# Tag Info

16

Bad robo audits can be frustrating, but they don't really do much, apart from make you wish the robo auditor had a neck you could squeeze. The criteria for how it chooses the "right" choice is explained here and is clearly prone to occasional errors. (If it weren't, why would we need reviewers?) It is possible to get an automatic review ban for failing ...

16

Just to get this question off the unasnwered list, here's the explanation (thanks to YuiTo Cheng, Xander Henderson, jgon and other commenters for the help). It turns out that the poster of the answers had been posting a large number of word-for-word identical answers on similar reference-request questions. The link contains a referral, making it seem quite ...

16

I'd say the culprit is that last sentence: This much anticipated second edition of the most successful calculus text published in the last two decades retains the best of the first edition while introducing important advances and refinements. That just reeks of advertisement. It says absolutely nothing of content about the book itself, and sounds like it ...

13

No, you did right. That's not an answer in any way, and voting to delete it is the correct action. The poor audit system was misled by the post having a score of +5. Since it doesn't know any mathematics, the only criterion it has to pick posts for audits is the vote tally. Sometimes that leads to wrong-headed audits. But that's at least as much an issue ...

8

This question post is a horrible "exemplar" of a post that should be reopened, according to a "reopen review queue audit." In fact, the question should be put on hold, so the asker can improve it, and perhaps, and only then, reopened. Including it as an exemplar of a post that users should reopen teaches users to reopen very poor posts, which is ...

8

Because sometimes there is a bigger pattern that regular users don't see where certain websites, books, or otherwise commercial venues post their links here. What might seem to you as a single post with a valid link can easily be considered spam when zooming out. Unfortunately, regular users don't have these tools to zoom out (except long-term users with ...

7

I rarely review, but I thought I'd give it a try, and almost immediately failed an audit. I was presented with a very poor answer in the “late answers” queue. I opened the thread to which it was attached. I saw that the answer I was reviewing had been deleted several weeks ago, so I clicked the “no action necessary” button, and got this obnoxious response: ...

7

Probability and expectancy problem This is supposed to be a "reopen queue audit question" and to "pass" the audit, one is supposed to vote to reopen. This is a problem statement question and deserves to be downvoted and closed, and not reopened!

6

The question is "missing context," as such it can be voted to be closed within the policies of the site (even if not everybody agrees with this policy). However, sometimes question that are interesting or unusual can be well received even without context. Abstractly, not few are of the opinion that unusually positive aspects in a question can compensate ...

6

Your edit nails it. The post had a spam flag on it that was handled as helpful, and thus the audit system thought that the post was spam (deleted post with a valid spam flag = BAD!). Although the spam flag on the original version was not without merit, I have cleared the spam flag from the post (it caused three audit failures altogether). That had the side ...

5

https://math.stackexchange.com/review/close/1076507 The entire question reads: I have been stuck on this problem for hours and have absolutely no clue how to go about it. Any help would be amazing. The question itself is in the title, and is a pretty standard combinatorics question. I honestly don't understand how the question garnered five upvotes in ...

5

https://math.stackexchange.com/review/close/1056774 The entire question reads: Are there any necessary or sufficient condition for when in a general convex hexagon, the lines formed by joining the midpoints of opposite sides are concurrent (intersect in a common point)? This question lacks context. I can see that it might be interesting, but it appears ...

5

I failed this one. After the fact, I voted to close it and it has since been closed. https://math.stackexchange.com/review/close/246038 It has no context or details. I hope the fact that it is now closed removes it from the review audit.

4

I failed this audit because I wanted it add a comment. Not that I added a bad comment. For all any computer might know I wanted to say this problem is the best research direction for mathematics since the Langland's program. Que sera sera.

4

I failed this one, ironically because I put too much effort into it. It was presented as a first post with 0 votes, on a question that had been answered 10 days ago. I navigated to the question and saw it had good answers v similar to the one I was reviewing so tried to add a comment to say it had already been answered => FAIL. (What I should have spotted ...

4

https://math.stackexchange.com/review/close/1015074 This question is a fairly straight-forward "problem statement question" that I voted to close as "Lacking Context." I think that the level of the material (advanced undergraduate or introductory graduate level complex analysis) coupled with the (non-obvious) difficulty of the problem earned it several ...

4

Yesterday I failed this Review audit, and when I posted an answer in the Reopen/Undelete thread, another user reported failing two similar audits, and someone else later failed another one. That same person failed another one of the same type less than 6 hours later. The number of such posts by the same user (who also had a question deleted on MO, though I ...

4

Are there any properties of sup? The question title is not informative, and suggests a very broad question (rather than the fairly focused question which is actually presented). The question itself reads: Can I say: $$\sup |f(x)-h(x)+g(x)-g(x)| = \sup|f(x)-g(x)|+ \sup|g(x)-h(x)|$$ I can't seem to find any properties of $\sup$ , so i am wondering ...

4

https://math.stackexchange.com/review/low-quality-posts/1480735 As far as I can see, the question is not visible in the audit link. The question is Prove this sequence converges to $1/2$ There is a comment under the question providing a link to a duplicate. So, I voted to close as a duplicate and failed the review audit.

3

I got this one: https://math.stackexchange.com/review/close/1194064 I passed it by leaving it open, but it seems not nearly clear-cut enough to qualify as a good review audit. The asker has not provided much in the way of evidence of effort. I also floated this in a discrete Meta question, before posting here.

3

Black holes and the Schwartzschild solution This Question turned up in my Close Vote review (as an audit). Because the Question garnered five upvotes, the system considers it a model of something that ought not be closed. But despite the OP's declaration, "This is probably more a mathematical problem as far as I can see...", it was cross-posted to Physics....

3

I failed this one: https://math.stackexchange.com/review/low-quality-posts/512046 I understand that it is an interesting question that does provide a bit of background with a link to the problem. But there is no attempt at solving the problem, so I voted to close. Some will disagree on this, but the question doesn't (IMO) belong in the list of audit ...

3

https://math.stackexchange.com/review/first-posts/174827 I failed this audit, because I tried to mark it as a duplicate. The audit said it has been asked (I think) 1 hour ago and I was absolutely sure, that I have read exactly the same question a few days ago. However, I had read exactly this question before, because that first post was a fake of the ...

3

https://math.stackexchange.com/review/low-quality-posts/1407444 Even if we accept that questions may be appropriately answered with hints (and the consensus seems to be that hint answers are okay in certain circumstances), it is not at all clear to me that this is, in fact, a good hint. I can see definite differences of opinion about the quality of this ...

3

https://math.stackexchange.com/review/close/1408914 The question is long but, at the end of the day, it is nothing more than a statement of a result which the asker wants proved. There is no additional context. This is even pointed out in the comments: It would be helpful if you could share some of your thoughts on the problem: Where did you encounter the ...

3

The answer says among other things: This is a great book for you to understand when to use certain concepts, equations, and tables. This is a very good introductory text into thermodynamics for undergraduate students. That's a bit peculiar as a recommendation for a book on differential equations. Sure some DE might be used in thermodynamics but still ...

2

Today I was asked to review an answer this question. The answer I was to review has been deleted. The deleted answer stated that the real number group may be equipped with the operation "$+$". I was warned that this was a bad answer. I am supposed to click the "I understand button." This I will refuse to do. It seems to me that is is an excellent hint for ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible