# Should we be able to close questions only when we have the tag of field of the question asked?

As far as it may puts users in danger of being blocked from asking any more, shouldn't we be able to close questions only when we have shown to the community we were competent (acquiring the tag badge)?

For instance being able to close a questions in compex-analysis only when we have the complex-analysis badge?

Another example: I had a misfortune with a question which had a nice answer by the "Old Dilletante"there. Yet it were put on hold by some users none of them but one having ever answerered or asked question in the field asked (which is very specific: logic).

• For people who are wondering why there is a new question very similar to another one recently posted. (It is now deleted, here is a link for 10k+ users.) It was my advice to post the feature request separately. The other question was edited several times and went through substantial changes. I think that in this way it will be clear that the votes on this post are expression of the opinion on the suggested feature. (Votes on the older one have accumulates through the previous versions.) – Martin Sleziak Oct 26 '15 at 11:22
• So you are suggesting, for example, that questions in several-complex-variables should be impossible to close (where I have the only bronze badge awarded). There are many other such tags with no or just a few bronze badges. Besides, it's often easy to recognize poor no-effort questions even if you know next to nothing about the subject in question. – mrf Oct 26 '15 at 11:41
• '[...] by some users none of them but one having ever answerered [sic] or asked question in the field asked (which is very specific: logic).' Count again. – quid Oct 26 '15 at 12:03
• Competent $\ne$ Acquired the tag badge. – Did Oct 26 '15 at 12:06
• So, you could invent the tag "Marineology", and no one could close your questions? – Gerry Myerson Oct 26 '15 at 12:17

No. The ability to vote to close questions should not be reserved for those users with a badge in some tag attached to the question.

As a practical matter, there are two points:

• There are tags which have fewer than 20 total questions, whereas a user needs to have at least 20 (non-community-wiki answers before achieving a bronze tag badge. This would mean that questions could be immune from closing.
• The ability to edit (tags, body, etc) comes much earlier than the ability to vote to close. If a user really wants to close a question, could they not just edit in a tag?

Consistently using either loophole would be abusive of the system, but it's hard to see who the primary offender would be.

(Note, too, that for fairness this would have to be symmetric, so only users with a badge in a tag associated with the question would be able to vote to re-open questions. I don't suspect that you'd be enthusiastic about this, as of the three users who voted to re-open your question, only I had a tag badge.)

Perhaps most importantly, putting a question on-hold is primarily a signal to the asker that they should improve the question. In the case of your question, it was put on hold as "unclear what you're asking" which probably had something to do with the "resolution rule". Your previous question mentioned

I ... copied and [pasted] one [definition] from Wikipedia, thinking that they maybe ... didn't have the time to google the definition of the discussed concept. ;)

But it is the job of the asker to make their question as clear as possible.

Our How to ask a good question guide lists proving definitions as an important part of "giving context":

Something that you are familiar with may not be so to another user. One should of course use one's best judgment in deciding what objects are sufficiently well-known to not need defining. But when in doubt, either provide the definition or provide a link to a resource that gives the definitions.

Quite frankly, the system worked in the case of your question.

• Playing devil's advocate: "could they not just edit in a tag" No, as it could be based on the original tags (as is the case for gold-badge dupe-hammer). – quid Oct 26 '15 at 12:38
• @quid Yes, that's certainly a possibility, and good point. I didn't want to get too involved with the intricacies of implementation and ignored this. – user642796 Oct 26 '15 at 12:43