I tried to change:

 

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a warning, and one to sleep or shut down the computer.

 

to:

 

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a first warning, and one to give you a second warning and then sleep or shut down the computer.

Here are the following improvements Grammarly suggested on your sentence.

1. It appears that the phrase "a first warning" does not contain the correct article usage. Consider making a change

2. The word give appears repeatedly in this text. Consider using a synonym in it's place

The answer here makes sense (especially?) to Windows XP and Vista, so I suggested the edit to clarify it more.

When reading the author's original statement what they said was clear, after reading the modified sentence, it's unclear what the explanation is trying to convey. I put the original and modified sentence through the same grammatical checks, the original, did not have any grammatical errors.

I stand by my decision that the edit introduces grammatical edits that are superfluous. The current statement and what you want to edit it to are saying the same exact thing. If you are trying to say there are three warnings, then you have introduced a grammatical error, and that is a reason to reject the edit proposal. I don't believe your edit clarifies the author's statement, in fact I would argue, your edit makes it less clear.

So XP and Vista does NOT have the second warning? Instead it only issues the "first" low battery warning and then simply hibernates in the critical level?

It doesn't sound like you actually know the answer to these questions. It is not the job of the users reviewing your edit proposal, to verify your edit proposals are factually correct, only if they substantial to warrant approving.

If they DO issue the second warning, then can my edit please be approved?

I believe your edit proposal to be invalid. Your edit proposal has grammatical mistakes, and while I could fix those grammatical mistakes, I also believe the edit not to be substantial even if it was grammatically correct. I also believe your edit proposal makes the statement more confusing. Based on the explanation you have provided, I am even more convinced, that edit is invalid since you are not clear on what the actual behavior actually is.

I tried to change:

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a warning, and one to sleep or shut down the computer.

to:

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a first warning, and one to give you a second warning and then sleep or shut down the computer.

Here are the following improvements Grammarly suggested on your sentence.

1. It appears that the phrase "a first warning" does not contain the correct article usage. Consider making a change

2. The word give appears repeatedly in this text. Consider using a synonym in it's place

The answer here makes sense (especially?) to Windows XP and Vista, so I suggested the edit to clarify it more.

When reading the author's original statement what they said was clear, after reading the modified sentence, it's unclear what the explanation is trying to convey. I put the original and modified sentence through the same grammatical checks, the original, did not have any grammatical errors.

I stand by my decision that the edit introduces grammatical edits that are superfluous. The current statement and what you want to edit it to are saying the same exact thing. If you are trying to say there are three warnings, then you have introduced a grammatical error, and that is a reason to reject the edit proposal. I don't believe your edit clarifies the author's statement, in fact I would argue, your edit makes it less clear.

So XP and Vista does NOT have the second warning? Instead it only issues the "first" low battery warning and then simply hibernates in the critical level?

It doesn't sound like you actually know the answer to these questions. It is not the job of the users reviewing your edit proposal, to verify your edit proposals are factually correct, only if they substantial to warrant approving.

If they DO issue the second warning, then can my edit please be approved?

I believe your edit proposal to be invalid. Your edit proposal has grammatical mistakes, and while I could fix those grammatical mistakes, I also believe the edit not to be substantial even if it was grammatically correct. I also believe your edit proposal makes the statement more confusing. Based on the explanation you have provided, I am even more convinced, that edit is invalid since you are not clear on what the actual behavior actually is.

I tried to change:

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a warning, and one to sleep or shut down the computer.

to:

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a warning, and one to sleep or shut down the computer.

Here are the following improvements Grammarly suggested on your sentence.

1. It appears that the phrase "a first warning" does not contain the correct article usage. Consider making a change

2. The word give appears repeatedly in this text. Consider using a synonym in it's place

The answer here makes sense (especially?) to Windows XP and Vista, so I suggested the edit to clarify it more.

When reading the author's original statement what they said was clear, after reading the modified sentence, it's unclear what the explanation is trying to convey. I put the original and modified sentence through the same grammatical checks, the original, did not have any grammatical errors.

I stand by my decision that the edit introduces grammatical edits that are superfluous. The current statement and what you want to edit it to are saying the same exact thing. If you are trying to say there are three warnings, then you have introduced a grammatical error, and that is a reason to reject the edit proposal. I don't believe your edit clarifies the author's statement, in fact I would argue, your edit makes it less clear.

So XP and Vista does NOT have the second warning? Instead it only issues the "first" low battery warning and then simply hibernates in the critical level?

It doesn't sound like you actually know the answer to these questions. It is not the job of the users reviewing your edit proposal, to verify your edit proposals are factually correct, only if they substantial to warrant approving.

If they DO issue the second warning, then can my edit please be approved?

I believe your edit proposal to be invalid. Your edit proposal has grammatical mistakes, and while I could fix those grammatical mistakes, I also believe the edit not to be substantial even if it was grammatically correct. I also believe your edit proposal makes the statement more confusing. Based on the explanation you have provided, I am even more convinced, that edit is invalid since you are not clear on what the actual behavior actually is.

I tried to change:

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a warning, and one to sleep or shut down the computer.

to:

In Windows, you can change that in the settings, there are two thresholds - one to give you a first warning, and one to give you a second warning and then sleep or shut down the computer.

Here are the following improvements Grammarly suggested on your sentence.

1. It appears that the phrase "a first warning" does not contain the correct article usage. Consider making a change

2. The word give appears repeatedly in this text. Consider using a synonym in it's place

The answer here makes sense (especially?) to Windows XP and Vista, so I suggested the edit to clarify it more.

When reading the author's original statement what they said was clear, after reading the modified sentence, it's unclear what the explanation is trying to convey. I put the original and modified sentence through the same grammatical checks, the original, did not have any grammatical errors.

I stand by my decision that the edit introduces grammatical edits that are superfluous. The current statement and what you want to edit it to are saying the same exact thing. If you are trying to say there are three warnings, then you have introduced a grammatical error, and that is a reason to reject the edit proposal. I don't believe your edit clarifies the author's statement, in fact I would argue, your edit makes it less clear.

So XP and Vista does NOT have the second warning? Instead it only issues the "first" low battery warning and then simply hibernates in the critical level?

It doesn't sound like you actually know the answer to these questions. It is not the job of the users reviewing your edit proposal, to verify your edit proposals are factually correct, only if they substantial to warrant approving.

If they DO issue the second warning, then can my edit please be approved?

I believe your edit proposal to be invalid. Your edit proposal has grammatical mistakes, and while I could fix those grammatical mistakes, I also believe the edit not to be substantial even if it was grammatically correct. I also believe your edit proposal makes the statement more confusing. Based on the explanation you have provided, I am even more convinced, that edit is invalid since you are not clear on what the actual behavior actually is.