We've all been there, you're going through the review queue and accidentally (or otherwise) fail a review audit. Even when you are trying your best and not robo-reviewing, sometimes mistakes happen. Normally not a big deal, but oh no, you failed a couple last week and now have a ban of x days.

You take it on the chin, resolve yourself to be more careful when the ban expires and pass several audits when your reviewing privileges return. But (!) you make a single mistake, hit a "bad" audit or otherwise fail and are hit with another longer ban period. This time is seems a little unfair as you were trying to review correctly, skipping where you weren't sure, looking at the original questions and everything else you're supposed to do when reviewing.

What I'm thinking is not a reward for doing what you should already be doing, but a confirmation that you have changed your ways after returning from a ban.

Perhaps every 10 or <insert some number here> audit passes offset 1 audit failure. That way, reviewers who are really trying and run foul of a simple mistake can show they are learning from their failures. Perhaps this offset number increasing with the number of recent failures (30 passes for 2 failures etc).

I think this would go further to encouraging the behaviour we want of reviewers, what is the consensus?

This question is similar: Does passing a review audit decrease the chance of a ban? but from a couple of years ago and asks about decreasing the chance of a ban, where I'm asking about specific metrics for reducing the failure count in a time period.

1 Answer 1


I don't see any need for this.

You don't say which queue (or queues) you're referring to, but for the close and re-open queues where I spend most (too much) of my time, failing an audit is a very rare event. I think if you really are reviewing conscientiously, you won't fail as many audits as you describe in your scenario.

I only fail an audit maybe once every 2 weeks, and at least half of those fails are because I accidentally click the wrong button. OTOH, I know from other peoples' comments and the small amount of reviewing I do in other queues that there are bad audits in some of them.

  • I was talking generally, obviously the number may depend on the queue (suggested edits being much higher for example because the audits are so obvious). Your situation is exactly the kind I'm talking about, though, where 99% of the time you review correctly, so basic misclicks or brain farts shouldn't penalise you.
    – Steve
    Feb 25, 2016 at 2:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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