How can we reward users who rewrite bad questions to fit quality standards?

Question

Recently(ish) the question Sources for Christian themes and motifs in Naruto? made an appearance in meta because someone noticed the sheer amount of downvotes it had and found it to be strange, considering the legitimacy of the question. It was quickly established that the question was originally much more lacking than its current state, but probably no longer deserved the score it had.

But, as Killua noted in a comment, the question received four downvotes before it was edited, and since SE prevents questions with a score of -4 or less from being bumped upon edit, the question remained at low score until someone went to the trouble of making an entire meta post about it.

Of course, the topic of the question probably played a role in the initial downvote barrage, but that's a different post.

Simply put, is there any way for questions downvoted past the point of bumpability to be given a second look once whatever issue they have is solved? Do we consider this too much of a corner case to bother with?

Answer 1

While I agree that this is an unfortunate thing that can happen, it's not a huge problem. There are currently only 13 open non-ID questions at a score of -4 or less, plus 6 more questions with the same characteristics that are deleted (I've excluded spam and nonsense from this count).

Note that if the post is closed and then somebody edits it, it gets kicked into the reopen queue, so there will automatically be additional eyes on it in that case.

One thing that users with 2k+ rep (10k+ once we graduate) can do is take a look at /tools occasionally. It has a bunch of useful data, one of which is a list of the lowest voted questions in the past such-and-such-number of days. Currently, it looks like this for the past thirty days:

If you find something voted abnormally low, you can vote on it, post about it in meta or on chat, etc.