Timeline for Should users suggest technical edits?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 25, 2017 at 19:12 | comment | added | Run5k | Notice: this specific question represented unusual circumstances. The OP originally authored the question with the title "Why was this edit suggestion rejected?" We had a rather lengthy discussion explaining why, and the OP was nice enough to concede that they didn't fully understand the process before asking their question. Unfortunately, the moderators deleted that entire conversation. With good intentions, the OP changed the topic subject to read "Should users suggest technical edits?", when that really wasn't appropriate... it should have been an entirely separate question. | |
| Feb 25, 2017 at 15:38 | comment | added | Braiam | Notice: is part of SE core philosophy to improve every post by editing. It's explicitly encouraged in the help center about editing. So, there's no need for "workarounds" of policy. The policy is clear in intent and wording: you feel it should improve it, nobody can tell you not to edit. | |
| Feb 24, 2017 at 1:23 | comment | added | fixer1234 | I would add to this that when adding a supplement that technically conflicts with the original answer, include an attribution to make clear that those are not the words of the original author. For example, start the addendum with "Edit by DaaBoss" and make the name a link to the user profile. | |
| Feb 21, 2017 at 16:33 | history | answered | DaaBoss | CC BY-SA 3.0 |