Over the last month or so, I've been making an effort to review Suggested Edits when I get a little time. I've got lots of "Success, that was a test" type responses and I don't recall ever seeing a failure equivalent.

Regardless, today I'm seeing the following message:

You have failed too many recent review audits – looks like you might need a break. Come back in 7 days to continue reviewing.

Assuming this isn't a technical fault (or a ban imposed in error), I clearly need to learn from my mistakes - how does one review the list of "failed review audits" in question, and what one did wrong on each?

  • 4
    This query I made might help. Plug in your user number. Although this most likely does not track audits. It is still good to look through your history to see how other people agreed with your voting.
    – gunr2171
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 19:33
  • 14
    Given this particular review I wonder if this is an automatic ban.
    – Bart
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 19:34
  • 2
    It was manually applied. That particular review would be sufficient reason.
    – user102937
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 19:40
  • 5
    Lucy, you got some 'splainin to do
    – user1228
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 19:41
  • 1
    Indeed, just noted my error - the OP had edited an answer to provide extra code on his own question - Lesson learnt! hangs head in shame
    – HeavenCore
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 19:41
  • @gunr2171 - That is very handy - thank you
    – HeavenCore
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 19:44
  • Okay, but why did you approve that?
    – Doorknob
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 21:27

1 Answer 1


I banned you manually from review for 7 days after seeing this review: https://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/4409783 (along with the others involved there). You allowed obvious vandalism to be approved, which should never happen. This was another questionable recent review: https://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/4393397

Unfortunately, the system uses the same banner and warning for manually banned reviewers as it does ones banned by the system for failed audits. Consider this an indication to slow down and take a little more time during reviews.

  • 4
    Although this is very good information for this particular user, the broader question is still open: how does a banned user figure out what caused him to be banned? (Though maybe there is no satisfactory answer.) In other words, how does one review one's own bad reviews, especially assuming one was acting in good faith but under some misunderstanding or just too hastily?
    – jscs
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 20:00
  • 4
    @JoshCaswell - Yeah, it's something we need to provide better visibility for. The first place would be in the warning banner, where for audit bans, recently failed audits could be listed, or for moderator-imposed bans we could have the option of custom wording. That would have allowed me to point this out in this case. Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 20:02
  • Many thanks for the clarification Brad.
    – HeavenCore
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 20:03
  • That's about what I figured, @Brad. I suppose moderator messages would be overkill here.
    – jscs
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 20:04
  • They leave a permanent mark on someone's record, and are fairly heavyweight for a more minor action like a review ban. We also ran into the same problem with really bad "plz answer my question" flaggers, and I hated to use mod messages to tell them to stop. The new flag warning system seems to be doing a better job of educating people about problems there. Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 20:09
  • Is there any reason why there isn't a less heavyweight mod message? There seems to be demand for it amongst mods Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 20:22
  • 1
    @RichardTingle: The less heavyweight mod message is a comment. If it has to be private, we use the full monty.
    – user102937
    Commented Mar 24, 2014 at 20:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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