Hot answers tagged

20

The proper definition of a Too Minor edit is this: There is no such thing. There are only Too Minor suggested edits. And they have two reasons behind them. Firstly, as others have pointed out, the suggestor gets two Rep, and that isn't something that should be handed out for teensy tiny little things like the edit you pointed out. And secondly, there's also ...


20

As the editor in question: I edited the title, to clarify the distinction being made (instead of the oddly-emphasized *GIVE*). I only edited the occurrences of the word 'Pokemon' after deciding that the title could use the clarification and reformatting.


17

This user has already been automatically banned from editing by the system for submitting too many bad edits.


16

Titles do not have to contain the name of the game, and you shouldn't intentionally edit a question just to add the game name to the title. The game name is required, however, to be in the tags. This is the canonical way to identify what game a question is about. Also, for SEO reasons, the first two tags appear in the HTML title of the page, so when the ...


15

Sometimes bad edits get approved when they shouldn't. On the other hand, good edits sometimes get rejected when they shouldn't too. The latter is what's happened in this instance. There's nothing wrong with the edit that you made, and it certainly didn't deviate from the original intent of the post. Indeed, as others have mentioned, a diamond moderator ...


15

There are a few things you can do when minor edits need to be done: Leave a comment on it alerting the op of his minor mistake. Look through the post to see if anything else can be edited as well, such as other spelling errors or any grammar errors. If the op hasn't fixed it, or there aren't any other things to edit, you can visit chat and let someone know. ...


14

No. Let me preface this by saying that I disagree with your edit. It's a complete re-write of the question and you used too much guesswork to fill in the blanks for my taste. I'm not saying small and medium-sized edits should not be done. They should, which is why we can. It's that to me (and presumably others), this particular question was unsalvagable ...


13

Nonsense is what happened. Before the edit, we had a crappy question, asking if someone had information. We love those questions, don't we? But this is just a phrasing issue. Editing the question can fix that. Now let's look at what that first edit did: What was the XP needed for 60-70 in the beta? I was wondering if anyone had any information on ...


13

Looking at your only question that was edited, the revision history details that people only removed superfluous text and/or adjusted grammar and fixed typos. Superfluous text can be bad for a post, since it doesn't help detail your question or answer. From your question, this was considered superfluous: let me go ahead and thank you for reading/helping ...


13

Especially since this case is a retag, I would say yes. We don't want content with errors, and mistagged content is even worse in my view. Ultimately, use your best judgement, but it isn't that big of a deal for things to get bumped, as long as we aren't bumping a whole bunch of things at the same time during, for example, a mass cleanup effort.


12

Yes. Edits that add image descriptions (or in this case provides a transcript of text in an image) add accessibility without changing the core content of a post and should be accepted. That said, this particular edit has been accepted, and it appears that the reject vote was a simple mistake.


11

I've seen this come up quite a bit recently and it bothers me when very solid guesses about what the question is really asking get rejected simply because we can't be 100% sure that it's what the asker meant. Yes, it's true, we shouldn't drastically alter a question to be another question entirely. But this, and many other cases I've seen, don't do that. ...


11

I have removed the bounty and rolled back the edit. In the future, if this comes up again, feel free to raise a custom moderator flag, since moderators have the ability to remove a bounty, refunding the reputation spent.


10

Some people downvote without even trying to read the question. People are free to downvote as they want, but your question will get more upvotes as long as the content is good and the question is on topic. Also one people called 'two bugs' literally modified my whole question to make another one while it made it worse. If a user damages your question, ...


10

You can't suggest reviews anymore now that you've reached 2000 reputation. The system (and the users who voted for your posts) trusts you to have learned how editing works by now, by having your suggested edits approved or rejected, and by seeing the edits of other users who have earned the same privilege as you. And frankly, the system seems to be working ...


9

If the answer is based off the information in the link and that link is no longer valid, the correct thing to do is downvote the current answer (unhelpful now) and submit a new answer with valid information that is relevant today. In this case, that entire answer is based off of that link being the source of servers. Since it's no longer true, that answer ...


8

If you improve your posts, then it's only fair that the post score goes up, and with it your reputation. If you make edits just for the sake of making edits, hoping for fresh pairs of eyeballs to see your old stuff and upvote it anyway, then we have a problem.


8

You mention that this site has a better reputation than Reddit. Part of that reputation is that the community here works together to improve the site's content. We do that by asking and answering questions, by voting, and by editing questions and answers to improve them. I understand that it looks like the user trashed your question to make a new one, and ...


7

Your edit ban is temporary, and you'll be resume making suggested edits again next week. In the meantime, though, you might want to take some time to ask yourself why your edits were rejects, or you might find yourself suspended from edits again. I can see by looking at your history, though, that you might want to take a look at this meta post, and also ...


7

This question is based on a slight misunderstanding. It's true that posts are a collaborative effort, but that doesn't mean post authorship is completely nonexistant. Just a look at the voting and badges system should tell you that Stack Exchange values the connection between posts and their authors, and that leaving a post's content to its author is ...


6

Answers are our bread and butter. They're the whole reason the site exists. We also provide our strongest rewards for answers: 10 whole rep per upvote, along with perhaps an accept. There's lots of incentive for answering a question. In fact, that's our heaviest moderation task; sorting the chaff from the wheat. We get plenty of contributions, but not ...


6

Your edit was perfectly fine, and should not have been rejected, and yet it has been, presumably because Tim Post lost his keys again. I have decided to edit the question myself now, going with @Dragonrage's proposal of appending the game name, although it's not strictly necessary. No game title in the title would have been perfectly fine, too, since "...


6

A lot of this comes down to why the question was closed in the first place. If the question was closed for being unclear, but you can decipher it, rewrite it in clearer language, and make it useful, go for it. If the question was closed for being off-topic, subjective, or too broad, odds are that any changes that would make the question a useful on topic ...


6

Each edit has a five minute window in which you can make subsequent changes and have them rolled into the same revision, provided no one else made changes in between. What happens in this case is that the original change is reverted by the editor during that grace window, as if no edit was ever performed. This wasn't recorded for a very long time, but that ...


6

As far as discouraging users goes, I can see how trying to maintain a certain standard can be a bit daunting. Initially, yes the system can be seen as a bit blunt, but that's where we come in. By simply explaining that a question is unclear, or perhaps off-topic, or whatever reason the question doesn't meet our standards, it can help the user understand what ...


6

If you don't feel that the edit was done correctly, rollback it and put a note that you believe that the edit was done incorrectly, if that user edits again/rollbacks, just flag a mod and let them decide. Also, trivial edits from 2k+ users probably wasn't done just to edit as they don't get +2 rep, so if they edited something, they probably have a good ...


6

You're looking at the post history. Version 1 had the picture. Version 2 had the picture. Version 3 removed the picture.


5

It's because there's already an active suggested edit pending for the question. The system doesn't allow you to edit an edit (there's too many cases to handle for a relatively rare occurrence), it simply disables the option. There are a few other conditions which will disable the button. Here's the Meta Stack Exchange faq entry on it: Why is the edit ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible