The notice for the duplicate closure doesn't mention the option to edit the question; the only option it offers is to "ask a new one". Sometimes (maybe even most of the times, it's hard to give an estimate) this is a far better option than posting a new question. I'll reiterate what I said here:
My gut feeling says it will ...
Rationale for status:
One thing that needs to be called out here: there are now three different descriptions for each close reason.
The general public gets a very "firm" reason: "this question is opinion based".
The close voter gets a very nuanced description when voting: "Many good questions generate some degree of ...
I noticed that an automatic comment is added when I close as duplicate (a single close vote with my gold badge)
Does this answer your question? How to create an irregular square shape in css? – Temani Afif 6 mins ago
Why is that? Shouldn't the OP edit their question to clarify if the duplicate is not suitable?
This comment will ...
Hide this blurb and only show it on hover over the stricken-through eye icon:
Viewable by the post author and users with the close/reopen votes privilege.
This is meta information that does not need to be present and read every time someone looks at a close banner, but it should be available if they want to read it. I ...
I have a small suggestion:
Show the exact reputation requirement on protected questions, even if one has enough reputation.
I, for one, still can't remember how much reputation is required. I think it'd be more informative to show the requirement in the notice:
... Since you have X reputation more than Y reputation, you can answer the ...
It seems that the close vote reasons have been rewritten from scratch, which is only mentioned as an aside on this post.
Here's what "typo/no repro" is now:
"It's caused by a problem that can no longer be reproduced. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a way less likely to help future readers."
I don't think it's a good option to remind users of to the option to 'post a new one' in this banner. My gut feeling says it will only lead to repeated questions, worded slightly different but not enough to make it clear. If authors decide to edit their question without much improvement, then at least the question stays closed and requires no further ...
Stating the closure date as "months passed since closure" doesn't seem particularly practical.
For questions closed many years ago, we'd end up saying things like:
Closed 92 months ago by Foobar.
If we are not showing the date as we do now:
Closed as not constructive by Foobar Feb 29 '12 at 17:52
We should at least resolve the ...
As Journeyman Geek said, "put on hold" is way better than "closed" because if a question is on hold there is a opportunity to make it better while closed discloses the feeling that the question is closed for good and that takes away the goal of improving a question and just making a new one.
With that said, overall, the design of it and hiding the people ...
There's a few things that could be tweaked.
It should be clearer that editing your question is the preferred alternative. Nothing's going to frustrate a new user than multiple closures and a potential question ban. Something like "You could edit your question. If you have a different problem, you may want to ask a new question instead"
"On hold" is meant to ...
Completion notes: we addressed point #2 below (now "spam and non-answer activity") as well as point #4 (now "you have enough reputation to answer"). More discussion on this in the comments; summary is: this should be used for questions that have had an unusual level of unwanted activity; that it's misused is not something ...
Make it clear that making an edit will cause the post to be reviewed for reopening
The existing notice already asks users to edit their question. Still, despite this, users are unaware of the fact that an edit will push their question into the Reopen Votes queue, and they believe that it will not accomplish much.
I'd recommend adding an extra sentence to ...
A couple days ago I found a post where two close reasons were listed:
How are these cases handled with the new post notices? The part of the new post notice reserved for this doesn't seem to adjust to this scenario.
Sadly, it seems I am on the B group, so I can't just visit the question to check it out for myself.
But from the ...
Link text should say what it links to. Generic "read more" and "here" links are considered bad practice and especially harm accessibility (users of screen readers rely heavily on link text).
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers. Learn more.
The "Learn more" link is confusing. Does it ...
The names of people who have voted to delete/recommended deletion from review aren't shown when an answer has been deleted.
There is a trailing "by ." which is confusing. I'm unsure if names are supposed to be removed, the direction I thought we were heading in, and therefore the by is redundant, or the names are missing.
This post ...
In other places of the site you make use of the serial comma (Oxford comma), for the sake of consistency can we make use of it when listing the people who have closed the question too.
Closed 25 months ago by Yaakov Ellis, Jon Ericson and Shog9
Closed 25 months ago by Yaakov Ellis, Jon Ericson, and Shog9
Problem: A generic close reason for most users for most questions
I don't always use my account when browsing Stack Overflow, so this message was my first introduction to the new post notices:
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers. Learn more.
Want to improve this question? Update the ...
The data you posted on per-site metas included information on who did all that closing. I found it interesting enough to summarize here. In the table below, the sites are ordered by the percentage of closing done by diamond-less community.
| Rank | Site ...
Another small suggestion: Don't show the large "This post is hidden" notice on other users' deleted posts.
This notice is indeed useful for a hapless newcomer who can't understand what a red background on their post means.
But for a 10k+ user looking at a long chain of deleted answers, this seems to be unnecessarily visually cluttering.
A few things I would suggest.
Emphasize steps for improving the post first
If we're going the route of showing different messages to the author and to the public, we should take the opportunity to put improvement steps first.
Your question has been put on hold because other users feel they do not have enough information to give you a satisfying response....
The bounty period is not displayed in hours anymore if it ends in less than one day:
I see two problems:
It is unclear: Does it mean “no time left” or “less than one day left”? Apparently it is the latter, but that is not obvious.
Important information is missing: For a possible answerer it matters whether there is 1 minute or 23 ...
In my opinion the below notice is somewhat unclear what it is referring to. I understand that it is only the second half below the horizontal rule but I feel like it could do with being made a bit clearer.
Viewable by the post author and users with the close/reopen votes privilege
Also the icon that is used seems a bit odd to me but I ...
The biggest thing I'd suggest changing is who we show the list of close voters in the notice to.
We're trying to prevent that feeling of being ganged up on, right? And while it's not nearly so prominent, the list of people who closed your question is still right there. I'd also ask that those close voters are only shown to those that have the close vote ...
I'm no UX expert, but I find plain "Learn more" links very meh. The way I see it, hyperlinked text should tell the user what they are going to see if they click it, and especially if they might be a bit put off by the "on hold/closed" banner in the first place. I don't instantly know what "Learn more" links to.
The current banner does that in a simplist, ...
We used to flag "this post is not written in English on English Stack Overflow" as "unclear what you're asking."
The new verbiage doesn't really allow for that interpretation:
Needs details or clarity
Please clarify your specific problem or add
additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's
currently written, it’...
No bug report, no rant, just a simple:
(plus suggestions how to continue from here, see further below)
Seriously, it is great to see that Stack Exchange Inc. actually did put in serious efforts to improve this core aspect of quality control. And albeit many "quality control users" complained for years about lack of support, within a few days, ...
Make it clear to outside visitors why new answers can't be added
On a closed post, the only indications as to why answers can't be added are at the top in the title, and in between the question and its answers. There's no indication near where the answer box is supposed to be, which means that on questions with lots of existing answers, it requires quite a ...
When doing a closing vote for a duplicate, there was a comment added, such as "Possible duplicate of Link-To-the-Dupe".
If the question was closed for a dupe, this comment was removed.
With the new post notice system the comments are changed to : "Does this answer your question? Link-To-the-Dupe".
When the question is closed, the comment ...
Another thing that could be helpful is to provide a status with respect to the reopen process on the close message itself. This would tell the user whether:
The question is currently undergoing reopen review.
The question underwent reopen review, and the result was Leave Closed (can provide hints to ask in chat and/or on the applicable per-site Meta).
Please don't hide detailed information about the reason for closure - from anyone.
For efficient site curation, the list of names is much less important than the reason for closure. On many sites, a question which has been closed may be edited to fit site standards by other users, not necessarily the OP. For this reason, it may be important to have ...