No, there are no spelling errors. The rejection was bogus for the reason as stated by the rejecting user.

If the edit is not classified as too trivial, that is. And since the rejecting user re-submitted my edits as their own, that doesn't seem to apply in this case.

I admit that it is not a completely comprehensive edit e.g. some grammar mistakes were left as-is on purpose, but it adds more to the question than a lot of other trivial edits that do get accepted.

No, there are no spelling errors. The rejection was mistakenly attributed to spelling errors.

As an aside, the intended reason was meant to be "too trivial".

No, there are no spelling errors. The rejection was bogus if the edit is not classified as too trivial.

It is not a completely comprehensive edit e.g. some grammar mistakes were left as-is, but it adds more to the question than a lot of other trivial edits that do get accepted.

No, there are no spelling errors. The rejection was bogus for the reason as stated by the rejecting user.

If the edit is not classified as too trivial, that is. And since the rejecting user re-submitted my edits as their own, that doesn't seem to apply in this case.

I admit that it is not a completely comprehensive edit e.g. some grammar mistakes were left as-is on purpose, but it adds more to the question than a lot of other trivial edits that do get accepted.