What should our process be for closing older questions? I'm asking this at an early stage so that moderators and others know what is acceptable to users of the site and what isn't. (There's only 1 example so far of a question where I think this is relevant, so I'm raising it now while we have a chance to provide a useful steer).
The question: Organising digital documents for genealogy and family history? gained 21 upvotes when it was asked 4 years ago. The question received minor edits when it was first asked, but has not changed since; and the rules for what questions can be asked here haven't changed in the intervening period. A discussion took place at Opinion questions. Good or Bad? about whether it was an acceptable question; the consensus (as I read it now, and as I read it at the time) was that it was acceptable.
The question was closed in July of this year as 'Too broad' by a moderator supervote. I discovered that it had been closed when I went looking for this question to refer peope to from elsewhere -- it's a really common question with useful answers, and can encourage people to stick around here.
If the site's scope and/or other policies had changed in the intervening period, than closure might have been the right option. However, nothing had changed, so I'm wondering if the closure was appropriate without any attempt to solicit the new community opinion.
Perhaps the moderator took the view that we should be more stringent about 'constructive subjective', but that view wasn't tested anywhere.
Would it be appropriate to solicit views on meta before these questions are closed? Best case, there's a consensus on how to handle them. Worst case, a moderator still has to make an (unsupported) decision but they can point to the meta question to support their action.