<!--IssueSummary start--> <details> <summary> Everyone can contribute. [Help move this issue forward](https://handbook.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/developer-relations/contributor-success/community-contributors-workflows/#contributor-links) while earning points, leveling up and collecting rewards. </summary> - [Close this issue](https://contributors.gitlab.com/manage-issue?action=close&projectId=278964&issueIid=384175) </details> <!--IssueSummary end--> In https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/105032, https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/105236, and https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/105523, we skipped some flash notice assertions as the flash notice was replaced by another one (due to an unrelated bug). As said in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/105236#note_1191357648: > I think the skipped assertions could be removed entirely as the test already checks its result another way (i.e. `expect(RepositoryCleanupWorker.jobs.count).to eq(1)`), or change the assertion to not check for a flash notice. In general, I think it's always a bad idea to assert on flash notices as you cannot be sure a flash notice won't be replaced dynamically with another one at runtime. It's better to assert on a fixed text in the page (if available) instead. This issue is to investigate if we should replace the flash notice assertions with more robust assertions, or remove them entirely.