Currently, it's a randomly generated random string of letters A-Z + a-z and 0-9, set to 30 characters total which is assigned to each feedback post. They don't make sense and are thus fail for human-readability. This is an example of what it looks like:
http://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Darth_Vader/055ba317c77597e9ad01f902f6477168
(Using most recent feedback posted by a registered user as of this time for the example, hope that's okay with you @lcf119 :P)
Solution idea 1
My proposal is to write it in a way where instead of a randomly generated string (while still providing the ability for unique identifiers to not run out on a high-traffic wiki with a large amount of articles and a large community) is this:
Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/{article}/{feedback author}/{#}
The concept is that it grabs the Feedback poster's username into that URL, and depending on how many feedback posts they've made, it'll increment that number (the #) by 1.
For example, we could convert the above URL to use the concept provided above. If this was Edward Nigma's first time posting feedback on Darth Vader, it would look like:
Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Darth Vader/Edward Nigma/1
Solution idea 2
Here I'm listing another thought I had. This second one was the same as the first solution that I've provided but instead of that, it would be the date that that feedback was posted, in a date format which most people recognize (DDMMYYYY) but that would prevent the ability of two unique identifiers if say, <username> posted feedback on Darth Vader twice on the same date. We could possibly expand it to hhmmss (hours, minutes, second) which results in a syntax that looks like this:
Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Darth Vader/Edward Nigma/DDMMYYYYhhmmss
This isn't as bad compared to the current URL architecture, since it's a username and a datetime format which is 14 characters long, compared to 30 characters (less than half) but the problem with is that it wouldn't be immediately recognizable just by looking, you would just see 14 numbers and it probably wouldn't be recognizable until it's directly explained which isn't very good. It's basically like the quote "if you have to explain the joke, it's not funny." but for user interfaces and design:
"A user interface is like a joke. If you have to explain it, it's not that good."
Replies with feedback and comments to these ideas are welcome!