Feature Request

When we move an article between states, can we not auto assign it back to the author who moved it from the previous state? It also needs to be unassigned from the reviewer. Currently, the reviewer has to manually un-assign the article from themself AND assign it to the previous author

To ensure high quality articles before publishing we like to have more than one person check the article, currently only one person can be assigned in a workflow so we would like multiple people at this stage. We would like to have a state for there review as well so we can track who completed the review.

While we can create a workflow for articles from Draft to Published, we would also like to continue the workflow or create a new workflow for after articles are published. For example, 1 month after an article is published, we would like to receive a notification about comments, likes, and dislikes from an article. From there, we will determine if the article needs to be edited, what changes need to be made to the article, and who should make those changes. From there, changes could be made, and Version 2 of article(s) can be published.

We often have multiple reviewers within a review. It would be nice if everyone that was tagged as reviewer could finish the review by pressing a button. Also it would be nice if this information would be visible to the writer so he/she knows who has done it and who needs to reminded of the task. Cherry on top would be if the workflow would then automatically move to the next step. In general it is a request for a bit more automation of the workflow.

currently, the onus on creating a different version is on the author. This is causing issues as people forget to fork. Thus they overwrite the content. An idea that struck - what if we could configure certain stages to automatically create a version when the article is moved to that stage? For example, peer review. Then there is no dependency on the author to remember to fork. And there wouldn't be overwriting of content - thus rendering versioning useless.

In any workflow, we have multiple stages through which content passes. One problem that we face is when an article is created, and sent for peer review, and the peer review doesn't happen, it becomes difficult to track these requests for the author who created the article. When the author moves the article to peer review, they re-assign it to another author. And there may be more than one writer involved in the peer review of multiple documents. There is no way to filter for all articles that are in peer review. The ask is that authors be able to filter for articles that were assigned to them in one stage (maybe in draft) and are now stuck in peer review. Since the author is responsible for timely delivery of the article, they should have a birds-eye-view of all their content in the workflow

We currently have 3 colors for articles in the left pane. Blue (unpublished), yello (published at least once but now is WIP) and Green - where the article is in production and there are no drafts. We add other states to the workflow. And it would be good to be able to color code these states so that it's instantly visible and easily accessible, distinguishable and actionable

We have articles that can be reviewed and published immediately. We also have articles that must wait till a certain date to be published. We can mark articles for review in settings. However, once they are reviewed, we'd want to custom mark these to say something else. For example - For release. Since we follow an agile process, some articles may need to wait till the functionality is actually available in production. Would be great to have the ability to change the label so anyone touching the article will be careful not to put it through the regular process... which may lead to the article getting published.

When you try to assign an article to an author, there's no logical order their names are displayed. Either an alphabetical or a last assigned or frequently assigned order would be much more helpful than current ordering (which as per support is - no order is being followed)

In the past, when an article was marked for review, it could be done with a single click. Today, after introducing workflows, each article... needs to be assigned individually before whoever is reviewing the article can see the entire list. Just marking them for review... doesn't help.