Timeline for Large number of small edits during birthday celebration
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:04 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://superuser.com/ with https://superuser.com/
|
|
| Nov 21, 2011 at 0:11 | vote | accept | music2myear | ||
| Sep 4, 2011 at 0:27 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackSuper_User/status/110146977936834560 | ||
| Sep 2, 2011 at 21:33 | answer | added | Breakthrough | timeline score: 7 | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 21:16 | comment | added | Pops | For what it's worth, I do editing here in occasional bursts/sprees. I came back for a new one earlier this week, and discovered the SU anniversary announcement on the main page shortly after I started. Now I am working just a little harder than I might have otherwise, which is better for the site (in my opinion). Now that my bias is in the open: I have no problem with people editing just for the contest, because the truly trivial edits get blocked by the system anyhow. Yes, lazy approval can be a problem, but that means we need to fix approver behavior, not discourage editing. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 21:10 | comment | added | Pops | Never a good sign when the edit comment is "grammer".... | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 19:51 | comment | added | Simon Sheehan | Please link us too these rollbacks | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 19:43 | history | edited | music2myear | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 604 characters in body
|
| Sep 2, 2011 at 19:30 | comment | added | music2myear | I've rolled back one today and probably two others in the last 4 days. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 19:19 | comment | added | Breakthrough | I think a bigger issue is the huge amount of inappropriate edits/tag wiki additions that some people have been approving. I hate to say it, but it seems like a lot of users are simply clicking the "Approve" button without giving any of these suggested edits a second thought. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 19:01 | comment | added | slhck | As @nhinkle said, it's not only a waste of time on your side — if the edits are so bad, then they shouldn't have been approved in the first place. Rolling them back doesn't help anybody. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 18:18 | comment | added | Simon Sheehan | I have looked at your activity and do not see any edits today or yesterday that are rollbacks...unless that doesn't show | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 18:05 | comment | added | nhinkle Mod | While I understand where you're coming from, I don't think rolling back helpful edits does the site any good. It would be much more productive to just give us a list of those users who've been doing this at length, and if necessary, a moderator can contact them to ask them to avoid trivial edits. Rolling back edits - even trivial ones - just because they weren't necessary seems like a waste of time. | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 17:33 | comment | added | Sathyajith Bhat Mod | some links to the ones you've rolled back? | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 17:29 | answer | added | Tamara Wijsman | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 17:13 | comment | added | Simon Sheehan | I was under the impression our judges would be checking each user | |
| Sep 2, 2011 at 17:12 | history | asked | music2myear | CC BY-SA 3.0 |