I often fix grammar on questions, including capitalization errors, misspellings, etc. I've been doing this for a while, maybe two weeks or so. No one has really said anything about my edits until today. A user asked me to "stop proposing minor edits". Lots of my edits do happen to be minor, but I don't purposely do small edits just for reputation. So the question is should I keep fixing grammatical issues/spelling even if it is a minor edit? I think editing these issues helps with readability, but I'd like to hear what other users think.
The idea that we should hold suggested edits to a higher standard than regular edits is patently absurd. If anyone should be held to a higher standard, it should be reviewers.
We should encourage edits that make a positive improvement to posts, not selfishly discourage them to keep the suggested edit queue at zero all the time. Discouraging edits that make positive improvements to a post, even if they aren't big changes, and even if they don't get everything (this is what "improve edit" exists for) is actively harmful to the mission of the site.
So, absolutely keep suggesting grammar edits. You are making the site a better place for it.
I believe the user you're referring to is me. I've been noticing a lot of edits from you lately that seem to hit the minimum character limit of suggested edits. Specifically, this edit is what spurred me to comment. On the face of things, the only improvement is adding an apostrophe into, "I'm". The rest of the change is superfluous, and adds no value. From my view, it was done to hit the six character minimum for edits. In cases like that, even with the improvement at the beginning, I'd judge the edit as no improvement.
While it would technically be an improvement, its so minor that we shouldn't encourage, nor reward, single character edits.
This isn't to discourage you from suggesting edits; its just that you should make them count. Two people have to review your edit, so if you're going to take up their time, let's not waste it on minor apostrophe edits, please.
I don't see why any edit that objectively improves a post should be declined. Even if all an edit does is add an apostrophe to contractions, that makes the post more proper and more readable, and is an objective improvement. If I saw such an edit, I would click approve.
I don't think it's worth the approver's time to consider whether something is enough of an improvement. Just consider whether there is improvement at all. Any improvement is better than none. Incremental improvement is still improvement.
Of course, if you're going to suggest edits, then do make an effort to improve the post as much as you can at that point in time. But if you see something blatantly formatted wrong, and all you have time to fix is the obvious formatting before you have to rush off to whatever plans you have, I think it's worth taking the time to suggest something rather than nothing, rather than worrying that "something" isn't "enough".
tl;dr: Objective improvements should be approved, even if they're small, and even if there are still more improvements to be made.