7

Suppose I'm reviewing a question which has been edited after being closed. Significant changes have been made, and the result does not fit the original reason for closing the question. However, IMO it should be closed - for another reason.

For example: Before the edit, the grammar was terrible, the sentences didn't make sense and the code was an off-site link. After the edit, I can read the question, but it seems off-topic to me; or maybe I don't understand why OP wants to do what s/he is asking us about.

Question: In this situation, should I Leave Closed, Reopen, or Skip?

Note: If I Leave Closed, as many suggest, the user would still see the original reason for closing. Sure, they'd have my comment, but it would be a case of mixed-messaging. Also, it might not be fair to them that "close" the question for a different reason using just my single opinion, rather than requiring multiple close votes for the new reason.

5
  • 5
    This is explained in the FAQ What are the guidelines for reviewing?. Basically, you should Leave Closed unless the duplicate reason is involved. – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog Sep 7 '19 at 16:48
  • @rene: But isn't that unfair? I would be "riding" the original closing to make my single close vote into the equivalent of 3 votes. Maybe I'm wrong? – einpoklum Sep 7 '19 at 17:25
  • Be the Skipper. – Rob Sep 7 '19 at 17:45
  • @rene: With respect - your argument is begging the question... – einpoklum Sep 7 '19 at 18:01
  • @Rob: I don't follow. I remember there's a skipper character on the "Gilligan's Island" show, but I never really watched it. – einpoklum Sep 7 '19 at 18:02
6

Good question, since the review guidance is kind of ambiguous at this point:

  • Leave Closed if this question is not appropriate for the site in its current state
  • Edit and Reopen to correct the issues with this question prior to reopening
  • Reopen if all issues with this question have been corrected, or it was incorrectly closed
  • Skip if you are not sure and want to go to the next question

I mean, the first bullet is quite clear. If a question is closed for reason X, but that reason doesn't apply, and the question is (in your opinion, that's why we have multiple people looking at a single review item) still not appropriate for the site, you need to choose 'Leave Closed', right?

But one could argue that "it was incorrectly closed" and you should choose 'Reopen'. I might actually do that if I'm the final reviewer and can perform the appropriate closing (on sites where I moderator, or if I can use a dupehammer).

In general, I agree with @rene's comment that it's often helpful to leave a clarifying comment, rather than to wait for a full reopen-close cycle.

2
  • 1
    The thing is, the "not appropriate" might be interpreted to mean "not appropriate in the sense due to which it was closed"; and not doing so might be somewhat unfair to the user asking the question. Also, they would still see the original closing reason. – einpoklum Sep 7 '19 at 17:59
  • @einpoklum it's already a problem when a question has multiple valid close-reasons since the beginning: only the majority reason is shown. Better put a comment explaining the whole problem with the question and not wasting another close-reopen cycle... – Meta Andrew T. Sep 8 '19 at 17:54

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333170/what-to-do-when-a-question-is-close-worthy-for-a-different-reason
meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-21
146015
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:Z765PG7YYPWAIOR6KGSD4RNPFJKKLLUT
<urn:uuid:fc9155eb-cbf9-4556-a396-ef0bc4106c7c>
2021-05-14T07:11:51Z
151.101.1.69
text/html
sha1:DR2DCNXAQWN3MEI4L3H5JR7JB55CRAOB
<urn:uuid:cd3d522a-fea0-4801-a115-e5515f0dfedd>
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333170/what-to-do-when-a-question-is-close-worthy-for-a-different-reason
response
<urn:uuid:fa5bfaa9-c2e3-4a85-be50-bff5da21661e>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-21
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for May 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-126.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/