Timeline for Is this rejected edit in line with SE goals?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 2015 at 21:33 | comment | added | user Mod |
Something one can do, when feeling that the question is too long, is to edit and **boldface** the specific question, put in a # heading making it easy to find, or something similar. That maintains the OP's intent, preserves the background for those who want it, while at the same time making the question much easier to skim for those who are in a hurry and just want to judge whether to spend time answering that particular one or not. Same goes for editing a question title if that is unclear or excessively witty to the point of impacting understanding of what the OP is actually asking.
|
|
| Jul 30, 2015 at 18:25 | history | edited | clem steredenn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
some Grammar
|
| Jul 30, 2015 at 13:22 | comment | added | DaaaahWhoosh | I agree with this. The post may have been a little too 'verbose', but it sure beats the other side of the spectrum. I'm glad I looked here though, I saw that edit yesterday but decided against voting it down so I could see what everyone else did with it. | |
| Jul 30, 2015 at 9:31 | history | edited | clem steredenn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 10 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2015 at 9:24 | history | answered | clem steredenn | CC BY-SA 3.0 |