121

The Public Platform team would like to announce another release in a series of planned work for the Review queues. This release focuses on refreshing the queue user interface in preparation for further improvements to the user experience. Starting today, we will roll out these changes in three phases across the network.

Roll-out plan

We have planned for these UI changes to ship in three distinct phases affecting specific queues across the network. We will update this post as each phase is rolled out.

What Where When
Phase 1 • Home page (/review)
• Close and reopen votes queue
• Stats/History view
• Steward badge
Meta Stack Exchange
Meta Stack Overflow
Shipped!
January 28, 2021
Phase 2 Changes from Phase 1
• Suggested edits queue
• Low quality posts queue
• First posts queue
• Late answers queue
SuperUser
Ask Ubuntu
Shipped!
February 16, 2021
Phase 3 Changes from Phase 1 + 2
• Triage queue (SO only)
• Help and improvement queue (SO only)
All network sites Shipped!
February 23, 2021

UI changes to all queues

updated close votes queue

All review queues will be adopting a new user interface that focuses on providing reviewers with context to make deliberate, thoughtful decisions on review tasks. We shared an initial design proposal in our product discovery phase and made sure to include that feedback into the final design.

Responsive/Mobile-friendly design

new mobile view of close votes queue

We utilized Stacks to update the visual design in the review queues. As part of this update, we were also able to make the queues responsive and utilize mobile-friendly UI components.

Changes

  • Actions menu - We’ve removed the action buttons for a menu-style component. Selecting an action now requires a bit of pause and mitigates robo-reviewer behaviors we've seen in the past. Instructions are now always visible and associated with each action.

  • More context - Users can now toggle between the review task and the necessary context (original question, answers, and comments) on the task page to assist in making educated decisions on a task. No need to open new browser tabs!

  • Vote controls and follow feature - We heard from you that being able to vote directly on all tasks as well as the option to follow posts and receive updates on changes would help in the reviewing process. These features will be available in all queues.

  • Filter button - We’re highlighting this feature (where it’s available) with a button and replacing the easily missed text-link.

  • Review count - We’ve removed the badge progress bar in lieu of keeping track of how many tasks you can complete in a queue (don’t worry, the badge bar isn’t gone).

Review home page

updated review queues home page

The review homepage has received a Stacks update as well, setting it up for forthcoming plans to create better onboarding for new reviewers. This page now provides a bit more information to new reviewers.

Changes

  • Only the queues available/earned by the user are clickable

  • Includes additional text about necessary reputation to earn access to new queues

  • Available queues are prioritized to the top and then sorted by the number of tasks in each queue

Additional updates

updated history page

updated stats page

All aspects of the Review queues are receiving some much needed design attention. Here a few more changes you can expect to see:

  • There is more incentive to continue reviewing. The Steward badge can now be earned multiple times for every 1,000 reviews in each queue. If you have already completed 2,000 or more reviews, we will backfill any additional Steward badges that you have already earned. You can expect to see them accrue over the next few days.

  • History view - Added and rearranged a few UI components so that users can better navigate and utilize the page

  • Stats view - Updated badge progress bar

Feedback

Please leave any feedback or bug reports related to this release below this post. We will be reviewing responses on this post for one month following Phase 3 (March 23, 2021). After March 23rd, please ask a new question to report any new issues.

35
  • 27
    You have Dark Mode on ... Meta Stack Exchange? I knew about Meta.SO from Catija's screenshots in the stacks-editor announcement ...
    – Glorfindel Mod
    Jan 28, 2021 at 17:41
  • 7
    What's behind the decision to show the "questions list" view of the post title, its asker, and ask date instead of the normal question view? Likewise, why are you injecting the meta information about the review item in between the title and the post body? Both of those decisions are confusing to me.
    – TylerH
    Jan 28, 2021 at 23:24
  • 15
    Look at the dates and names in those screenshots, @Ollie / Glor - this is likely a local or dev-tier build running against a dump from the MSE database. Any theme can be selected in that context - dark-mode Physics, for instance. Which just leaves the question of why Lisa is NOT using dark-mode Physics?! 😏
    – Shog9
    Jan 29, 2021 at 1:46
  • 4
    Thanks for adding responsive design. I use the site (math.se) exclusively on mobile device and it was a real pain handling reviews . Jan 29, 2021 at 2:21
  • 5
    I think it would've been better if Phase 1 included an opt-in on Stack Overflow. Only ~900 users have access to the Close and reopen votes queues on Meta.SE and Mata.SO's queues are almost always empty :(
    – 41686d6564
    Jan 29, 2021 at 9:31
  • 5
    The giant gap between the title and body of the question is jarring and confusing. The body follows from the title, so putting the reason for flagging between the two like you did is like putting it between the first and second paragraph of the question. Except this is worse in some sense, as the title is now part of an entirely different thing and doesn't appear to be the title of what appears below at all any more. That thing also duplicates the score and answer count. Jan 29, 2021 at 21:11
  • 3
    @StephenRauch Probably because the user profile image is not relevant info to have for reviewing posts, and screen real estate is limited as it is
    – TylerH
    Jan 29, 2021 at 22:16
  • 5
    Wow, you can update the Review Queues but still cannot deliver site designs? Some sites have been waiting nearly five years to get their look feel updated as promised. You implemented a generic site design which was supposed to standardize and make easier the rollout of the designs. That was a few years ago now, too. So, just curious? You have time for this but not for site designs? Jan 30, 2021 at 13:49
  • 5
    @Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 I understand your frustration and I know that it's difficult to be waiting for so long. But we can't make site designs at this point. We have major needs for improving very basic elements of our sites so that they function well and so that people understand how to use them. This change improves the review experience network-wide, site designs benefit a single site and are purely cosmetic. On smaller sites, the improvements to review may not be as important but these are still valuable changes.
    – Catija
    Jan 30, 2021 at 14:56
  • 3
    @Trilarion it's not that they aren't important... but it's like trying to paint a house while the foundation is failing. Paint serves a purpose in protecting wood siding and making the house look approachable but I don't think anyone would argue that painting a house that has identical paint to the ones in the neighborhood but has foundation issues is the right choice - do you?
    – Catija
    Jan 31, 2021 at 16:17
  • 5
    @Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 They probably cannot deliver site designs because they are working on review queue updates (among other things). The review queues have been needing an overhaul for more than 5 years anyway. Sites can wait to have a new background image.
    – TylerH
    Feb 1, 2021 at 16:10
  • 4
    Does the new version include the ability to flag low-quality spam, or do we still need to open a new window for that?
    – Mark
    Feb 3, 2021 at 21:30
  • 5
    @Braiam, yes, there is: the system can automatically decide that a post is low-quality, or someone could flag it as "very low quality" instead of "spam".
    – Mark
    Feb 16, 2021 at 21:54
  • 3
    Answering for Lisa here @TylerH - we're following the answers to this question closely, so this is still the best place to share your thoughts.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Feb 24, 2021 at 16:51
  • 3
    @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog yes - please do. sorry it got passed over, but submitting it as a new question is definitely the best way to get it looked at.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Apr 11, 2023 at 15:24

113 Answers 113

1 2 3
4
2

If a question has already been closed since you opened the review, selecting "Close" and clicking "Submit" has no visible effect. In the current version, you get an error message informing you that the question is already closed.

Behind the scenes, there's a 500 error on a request to GET https://[site]/flags/questions/[post-id]/close/popup.

1
  • 1
    This fix is building out. We were sending error messages to a non-existent view. Feb 18, 2021 at 17:24
2

This suggested edit is proposed by a user whose avatar isn't working. That looks rather awkward in Firefox on macOS:

enter image description here

Safari (left) and Chrome (right) handle it better:

enter image description here enter image description here

1
  • 1
    This is fixed. The alt-text was so we wouldn't have an unlabeled link, but the link is just there to increase the mouse hit area, so the solution was to omit the avatar link from screen readers and keyboard navigation with tabindex="-1" aria-hidden="true" in addition to alt="", which will hopefully be a better overall experience for everyone. Feb 18, 2021 at 17:35
2

In the Close Votes queue, the currently voted/flagged-for close reasons are visible close to the top of the review task screen, which is awesome to be able to see.

But in this particular review (now completed), the close reasons that were shown were duplicated. Here's a screenshot of what I saw when I started the review:

Duplicated close reasons

At the time that I had started the review on the post, it had 4 close votes. I imagine the reason it was counted as 5 (the number at the end of each close reason in the list) was because of a flag, but that's pure speculation on my part without being a moderator and being able to see the flags on the post.

Speculation aside, the close reasons being duplicated in the list is still a bug. Could this be fixed?

3
  • 2
    They're not exactly duplicated. One has a comma after "network", the other does not. There's a certain reputation threshold where we don't let users flag with the individual community-specific options and they instead just have the default option (reasonId = 1). These are technically distinct reasons that can't be grouped together because reasons. :/ Feb 18, 2021 at 17:48
  • 1
    @BrianNickel Interesting... And unfortunate. Thanks for looking into this!
    – Spevacus
    Feb 18, 2021 at 17:52
  • 2
    Most of the users voting or flagging chose the canned reason, while one user either voted with a custom reason or flagged with the "Blatantly off-topic" separate option. Feb 18, 2021 at 21:47
2

There are two types of Actions box. One for a wide screen, and another for the narrow (e.g. smartphone) screen:

wide screen

narrow screen

On the desktop browser you can switch from one to another by changing the window width. And in that case currently selected option is not synchronized among different types of boxes.

My suggestion is that these boxes should use only single active option that is synchronized for both types. I.e. changing the value inside one box should reflect the value in another when I changed the screen width.

2
  • 2
    This will be added in the next build. Mar 4, 2021 at 17:36
  • @BrianNickel glad to hear you Brian! I'm still using iPad SE app and waiting for continue of development and your great work and answers! Thank you for the current fix as well. Mar 4, 2021 at 17:59
2

As far as I know (and see according the results on the page) filtering all in the queue behaves like filtering nothing, but the button in latter case says "Filtered" which is not actually true.

Filter all

Filter none

Same behavior after adding only space(s) into Tags box.

5
  • 1
    Thanks for the report! The first part, if I'm understanding you correctly, is by design. When nothing is selected from the filter list, you're removing each of those close reasons from the filter. That's why the default is having them all selected - it's not filtered if everything's selected. For the latter half of your report, I have to dig in a bit more to the tags issue before I can weigh in there.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 1, 2021 at 22:15
  • @kristinalustig I know that all empty checkboxed work as all checked. The issue is why text on the button says "Filtered" in latter case if it works same as not filtered? Mar 2, 2021 at 5:57
  • It doesn't work the same - if all checkboxes are empty, you are filtering out every item that meets one of those criteria. No duplicates, no "Not suitable for this site", etc.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 2, 2021 at 16:49
  • @kristinalustig if you're right why I see that? Filter already applied of course. Mar 2, 2021 at 17:03
  • 1
    Alright, I figured it out. We fixed this and made it so that if you deselect everything, it just defaults back to no filter. Also fixed the tag space issue. Thank you! The fix will be out in the next build, either today or Monday.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 5, 2021 at 17:00
2

When a review queue has a long description, the 'Recent reviewers' label in the right column wraps around as well, as can be seen on Stack Overflow на русском:

enter image description here

Not a big deal, but having more consistency is always an improvement.

2

At [cs.SE] there is still no option to vote on the answer in "first post review queue".

When switching from "Question" to "Answer" the Actions pop-up disappears, which prevents this use case: Question is good, I vote up, answer is good, I vote up and submit "I'm done".

In other queues, when there is preview of "other answers" e.g. from Low quality or Late answer, voting is also unavailable.

Voting at Close review also makes sense to me, if it was a mistake to put question there, it might be salvaged, edited or cleared. If someone understood the question, giving a good answer and addressing ambiguities (e.g.) in the comments, any additional action requires opening a new tab. It cannot be the same one, because the reviewing process skips the current item then.

2
  • 2
    Thanks for the report. We've added in voting in all places in review queues, so you can vote on whichever questions and answers you'd like. This fix will be in the next build, either later today or tomorrow.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 9, 2021 at 18:39
  • Thank you. It works.
    – Evil
    Mar 10, 2021 at 20:10
2

Please move the banner shown directly after completion of an audit to be more consistent with the layout during review.

During review all actions including moving to the next review are shown in a small box on the right:

enter image description here

While after review the action to move to the next review is now on the other side of the screen at the far top left:

enter image description here

I guess this is because it's the same banner which is shown when looking at historical reviews, but it's disruptive to reviewing and inconsistent with the review layout. Perhaps this is clear on a SD/HD screens, but on a UHD screen screen I had to go looking for the button.

1
  • 4
    Thanks for reporting this. The slowing down here is intentional - we want folks to pause and review the result of their audits, positive or negative, so the button being here next to the message is the place that makes the most sense.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 9, 2021 at 18:42
2

Perhaps users would appreciate seeing the total count of review items in the queue for their selected filter?

enter image description here

This would effectively change the review queues from a black-box to a white-box. The same functionality already exists for regular post searches.

enter image description here

Conceivably this would allow tag enthusiasts and chat room users to have a grasp on the real volume of expertise reviews that are needed and organize accordingly.

1
  • 4
    This idea was indicated in the designs as well. Unfortunately, the way review queues are currently built, it is not trivial to determine the number of review tasks that match a filter or importantly the number of those tasks that are actually reviewable by the current user. The next phases of this project are more architecture-oriented, which will hopefully allow us to revisit this. Mar 9, 2021 at 19:09
2

More context - Users can now toggle between the review task and the necessary context (original question, answers, and comments) on the task page to assist in making educated decisions on a task. No need to open new browser tabs!

Why is the question itself hidden in a modal when reviewing an answer, when it's important to know that before doing a sensible review. Yes, I know, it's a click away, but I didn't have to click before to get the question. This is important in both late answers and low quality review queues (while I'm good at identifying spam, I'm terrible at identifying not-spam when the question asks for it).

Please, bring back the question on all views that review an answer.

2

In the First Posts queue on AU, clicking "Filter":

enter image description here

And then selecting "Clear" without doing anything else seems to skip the review task without giving feedback, even "Skip". I managed to do the same with an MSE suggested-edit review task a couple seconds ago.

2

According to observable behavior filtering for tags uses max 3 different tags. E.g. I've entered more than 3 same tags and the result only shows one instead of many:

enter image description here

So I'm suggesting adding the word "different" to the description.

2
  • 2
    Or “distinct”. But this behavior is the same for questions or edits to those (max 5 tags), search, and tag watching. Identical tags get merged into one, because tags have set semantics, implicitly. Mar 4, 2021 at 13:59
  • 1
    I fixed this a while back to use the standard tag editor. Jul 13, 2021 at 14:40
2

When reviewing first posts (in the case of an answer):

Radio Buttons There are two issues with the buttons:

  1. Pointless clicks
  2. Standard radio button UX is not followed

Pointless clicks

Pointless clicks are required. Once an edit has been done, there is only one radio button available ("I'm done" - the other is greyed out), which must be clicked before being able to click "submit".

Utterly pointless! If only one option is available (in a radio button group) then it should be automatically selected. Otherwise a checkbox should be used1.

Radio button UX

When first opening, the "I'm Done" is disabled... so surely that should mean that "No action is needed", as it is the only enabled option, should be selected by default?

But no, if you action something (i.e. make a change to the post, vote, etc.) then "No action is needed" becomes disabled, yet "I'm done" (which magically becomes enabled) is not selected by default.

This is not how radio buttons work. The radio buttons are extremely confusing in their logic, and leave the user dithering over which one to click, only to find that one, or other, is disabled anyway (without the only enabled button being automatically selected).

In addition, the "No action required" radio button is superfluous to requirements, as if the user could click Submit, without doing anything (which they used to be able to do so), then it is implicit that no action is required.

In summary, there is no need for the radio buttons and they should not exist:

  • "No action required" is implicit when the user clicks the Submit button after having done nothing, and;
  • "I'm done" is the only choice (if an action has been taken).
  • At no time are both buttons enabled, thereby negating their reason for existence.

"Question"/"Other Answers"

WRT to the "Question"/"Other Answers" tabs, it was already possible to view the question of the first post answer under review, by simply scrolling down. Now you have to click another button. The other answers weren't visible though, so the ability to now view them might be an improvement, I guess.

Conclusion

UI/UX improvements are meant to make things easier, and not require even more effort and induce RSI. As a result, reviews now take longer to perform, which impacts on people's time and reduces workflow efficiency. These additional clicks quickly add up, especially when doing multiple reviews, across multiple sites. If people were being paid (by the hour) to do reviews then they might not mind so much about the time each review takes, but as this is an unpaid voluntary task, it's not a good idea to put reviewers off, as this will lead to more full queues, and people will not then be able to suggest edits, or what-have-you.


1 However, that would mean that the UI element would have to change, from two radio buttons (before anything was done), to a single checkbox (after some change has occurred), and obviously changing UI elements, in the middle of a workflow, is extremely bad practice.

2
  • 1
    I did write a user script to make it so that clicking a review action will immediately submit the review. This restores the behavior of the old review UI. Mar 22, 2021 at 6:39
  • We're planning to rework these queues with explicit actions to be taken rather than just tracking interactions. Jul 13, 2021 at 14:50
1

I see a conflict in Phase 3:

conflict in phase 3, will it be SO only or network wide?

On one hand you say both changes are SO only, on the other hand you say "All network sites". Which hand will it be?

4
  • 4
    All changes from Phase 1 and 2 will roll out network wide. The two remaining SO-only queues will also be rolled out at that time.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Jan 28, 2021 at 17:27
  • 5
    Those queues only exist on SO.
    – Makyen
    Jan 28, 2021 at 17:27
  • 2
    @animuson that's not clear at all that the "Where" refers to all previous phases. Thanks for clarifying. Jan 28, 2021 at 17:28
  • @Makyen I know, hence the confusion. If they exist only on SO how will the change be shipped to all sites? (No need to answer, animuson already did) Jan 28, 2021 at 17:29
1

Some screenshots and text seem to be swapping places in the VLQ posts queue:

enter image description here

On this review, Question tab. The actual post looks like this:

enter image description here

What happened there?

3
  • 1
    Do you mean the placement of the "The screenshot"? I took me a while to figure out the difference between the two images. Maybe add block quote to give the image a border as the amount of white is a little confusing, as to where the screenshots begin and end, and which text belongs to the screenshot and which to your answer. Or maybe, I'm just getting old... :-) Feb 22, 2021 at 5:16
  • It’s not swapping. It’s actually rendered the same way. The image is inline, as there is not paragraph break between “This screenshot:” and the image. In review, the post width is just wider, so the screenshot fits into one line with the text, but outside of review, the post is not wide enough for that. Feb 22, 2021 at 8:30
  • As mentioned above, this is an artifact of the screenshot being cropped in a way that makes it seem like it's above the "This screenshot" text, when in this circumstance it's actually to the right of it.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 1, 2021 at 18:50
1

No need to open new browser tabs!

I appreciate the thought behind this, however, as long as the review process puts fake work in front of me, I think I am always going to open a new tab. It's how I know the review is fake and I don't need to spend time reading or thinking about it.

1

I just encountered this question in the Reopen Votes review queue. Presumably it got there after @rene's edit (9 seconds after it was closed). Yet while reviewing it said (and still said after revisiting the page before the review was completed; now it's gone) "No changes to display.":

enter image description here

(It could very well be that this is unrelated to the UI changes, but if you are working on this now, perhaps it's an easy fix.)

3
  • 1
    Aaaargh, ninja'd again!
    – Ollie
    Feb 8, 2021 at 19:21
  • 1
    I'll look into this. Off the top of my head, I'd say we render the revision tab if there were edits after the closure, but the diff can cover multiple revisions, which may undo each other. We should be able to detect that the diff has no changes and hide the tab. Feb 17, 2021 at 0:01
  • 1
    This will be fixed in the next build. If there's no changes to display (because the diff is empty), we won't show the revision tab. Interestingly, it's not just rollbacks that can cause this state but quick edits like the one you saw. We omit any edits that occurred in the 10 seconds after closure from counting, I assume because we don't count them as edits in response to closure. Changing that would be a bigger and more philosophical conversation. Mar 4, 2021 at 17:30
1

Another bug on narrow screens.

This is similar to - but not the same as - this bug (which is and seemed to affect Chrome and Edge but not Firefox).

When shown a low quality posts review task (and possibly other review task types) where the title for the post under review is long (this doesn't seem to be an issue if joined with backslashes, e.g. path1\path2\path3\...\pathN), there is no wrapping of the title text - and this causes the review actions to not be visible without zooming out.

For instance, this review task is for an answer to the question Could not load type 'Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.ViewFeatures.Internal.AutoValidateAntiforgeryTokenAuthorizationFilter'

In the default view, the review actions options are not visible and they were not visible after scrolling down slightly (though they may have been visible if I'd scrolled down to the very bottom of the page - I should really have skipped the review so I could investigate further):

One when zoomed out are the actions visible:

This affects (at least) Chrome 88.0.4324.190, Edge 85.0.564.67, Firefox 86.0 (all on Windows 10), and Chrome 88.0.4324.181 on Android 10.

The behaviour is confusing and it made me wonder if I'd reached the current quota of reviews (or if I'd been review-suspended).


Upon using the HTML inspector, I found that the CSS for the text in the <a> anchor inherits

overflow-wrap: break-word

from h3. According to the MDN page for overflow-wrap:

The overflow-wrap CSS property applies to inline elements, setting whether the browser should insert line breaks within an otherwise unbreakable string to prevent text from overflowing its line box.

Note: In contrast to word-break, overflow-wrap will only create a break if an entire word cannot be placed on its own line without overflowing.

Changing the value of word-break from break-word to anywhere 'fixes' this issue but may well cause other bugs.

1

Another narrow screens bug - some of which is browser-specific

Posts with long titles can fail to be wrapped in the history view, causing a horizontal scroll bar to be required/shown.

This relates to this first bug (now ) and this second bug (with no [status] tag) (both regarding long question titles on narrow screens).

Note: To minimise the vertical width of this answer I've resized the windows to the smallest vertical size to demonstrate the bug. The bug is still present if the windows have a larger vertical height (e.g. on a phone in portrait orientation).


Reviews on PHP Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 60 seconds exceeded in C:\xampp\htdocs\vendor\symfony\process\Pipes\WindowsPipes.php on line 140.:

  • In Chrome 88.0.4324.190 and Edge 85.0.564.67 (both on Windows 10), and Chrome 88.0.4324.181 on Android 10 - no text wrapping:

  • In Firefox 86.0 (on Windows 10) - text successfully wrapped:


Reviews on Could not load type 'Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.ViewFeatures.Internal.AutoValidateAntiforgeryTokenAuthorizationFilter':

  • In Chrome 88.0.4324.190 and Edge 85.0.564.67 (both on Windows 10), and Chrome 88.0.4324.181 on Android 10 - no text wrapping:

  • In Firefox 86.0 (on Windows 10) - no text wrapping:


Other pages that have reviews with neatly-wrappable titles reflow nicely for any screen size - this appears to be related to very long titles which contains 'words' which are not allowed to be broken up by the browser.

As with my remark at the end of the second bug, it looks like changing the value of the overflow-wrap CSS property to anywhere 'fixes' this problem but could introduce others.

1

When suggested edit already reviewed by me, but not yet applied to the post I can still see the Edit (1) link under the post. Clicking the link opens popup:

not relevant header

The header (whatever on the top of popup) is not relevant for me since I can't do anything with this edit anymore.

1
  • 1
    Thanks for the report - fixed this! Fix will be out either later today or tomorrow in the next build.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 9, 2021 at 18:32
1

First seen in the Reopen Votes queue: If you click “Following” on a task to unfollow the question, and then submit the “Next” action, the Stacks error message doesn’t go away:

Minor annoyance, but it goes away when you move to the Stats or History, so can we make it disappear when you move to another task?

3
0

I found a weird color issue for review pages on my phone (Android 10, Chrome).

The orange/brown background color for selected tab (SO logo/topline at the page header are also affected) is darker for "Stats" tab and brighter for other tabs:

Different brown/orange

Affects all SO family sites: English and internationals.

Not reproducible on:

  • desktop browser (neither Chrome, nor Firefox) on Windows 10.
  • mobile Firefox on the same Android device

BTW I got a tangible delay while loading "Stats" page on every browser/device.

3
  • Are you sure the tab isn’t just selected or focused with a default blue selection color? Actually, on a second look, the entire web page content looks desaturated in the middle screenshot, not just the tab. Look at the Stack Overflow logo or your profile picture… Mar 8, 2021 at 18:54
  • @SebastianSimon tab bg-color is the first thing what I looked at, the second was a logo, then horizontal (orange) line right below the URL. The latter two are described in my post. The "Learn more" link also looks darker for the middle image. Seems you're right about whole page desaturation, but I can't get the reason for that behavior. Mar 8, 2021 at 19:21
  • 1
    Neither Brian nor I are able to reproduce this color desaturation issue or find any reason why it might be happening on that particular page. So, while that is status-norepro, you're right that there's a query that takes for-e-ver on the stats page. We're taking a look into that now. Thanks for the heads up.
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 9, 2021 at 19:16
0

Consider removing the hyperlinks from the canned review text (in the pop-up window) during the review process. I never want to click on the links when selecting the item; I only want to select the item. Having the links there means that there are places on the screen that I never want to click on.

6
  • 1
    I agree that they can be annoying, especially on mobile. I end up getting directed instead of selecting a close reason as well every now and then. But I do understand the usefullness these links provide to new(er) reviewers. Hence I disagree they should be removed.
    – Luuklag
    Feb 26, 2021 at 19:09
  • The text of the links is pretty descriptive. Maybe it could be a toggle like the ads are. Or maybe it's just another userscript to make SE more useful. Feb 27, 2021 at 0:27
  • 1
    I'm not sure how to solve this without making it less useful to newer reviewers. I'm tossing an upvote on this for the general concept that I constantly misclick them when I'm on mobile, but I think just removing them isn't the right solution (if there's any way to disable the browser redirecting nearby touches onto the link, that might help).
    – Ryan M
    Mar 6, 2021 at 2:34
  • 1
    We want to retain these links for newer users who might need the links for additional context. We may consider other solutions in the future but for now I'll status-declined this particular request. Thank you for reporting the issue!
    – kristinalustig StaffMod
    Mar 9, 2021 at 18:41
  • 1
    Thank you for considering it. I would just suggest that linking terms like "reputation" or "Ask Question" or "vote up" doesn't really add much value. Besides, reviewing queues is a privilege that starts halfway towards the "established user" level, beyond several other privileges, so I would say that the links aren't providing very much value, as the target audience is already fairly established in SE. @kristinalustig Mar 9, 2021 at 18:59
  • My point is that the links are perfectly valuable to the recipient of the stock text, and not particularly useful to the reviewer. Mar 9, 2021 at 19:00
1 2 3
4

You must log in to answer this question.

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