of tags they active more.

    This is a very good idea, and is already implemented. The Close Votes queue already has a filter button, which allows for sorting by tags and close reasons. I'd be curious to see how much this is used in practice.

    filter button

  5. Increase the threshold to review the queue from 40 to 60 (or somewhat more suitable)

    This one has been suggested before.

  6. Highlight the close link for more visibility so more user can cast close vote directly from post.

    There is already a close button beneath each post; I think it's just a matter of getting in the habit of checking it. It's rather prominently displayed in an awkward way as close (#); it's pretty attention-grabbing in my opinion.

  7. Anti-close like Leave Open should be on the post itself, gets visible if close vote given, so wrong misleading vote can be ignored directly from post without being reviewed in queue.

    I would be in favor of a Leave Open option under the close reasons. While this would very likely not help the close votes queue size, it would certainly allow for both feedback types. Recall this issue in comments - only one portion of comment votes are seen.

Some good ideas, some of which have been implemented, some of which have been discussed before. Just some food for thought.

share|improve this answer
    
@ZaheerAhmed I'm commenting on your suggestions individually. –  Emrakul Jun 13 '13 at 16:41
6  
@ZaheerAhmed: That's how the meta gauntlet works. If your ideas can survive the pounding, they might actually be good ones. –  Robert Harvey Jun 13 '13 at 16:42
    
Wow, I didn't know about the "filter" button. It's really well hidden, in tiny text up top. –  derobert Jun 13 '13 at 16:58
1  
I use close filters! –  Undo Jun 13 '13 at 22:49
    
I use close filters a lot, well I also requested a feature for excluding a particular tag for more faster reviewing meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196015/… but have not yet got response to it. –  Narendra Pathai Sep 13 '13 at 6:24
add comment

I created this query a few days ago when I was investigating the practicalities of doing some of these, specifically Rosinante's (excellent) suggestion:

define a function: close(p) = ....

where the right hand side includes the number of close votes, the total rep of all the close voters, the net vote score of the post, the number of answers to the post, and the age of the post.

I broke down all the posts with close votes by the number of close votes that they had and whether their score was positive or negative:

# Close Votes # Posts Minus Score 0 Score Plus Score 
------------- ------- ----------- ------- ---------- 
1             30,634  4,906       18,585  7,143       
2             16,475  3,725       9,176   3,574       
3             8,208   2,276       4,347   1,585       
4             2,718   820         1,358   540        
5             6       3           2       1     

Unfortunately SEDE doesn't include the UserID of the close voter so I can't break this down by reputation already.

So, I'd like to use data to address some of your points individually:

Review queues only contains the post which have already 2 close votes, as 1 close vote can not always be correct(some user cast vote just because they do not get the post).

This obfuscates rather than solves the problem, it means that questions with pending close votes are ignored rather than being closed or having the close votes removed. It does, however, have the largest impact on the queue with 30,634 posts being removed.

Privileges to close the post directly should be at level where more user can avail it.(Obviously the level where community can trust them).

This only helps if they work the queue. If they start closing new questions then it makes the situation worse.

3 votes of user with 5000+ reputation should be enough to close the post.

Assuming that every single user who's voted on a post with 3 or more close votes had greater than 5,000 reputation this would remove slightly under 11,000 posts. That's obviously a massive over-estimate and definitely not enough to break the malaise affecting the queue and the people using it.

Pre-filter apply to review queue for the users on the basis of tags they active more.

This is already possible, there's no need to implement it again.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I would rather just have two close vote queues.

One for "last active 30+ days ago" (other than close votes, maybe even make this only if new answers are added to avoid "edit... close vote" games) and one for questions with activity in the last month.

I understand closing older questions is good, but closing new, poor questions is more important in my opinion.

I would be curious to see a distribution of questions in the close vote queue based on either question age or activity.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .