4

I came across this posts review history.

If you look at it you will see that not the original author added the script but rather another user. Should something like this actually pass as a valid edit or be rejected? In this case you could assume that the person who proposed the edit was the anonymous user who originally asked the question but is there any way to verify this?

4

Rolled it back to the last edit - that should not have been approved. It made substantial changes that we don't know the OP did.

Feel like a case of

This edit deviates from the original intent of the post. Even edits that must make drastic changes should strive to preserve the goals of the post's owner.

To me. If we change/assume what the command is., the answer would be different, and there's often more than one way to do things

  • 2
    I agree; When I review an edit, unless you are trying to fix grammatical errors, I typically attempt to keep what the author actually wrote. It is very rare that I approve an edit that improves a command, because I as a reviewer can't possibly know every command, so there is no way I know the proposed edit to the command is even valid but I trust the original author of the content knew more then I did since they provided the command in the first place. – Ramhound Jan 27 '17 at 15:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .