Feature Request/Idea: Review process support

[sergejzr]

Overview of the Feature Request Dear Dataverse developers, I wouold like to propose a feature enhancement for the status tracking of reviewed datasets. Currently, there are two statuses: "Unpublished" and "In Review." However, "In Review" is semantically more aligned with "Submitted for Review." The "Unpublished" status encompasses all drafts, tests, and potentially abandoned datasets, which can be confusing and cluttered.

This feature request aims to:

• Clearly distinguish between datasets that are actively "In Review" and those that are merely "Unpublished."
• Provide administrators with tools to effectively manage and track the review process.

What kind of user is the feature intended for? (Example users roles: API User, Curator, Depositor, Guest, Superuser, Sysadmin) Curator, Superuser, Sysadmin

What inspired the request? As an administrator, I need a streamlined process to identify datasets that require my review and those that are with authors for improvements. Currently, the "Unpublished" status is too broad and includes all drafts, which can be overwhelming and inefficient. Having clearer statuses and notifications will significantly improve the management of the review process.

What existing behavior do you want changed?

• Redefine the "In Review" status to explicitly mean "Submitted for Review".
• Introduce a way to differentiate datasets that are actively being reviewed - for example status: "In Revision" - from those that are merely in draft form or potentially abandoned.

Any brand new behavior do you want to add to Dataverse?

• A feature that allows administrators to list datasets currently under review, specifying whether they need to be reviewed or are awaiting improvements from the author.

• A functionality where administrators can read the messages sent to authors when a dataset is returned for revisions.

• (Optionally, but welcomed) An automatic email notification system that alerts administrators when a dataset is sent back to the author, including the message content provided to the author.

Any open or closed issues related to this feature request? There are couple of issues regarding the review process, but not that exactly, as far as I could see.

Thank you very much for consideration! Sergej

[qqmyers]

Have you considered the use of Curation Labels? They were designed to be a lightweight mechanism to track the review process. There's an associated API that would allow integration with an external app, with a call that can produce a report.

[pdurbin]

@sergejzr thanks for the thoughtful issue. I agree with Jim that curation labels might help in the short term.

You might also be interested in an upcoming tool by @okaradeniz and @DieuwertjeBloemen that they are referring to as a "review dashboard". You can see a nice video at https://groups.google.com/g/dataverse-community/c/S6eXX9wfjRA/m/Aya8YDztAAAJ

[sergejzr]

Thank you both, @qqmyers and @pdurbin . The review tool looks like exactly what I as missing, I will check it out as it is in github. This would probably solve the issue!