This question already has an answer here:

I just got a failed audit by voting to close this question as "too broad"; it has 15 upvotes, but it's very clearly a matter of preference, and both the linked MS documentation and all the answers given amount to "it depends".

I understand the need for automated selection of audit questions, but are we ever going to see a mechanism for when the auditbot clearly gets it wrong?

marked as duplicate by psubsee2003, Martijn Pieters, Hugo Dozois, Azik, Aziz Shaikh Nov 6 '13 at 4:23

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.

  • 3
    but are we ever going to see a mechanism for when the auditbot clearly gets it wrong.... ultimately unless you habitually fail audits, you don't have to worry. Just visit the post outside of the review queue, vote to close so it won't be used again, and move on. If we had the ability to contest an audit, it won't result in any thing different. – psubsee2003 Nov 6 '13 at 0:39
  • 1
    "too broad" is not the same as "primarily opinion based" though. – Simon Forsberg Nov 6 '13 at 0:47

I don't think the issue is all that clear-cut on the question you linked. While it does appear on its face to be "gorilla vs shark," the scope of the question is tightly confined, and there ought to be an actual answer based on relevant, factual information and not opinion. The guidance on audits like this says something like "reasonable questions should be allowed to stay open."

Since the question now has a close vote on it (probably due to the attention it is getting here on meta), I doubt that it will appear as an audit candidate again.

  • for the sake of precision, posts with close and down votes sometimes appear as known good audits, at least in FP queue – gnat Nov 6 '13 at 8:50

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