There's a thread - actually, series of threads - on math.stackexchange for people to nominate questions/answers for reponening/undeletion as appropriate. I think the same type of thread would be appropriate here, but I'm hesitant to create it since my opinion on its value may not be shared by the community here.
If there is reasonable consensus that such a thread would be a good thing, I'll go ahead and start one (or someone else can of course).
Sometimes good posts (questions and answers alike) are forgotten and never appear in the review queue after closure or deletion (there needs to be at least one vote for reopening/undeletion for that). And even if it is in the review queue, this queue in particular rarely gets the attention it deserves so that we rarely have the five votes needed either way. Thus, such a meta thread is a good way to raise attention and discuss borderline cases. And it keeps meta tidy.
Basically, closed questions get deleted automatically if they are abandoned by the OP. Direct deletion applies solely to serious violation of our terms of service. And since every OP is free to open an individual thread for their closed question or deleted post and cases can be discussed more pointedly there, we do not need such a thread.
I rise to support this motion. One of my biggest concerns is that there is not enough incentive to spend time on MetaSE to learn how to do the business of the community. After spending a year on and off, I feel I am just starting to understand how the community functions in practice (as opposed to claims). Wikipedia makes excellent use of certain strategies such as bots, lists, FAQs, and portals. There have been repeated concerns expressed about excessive and mistaken closure, and by having a thread to make manifest what is on the agenda for opening and closing, I believe that there will be more activity.
