![]() ![]() Support - Yes, really need this right now.I thought this what was supposed to have been changed already. Jbh Talk 16:11, 14 September 2019 (UTC) Reply This would, in my mind, mean issues would be more likely to be addressed before Google indexes the article and take some of the pressure off of reviewers in questionable cases. This would allow more experienced or specialized reviewers to check on whatever issue led the original reviewer found troubling enough not to pass. What I would like to see though is a queue of tagged but unreviewed articles. It also may lead to newer reviewers indexing something that is not ready for prime time because they forget to unreview. The review/unreview method i'd just clumsy. ∯ WBG converse 05:38, 14 September 2019 (UTC) Reply ![]() I guess provisions can be alsoimplemented to set the check-box to either of the two states (as default) and remember it, so as to not interfere with current workflows. I (thus) propose for a return to the old days, which effectively decoupled maintenance tagging and reviewing. The drawback is that the article creator receives 2 notifications:- one for the review, and another for the un-review. But the change meant that anybody, who was inclined to tag an article but not review it, was now being compelled to manually un-review it after the tagging. Subsequent updates ( T41208) removed the option in a bid to un-clutter the fly-out and reduce maintenance overhead. A screenshot of the old workflow is visible over here. For doing the review as well, you needed to enable a 'Mark as reviewed' checkbox at the bottom of the 'Add Tags' flyout. In the ancient days ( ), it used to be not possible to automatically review articles by tagging them. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |