Today I made several reviews on Stack Overflow and noticed that the counting system worked perfectly when I either flagged a question, or downvoted it, or marked it as a question that doesn't need any changes. I made edits to a bunch of questions/answers that I thought needed to be substantially changed, and clicked I'm done afterwards.

As far as I understand, editing an answer is a way of reviewing and, as far as I'm concerned, the most thorough way of doing so. Still, the number of reviews made was not incremented after I was done with reviewing.

My question is whether it was an intentional choice. If yes, what were the reasons behind that? If no, shan't we add that feature?

  • Since you have less than 2K rep, you've actually made edit suggestions. This means that your edits need to be reviewed by at least three people before they are accepted. That obviously takes (some) time, which is probably why the counter didn't increment immediately. – yannis Apr 5 '13 at 19:08
  • That hasn't happened. I know that my edits need to be peer reviewed, and in fact they were reviewed, and all of them were accepted. I can tell it basing on reputation increase. Still, amount of reviews I've done was unchanged, and is at that level now, actually. This makes me suppose that either there is a time lag when these changes are effected, or this feature wasn't implemented. So I asked this question to clarify this. – skuntsel Apr 5 '13 at 19:15
  • Yes, I noticed your edits were all accepted (btw good edits, keep them coming). This is weird then, but I'm sure someone will post an answer soon enough and we'll find out what happened. – yannis Apr 5 '13 at 19:23

As far as I could see from my recent reviews the case can be considered resolved.

The problem was in fact stemming from the amount of time needed to make a review. I saw that when it took me some time to make a good/substantial edit of question/answer, it had already been reviewed by somebody else. Effectively, my review counter didn't change.

It happens most probably because of a preset timeout of 5 (?) minutes from the moment of review assignment to a particular user till the moment when review is assigned to another user. In fact, it is not a fair behaviour and I'd vote for a timeout prolongation for 10-15 minutes to distinguish between abandoned reviews and reviews that are still being edited.

  • Yes, I have observed something pretty similar – Hugo Dozois Apr 24 '13 at 20:08

This should be mostly fixed now. I think the behavior you were observing was due to

To prevent behavior like this, though, we'll add new logic to not count reviews that took over 2 minutes if the review item has already been completed.

– from my answer a while ago

We've upped the limit form 2 minute to 15 minutes.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .