Q:

Are we voting to close too quickly?

With the kerfuffle on SE, I've decided to try & contribute a bit more again.
So I started with the vote close queue, and this one irked me:
https://codereview.stackexchange.com/review/close/124096
How did this question get in the close queue within 25 minutes of its creation?
Are we no longer giving folks the time to edit their question, or are they meant to edit the question while it is closed, and then try to get it unclosed?
I voted to keep it open strictly because the timing seems over the top.
Please let me know your thoughts.

A:

If anything, we don't vote to close quickly enough.
An off-topic question can often be fixed. In the meantime, it shouldn't be answered. It helps to close the questions for answers, so they don't get answered anyway. We actively discourage answering off-topic questions[1][2], but new users don't necessarily know this and others don't necessarily comply with that sentiment. Answering an off-topic question in the answer section leads to all kind of problems, although we tend to side with whoever posted the question at that point since the answer shouldn't have arrived in the first place.
If a question is off-topic, leave a comment[3] and close it. This is the best thing that can happen to such a question at that time. Now, the author of the question can attempt to fix it, after which the question will automatically[4][5] be put in the re-open queue.
Closing a question doesn't mean we've given up on them. Some questions are beyond repair, a lot of them are not.

A:

The Close-/Reopen system is at least partly predicated on quickly closing questions that are not on topic and quickly reopening those that were edited to be on topic. Let me quote Shog writing on the "purpose of closing":

I would like to propose the following four-part sentence as a summary of purpose for closing - and the larger "close / edit / reopen OR delete" cycle - on Stack Overflow:

The closing system exists to allow askers and answerers to collaborate on constructing high-quality questions and answers, by...
...providing a clear path for questions that either cannot or should not be answered to be identified, and...
...ensuring that they are then either sufficiently improved or...
...removed from view.

In this summary, #2 corresponds to the act of closing a question, while #3 encompasses both editing and reopening, and #4 is deletion. These are the critical actions that enable this purpose to be realized.

Unfortunately for large sites that's not really working as well as originally intended.
To improve the reactiveness of closing and reopening on Stack Overflow, the CM team ran an experiment with reducing the number of required close-votes to 3 (instead of the 5 that are standard network-wide)
The results show a clear improvement in the number of questions that are edited and reopened as a result of changing that.
The implication of that could be that quicker closing is more likely to result in edits making the question on topic, speeding up the system overall.
As such closing a question is intended to be significantly less harsh than it might look like at the first (or even second glance).
As usual for SE that's badly communicated, but alas that's not what this question here was about ;)
The problem with the review item you linked was not that it was quickly voted to close. Instead the problem lies within the lack of guidance, the "clear path for questions" that should hopefully lead to "sufficient improvement".
That issue is currently being discussed in various posts here on our meta.

A:

Not enough people that VTC are leaving helpful comments, or even comments that refer to the How do I ask a good question help page. This answer is in support of @vogel612 answer.
When I come upon a question that has one or more votes to close but no comments at all I feel that we are doing the poster and the community an injustice. The first person to VTC should provide a comment, and I feel that it should be clearer than just a link to the How do I ask a good question help page. It should provide the poster with a clear path to improve the question. In the case of LCC, tell the poster what is missing. If it is broken code tell the poster. Perhaps VTC should urge the closer to provide a reason like the flags do.
This may be a feature request that should be posted on MSE. There could be some canned selections and then a text field for open descriptions of how to correct the issue. This would help the poster before they get 5 votes to close. The earlier we identify issues the faster the question can be fixed, and the faster we can notify possible answerers not to post an answer.
The kind of helpful comments I would like to see is my comment on this question: Beginning BMI calculator in Java

