What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 129 Stack Exchange communities.

Given the ever growing close vote review queue, I think it would help things along if we could streamline the filtering a little more.

At the moment we can filter by tag and by close reason, but off-topic has 7 sub-close-reasons. It may improve the workflow a bit to be able to narrow it down to one or two sub-close-reasons.

enter image description here


There are 41,155 reasons to add this filter. About half of all the CV review queue.
Supporting data provided by Shog:

enter image description here

share|improve this question
6  
Better yet, can't we just hoist one or two of those items out of the "off-topic" sub-heading? Certain ones don't really seem to fit the natural interpretation of off-topic, but are distinct problems with the state of the question. –  Cody Gray Aug 2 '13 at 5:47
4  
@CodyGray That's a good point, but I didn't want the filtering idea to get wrapped into another argument/proposal –  apaul34208 Aug 2 '13 at 5:53
    
I don't disagree (I really dislike the new categories), but this seems to go against the reworking of the flag categories that was recently done. –  Austin Henley Aug 2 '13 at 5:59
    
I'd be happy if Super User, Server Fault and "belongs on another site" (and "other"?) were all grouped - they're strongly related, unlike the other 3 reasons. –  Dukeling Oct 4 '13 at 9:47
3  
there are 61,745 reasons to add this filter. 2/3 of all the CV review queue, apparently extremely diverse issues, are presented to reviewers as an unsorted pile - even to those aware about how filtering works. No wonder that reviews get stuck –  gnat Nov 30 '13 at 10:28
1  
@gnat thanks for the clarification –  apaul34208 Nov 30 '13 at 15:57
    

2 Answers 2

I do like the idea.

For example I'd review general off-topic, custom off-topic, and belongs to other site but I don't like reviewing "please post SSCCE" and "minimal understanding" reasons.

Note, that it may help reduce the close votes review queue because it may attract some people to review things they want to (like me, for example)

share|improve this answer
2  
love the point that each person can choose their type –  Dave A Dec 22 '13 at 20:49

This kind of filtering would make a huge difference.

The worst kind of questions, and easiest to review (least time invested), are the infamous

must demonstrate minimal understanding.

They represent the "do my homework", "I haven't done any personal research", etc types. They are most deserving of being removed and least difficult to identify.

If I could filter by those, I could knock out 40 quickly, efficiently, and without being sloppy.

share|improve this answer
2  
Not as easy as recommended a tool, library or off site resource, could do those in my sleep –  Richard Tingle Dec 22 '13 at 21:32
1  
Really suspicious this post is just encouraging people to review a certain filtered type of post like popcorn and get sloppy. –  djechlin Mar 23 at 14:00
1  
Really suspicious??? As in conspiring to cause harm suspiscious??? Are you arguing that these kinds of questions are not more obvious than others? Are you arguing that there is no merit to distinguishing between obvious, and blatant Q's that need closing and are easier to identify? Or are you arguing that I'm conspiring to cause sloppy reviews? I don't see you addressing what I've said, @djechlin. What I see is you sniping and down-voting me, as usual. –  Dave A Mar 23 at 17:43

You must log in to answer this question.

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