user4108: I am often disturbed by how easily the community of Biology.SE close and down vote questions asked by newcomers and layman.
When I go on other SE websites, I often have to ask unclear questions or too broad questions just because I am not able to realize how complex is my question or because I don't understand the epxistemiology of the subject of interest. I think that users of other sites are more welcoming and more willing to formulate answers that give me hints in order to improve my knowledge and eventually my abilities to formulate better questions in the future.
I think that if we want to increase the popularity of BiologyBeta we have to start to offer more help to newcomers and be a bit less strict in how we judge the quality of their questions.
Let's consider the Core Architecture of the Body Encoding post for example. I actually started to write this meta-post in response to 5 closing votes that it received. Of course, it is not the first example of questions that get closed while I would have liked it to remain open. Core Architecture of the Body Encoding post has several issues. It contains several questions and it is extremely broad. However, I think that it actually is quite easy to provide an answer. I know very little on the subject so I formulated a quick answer from what I could remember from my Developmental Biology first year class. I accompanied the answer with a bunch of wikipedia references. I think that my answer can typically help the OP to realize what was wrong with his question and to understand why he touched too many different topics. It also gives the name of the different fields to the OP allowing him to go for some wikipedia reading.
I think that, very often, we should rather offer criticisms, ressources and a sense of the disciplines that are concerned by the question(s) rather than voting to close, leaving the newcomer in ignorance and frustration, pushing him to leave Biology.SE.
From the FAQ:
Biology - Stack Exchange is for people studying biology at any level.
If the reasons for closing questions come from refusing low-level questions because we want to attract a higher-level community, then I think that we should create a new reason for closing: Vote to close because it is a low-level question. Biology.SE is for Biology students and professionals which activities directly relate to Biology.
If we are so strict because we want to make sure that newcomers learn how to use this site, we may eventually be nice at the beginning and slowly get harsher if we see no effort from the OP to improve his/her posts.
Question
What do you think? Should we be more tolerant with newcomers and bad questions?

user12877: 
What do you think? Should we be more tolerant with newcomers and bad questions?

In the vein of bad questions or newcomers, i have the following input as a relatively new BioSE user:
A big issue comes in the specific paradigm which poorly founded or researched questions and/or answers are posed. Just citing a recently answered question about narwhal tusks, and their function; it took me approximately 7 seconds in a well-keyworded search to draw a conclusive answer from a peer-reviewed source. This brings us two problems: (a) Some questions invoke the concept of common knowledge, where we can almost immediately find our answer in a respectable source format with a quick search engine query. Some users may find questions like this a waste of time, and honestly the OP may find that putting in the effort before asking BioSE to find an answer may overall improve their understanding of the subject. (b) In some cases a bum source or wiki page on a matter is acceptable. Generally though, some of these sources contain opinion and/or wrong information. It's important to pose questions and answers, keeping in mind they need to be objective, and contain correct, objective sources. When this isn't the case, users tend to find these questions a waste of time as well.
So going back the the initial question: I think what'll be important is emphasizing questions that don't fit the above descriptions, and giving reasonable critique to questions that do whether they intend to be closed or not. I think that to a new user, simply being closed for too broad or off-topic, etc. without adequate background to know exactly what's good enough would be frustrating.

user4109: I have been wondering this myself. Questions like this one make me quite sad. Clearly this poster is trying quite hard, but a good question would have to provide so much background information just to get the asker up to a level where the answer makes sense would be too much to ask. 
There is just something sad about being a website where you get to share knowledge and questions that are poorly-researched and poorly-posed but very very earnest aren't answered. They're terrible questions but the askers are so enthusiastic and what they are really asking is often quite obvious(as-posed it's hilariously broad but as-intended has a simple answer). It feels cruel in a way to require askers to go back and get a biology education before asking questions that are eminently answerable. I'd prefer biology.stackexchange to be biology.stackexchange and not, perhaps, biologyprofessionals.stackexchange or labtech.stackexchange. 
And then of course there's this question which was nearly closed for lack of research. It's a legitimate question, if strangely posed from a biological point of view.

user12909: What SE do you say doesn't vote to close quickly? I know that the two biggest SO and Math shutdown poor questions instantly, and it doesn't stop those same users from posting again if they plan to stay. Having a question put on hold isn't the end for the question either. The OP can always read the close reason and refine their question to better suit the community.
If the user is just a hit and run user, they could careless. All they want is an answer now. Considering the OP is conversing through comments they don't seem to be this type so they could be coaxed into refining their questions and a vote to reopen can occur.
You said start out nice and get harsher. That would mean, for those unfamiliar with said user, bio members would have to go to OP account and review their previous questions prior to voting down or closure. Most people are going to see this as a colossal waste of their time. 
This type of micro management of action is probably fine now but the moment this site has explosive growth and becomes the size of math or SO it will be impossible to enforce. The user who are scared away from closure are probably hit and run users and tend not to be valuable to the community. The ones who improve their post and stay are the ones you want anyways.
More Thoughts on the Topic to expand on Close Voting:
Let's think of this in an academic setting as well. If a student approaches their professor or TA and just say here is said problem help me, how will a professor or TA react?

Will it be well you asked a question and provided no feasible input yourself so here is the answer, or
What your thoughts on the matter? Did you read chapter so and so? If you didn't, take a look at that come back if you still need help?

I would frankly guess the reaction will be more along the lines of 2. That is, in an academic situation, the professor or TA would put the question on hold (5 close votes) and wait for the student to come back to them. If the student doesn't update their question, maybe they figured it out and didn't run away. If they do update their question, they are now participating in the academic development of their on mind by researching, reading, and learning in stead of wanting instant gratification of an answer now.
Therefore, I don't think close voters should wait x days. The OP will probably see comments and a close reason. If they are true students and driven to succeed, they will take the comments and close reason to heart and edit their question. If they only want instant gratification, the University or self taught education system isn't the right place to be in the first place.

4108: <p>I am often disturbed by how easily the community of Biology.SE close and down vote questions asked by newcomers and layman.</p>

<p>When I go on other SE websites, I often have to ask unclear questions or too broad questions just because I am not able to realize how complex is my question or because I don't understand the epxistemiology of the subject of interest. I think that users of other sites are more welcoming and more willing to formulate answers that give me hints in order to improve my knowledge and eventually my abilities to formulate better questions in the future.</p>

<p>I think that if we want to increase the popularity of BiologyBeta we have to start to offer more help to newcomers and be a bit less strict in how we judge the quality of their questions.</p>

<p>Let's consider the <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/29710/core-architecture-of-the-body-encoding">Core Architecture of the Body Encoding post</a> for example. I actually started to write this meta-post in response to 5 closing votes that it received. Of course, it is not the first example of questions that get closed while I would have liked it to remain open. <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/29710/core-architecture-of-the-body-encoding">Core Architecture of the Body Encoding post</a> has several issues. It contains several questions and it is extremely broad. However, I think that it actually is quite easy to provide an answer. I know very little on the subject so I formulated a quick answer from what I could remember from my <code>Developmental Biology</code> first year class. I accompanied the answer with a bunch of wikipedia references. I think that my answer can typically help the OP to realize what was wrong with his question and to understand why he touched too many different topics. It also gives the name of the different fields to the OP allowing him to go for some wikipedia reading.</p>

<p>I think that, very often, we should rather offer criticisms, ressources and a sense of the disciplines that are concerned by the question(s) rather than voting to close, leaving the newcomer in ignorance and frustration, pushing him to leave Biology.SE.</p>

<p>From the FAQ:</p>

<p><code>Biology - Stack Exchange is for people studying biology at any level.</code></p>

<p>If the reasons for closing questions come from refusing low-level questions because we want to attract a higher-level community, then I think that we should create a new reason for closing: <code>Vote to close because it is a low-level question. Biology.SE is for Biology students and professionals which activities directly relate to Biology</code>.</p>

<p>If we are so strict because we want to make sure that newcomers learn how to use this site, we may eventually be nice at the beginning and slowly get harsher if we see no effort from the OP to improve his/her posts.</p>

<p><strong>Question</strong></p>

<p>What do you think? Should we be more tolerant with newcomers and bad questions?</p>
 12877: <blockquote>
  <p>What do you think? Should we be more tolerant with newcomers and bad questions?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In the vein of bad questions or newcomers, i have the following input as a relatively new BioSE user:</p>

<p>A big issue comes in the specific paradigm which poorly founded or researched questions and/or answers are posed. Just citing a recently answered question about narwhal tusks, and their function; it took me approximately 7 seconds in a well-keyworded search to draw a conclusive answer from a peer-reviewed source. This brings us two problems: (a) Some questions invoke the concept of common knowledge, where we can almost immediately find our answer in a respectable source format with a quick search engine query. Some users may find questions like this a waste of time, and honestly the OP may find that putting in the effort before asking BioSE to find an answer may overall improve their understanding of the subject. (b) In some cases a bum source or wiki page on a matter is acceptable. Generally though, some of these sources contain opinion and/or wrong information. It's important to pose questions and answers, keeping in mind they need to be objective, and contain correct, objective sources. When this isn't the case, users tend to find these questions a waste of time as well.</p>

<p>So going back the the initial question: I think what'll be important is emphasizing questions that don't fit the above descriptions, and giving reasonable critique to questions that do whether they intend to be closed or not. I think that to a new user, simply being closed for too broad or off-topic, etc. without adequate background to know exactly what's good enough would be frustrating.</p>
 4109: <p>I have been wondering this myself. Questions like <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/28048/what-are-the-differences-between-a-benign-tumor-and-swelling">this one</a> make me quite sad. Clearly this poster is trying quite hard, but a good question would have to provide so much background information just to get the asker up to a level where the answer makes sense would be too much to ask. </p>

<p>There is just something sad about being a website where you get to share knowledge and questions that are poorly-researched and poorly-posed but very very earnest aren't answered. They're terrible questions but the askers are so enthusiastic and what they are really asking is often quite obvious(as-posed it's hilariously broad but as-intended has a simple answer). It feels cruel in a way to require askers to go back and get a biology education before asking questions that are eminently answerable. I'd prefer biology.stackexchange to be biology.stackexchange and not, perhaps, biologyprofessionals.stackexchange or labtech.stackexchange. </p>

<p>And then of course there's <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/28124/are-boat-tailed-grackles-efficient-flyers">this question</a> which was nearly closed for lack of research. It's a legitimate question, if strangely posed from a biological point of view.</p>
 12909: <p>What SE do you say doesn't vote to close quickly? I know that the two biggest SO and Math shutdown poor questions instantly, and it doesn't stop those same users from posting again if they plan to stay. Having a question put on hold isn't the end for the question either. The OP can always read the close reason and refine their question to better suit the community.</p>

<p>If the user is just a hit and run user, they could careless. All they want is an answer now. Considering the OP is conversing through comments they don't seem to be this type so they could be coaxed into refining their questions and a vote to reopen can occur.</p>

<p>You said start out nice and get harsher. That would mean, for those unfamiliar with said user, bio members would have to go to OP account and review their previous questions prior to voting down or closure. Most people are going to see this as a colossal waste of their time. </p>

<p>This type of micro management of action is probably fine now but the moment this site has explosive growth and becomes the size of math or SO it will be impossible to enforce. The user who are scared away from closure are probably hit and run users and tend not to be valuable to the community. The ones who improve their post and stay are the ones you want anyways.</p>

<h2>More Thoughts on the Topic to expand on Close Voting:</h2>

<p>Let's think of this in an academic setting as well. If a student approaches their professor or TA and just say here is said problem help me, how will a professor or TA react?</p>

<ol>
<li>Will it be well you asked a question and provided no feasible input yourself so here is the answer, or</li>
<li>What your thoughts on the matter? Did you read chapter so and so? If you didn't, take a look at that come back if you still need help?</li>
</ol>

<p>I would frankly guess the reaction will be more along the lines of 2. That is, in an academic situation, the professor or TA would put the question on hold (5 close votes) and wait for the student to come back to them. If the student doesn't update their question, maybe they figured it out and didn't run away. If they do update their question, they are now participating in the academic development of their on mind by researching, reading, and learning in stead of wanting instant gratification of an answer now.</p>

<p>Therefore, I don't think close voters should wait x days. The OP will probably see comments and a close reason. If they are true students and driven to succeed, they will take the comments and close reason to heart and edit their question. If they only want instant gratification, the University or self taught education system isn't the right place to be in the first place.</p>
