0

When reviewing answers in the Low quality posts review queue there seems like there should be an option for other action instead of just looks okay, edit, and delete/recommend deletion. I am asking this as I run into answers from time to time that while they don't look okay do not rise to the level of deletion. Having this option would allow for better handling of questions that don't fit into any category and the reviewer doesn't have what they need to edit it into proper shape.

5

1 Answer 1

4

How do I use the Low quality posts queue?

  • Choose Looks OK for questions that are on-topic, sufficiently detailed, and not too broad. Use this option for answers that answer the question as asked, even if they may be incorrect.
  • Select Edit if the post is good quality, but you can improve the post to make it better. Avoid editing posts that should be closed or deleted, as it will remove the post from review.
  • Recommend deletion or Delete if you think that an answer does not address the question at all, is link-only, or is incomprehensible. Do not vote to delete answers that are simply wrong. You may leave a comment explaining the issues with the answer, or choose one of the provided canned comments.
  • Recommend close or Close if you think that a question should be closed (See What does it mean if a question is “closed”?).
  • Skip if you’re unsure about the post’s quality.

I agree that the "Looks OK" guidance for answers is a bit vague and might lead some people to think that choosing that option means they think the answer is acceptable quality. There is more detailed information in the FAQ Guidelines for reviewing Low quality posts / Low quality answers, that is linked to the help topic. (I'm not sure if it's linked somewhere it can be found while reviewing.) It would also be helpful if the help topic explained explicitly what the low quality queue is for, not just how posts get into it.

The entire purpose of that queue is to figure out whether to delete/close or try to salvage low quality posts. If you don't want to say it looks OK, and you don't want to delete it, and you can't think of a way to salvage it through editing, just skip it (maybe leave a comment if you think it would be helpful).

What else would you want to do to it that should remove it from the queue? I don't think leaving a comment should remove it from the queue; if you think the author is still engaged with the post and could salvage it with a minor edit, then you should leave the comment and say "Looks OK". Deletion is only for content that can't be edited to be acceptable quality. It is not for incorrect answers. If extensive edits are required to bring a post up to quality, it's probably better to delete it. It doesn't prevent the author from posting a better answer unless they have a habit of posting low quality answers.

If it helps, think of the options this way:

Looks OK → "Doesn't need to be deleted or closed"
Edit → "I can fix it so it doesn't need to be deleted or closed"
Delete → "Needs to be deleted"
Skip → "I'm not sure or I don't want to make a decision on this post"

15
  • Pretty sure OP means that it would behave same way as other review queues: i.stack.imgur.com/PnFmX.png but would be better if it will be mentioned in the question as well. Jan 16 at 18:11
  • 1
    @ShadowWizardLoveZelda I understand what they want. I don't think it's necessary. I think it would be better to make it clearer what "Looks OK" really means for that queue.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 16 at 18:13
  • The issue is that an answer can address parts of the questions while not fully answering it. Which for some wouldn't fit as looks okay and also doesn't fit as worthy of deletion.
    – Joe W
    Jan 16 at 19:01
  • @JoeW You don't understand what "Looks OK" means in the context of the low quality queue. You only need to answer one question, "Is it so low quality it should it be deleted or not?" You express your view about the quality of answers that shouldn't be deleted by voting. If you don't answer that question, the post should stay in the queue.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 16 at 19:11
  • 1
    I am stating that not everyone sees the "looks okay" option in the same way and they don't see a valid option for a bad answer that isn't to the point of deletion. You can keep repeating that I don't understand how that button is supposed to work but that isn't going to change what I said about people not thinking it is the correct choice. Maybe the action needs to be renamed from "looks okay" to something else.
    – Joe W
    Jan 16 at 19:14
  • @JoeW I would support renaming the options, and improving the help topic. Users not having the same understanding of different choices when reviewing is a problem across all queues. The idea is to have so many people voting, that the inconsistencies get lost in the noise. Adding an "other" option to let people dump LQPs out of the queue without actually handling them is not something I would support.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 16 at 19:19
  • As would I however that wasn't an option I thought of when making my question. If you have another option for a name I would be happy to consider accepting that as the answer.
    – Joe W
    Jan 16 at 21:45
  • I think "needs author edit" would be a good option to add, especially for answers. That could add an auto-comment under the answer to ask for more details.
    – Marijn
    Jan 18 at 13:01
  • @Marijn If you've reviewed it and decided the author can salvage the question, then you should click "Looks OK" (aka Shouldn't be deleted). There's no need for an additional button.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 18 at 13:20
  • @JoeW I don't feel that me coming up with different wording for "Looks OK" addresses your question as written. If you've thought about it and feel like that would address your concerns, you could write an answer with wording you feel would work. Or, maybe an entirely new feature request to update the wording and clarify the help page if you feel like it.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 18 at 13:24
  • @ColleenV I think an extra category would be helpful, again especially for answers, since they cannot be closed. The post should be deleted, unless the post author provides a (sufficient) edit. I'm not sure how that should be handled down the line, but in any case I feel there is quite a bit of room between "needs to be deleted/unsalvageable" and "sufficiently detailed/answers the question/doesn't need to be deleted".
    – Marijn
    Jan 18 at 13:34
  • @Marijn No, reviewers should not kick the can down the road. If it is so low quality that it should be deleted unless someone edits it, and the reviewer can't make the edits to bring it up to snuff, letting it stay on the site when the author is under no obligation to come back and fix it is silly. If they want to write a decent quality answer, they can come back and write a new one. I have yet to see an answer in the LQ queue that would be difficult to replicate.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 18 at 13:37
  • 1
    That is fine, and I am not sure what to change it to either. I just thought you might have an idea since you made that as a suggestion. The issue is that not all bad answers deserve to be deleted.
    – Joe W
    Jan 18 at 13:37
  • @ColleenV but you wrote in your answer here "Deletion is only for content that is unsalvageable". In many cases the LQ answer is salvageable with an author edit.
    – Marijn
    Jan 18 at 13:44
  • @Marijn If you can't salvage it with an edit, it is unsalvageable for the purposes of the queue. If your standard for "salvageable" is that the post author could come back and write the post so that it is not low quality, then you would never delete any post for quality problems. The goal is to remove poor quality stuff from the site, not to imagine all the ways it could be fixed if a miracle happens and the drive-by poster suddenly decides to write good quality stuff.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 18 at 13:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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