In the Meta Stack Exchange FAQ of review tests (audits), it is mentioned:

Also, if you find something in the review audit system that makes audits extremely obvious (as in one can tell that a review is an audit in just a few seconds, with little to no extra investigation), feel free to report that flaw.

So, the goal of this post is to report that flaw.

In the above screenshot we can notice that the question has 0 answers. So it's pretty obvious to the reviewer that this review is a test (audit).

But there's also one more thing mentioned in the FAQ:

Easy-to-identify audits help legitimate reviewers pass and help better hone new reviewers' skills.

So is this a flaw or is it meant for new users to improve their reviewing skills?

After Zanna's suggestion (given in her answer), I asked a question in Meta Stack Exchange (link to the question).

In the Meta Stack Exchange FAQ of review tests (audits), it is mentioned:

Also, if you find something in the review audit system that makes audits extremely obvious (as in one can tell that a review is an audit in just a few seconds, with little to no extra investigation), feel free to report that flaw.

So, the goal of this post is to report such a flaw.

In the above screenshot we can notice that the question has 0 answers. So it's pretty obvious to the reviewer that this review is an audit.

But there's also one more thing mentioned in the FAQ:

Easy-to-identify audits help legitimate reviewers pass and help better hone new reviewers' skills.

So is this a flaw or is it meant for new users to improve their reviewing skills?

After Zanna's suggestion (given in her answer), I asked a question in Meta Stack Exchange (link to the question).

In the Meta Stack Exchange FAQ of review tests (audits), it is mentioned:

Also, if you find something in the review audit system that makes audits extremely obvious (as in one can tell that a review is an audit in just a few seconds, with little to no extra investigation), feel free to report that flaw.

So, the goal of this post is to report that flaw.

In the above screenshot we can notice that the question has 0 answers. So it's pretty obvious to the reviewer that this review is a test (audit).

But there's also one more thing mentioned in the FAQ:

Easy-to-identify audits help legitimate reviewers pass and help better hone new reviewers' skills.

So is this a flaw or is it meant for new users to improve their reviewing skills?

In the Meta Stack Exchange FAQ of review tests (audits), it is mentioned:

Also, if you find something in the review audit system that makes audits extremely obvious (as in one can tell that a review is an audit in just a few seconds, with little to no extra investigation), feel free to report that flaw.

So, the goal of this post is to report that flaw.

In the above screenshot we can notice that the question has 0 answers. So it's pretty obvious to the reviewer that this review is a test (audit).

But there's also one more thing mentioned in the FAQ:

Easy-to-identify audits help legitimate reviewers pass and help better hone new reviewers' skills.

So is this a flaw or is it meant for new users to improve their reviewing skills?

After Zanna's suggestion (given in her answer), I asked a question in Meta Stack Exchange (link to the question).