Normally, the close/lock/delete history of a post (including the reversal of such actions) is easily accessible along with the posts revisions.

However, if the post has not been edited (aside from closures/lockings/deletions), there is no link to the revision history, and no indication (aside from maybe comments) that the post was ever closed and reopened, locked and unlocked, or deleted and undeleted.

Example: Remove links from close question dialog for moderators

Of course, the revision history is still accessible via the direct URL, so the close/lock/delete history can be seen, but there is no indication that such history exists.

I propose that if there are no edits on a question that has been closed, locked, or deleted, there be a link to the revision history in the typical location, with a timestamp of the closure/locking/deletion activity.

It'd be useful to know by looking at the post that there is disagreement as to whether it should be open or closed, locked or unlocked, deleted or undeleted, and it's unclear enough that it's gone both ways without even being edited.

Another example is here: https://workplace.stackexchange.com/q/11006/869

The question was closed (and then reopened) by a moderator. There is a comment about expanding/improving the question, but no indication that it has been closed/reopened or why.

  • 2
    I think this is a duplicate because I've written the following comment before: "The same happens with (un)deletions". Were your feature request worded "If there is any change to the status of a question the link should appear" I would strongly agree with this. This, then, includes deletions and (hopefully) bounties / post locks etc. – ben is uǝq backwards Apr 10 '13 at 14:50
  • Hm... a question getting closed and re-opened without a single edit (not even a minor one) or even a comment discussing either the closure or the re-opening points to... other problems. If you happen upon this a lot, perhaps it's time to start a Meta discussion on your site, this really shouldn't be happening. – yannis Apr 10 '13 at 14:53
  • @Yannis, it's on meta; unless you want the meta-meta-meta discussion again :-) – ben is uǝq backwards Apr 10 '13 at 14:55
  • @benisuǝqbackwards My comment was more for the last sentence of the question, and the Meta discussion I was suggesting was to solve the social problem. Although it's technically possible for a question to get closed and re-opened (and closed and ...) without edits or comments (that would help point out that the question is contested), that really shouldn't be happening on a healthy community. – yannis Apr 10 '13 at 14:59
  • @Yannis Comments could get deleted. – yoozer8 Apr 10 '13 at 15:15
  • @benisuǝqbackwards I've indluded lockings and deletions – yoozer8 Apr 10 '13 at 15:17
  • @Yannis all the more reason to include this feature - to make more clearly obvious/trackable when things like this are happening. – Ben Barden Apr 10 '13 at 16:15
  • @BenBarden Perhaps. I wasn't really trying to say the feature is a bad idea, was more commenting in general. I'm not entirely convinced it's a good idea either, but it's a very minor thing and I don't see how it would hurt. Also, the feature is extremely easy to build with a userscript, and there are at least a couple of userscripts on stackapps.com that implement the functionallity. – yannis Apr 10 '13 at 16:30

Some time ago, I wrote a User script to get the revision link to appear on all posts.

// ==UserScript==
// @name           Stack Exchange: Add revision link
// @namespace      Rob W
// @description    Add a (history) revision link to each post
// @include        http://stackoverflow.com/questions/*
// @include        http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/*
// @include        http://superuser.com/questions/*
// @include        http://meta.superuser.com/questions/*
// @include        http://askubuntu.com/questions/*
// @include        http://meta.askubuntu.com/questions/*
// @include        http://mathoverflow.net/questions/*
// @include        http://meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/*
// @include        http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/*
// @include        http://meta.answers.onstartups.com/questions/*
// @include        http://serverfault.com/questions/*
// @include        http://meta.serverfault.com/questions/*
// @include        http://stackapps.com/*
// @include        http://*.stackexchange.com/questions/*
// @version        1.0
// ==/UserScript==

var vt = document.querySelectorAll('.vt');
var div = document.createElement('div');
div.className = 'user-info';
div.innerHTML = '<div class="user-action-time">post <a href="/posts/%d/revisions"><span class="relativetime">history</span></a></div>';

for (var i=0; i<vt.length; i++) {
    let cell_vt = vt[i],
        cell_next = cell_vt.nextElementSibling,
        cell_sig = cell_next.nextElementSibling,
    if (!cell_sig) {
        // Recycling cell_sig variable for postID
        cell_sig = /\d+/.exec(cell_vt.getElementsByTagName('a')[0].href);
        cell_next = cell_vt.parentNode.insertCell(1);
        cell_next.className = 'post-signature rw-post-history';

        cell_content = div.cloneNode(true);
        cell_content.getElementsByTagName('a')[0].href = '/posts/' + cell_sig + '/revisions';


var style = document.createElement('style');
style.type = 'text/css';
style.textContent = '.rw-post-history{opacity:0.2}.rw-post-history:hover{opacity:1;}';
  • Did you post this on stackapps.com? – yannis Apr 10 '13 at 16:32
  • Nope, I didn't expect that anyone else besides me would need this feature :p Besides, the code is very simple. – Rob W Apr 10 '13 at 16:32

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