Timeline for Why are substantial edits rejected when they don't also address all, potential minor, issues?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 18, 2018 at 10:04 | comment | added | Albin | @Ramhound the discussion about the post in question is taking place in the comments of the question, could I refer you to my explanation there? I don't understand the reason for you're comment on "high standards", did I suggest in your view that I doubt "high standards"? | |
| Jul 17, 2018 at 13:53 | comment | added | robinCTS | @Ramhound Btw, how did you manage to find that particular review? (And check out the next two edits done to the question.) | |
| Jul 17, 2018 at 13:53 | comment | added | robinCTS | @Ramhound Thanks for bringing up that specific case. I was thinking of doing so myself as an example of incorrect approvals by users, the issues it causes and the fact that reviewers don't always have time to attempt major reject and edits. I also wanted to illustrate that I often come back to my rejected edits when I have more time and improve them outside the queue. And also to show that despite my best efforts I still couldn't quite completely clarify the question without possible changing the OP's intent. But then I thought that that would just be adding more fuel to the fire ;-) … | |
| Jul 16, 2018 at 10:46 | comment | added | Albin | yes but if I'm not mistaken, individual judgement is not always applied, for example: superuser.com/review/suggested-edits/773037 the edit was substantial because it made the headline (in my view the most important part of the post because it is used for shortcuts in "related" etc.) "more accurate" in terms of "more specific" (not as broad). | |
| Jul 16, 2018 at 10:32 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @Albin, site perspective = user perspective if user perspective = the population of users. I was just showing a few examples to illustrate that "improvement" needs to be considered in a broader context than just a chunk of text in the abstract. Every case is different and reviewers need to weigh all of the relevant factors and make their best judgement. Individual judgements will differ, which is why there are multiple reviewers. | |
| Jul 16, 2018 at 10:22 | comment | added | Albin | You make a lot of assumptions, I could as well say that old posts are found because s.o. had the same question an needs the answer. He finds that it has some typos in the paragraphs or sentences relevant for him and corrects them. Only because those points are not relevant for the reviewer does not mean their are not relevant for this and other readers but the edit would still gets rejected. So "better" should not be a "site perspective" but a "user perspective". | |
| Jul 16, 2018 at 10:06 | history | answered | fixer1234 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |