16
$\begingroup$

Quite often, when browsing through the review queue history, I stumble upon cases where the reviewers apparently didn't do any real review but just clicked on "no action needed".

The latest example I saw, the post under review was:

  • written in a well below standard English. It would have definitely benefited from an edit to improve the bonanza of typos and errors left by the OP.
  • written with questionable logic, something along the line of "trees are green, dollars are green, then trees are made of dollars". Leaving a comment to the OP asking for clarification would have been the bare minimum.

This post was reviewed as "no action needed": no comments to the OP, no edit, no flags. Nothing.

Please, when you review a post in any review queue, keep in mind that while reviewing you are enforcing the quality standards of the community. While I get that there can be different opinions on certain topics, I hope we agree on the bare minimum we want to have here.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ While I have you on the phone... I clicked on the "focused" link in the VTC:needs-focus box on a closed question (e.g., here). The link took me to the "What does it mean if a question is 'closed'?" page in the help center. That page is incredibly out of date. Is that a page we have any control over? $\endgroup$
    – JBH
    Nov 10, 2020 at 1:17
  • $\begingroup$ I haven't done any reviewing lately. Trust me: when I do reviews and come across below standards English, I shall edit with savage abandon! $\endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    Nov 12, 2020 at 2:19
  • $\begingroup$ How many NAAs were on these posts specifically? Because being a reviewer doesn't mean you've mastered English or have impeccable logic; these problems may not actually be apparent to all reviewers. $\endgroup$
    – rek
    Nov 27, 2020 at 15:13
  • $\begingroup$ @rek, some review queues require a single vote $\endgroup$
    – L.Dutch Mod
    Nov 30, 2020 at 6:59
  • $\begingroup$ @L.Dutch-ReinstateMonica Perhaps that needs to change. $\endgroup$
    – rek
    Nov 30, 2020 at 19:35

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

When I review stuff, I try very hard not to do that.

However, it would be my guess that people are using the "no action needed" button like the "skip" button.

Well, they aren't the same. "No action needed" literally means no action is needed; when you click the "No action needed" button you are saying that, in your professional opinion, the post is OK.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Suggestion to take to the main meta: allowing voting from that queue.

I fix grammar when I see errors (I'm that guy who will edit to add one ') and I flag as NAA when an answer is off-topic. Sometimes an answer has OK English and is on topic, but is just bad as an answer. In these cases I hit no action needed, while also browsing to the post so I can downvote it. Yes, I don't always leave a comment.

While I don't think the review that led to this discussion is mine, I want to believe that the reviewer marked a post as ok because no other option was satisfactory. If they could downvote from the queue maybe the history for that review would have been different.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ You can vote from the First Posts and Late Answers queues (the ones with the No Action Needed button). That enables the I'm Done button. $\endgroup$
    – Glorfindel
    Nov 11, 2020 at 13:52
  • $\begingroup$ @Glorfindel I think you can't from the low quality one, though. $\endgroup$ Nov 11, 2020 at 13:53
  • $\begingroup$ Correct, but that's the Looks OK button. I'm not experienced enough here to know whether the Worldbuilding community only wants to downvote bad answers or outright delete them. $\endgroup$
    – Glorfindel
    Nov 11, 2020 at 14:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Glorfindel I have a feeling we generally only delete when the answer is way off-topic or in poor taste. $\endgroup$ Nov 11, 2020 at 14:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sure, that works. Here is some rationale about why voting isn't possible from the LQP review queue. $\endgroup$
    – Glorfindel
    Nov 11, 2020 at 14:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8110/reminder-to-reviewers
worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com
CC-MAIN-2023-14
126546
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:ZDP6OJ5N2GFJILIX542GS4Z7IC7BQA4H
<urn:uuid:7a2c7907-79d3-44cb-a140-e25e89332545>
2023-03-20T17:07:08Z
151.101.1.69
text/html
sha1:3RL2V77FUUSVES5BG5YVHTRBKED2PSHQ
<urn:uuid:f3f061d3-6a6b-4ce8-b11d-6f1e15e49fd7>
https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8110/reminder-to-reviewers
response
<urn:uuid:4f67494f-ca5e-463c-bfb0-e1c8f7f6cf93>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2023-14
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for March/April 2023
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-81
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/