TL;DR I think I have found a related set of small tweaks that could have an out sized impact.
Overview The reviewing criteria list a set of specific reasons for rejecting a nomination on the basis of the photo. The reviewing interface has a drop down menu which lists reasons to reject a nomination due to the photo. I would like to suggest a couple of tweaks to that reviewing interface that would
- be trivial to implement
- significantly improve reviewer and nominater experience and overall wayfarer outcomes.
Tweaks
- Add entries for too dark and through car window to the list.
- Make the list multi-select rather than mutually exclusive.
Rationale
Why add those particular two reasons?
- Frequency: after reviewing over 1k nominations, I have noticed that those two reasons come up fairly often. They come up significantly more often than, say, orientation, which has its own entry.
- Specificity. Each reason is easy to communicate in a few words, and easy to understand. The nominater gets a succinct reason for rejection, thinks “oh, I didn’t realize that was against the rules” takes a new photo and resubmits.
Why make the list multi-select? Because photos sometimes have more than one thing wrong with them. Why make the list mutually exclusive in the first place? If the nominater has made several errors, best practice is to provide feedback on all the significant concerns at once (retired professor 
, can you tell?)
Impact
We often see people come to this forum frustrated and confused by why their nomination was rejected, sometimes repeatedly, as they try to fix reasons that are poorly explained in the rejection. When we can explain a reason clearly, because it is a specific, succinct, reason, why wouldn’t we? Nominating has a high learning curve, with some criteria less sticky (intuitive) than others. If we can walk nominaters through that process gently and efficiently, everyone wins.
