AMO:Editors/EditorGuide/AddonReviews: Difference between revisions

AMO:Editors/EditorGuide/AddonReviews (view source)

965 bytes removed , 19 January 2011

no edit summary

canmove, Confirmed users

1,448

edits

@@ Line 125: / Line 125: @@
 Small numbers (less than a couple hundred downloads, few or no reviews) should be an indication that the add-on should be rejected. When in doubt, leave the review to somebody else or ask in the mailing list.
-==== Review History and Editor Comments  ====
-Below the descriptions you should see the add-on version review history. The review history contains all previous reviews peformed to the add-on, including the editor notes for each one of them.
-This is very valuable information, and you should always read at least the most recent reviews. If the last review was a rejection, you should verify that all issues noted in the previous review were addressed. If an editor made a request for information that hasn't been answered yet, you should not review that add-on. Most add-ons in the nomination queue will have this section empty because they haven't been reviewed before.
-Editor comments are rarely used, but if there are any, you should read them. They are only used for internal communication between editors. You can add notes about this review, like if the source viewer or diff tool didn't work for you, but you can use the mailing list for that as well.
 === Step 2: Automatic validation  ===