I see many benefits in having a sortable table, the old page not being sortable is something I always disliked. And I like the updated design, I think it's very desirable for all special pages to use Codex.

PS. There is no need to separate the link "review" in its own column; it should appear next to the title of the article, instead “edit”.

It is easy to click if it is aligned as current. No need to move mouse/finger horizontally, when opening multiple pages. And edit link should not be hidden at all.

In T372085#10052810, @Wargo wrote:

It is easy to click if it is aligned as current. No need to move mouse/finger horizontally, when opening multiple pages. And edit link should not be hidden at all.

Yes, now the "review" links are aligned relative to each other (they used to be offset), but there are more mouse movements:

• they are separated from each other by vast empty spaces, through which you need to move the cursor;
• the column with them is at the other end of the table from the "page" column. Accordingly, to open the page history first, and then the unchecked changes, I have to move the cursor across the entire screen to the right. Therefore, for ease of use, the links to the page itself and "review" should be as close to each other as possible, and not separated by non-clickable information messages about the size and time of the change.

And "edit link" is absolutely useless in this context: the point of the page is to provide access to view unverified changes. Accordingly, you make decisions about whether to edit the page only after you see the diff.
No one will open the text editor "blindly", without knowing whether to do this - that is, "edit link" here only takes up space that could be used for something useful. And access to editing the page is from the diff page.

The tool should be as convenient and ergonomic as possible, without any frills.

I am against going back to bullet list. All reasons mentioned by Wargo are correct. One column where we can just move in one column cursor is much more user friendly. Issue "how far is this column from name of article" can (and should) be solved by T372124

there are several issues mentioned here which could be solved without the need of converting the table back to a list:

1. the "review" link should be closer to the page
   • solution: this will be done via T372124
2. the vertical space is too large (this has also been critisized by several power users at dewiki).
   • solution: reduce padding or line-height per CSS.
3. there's too much whitespace between the columns without any benefit (this has also been critisized by several power users at dewiki).
   • solution: don't use min-width: 100%; or set .cdx-table {max-width: fit-content;} in order to let the table fit the content (as in https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:LintErrors/fostered for example)

the table should be made more dense with these changes, because power users want the information to be presented not only clear, but also very dense, such that they don't have to scroll too much (with their mouse or their eyes) in any direction.

Consider making 2 and 3 its own ticket. 2 and 3 might be able to move forward, unlike this ticket of rolling back the Codex/table conversion entirely, which in my opinion is not likely to be accepted.

Even though the specific layout of the table could be indeed tweaked as mentioned above, I think that the alignment of the buttons and links in the same columns is beneficial overall and I second keeping this special page displayed as a table