user30170: I've noticed that on Biology.SE there are so many poor questions at Biology?
 See for example here, here, and here. They usually appear as first questions of new users, don't show the faintest sign of research (as mentioned in the first comment of this question, they could have been answered if only the OP had googled it) or the will to ask a well built question. 
It appears to me that the rate of VTC (vote to close) on this site is bizarrely low compared to other SE sites. Shouldn't we assure a higher level by closing more (ideally all) of these poorly-phrased, poorly-researched questions? 
Edit: this is related to this question and also this one.

user22057: Just addressing the title of this question (Why?), I would add:

The large number of students from certain countries with large populations, intense competitive pressure and low levels of support in education. This means that we will continue to get a flood of questions from people who only want a free answer. This makes it difficult to know whom to advise about the rules/procedures of the site, because in most cases it will be a waste of effort. We should try to flush these out as quickly as possible but I have no suggestion how to do this.
The fact that this is a hybrid site with questions on concept-based biology (molecular biology, physiology etc) mixed with naturalism — plant and animal identification. Now the latter questions are very popular, but by their very nature they encourage "Identify this" questions (i.e. without research) and factual answers of the "It's a greater lesser-spotted moderator". This has two effects. 1. By example it encourages people to post unresearched questions in concept-based areas. 2. It puts off biologists in molecular areas from contributing to the site. I'd suggest a split, but I suspect there is a problem with this.


user9943: I also have noticed a trend towards poor-quality questions becoming abundant. I think there are several reasons for the overall quality being relatively poor at this stage:

The number of active reviewers has dropped; at this time there are 57 close-voted questions in the review pane. It has been brought up before that not enough people perform the review tasks so essential to the SE network. I have mentioned it in chat, other mods have done the same thing, but nonetheless the review queues, especially the close-vote queue is sky rocketing. As a mod, I sometimes go through it, but I don't like to use the mod-hammer. It's the community's task to vote. Note that the linked examples in your post are already close-voted, and hence appear in the queue, but not enough people go through the effort of adding more votes to reach the mandatory 5 votes. 


Folks - Please Review!!!


Since our relatively recent graduation, people have become less stringent in letting questions pass [yes, the reviewing has slacked]. 
The number of questions per day has been steadily increasing which may put more work into proper reviewing questions;
The folks here that are critical, and start commenting, downvoting and close-voting are often frowned upon. I receive quite some rude comment flags and often that involves comments to poor questions. OPs don't like it when their post is being shot at. It has to happen though and I fully support downvotes and critical comments [be nice though 'What a stupid question' won't help much :-) ];
Downvoting is often frowned upon here, which is a bad habit. Downvoting is good and I encourage it. It is good practice to comment in addition, but because of the often harsh reactions to suspected downvoters, people often don't comment I guess. Well, I do both and yes, I've been [expectedly] the target of revenge downvoters. Well, bring it on. Upvotes bring in a lot more rep than downvotes so I encourage evryone to accept that downvotes are part of the SE system. They are important. Im downvoting more and more. It also signals other users that there is something wrong with a post and it draws in more people to look at it. It certainly helps me to identify problematic posts;
The topic of this community is pretty broad which attracts a lot of people with little or no experience in biology. I also notice that in the related stack Psychology & Neuroscience - the proportion of totally rock-bottom quality questions is actually high there [higher than here]. However, due to the low #/questions per day, pretty much every questions receives attention there and the overall level is pretty good there, and admittedly higher than here.


30170: <p>I've noticed that on Biology.SE there are so many poor questions at Biology?
 See for example <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/69625/what-is-the-difference-between-gene-expression-and-protein-synthesis">here</a>, <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/69601/is-there-a-double-helix-rna">here</a>, <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/69501/inheritance-of-acquired-traits-in-humans">and here</a>. They usually appear as first questions of new users, don't show <em>the faintest sign</em> of research (as mentioned in the first comment of <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/69567/why-is-blood-collected-at-crime-scenes">this</a> question, they could have been answered if only the OP had googled it) or the will to ask a well built question. </p>

<p>It appears to me that the rate of VTC (vote to close) on this site is bizarrely low compared to other SE sites. Shouldn't we assure a higher level by closing more (ideally all) of these poorly-phrased, poorly-researched questions? </p>

<p>Edit: this is related to <a href="https://biology.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/783/what-should-be-done-with-questions-of-low-or-poor-quality">this question</a> and also <a href="https://biology.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3738/general-quality-of-biose-questions-vs-other-ses">this one</a>.</p>
 22057: <p>Just addressing the title of this question (Why?), I would add:</p>

<ul>
<li>The large number of students from certain countries with large populations, intense competitive pressure and low levels of support in education. This means that we will continue to get a flood of questions from people who only want a free answer. This makes it difficult to know whom to advise about the rules/procedures of the site, because in most cases it will be a waste of effort. We should try to flush these out as quickly as possible but I have no suggestion how to do this.</li>
<li>The fact that this is a hybrid site with questions on concept-based biology (molecular biology, physiology etc) mixed with naturalism — plant and animal identification. Now the latter questions are very popular, but by their very nature they encourage "Identify this" questions (i.e. without research) and factual answers of the "It's a greater lesser-spotted moderator". This has two effects. 1. By example it encourages people to post unresearched questions in concept-based areas. 2. It puts off biologists in molecular areas from contributing to the site. I'd suggest a split, but I suspect there is a problem with this.</li>
</ul>
 9943: <p>I also have noticed a trend towards poor-quality questions becoming abundant. I think there are several reasons for the overall quality being relatively poor at this stage:</p>

<ul>
<li>The <strong>number of active reviewers has dropped</strong>; at this time there are 57 close-voted questions in the review pane. It has been brought up before that not enough people perform the review tasks so essential to the SE network. I have mentioned it in chat, other mods have done the same thing, but nonetheless the review queues, especially the close-vote queue is sky rocketing. As a mod, I sometimes go through it, but I don't like to use the mod-hammer. It's the community's task to vote. Note that the linked examples in your post are already close-voted, and hence appear in the queue, but not enough people go through the effort of adding more votes to reach the mandatory 5 votes. </li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>Folks - Please Review!!!</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>Since our relatively recent graduation, people have become less stringent in letting questions pass [yes, the reviewing has slacked]. </li>
<li>The <strong>number of questions per day has been steadily increasing</strong> which may put more work into proper reviewing questions;</li>
<li>The <strong>folks here that are critical, and start commenting, downvoting and close-voting</strong> are often <strong>frowned upon</strong>. I receive quite some rude comment flags and often that involves comments to poor questions. OPs don't like it when their post is being shot at. It has to happen though and I fully support downvotes and critical comments [be nice though 'What a stupid question' won't help much :-) ];</li>
<li><strong>Downvoting is often frowned upon here</strong>, which is a bad habit. Downvoting is good and I encourage it. It is good practice to comment in addition, but because of the often harsh reactions to suspected downvoters, people often don't comment I guess. Well, I do both and yes, I've been [expectedly] the target of revenge downvoters. Well, bring it on. Upvotes bring in a lot more rep than downvotes so I encourage evryone to accept that downvotes are part of the SE system. They are important. Im downvoting more and more. It also signals other users that there is something wrong with a post and it draws in more people to look at it. It certainly helps me to identify problematic posts;</li>
<li>The <strong>topic of this community is pretty broad</strong> which attracts a lot of people with little or no experience in biology. I also notice that in the related stack Psychology &amp; Neuroscience - the proportion of totally rock-bottom quality questions is actually high there [higher than here]. However, due to the low #/questions per day, pretty much every questions receives attention there and the overall level is pretty good there, and admittedly higher than here.</li>
</ul>
