I always thought that high-rep users with additional privileges only support moderators in their work but it looks like they're actually the ones doing it. If moderators don't care about the queues, why do we have them at all?
Good! Then you're looking at healthy sites. The queues are there for the community, not for the mods. In fact, on the sites I mod, I ...
Aren't moderators supposed to show users how each site works, keep questions clean, edit bad titles, give askers tips etc.?
No, the job of site moderators is to handle the exceptional cases of
rudeness or other violations of the CoC
detect abuse like irregular voting
reviewing the flag queues when moderator attention is needed
Anything else can be ...
And there appears to exist some private and/or confidential information, available only to moderators
There is no private or confidential information that I've seen (moderator on SO) which would indicate it's unsafe to continue reviewing. There is, in my opinion, no danger to yourself or your accounts in doing so.
Ok, this is fixed - all comment flags will be henceforth ignored for the purpose of this check, along with any "in need of moderator intervention" flags raised on the post itself (that exception already existed).
Thanks for pointing this out; by my estimation this was probably responsible for around 700 invalidated reopen reviews on Stack Overflow alone, ...
Is it bad to skip a lot of suggested edits?
No, it's perfectly fine to do so. Better to skip a post in the review queue than to approve a bad suggested edit / reject a good one. Just review the ones you feel confident about.
Or is it considered bad and does the system penalise this?
No, the system doesn't penalize skipping posts. The FAQ explains the "...
This is fixed now. Thanks for letting us know privately before posting it publicly!
We won't be revoking existing hats, but I urge anybody who got the hat by skipping a lot to do their civic duty so they really deserve the hat :)
Authors of posts should always be able to edit their own posts. Otherwise, there would be no possibility of them fixing mistakes they realize they've made, adding new information they've thought of, or responding to comments and answers.
If I'm a new author and there's already an edit that's pending, what should happen?
As I see it, there are three ...
They are displayed in the order you unlock the queues. On regular sites you earn close/reopen voting privileges at 3,000 reputation, and that is when you gain access to those queues. You gain edit privileges at 2,000 reputation, and that gives you access to the Suggested Edits and Low Quality Posts queues.
Aside from reviewing suggested edits, the low ...
As I was almost finished writing the question, the solution hit me: Law Stack Exchange just had an election, and the review was made when the ♦ moderator was still a regular user without binding review powers. It's similar to a more frequently occurring situation where a ♦ is shown in the 'middle' of a close banner:
In addition to what πάντα ῥεῖ and terdon said...
Now, in times where many people quit, isn't the job of a moderator
even more important?
In case you haven't noticed many moderators actually resigned and suspended their non-critical activities. Firing mods and forced relicensing: is Stack Exchange still interested in cooperating with the community?
♦ moderators don't review bugs and feature requests (they might read them and comment on or answer them, but regular users do so as well). They are able to add red tags like status-review but do so rarely; most of the time when this happens they add a status-completed to a question which has been fixed more or less by accident (example), or where the ...
As others have surmised, there are lots of reasons why you might be able to "improve" a suggested edit without getting credit for it:
You could've hit your limit for suggested edit reviews that day
You could've somehow gotten review-banned after loading the review task but before submitting the edit
The site could've logged you out or expired your token in ...
Yes, it does. Any post which is closed, deleted, locked, or accepted is considered ineligible for the Low Quality Posts queue. For answers, the deleted and closed status of the parent question are also checked (which can cause a situation where if the question is locked, but the answer is not, the answer would still be ineligible).
It isn't incorrect.
"Has" is a third-person singular and a present perfect tense, it refers to an action that began at some time in the past and is still in progress. The reviewers may or may not continue reviewing, the number could remain the same of increment.
"Had" is a past perfect tense and is used in all cases, singular and plural. The past perfect ...
I'd argue that skipping should earn you the hat. If you're skipping, you're not robo-reviewing - it means that you're deciding that you aren't qualified to judge this post. We should be encouraging people to skip more. People too often will review something even if they're not qualified to. Skipping is a fundamental part of review.
This hat already kinda ...
This should be fixed in the next build. I updated the filter for the Low Quality review queue to exclude items flagged by the reviewer. This filter was also updated on some other queues that were missing it.
Yes, but not this Meta.
Questions about contents (including reviews) on a site is totally on-topic on its per-site meta, in your case, Meta Stack Overflow.
Well, this site also starts with "Meta", but not the right place. But at least I'm glad that you know there's something called "a meta site" for issues like this.
If there's already a comment, upvote it!
That will allow you to complete the review.
Here's the list of actions that you can take - if you can't see the info, hit the (more) button - note, this is on questions but the answer one is the same except that "close" isn't an option.:
I'm Done is only available if you've done one of the following:
For new users there is more possibility that they will simply reject edits as they are not trusted users
No, you can't throw such assumption without proof. First please come with extensive research, e.g. latest 100 reviews made by post authors. Then we'll see, but I'm pretty sure you'll see post authors can make good decision like any other user.
The Community user is the creator of the tag in that scenario. It looks like those tag wiki edits are what's preventing your Q&A posts from landing in review. It's an easy fix, but I'm going to ask around if this is intended behavior or an oversight since I'm honestly not sure off the top of my head.
Update: It was an oversight after all. Going forward, ...
Probably not. While the exact details are secret, even from mods, the goal of a post ban is to encourage improvements in existing posts (and the occational future one). There's certainly a reputation element - but I'm unaware of reviews helping.
This is a good thing - the aim of reviews shouldn't be getting out of your post ban, it should be to help curate ...
How is your proposed solution different from what we have right now? A question that is off-topic or missing vital information can be put on hold. This comes with a message describing what is wrong with it.
It is put on hold so that OP (or others) can edit it into shape, and in the best case, it will be reopened when it becomes a "complete" question.
For historical data, one can use a SEDE query like this one - it shows the number of review tasks which were created on a certain day, split by type.
You can use the API to get a (real-time) list of pending suggested edits to posts, which form the majority of the Suggested Edits review queue (the only items which are missing are suggested edits to tag wikis ...
Why and how are some answers deleted?
Answers that do not fundamentally answer the question may be removed. This includes answers that are:
commentary on the question or other answers
asking another, different question
“thanks!” or “me too!” responses
exact duplicates of other answers
barely more than a link to an external site
not even a partial answer to ...
The very few reviews in that queue here were done for testing purposes only. There were 21 total reviews, all from staff, that took place all on one day over the span of half an hour, corresponding with when that queue was first announced.
The queue never existed here as a formal review queue that regular users could access.
When reviewing Suggested Edits on Stack Overflow, I commonly see edits that either introduce more problems than they fix, or don't even attempt to fix all issues with the post. In both cases, Reject and Edit is a useful option as it allows the reviewer to correctly edit the post while also not approving a bad edit. It can also help the edit suggester learn ...
If you've already cast a close vote, you can't cast any further close votes on that question, and so it won't let you review in the Close Votes queue. (Reopen has nothing to do with it.)
On the one hand, you could argue that this is an oversight, since it is still potentially useful to Leave Open, and any items that should be closed can simply be skipped by ...
Is it bad to skip a lot of suggested edits? Or is it considered bad and does the system penalise this?
No, AFAIK that's the right action to do if you're unsure, or aren't familiar with the question domain.
If you skip, it's just like you didn't touch the post at all (besides viewing it).