When I vote to close a question, there's a message saying that I have X votes left. I assume those regenerate after some time? What are the rules on that? Is it different for different sites across the Stack Exchange network?
28422
What limits are there on how I can vote?  How often can I vote? How do my votes become locked/unlocked?
53250
When I'm using the Stack Exchange mobile view (specifically on my iPhone), after voting to close a question I am also shown the flag count. If I refresh the page afterwards, the flag count disappears and I don't think there is (or should be) any way that a non-moderator should see this.  Take for example . This is what I see before my close vote:    Additionally, the close vote dialog doesn't make it immediately obvious like the desktop version how the close votes are distributed, but this is a lesser issue:    After the close dialog is gone, I get the "x votes remaining" message, and I am also shown the flag count, which I don't think I should be able to see.
38355
In the "Votes Cast" section of my profile, my vote to close  is annotated with "(deleted)":    However, the close vote does not appear to have been deleted: it successfully closed the question:    Why was this vote marked as "(deleted)"?    If the vote was deleted my some internal process after the question was closed and the closers were recorded, I call that a . Regardless of what happens internally, it's irrelevant to users if close votes are deleted after they have taken effect.
12407
In the SO Review page , I see the following stats for questions awaiting review:   Close votes:  51.8k (and rising) Suggested edits: 10 (fluctuates, but rarely goes above 20) Everything else: 0 (occasionally see some if you're really lucky)   My question is: Why?  Why are there so many close votes waiting for review? Close votes should expire after four days. And even if there's a good reason for them hanging on longer (ie they're not being viewed), there surely has to be a cut-off eventually after which they can be safely dropped?  And yes, I saw , which is asking basically the same thing. But that was several months ago, and it seems that the queue has hardly moved since then. It seems to me that there's a massive backlog that will never be cleared, and apparently will never expire either. That's not good.  And on the flip side, why are there hardly ever any new user posts or low quality posts to review -- there are always new users posting things, and I recall before this new review system was launched that the list of low quality posts to review was always pretty big.
16182
Back in April, I flagged a post as "not a real question".  The post was subsequently closed and reopened, then closed again and finally just reopened a 2nd time a short time ago.  I still firmly believe the post is not acceptable for SO, so I went to use my recently acquired close vote privilege and was greeted with the following messsage:    I specifically clicked close and not flag (and figuring I just clicked in error, I tried again and got the same message).  I do understand that, in the new closing system, flagging for closure is treated very much like a close vote (since it throws it to the close vote queue) except no vote is actually recorded.  My issue is why should by flag be counted as a close vote when I never actually voted to close.
36891
I was wondering about a question similar to  (for another site), where my &quot;stats&quot; are currently &quot;10/5&quot; (instead of &quot;13/5&quot;). The answer from &quot;Shadow Wizard&quot; links to , which links to yet another &quot;&quot;. This last answer has some details about the actual calculation (like the &quot;10&quot; in my case), which is like so:  A positive question record means you don't have too many closed, downvoted or deleted questions, overall. The formula is (total questions - negative questions - closed - deleted)/total questions &gt;= 0.5. Questions that have been downvoted and closed and deleted count three times in this calculation!  Somewhere I also read that these deleted questions seem to count for 3. But the OPer of a deleted question cannot see deleted questions anymore after a while (X days) either. So that seems to make it impossible to actually &quot;verify&quot; your own score (the &quot;7&quot; part), and also how many more &quot;good questions&quot; will be needed. In my case, I'm aware (remember) that there has been at least 1 question deleted. So I assume in my case the &quot;7&quot; must become at least &quot;8&quot; (I don't have negative or closed questions), though I doubt that will be sufficient. Also because I have 2 more questions with a zero votes balance (which makes me wonder also how accurate the &quot;total questions&quot; in the above quote really is ...). My suggestion: think of a way to somehow clarify (visualize) the formula quoted above. Or as a variation at least provide some way to find out the exact number of you questions that were ever deleted (not just the recently deleted ones). Or maybe some other type of indication to indicate &quot;how much more good questions are needed to ever receive the &quot;Curious&quot; badge. Update: I recently learned about adding deleted:yes to a query. With that, these are some more stats about my questions (using &quot;12345&quot; to represent my user id from the site where this question is about):  user:12345 is:q - results in 14 (not deleted) questions, 11 of them have a positive (&gt; 0) voting balance, none of these 14 are closed.  user:12345 is:q deleted:yes - results in 7 (deleted) questions, with this Status / Voting balance for each of them:       Question id Status Voting Balance     1 Closed +4   2 Duplicate +2   3 Migrated 0   4 Duplicate 0   5 Duplicate 0   6 Closed -1   7 Closed -4     So with that extra info, and as per the &quot;Questions that have been downvoted and closed and deleted count three times in this calculation!&quot; I think (guess) in my case the 2 deleted questions with negative voting balance corresponds to -(2*3)=-6 ... So that the &quot;stats&quot; in my case will have to become something equivalent to &quot;(11-6)/5&quot; = &quot;5/5&quot; ... Just guessing, and fingers crossed to see what will happen if I ever post a new question on that site that does not get downvoted+deleted (assuming all other votes for my existing questions don't change in the meantime).
11991
Do not give the impression that all votes are unanimously in favor of the winning close-reason. I closed for "belongs on superuser," yet SO claims I closed for a completely different reason.  Source:
12891
We should recover close votes cast on questions which are deleted by the owner before actually being closed.   For example, a user posts a question, and I think to myself that it looks familiar. A search turns up one (or several) pretty clear duplicates, so I vote to close and provide the link to the older question(s). A short time later, the OP comes by and realizes that their question is, indeed, a duplicate and decides to delete it.  What I don't like about this is that I've essentially "wasted" a close vote. Now I'll admit, I've never actually used all my allotted close votes in a day yet, but it's a little disappointing to know that I've effectively squandered a vote pointlessly when it could have been used for something more productive instead (i.e. a question that really ought to be closed for whatever reason).  I suppose there's also some hypothetical room for abuse of this current mechanic (trying to force people to waste votes), but with moderators on the boards I think that's a non-issue.
168
Normally, it takes three votes to delete.  It still does, though the mouseover tip for a question with one delete vote cast on it already appears to be stuck at '1'    And then after casting a delete vote on it:    And if I've cast the first delete vote:    The above examples are from P.SE, and while I don't have the privs to verify this being the situation on other sites, this has been confirmed on at least SO and is likely network wide.    Child meta dups:   SO:
81927
Are there any stats about the percentage of close reasons used to close questions   Successfully (preferably, based on the number of closed questions) Unsuccessfully (alternatively, the total percentags of close votes cast by users)   ?   Is there any way to get this from the query explorer?
5020
I just stumbled upon a question from 2009 (that's what I mean by 'old'), .  I think we can all agree that by Today's standards this question would be closed (with a couple of valid reasons to choose from).  However, things were different back then - well from what I can gather, I see quite a few questions like this from back in the day. This kind of question was clearly acceptable at one point.  So, should I vote to close it or leave it be? And just for extra understanding, what would happen to any rep for that question and the answers if it was closed?
114986
I got  in the re-open vote queue.  I noticed it is marked as a duplicate of a question titled Complete and utter nonsense, which was a bit suspicious. So I looked at the bottom of that question and found out it was closed as duplicate by a single user with the new close-vote superpowers.  When going to the duplicate question (the one titled ), I noticed that the same user with the superpowers changed the title of that question and edited the only answer to say If you're reading this, you've posted a question that makes no sense what so ever !.  While this is quite funny, and perhaps both of the questions are low quality and don't make sense (I don't have a gold badge on the relevant tag, so who am I to say), this behavior seems to abuse both the new superpower (since if the new question makes no sense, it shouldn't be closed as a duplicate of a non related question, it should be closed as off topic or unclear) and the edit privileges (what was done to the older question looks like vandalism to me).  This is definitely not a behavior I expect from a 100k+ rep user.  What do you think should be done in this case?
35465
When voting to close a question, it's possible for users to vote for any close reason, even if others have voted for different reasons. However, in the end, once the question reaches five close votes for any reason, only one of those reasons can be displayed.  How does the system determine which one close reason to display, given the votes made by users?
53275
Having been a member of Stack Overflow for a year, I have participated in reviewing close votes and flagging questions if I found any duplicates. However, I don't understand the purpose of closing a question.  As per myself, the main purpose is keeping the site clean and make a better place.     I still see closed questions on the site that are a year old.  When will these questions be deleted?   Also, when a question/answer does get deleted, it is still visible to 10k users, even if it is deleted by the owner.   Every day I participate in reviewing close votes, but the question arises why we are preserving these questions and answers even after they are closed.
26454
In seeing some of the potential solutions and problems related to this  I noticed something. Why are closed questions allowed to obtain more reputation for a user?   So my recommendation(even though it's a pain to implement probably) is this(note, this includes all close votes except for migrations)   When a question gets closed, only the question gets retroactively marked as community wiki. By retroactive, I mean all upvotes on the question before closing are undone.  Also note, downvotes are kept. This means a closed question with downvotes will always have a net negative reputation.  When a question is reopened, it gets retroactively assigned to the user instead of the community user. This just undoes point #1.   Details:  Point one solves these problems:   User asks a popular, but "bikeshed" subjective question. Even if the question is closed an hour later, they may accumulate 15 upvotes. With this system, those 15 upvotes won't matter. Downvotes are kept to the user while being closed. This deals with low-quality questions that people should get a negative reputation affect for. However, after being closed downvotes should be assigned to the community user to prevent the downward spiral affect, especially since pitty upvotes won't be able to save them. People can still upvote as a method of suggesting that a question should be reopened. The upvote just won't count for the author of the question until reopened.   I see no actual point in closed questions being capable of acquiring reputation, except for maybe duplicates(but only barely).  So, here is my feature-request. :)  Also, to solve the  you could apply the same thing toward the answers of closed questions. This isn't a big problem with any close reasons other than Not A Real Question, where many low quality answers fall but with users who try to answer them anyway with the small amount of information given. I think those users should not be discredited for their attempts.
114557
Someone  to try and get help reopening , and it got deleted as a result.  I voted to undelete it and flagged it as well since , and noticed it has been deleted a 2nd time, with the same user initiating the delete vote.    I can also vote to undelete a 2nd time.  Why are delete/undelete votes not limited to once per user per post the way close/reopen votes are?
25763
There is some sort of delay for deletion of your own closed questions (2 days, I think) for non-mods. Now, when you try deleting a closed question on the desktop site, it nicely tells you "please wait xyz to allow for possible reopening" (in a box similar to the "please consider adding a comment explaining why you downvoted" thingy).  On mobile, it just reloads the page—there is no indicator that deletion is not allowed.  Either completely disable the delete button on mobile for closed questions, or give it a popup as well. Not letting the user know what's wrong is confusing.