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

I see lots of questions that are good questions, but subjective or unanswerable and should probably be changed to community wiki (and are often closed because of this)

Would it make sense to have a "Should be community wiki" option in the vote to close box? I would see this functioning in such a way that if a question was closed with that reason, and the OP edited it and changed it to community wiki, it would be automatically reopened.

Obviously, marking this question as community wiki :)

share|improve this question
Yes, except that the question should still stay "closed" in that no new answers are permitted, but still marked as "open for collaborative edits". We need a better word than "closed". – Ether Jan 31 '10 at 3:38
up vote 10 down vote accepted

I would love to see the "Vote to make community wiki" feature described here. Right now the work flow is like this:

  1. User opens question as personal
  2. Question gets closed as "not a real question" or something because it should be community wiki
  3. Someone leaves a comment saying "make this a community wiki"
  4. User (sometimes) complies. Post is made community wiki.
  5. People vote to re-open
  6. Post is community wiki and people can respond

Wouldn't it be better like this?

  1. User opens question as personal
  2. Question gets voted as "community wiki"
  3. Post is community wiki and people can respond

This would seem to save a lot of headache and get to the same place.

share|improve this answer
This implies that personal questions should be community wiki questions, but that's just an excuse for abusing community wiki to get around the site rules. The problem here is that the intention behind the community wiki feature is poorly defined. – naught101 Apr 2 '12 at 12:08

I see lots of questions that are good questions, but subjective or unanswerable a

Then should the close reasons not be..

closed as "subjective" by {user1} .. {usern} on {date}

closed as "unanswerable" by {user1} .. {usern} on {date}


I'm not seeing the distinction here that makes

closed as "should be community wiki" by {user1} .. {usern} on {date}

necessary at all.

share|improve this answer
That works for questions that are blatently subjective or unanswerable (e.g. "Whats better, vi or emacs?") But there are plenty of questions that, while subjective or unanswerable, still provide value. Those are questions that I wouldn't vote to close, but would want to see as community wiki. I think many others share my sentiment based on the number of "this should be community wiki" and "I'll vote to reopen if this is changed to community wiki" type comments that I see on questions. – Eric Petroelje Sep 3 '09 at 17:22
agreed, see Steve's answer for a proposed workflow. – antony.trupe Jan 4 '10 at 5:41

I think the answer is that these questions are not really good questions, and are not the type of questions that the site was designed for.

Some questions slip through the net just because users like to express their opinion on subjective matters, even though the question really deserves to be closed.

If you're lucky you'll get hundreds of upvotes on a non-CW question, because of people upvoting it to keep it on the front page (to make their own voice heard when others open the question and see their answer.) If you're unlucky, you'll get a bunch of downvotes before the question is made CW.

Look at my latest question for example. I knew this was subjective, not the type the SO developers want to see, and likely to get closed. Which it was (but at least I got a badge out of it.) The fact that it was CW makes no difference.

share|improve this answer

This has been suggested a number of times, including here

share|improve this answer

This would have the added benefit that no user can force the question into CW status, they can only force you to change it, or you can wait for people to vote to reopen it.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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