Return to Question

These categories are collectively defined and addressed in the Help Center, in the guidelines for reviewing on Meta Stack Exchange, on Meta Stack Overflow (with nice examples) and as the "recommend deletion" canned comments². The prescribed action is quite unambiguously to delete or recommend deletion, there is not much disagreement around them and their review usually doesn't pose much of a problem.

Now, apparently there is strong consensus that we should avoid deleting poor and wrong answers, as stated on Meta Stack Exchange (Guidelines for reviewing low-quality posts, How to handle low quality answers in LQP queue?, "What are the criteria for deletion?" in this FAQ article, When should I delete an answer?) and Meta Stack Overflow (You're doing it wrong: A plea for sanity in the Low Quality Posts queue).

In Shog's words:

Can we agree on some specific guidelines for our site? It would be beneficial to reviewers (less work for them in the queue), to answerers (a more clear message on what they did right/wrong) and to all users trying to learn the art of reviewing.

These categories are collectively defined and addressed, among other places, in the Help Center, in the guidelines for reviewing on Meta Stack Exchange, on Meta Stack Overflow (with nice examples) and as the "recommend deletion" canned comments². The prescribed action is quite unambiguously to delete or recommend deletion, there is not much disagreement around them and their review usually doesn't pose much of a problem.

Now, apparently there is strong consensus that we should avoid deleting poor and wrong answers, as stated on Meta Stack Exchange (Guidelines for reviewing low-quality posts, How to handle low quality answers in LQP queue?, "What are the criteria for deletion?" in the FAQ article about deletion, When should I delete an answer?) and Meta Stack Overflow (You're doing it wrong: A plea for sanity in the Low Quality Posts queue).

In Shog9's words:

Being able to agree on some specific guidelines for our site would be beneficial to reviewers (less work for them in the queue), to answerers (a more clear message on what they did right/wrong) and to all users trying to learn the art of reviewing.

Can we agree on some common principles for our site? It would be beneficial to reviewers (less work for them in the queue), to answerers (a more clear message on what they did right/wrong) and to all users trying to learn the art of reviewing.

Can we agree on some specific guidelines for our site? It would be beneficial to reviewers (less work for them in the queue), to answerers (a more clear message on what they did right/wrong) and to all users trying to learn the art of reviewing.

To be clear, I'm not referring to the (many) answers reviewed in the LQP queue that are easily identified as variants of "not an answer": gibberish, link-only, "thank you", comments, new questions, "I have this problem too", details from the asker that should be added to the question, question bumping¹.
These categories are collectively defined and addressed in the Help Center, in the guidelines for reviewing on Meta Stack Exchange, on Meta Stack Overflow (with nice examples) and as the "recommend deletion" canned comments². The prescribed action is quite unambiguously to delete or recommend deletion, there is not much disagreement around them and their review usually doesn't pose much of a problem.

Now, apparently there is strong consensus that we should avoid deleting poor and wrong answers, as stated on Meta Stack Exchange (Guidelines for reviewing low-quality posts, How to handle low quality answers in LQP queue?, "What are the criteria for deletion?" in this FAQ article, When should I delete an answer?) and Meta Stack Overflow (You're doing it wrong: A plea for sanity in the Low Quality Posts queue).
Along the same lines is also the accepted answer to When to vote to delete an answer? on Meta U&L, which this question looks tightly related to.

What criteria do you follow when reviewing low quality answers? Are there answers you think should be deleted despite not being "not an answer"? Is the LQP review queue a suitable place for such a cleanup work?
Can we agree on some common principles for our site? It would be beneficial to reviewers (less work for them in the queue), to answerers (a more clear message on what they did right/wrong) and to all users trying to learn the art of reviewing.

To be clear, I'm not referring to the (many) answers reviewed in the LQP queue that are easily identified as variants of "not an answer": gibberish, link-only, "thank you", comments, new questions, "I have this problem too", details from the asker that should be added to the question, question bumping¹.

These categories are collectively defined and addressed in the Help Center, in the guidelines for reviewing on Meta Stack Exchange, on Meta Stack Overflow (with nice examples) and as the "recommend deletion" canned comments². The prescribed action is quite unambiguously to delete or recommend deletion, there is not much disagreement around them and their review usually doesn't pose much of a problem.

Now, apparently there is strong consensus that we should avoid deleting poor and wrong answers, as stated on Meta Stack Exchange (Guidelines for reviewing low-quality posts, How to handle low quality answers in LQP queue?, "What are the criteria for deletion?" in this FAQ article, When should I delete an answer?) and Meta Stack Overflow (You're doing it wrong: A plea for sanity in the Low Quality Posts queue).

Along the same lines is also the accepted answer to When to vote to delete an answer? on Meta U&L, which this question looks tightly related to.

What criteria do you follow when reviewing low quality answers? Are there answers you think should be deleted despite not being "not an answer"? Is the LQP review queue a suitable place for such a cleanup work?

Can we agree on some common principles for our site? It would be beneficial to reviewers (less work for them in the queue), to answerers (a more clear message on what they did right/wrong) and to all users trying to learn the art of reviewing.