Hot answers tagged

27

When rejecting an edit, we need to justify the rejection through a dialog. It provides the following options: spam or vandalism This edit defaces the post in order to promote a product or service, or is deliberately destructive. no improvement whatsoever This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more ...


20

So long as it's consistent within a single post, it doesn't matter what style is used. Assuming, of course, that it meets all other guidelines for politeness, legibility, and so forth. There's no useful way to define a standard version of English for the site--even within, say, American English, we'd have to choose which style guide to adhere to. We cater ...


18

I haven't had a chance to look at the various edits in detail, so cannot comment on the validity of those, but I still want to answer one part of your question. Either way, should we removed the "do not edit my question" part of the question? This one seems fairly obvious. While the OP shouldn't have to put up with nonconstructive edits, making ...


16

That's something I have done by myself various times, as jumping between the question and the converter is not so handy. Since it is an integration and definitely improves clarity, especially in those cases where the number is highly meaningful to the question, I would see no reason to reject such an edit.


16

One small clarification, since it seems to have come up a bit in discussion. It’s true that correcting pronouns, including towards gender neutral pronouns where relevant, is a positive contribution. When folks come across this organically, it should be changed and is an improvement to the post. However, folks shouldn’t go well out of their way to make these ...


15

No Don't change the content of someone else's answer. Feel free to roll back that edit. I approved that edit, so I need to remand myself for punishment. I think that I thought it was a grammar edit. If you don't want to read the edits carefully when you review, don't do the reviews. Technically you are right; changing the mass does change the orbit. ...


14

It is the responsibility of the OP to ask a clear, concise question That, as of the writing of my answer, is a question run amok. Rather than improving the question, the OP simply appended... and appended... and appended... in massive quantities. Frankly, if you need to express that much information to ask a question, IMO you don't have a question (or ...


13

There are a few factors to consider for old posts: Has this question been bumped recently anyway (so it's already on the front page)? It sometimes happens to me that Community (or a new answer or edit) bumps something, causing me to see it for the first time (or the first time in a while), and I spot some things that could be improved. It's already active,...


13

When an image is used into a question or an answer it shall support what is being said. When I saw those gifs, my first question was: "Why is the smoke cloud of a rocket launch here?", followed by a "wait, why is Deep Impact quoted here?". And I had to read again your question to understand what it was about. Unless your target is to confuse your readers, I ...


11

I think the Stack Exchange system actually provides a bit of guidance in the matter. Consider the description of the no improvement whatsoever reason for rejecting an edit: This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm ...


11

I don't have any such edit to look at immediately, so I'm going from memory here. Please excuse any inaccuracies. There are different "views" of posts in the review queues. Particularly, there is a source view and a "rendered" view. These are good at different things, but one thing the "rendered" view is decidedly better at is showing Mathjax. Whenever ...


11

The bottom line is that we're not here to compete with one another; we're here to write good answers (and ask good questions!). I'm struggling to see where there's been any misconduct here. LazyReader's answer linked to the video, but prior to JBH's edit, it was rather tangential. The main point of the rather succinct first version was that tapuis involve a ...


10

I can't speak for the users who edited your posts, but I can speak to your points: "Added x chars in body" is in fact the automated edit reason if one isn't given. The edit itself was not automatic; the user did manually go in and edit your post. With a little speculation, my guess is that they might have felt their edits were minor but also self-evident, ...


10

In short, yes. We should discourage it. That said, I think there is a definite place for this usage when questions are first getting posed and commented upon. "Edit:" passages should be inserted in the question at the relevant points, not all stuck at the end. But such a usage can make it much easier to follow the progress of revision and refinement. Once ...


9

The Original Question I definitely think that the original question was poorly thought out, and was far too broad. I believe the driving force behind it was curiosity, and was not researched at all(for example, most plants would die, as they require the help of insects to breed, etc.), which should not be encouraged (curiosity is fine, but the OP should put ...


9

The post should always be a coherent whole, not a sequence of original text + edit 1 (which revises some of that) + edit 2 etc. The "Edit:" style comes from the blog world, I think, where revision histories aren't usually available and authors want to call out a change. Here, the edit timestamp (and post bump) signals that there was a change and the ...


8

respect the CSS and site design Some people overlook provided features for markup (headers) or don’t trigger the recognition of numbered lists and bullets properly, etc. Don’t make up your own formatting by hacking the other format details: this is fragile in the face of CSS/design changes, has not been checked on various browsers, and doesn’t provide the ...


8

No, please don't invalidate existing answers by editing The bounty reason you named is supposed to be used if for example new research came up or on some other sites on the network if the programming language in question is updated. Things where it's outside of the control of the participants. See for example: Invalidate an answer when starting a bounty ...


8

An edit can be trivial but still important or worthwhile. For example, correcting a misspelling that leads to misunderstandings can be important, yet by some measures trivial. (An edit can also be massive, as opposed to trivial, and utterly unimportant. The extreme case of this would be someone intentionally vandalizing posts.) That said, that text is ...


8

There is a network-wide consensus: Exit strategies for “chameleon questions” And I personally like it. In short, it is like that: Edits are not allowed to invalidate answers If scope of question changes slightly, and it is still an original problem (aka answers are not wrong, just slightly off) notify OP and answerers and let them figure it out Use chat ...


8

It is almost always appropriate to edit in unit conversion; and in both directions! If a query is in normal units, then editing to add metric is not only acceptable but commendable. Same goes for the other direction. If a query is in metric, an edit to put the numbers in normal units is perfectly fine. In my opinion, it should be a regular practice of the ...


8

The edits were ridiculous If the world has really come to the point where reading the words "he" or "she" are intrinsically offensive, then we've really come to a sad state of affairs. But I beg you, understand what I'm saying in its correct context. The OP asked a question about a fictional world of their own creation. In that world, the ...


7

Making grammar edits on a question that is closed, downvoted, and unanswered might be wasted effort because such a question, if not reopened, will get auto-deleted eventually. (Except duplicates -- those stick around.) Making only minor edits to a closed question that wasn't already recently active is not a good idea because it bumps the question to the ...


7

Background information helps establish the context in which the question is asked. In many cases this can be a good thing. In no case that I can think of can we say that removing that information preserves the intent of the original poster. That said, there are other things one can do to make the question easier to read. I originally posted these as a ...


7

Being one of those who rejected your edit, I should probably try to explain my point of view. I would say, that this is again one of those cases where Worldbuilding differ from other SE sites. Your edit suppressed 70-80% of the content of the OP. With it, you removed any background information on the world the OP intend to build. This background can give ...


6

It's not considered kind or polite to invalidate existing answers by altering a question Responders have spent time and effort to answer a question. Changing a question to invalidate their time/effort is rude and disrespectful of their time. That said, there are times when a clarification needs to be made and that same clarification causes some answers to ...


6

You've got a couple of options here: Anyone who has edited a post (or participated on it in some way, including the author, editors, commenters, and, for questions, anyone who voted to close/reopen or set a bounty) can be pinged in a comment. Therefore, if they've edited a post, you should be able to write something like @username, I feel like you've ...


6

This, like most things, is a two part problem at least in my opinion. 1) The person posting the question should be clear. They should meet all the requirements from the how to ask page. Namely this bit: General guidelines for all questions: Must be specific and answerable: What problem are you trying to solve? Must include context: What are you ...


6

An edit bumps the question to the top of the front page and also to the top of the questions list, if sorted by activity. So yes, people will see it again and can look at your changes to decide whether to vote to reopen. Further, an edit from the author puts a question that's "on hold" (closed for fewer than five days) in the reopen queue, where reviewers ...


5

I think it's obvious that Earthins should be Earthlings or Earth-people or Terrans. Earthins is not a word.


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