you think so?

Retired kata stay retired, and they cannot be brought back. Adding tests to a retired kata won't help it, but if you want you can still add them and ask for review on Discord if you want to train your authoring skills and get some practice before authoring your next challenge.

Retirement is permanent, but if you think you can improve it a lot to prevent retirement next time, you could simply create a new kata and copy your code across. However if the cause of retirement was people not finding it interesting enough, then simply adding random tests probably wont change that.

If you are interested with creating kata for Codewars, you can find following resources helpful:

• Docs on authoring and articles linked from this stub,
• My collection of authoring examples for ideas how to implement and organize tests,
• Codewars Discord and its channels related to authoring.

Just a hunch, but beta is a ruthless process. If your kata isn't (nearly) perfect or interesting, or novel, from the start, chances are it will be downvoted. After so many downvotes, it's automatically retired. Without random tests, most power users will downvote immediately.

Agree

that is one way to handle issues

But there is no issue presented. Issues like "tests are broken" or "it works on my PC" are simply useless, because you're giving no tangible information to track or fix.

At least you mentioned the language, which is a start, but what next? Should I (or anyone else) go and debug the entire tests suite, trying to find a bug that probably doesn't exist? Keep in mind, I don't even know what I'm looking for, because there is no mention of a test that causes the failure, an error message that could help narrow it down, or... anything?

There are a few issues already raised below, so you should check them first to see if it's already reported, or provide as much information as possible. The kata is 10 years old (originally published in Ruby), so I expect there to be some issues like poor feedback or lack of tests... but that has to be specified in issue report.

It's not enough to just say something is broken; very often it is in fact the user's code, not the tests.

So, the appropriate way to handle issues is to provide details, explaination, examples, or evidence of the problem, as can be seen in the post just before this thread.

No proof, no issue.

Proof?

Same here, didn't use regex at all in Python.

And since ranking is shared by all the languages, you have to see 5kyu as a sort of average.

In Python, it required a bit of thinking, but I could see it be easily a 6kyu.

Not all users solve this kata in the same language, so, what seems obvious in one language can be not so obvious in another and viceversa. That's why mentioning the language you find a problem is important. About your see my post, that applies only to Ruby translation afaik, and that's why it wasn't clear. Take a look at javascript version, is something missing there?

What would you add to the description? Which language do you say is lacking sample tests?

Duplicate issue