Disclaimer: This is about closing as duplicates only - not other types of closures.


When in the review queue for close votes, I sometimes find myself reviewing a question that has been voted for closure as a duplicate, where the title or body has some formatting & grammar issues that need fixing up.*

For example, there was this question. From the revision history, all I did was change the title from

GTA4 (Steam) on Ubuntu

to

Is it possible to run the Steam version of GTA 4 on Ubuntu?

I still think this question is a duplicate of this one, however after the edit, the review queue auto jumped to the next item in the queue - i.e. not giving me a chance to close the question.

Granted, I can visit my Profile page, click on 'Activity', see the recent Edit action, click to navigate to the question, and finally click 'Close', but that's a lot of clicks I have to take.

I could also remember to middle-click the title when reviewing to go directly to the question and edit/close from there, but that kinda shirks the whole review-queue idea.

So, I request that the auto-redirect after reviewing duplicate close votes be removed, and instead we have to click I'm Done like the other review queues.

* Duplicate questions aren't eventually removed like the other close reasons. They're considered helpful in terms of providing different ways of phrasing the same question, as well as links back to the original question and answers. So I edit them under the pretense that it might be the first thing visitors see. In other words, I prefer a patched up window to a broken one.

share
    
Related: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/169988/… and meta.stackexchange.com/questions/212862/…, especially take a look at Shog9's answer in the second link, it covers this pretty well. –  3ventic Mar 22 at 10:09
    
@3ventic - Shog's answer makes the assumption that every close reason is treated the same (close->delete), which is simply not the case here. We don't delete duplicates, thus 'edit & close' is a viable path. –  Robotnik Mar 22 at 11:00
2  
But the edit button's description holds true: "improve so that it does not need to be closed." If you edit for another reason, it's easy enough to open the question itself. –  3ventic Mar 22 at 11:30
    
@3ventic - Of the functionality that I'm asking to be changed, a tooltip is probably the easiest of the lot. –  Robotnik Mar 22 at 12:51
4  
Worth noting that if you're leaving duplicates around as sign-posts, changing the wording is probably counterproductive. –  Shog9 Mar 22 at 14:41
    
@Shog9 - In regards to your edit summary - that's why this is a feature request - I'm requesting the action be changed. As for the comment, the signpost still exists its just been made clearer. –  Robotnik Mar 23 at 2:24
1  
Please refer to FEichinger's answer. –  Shog9 Mar 23 at 2:42
    
@Shog9 - please refer to response to FEichinger's answer –  Robotnik Mar 23 at 2:58

1 Answer 1

The Close Vote queue exists for one specific purpose: To determine whether or not a question should be closed.

Editing a minor grammar or formatting issue is not a Close Vote review action. Open the question, do the edit outside the review queue. In the queue, you should only perform queue-relevant actions. An edit that doesn't change anything about whether or not the question should be closed is not such a queue-relevant action.

share
1  
Closing is not the sole purpose of any review queue, and I'm honestly kinda shocked you think that. The purpose of the review queues is to a) determine good from bad, b) edit bad into good, and finally c) If bad cannot be salvaged, to close/delete. Now I'm talking about duplicates specifically, so I'll say again: closure != deletion in this case, therefore editing grammar etc = good. What I'm asking is that if a question is in the review queue for 'duplicate', let us edit it without the assumed agreement that edit=leave open. That's all. All other close actions remain the same. –  Robotnik Mar 22 at 12:49
    
I did not say "closing was the purpose of that queue", did I now? I said the close votes review queue is about determining whether or not a question should be closed. An edit that changes nothing about that is irrelevant there - it does not actually review the item in what the queue is about. You also have not fully clarified in your question that you want this only for possible duplicates. (Which might get their own queue anyway.) –  user98085 Mar 22 at 13:22
    
I must've read that first part wrong, I apologise. As for clarity of dupes in my question however... well it's right there in the title. And the first sentence. And the example I give is a question VTC'd as dupe. I even reaffirm that I think it's a dupe, and then go on to talk about closing as dupe :P. Nevermind, I've now added a disclaimer. Hopefully that'll clear things up –  Robotnik Mar 22 at 13:46
1  
An Edit for clarification is part of the low quality and first post queue, I also can then go on to downvote, flag, leave a comment without ever leaving the queue, before clicking 'I'm Done'. That's all I'm asking for here. The ability to edit a dupe and then go on to close. If you ask me, that's exactly why they're in the queue to begin with. To be reviewed. –  Robotnik Mar 22 at 13:52
1  
@Robotnik That's what we have quality review queues for, though. These are very distinct concepts with very distinct goals. Mind you, I think a separate duplicate queue would be well-served with such a feature, but the close vote queue is about figuring out if a question should be closed, and fixing it if not, not about the general quality of the post. –  user98085 Mar 22 at 13:53
1  
Our distinct goals (as a site) is good, readable content that's easy to find. Every review queue works toward those goals. If and when we get a duplicate queue that allows us to edit & close, great. Until such time however, the close queue is all we've got. However, without the ability to edit AND close as dupe from the one place, you're forcing people to do one or the other- either edit and leave open, or close and leave as bad content. Forcing people to navigate away to perform both is bad design and doesn't allow us to accomplish both goals –  Robotnik Mar 22 at 14:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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