Recently, a contentious discussion has been taken place in Removed Question vs Reputation around the opening of the question Determine if $\frac{k-1}{k}+ \frac{1}{k(k+1)}= \frac{k}{k+1}$ holds.
I have noticed that an important issue of the discussion is about how some kind of questions should be edited. Sometimes, the OP doesn't present any effort or ideas to solve his question. Actually, very often he just says something like: " I have no idea how to prove this".
In spite of his lack of effort, some times the question is interesting and even receives some answers. However, it takes a risk of losing educational content (and/or reputation points) if the question is deleted.
It is true that the question can be edited and all people can earn with that, but how to edit questions that don't have any effort presented by the OP? Is it fair taking the OP's place and editing something wrong just for presenting a "fake effort"?
Now, I present a possible solution for mitigating this contentious problem:
When a new question is posed, I suggest that it can be available only for users with +X reputation points just for evaluation (not for answering yet) and also for the OP. If the question is OK, then it is opened (available) for all users to give an answer (as it is at present). If not, the OP should improve his question, otherwise the question can be deleted even before to be available for all people.
The evaluation can be just a voting procedure, where the evaluators vote either to the deletion or the opening of the question. This evaluation could be available for two days (for instance) and some improve suggestions can be reported to the OP during this time. After this period, if the question is not deleted, then it is automatically available for all users.
I don't know what are the implications if this is implemented in the site. What do you think?
Thanks in advance and sorry about my English.