2

The current format of showing review history works fine without bug. But, we should intend to change the format of that page to add some more precise.

We are showing the reviewer name in the review history. I think there is no need of showing that, as the reviewer is seeing his/her own history.

enter image description here

We should remove that and get some more space for other reasonable details. We can also have titles for the details showing on like post, action, time, etc. Provided screenshot is for suggested edit review history. We can have unique format changes for each review type.

4

For high-rep users (I believe 10K and up), the review history also shows the recent reviews of other people:

enter image description here

So the user name field is necessary. It would not be worth the effort to remove it for users that have not yet sufficient rep to see the others' reviews, I think.

  • as I am a low rep holder, I don't know this. – Azik Jun 19 '13 at 13:53
  • @Azik yep that's not common knowledge, though I'm pretty sure it's written somewhere. :) – ShaWiz Jun 19 '13 at 13:55
  • 1
    @ShaWizDowArd Slowly move up your eyes. – Daniel Fischer Jun 19 '13 at 13:56

You must log in to answer this question.

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