If someone else has access to your Wallet

[earakel]

Hey @jorge-campo, sending this for your review!

This article breaks the rule of no links in procedures when talking about switching between accounts. Otherwise, I'd have to either to list the same steps as Chen does in her article several times, or risk confusing the user by leaving this step out of the procedure - you'll skip admonitions when you're in rush.

[jorge-campo]

Thank you, Emma - Here are my review comments, mostly about the content structure. I hope this helps.

• This article was written before the new content organization you made. The new sub-section for the article is 'Secure your wallet'. You must rebase the branch and fix the merge conflicts before pushing to master. Remember also to update the links in the hamburger menu (if they're not updated yet).

• 'Your Status Wallet and profile share the same recovery phrase'. You can link here to the recovery phrase article, 'Understand your Status keys and recovery phrase'.

• 'While your profile is protected by a password locally, anyone who has the recovery phrase can log in to your profile even without your password.' What do you think we include the wallet information as well? For example, 'While your profile is and wallet are protected by a your Status password, anyone who has the with your recovery phrase can log in to your profile and wallet even without your password.

• Right after the first paragraph, you can add a tip-style admonition to the 'Back up and secure your recovery phrase' topic.

• Your content is complete and follows a logical order; great work on that. However, its structure can improve a bit. Having steps inside steps doesn't make things easy for a reader that, most probably, is in a bad situation. I think the following changes will make things much easier to scan and follow. Try them 😄 You can share the 'before' and 'after' versions and ask in our group chat what the rest of the team thinks.

  • In our structure, steps work better when they're in H3 but not when they're in H2. Create a single H2 with a name similar to 'What to do if someone else has access to your Wallet'.

  • Transform Step 1, Step 2, and Step 3 into H3s under the single H2.

  • Merge your Step 1 and Step 2 H3s' procedural steps under a single 'Step 2' H3. In other words, merge your procedural steps so they're part of a single numbered list. You'll end up with 7 steps in total (for mobile), which is more than the recommended 6, but considering this process is an important one, we can go ahead with 7. You can also merge these two steps into a single one to narrow down the number of steps to 6:

    • (2) Select an account you want to send your crypto from.
    • (3) Tap Send.
    • -> (5) Select an account you want to send your crypto from and tap Send.

  • I'm not concerned so much about the number of steps on desktop, as desktop designs will change to align with mobile. But you can merge the same steps to narrow down the steps to a total of 7.

  • Select an account you want to send your crypto from -> Select an the account you want to send your crypto from.

  • In this new step (5), explain to the reader they need to repeat this process for every account in the wallet they believe is compromised (and still have funds/NFTs).

  • (3) Select your legacy address [..]. I would remove the legacy word here; I understand your goal, but it will make the reader think, 'What's the legacy address?'

  • Switch back to your old Status profile -> Switch back to your old previous Status profile ? Or 'compromised Status profile', to be more precise?

Thanks.

[earakel]

Thanks @jorge-campo, I revised the article using your suggestions - all of them 🙂

[jorge-campo]

(deleted review comments because they don't belong to this article but to #651 - See #613 (review))