-8

Every now and again, I see some old content that could use an obvious edit. This might be something as simple as some bad spelling or grammar that made its way through, or a series of questions that have been improperly tagged.

My instincts are to go through and fix them, but I hesitate, and often leave them alone. While I want to make the relevant changes to the older questions, I do not want to needlessly bump a bunch of old questions to the top of the board. In the cases I am talking about, there are multiple questions that need fixing, in the multiples of 5 or 10.

I was under the impression that any edit to a question would have this effect, however, recently I have noticed minor edits that do not

This leads me to my proposition. A "Quiet Edit" check box that can be ticked when making any appropriate edits. By ticking the box, we identify that the question is being edited for general quality control, but should not be pushed to the front of the queue. A quiet edit could also imply that edits we have made to closed questions should not elect them for reopening.

enter image description here

The option could be only made available to high-reputation users, if we are worried that it would lead to a whole bunch of low-quality new-user content flying in under the radar. Quiet edits would still behave identical to normal edits in every other way.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the current edit process. Perhaps there is already a tool available I am not using, or I am otherwise misinterpreting the weight required in an edit to push the question to the top of the board. I thought it might be a good idea to see what general feedback I could get about this.

  • 7
    I get that you're trying to do some editing without bumping it, but that's one of the advantages of edits; it bumps it back up for more people to look at, so that edits can't vandalize something. – Frank Oct 30 '15 at 12:56
  • @Frank I mean, this would obviously not be an option for users less than 2k, and I (and the system) generally trust that 2k users won't vandalize stuff – Unionhawk Oct 30 '15 at 12:58
  • 11
    You'd need to make something like this at least 10k. Probably 20k. – Sterno Oct 30 '15 at 12:59
  • 3
    Also, feature-requests should probably go on meta.stackexchange.com, unless it's about a stylesheet or layout thing for this site. – Elva Oct 30 '15 at 13:00
  • @Sterno I'd tend to agree. I'm just more making the point that such a thing could definitely be rep gated since edits already are – Unionhawk Oct 30 '15 at 13:02
  • @Frank, I had initially thought of this idea a week back. I noticed some poorly used tags, and realised that while making the corrections would be quick, it would bump 20-30 questions all at once. I have considered the potential for vandalisation, though. Another thought I had was that perhaps the quiet feature would auto-disable if the character length exceeded a certain length, implying a non-minor edit. I'd me more supportive of a 10k/20k rep req. – user106385 Oct 30 '15 at 13:08
  • 2
    That's why they get bumped; to put more eyes on them, so we don't have users unilaterally changing things. – Frank Oct 30 '15 at 15:01
  • 1
    @Sterno I don't even know if I'd want this for moderators, e.g. we have better tools to handle batch operations on tags – badp Oct 30 '15 at 15:26
  • 6
    To be clear, I don't want this. But if we did have it, it'd better be very high reputation. – Sterno Oct 30 '15 at 17:28
  • As far as I thought there was no implication of editing old questions - the only caveat is to only edit a couple of old questions at a time so as not to flood the front page. As it is, I disagree with this feature on the grounds of opening up an avenue for abuse - I feel -if it does get considered - it should be a 20+k feature or even a mod-exclusive feature. – Robotnik Oct 31 '15 at 9:09
  • 2
    Yeah, I'm not keen on this. It goes against the community moderated/monitored nature of SE. – shanodin Oct 31 '15 at 9:19
  • @Robotnik, I sometimes identify 10-20 questions that could do with an edit all at once. This has mostly been through the course of updating tag wikis, and noticing misuse of tags, but I'm not sure what else I should be doing here to fix that. – user106385 Nov 2 '15 at 1:10
  • 1
    @Timelord64 - Edit 6, wait half an hour/45 mins then edit 6 more. That's what I do and noones complained yet :-) – Robotnik Nov 2 '15 at 3:22
  • @Robotnik, might be the solution I was after. From previous experience I favour the "do it all at once" approach to ensure uniformity, but I'm sure I can figure out something alternate in regards to tags, that constitute the greatest sum of potential edits and don't really have that issue – user106385 Nov 2 '15 at 4:07
6

What exactly is the problem you're trying to solve here?

I think that's the reason I completely disagree with your proposal is there's nothing to fix. There's nothing wrong with editing a question to improve it and then having it bumped to the top. If it does so, great, a person who finds the question interesting will click on it and learn whatever information is inside the question. If not, the only thing gained is the visibility of the question, and that's it.

Now if it's done maliciously, such as a user constantly editing a same question over and over or a pattern of some sort, those questions would be locked, so we already have a solution in place to deal with the abuse of editing/bumping questions.

That's why I disagree with this proposal of a "quiet" edit. You're trying to solve a problem that simply doesn't exist. Users who partake in malicious behavior are dealt with by either the system or by moderators.

  • Perhaps I should have emphasised the improper taggings more, but sometimes I will see tag cleanup, and when I go back to the source there are 10-20 questions all at once. Coincidentally, there is currently a user adding technical-issues to old questions. This is what I am trying to solve. The rest would just add convenience for a 10k 20k user. – user106385 Nov 2 '15 at 1:08
  • If you feel a user is abusing the system, flag one of their edited posts, and a moderator will take a look at that. You can feel free to peruse this topic: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1323/flag-abusive-users which discusses how to "report" a user for review. With this suggestion you're trying to a fix problem that already has a working reporting system. – senpai Nov 2 '15 at 5:40
  • Dw your missing the point entirely.. – user106385 Nov 2 '15 at 7:07
  • @Timelord64 Okay, so if they aren't abusing the system, what exactly is the issue here? – senpai Nov 7 '15 at 7:29
  • That there is no real benefit in the question being bumped to the front, but it wilk still be bumped to the front, oh look a new question. Oh. Wait. It was posted in 2004.. oh look.. a tag clean up. They are ALL from 2004. – user106385 Nov 7 '15 at 12:54
  • The point is, this is not an abuse of the system.but mass tag fixes are usually preluded by a "sorry were spamming the new questions list", and the best counter seems to beto not do it. And people still complain about tags. And at the end of the day, if we have exanples of bad questions,because fixing a popular problem half a year later means editing all the effected questions to reflect said meta decision – user106385 Nov 7 '15 at 12:58
  • If you dont see a problem, look at the questions tagged with a console that do not fit the requirements for a console. I see mod posts about tag cleanupsand think mods must have something better to do, for how easy it would be for someone to do the samr thing, if they had the effort. – user106385 Nov 7 '15 at 13:07

You must log in to answer this question.