When the new top bar rolled out, the suggested edit indicator disappeared. A short while later, they came back, but with the understanding that they'd eventually be replaced by an indicator for all queues, not just the suggested edit queue.

Unfortunately, due to implementation limitations, the new results have to be cached and aren't customized per user, so they don't indicate anything useful to individual users. And as a result of these limitations, a decision was made to only show the queue if it has at least 10 review tasks.

Of course, this is bad UI. People click notifications to make them go away. But that only matters for larger sites like Stack Overflow. What about smaller sites where there are never more than 10 tasks in the queue? For these sites, this change is much worse:

The suggested edits indicator has, in effect, vanished!

People will still review edits sometimes, but without the indicator we're back at square one: reviews will happen, but fewer users will review, and it'll take longer on average for edits to go through. For example, I recently found a suggested edit on ELL, but the only reason I know it's there is because I happened across the question. The question had been waiting for a review for over an hour before I saw it, even though I'd been on ELL the whole time.

Without the suggested edits indicator, we're back in the situation Gilles described:

The suggested edit indicator is useful. Suggested edit review is not like other review tasks which can wait until somebody's interested in doing moderation. A pending suggested edit on a post locks the post against modifications by users without the edit privilege. Without the indicator, posts will spend longer in that semi-locked state. That's not good.

Sure, this doesn't apply to larger sites where the queue is typically larger than ten items. But for us over on ELL, the indicator's altogether gone!

I miss our suggested edit indicators. Could we have them back, please?

  • 2
    Seems like this should be a per-site customizable value. Set it to minimum 1 or 2 by default and increase it little bits at a time if a site grows larger?
    – animuson StaffMod
    Commented May 2, 2014 at 0:53
  • 2
    The minimum number of suggested edits that have to be pending before an indicator shows up is 3. We probably should set the number of pending reviews to the same number. (But either way, it is configurable per-site.)
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 2, 2014 at 1:11
  • Borrowed some info and mentioned this request in my own regarding the changed notification; thanks! I think you may encounter a little resistance in requesting a simple rollback, because there's arguably some common good served by shoving the overall review queue in everyone's faces when it's not emptying fast enough – I think that was the idea. Yet I agree that this serves sites with better review queue dynamics poorly, and I support lowering the notification's appearance threshold...especially w/ mildly enhanced visual dynamics I've proposed! Commented May 2, 2014 at 7:38
  • 1
    In principle at least, the old system isn't mutually exclusive with the new one. We could be notified of suggested edits if the indicator would otherwise not be shown, for example.
    – user215040
    Commented May 2, 2014 at 8:45
  • @Anna The reason it's 3 and not lower is because if someone reviews the notification won't go away until enough other people do?
    – Troyen
    Commented May 2, 2014 at 20:12
  • @Troyen I've no idea why it's 3, but it's probably not that.
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 2, 2014 at 20:13
  • 2
    +1; my edit on Stack Apps took about a week to get a single review. Commented May 3, 2014 at 1:20

1 Answer 1


Easy solution here: just make the threshold for this 3 (same as the threshold for suggested edits) on sites that don't get a lot of review tasks.

Slightly different behavior, but not crazy. So, that's done.

Super User, Stack Overflow, Ask Ubuntu and Math all average more than 10 review tasks per hour, so their threshold stays at 10.


You must log in to answer this question.