0

I came across this edit in the suggested edit review queue. Original was from user utsav, edit from user3782114. Strange.

It could be someone mistakingly using a new account (in which case I'd approve), but if it is from an actually different user using the question for his own (similar, but not necessarily equal) issue, I would reject the edit as 'clearly conflicts with author's intent'.

There is just no way of knowing, so I have skipped the review.

Recommendations?

  • 1
    utsav had an unregistered account, the second user is the same as the first but then registered it – Sathyajith Bhat Dec 31 '14 at 8:51
0

These do come up occasionally. This is how I handle it (comments/suggestions welcomed).

I start with general rules that are independent of who the author is:

  • If it is non-substantive edits that improve the question, I accept them.

  • If they are substantive edits and I can't validate that they are correct, I skip them.

  • If they are substantive and correct, it depends on the scope. If they fix technical typos, I usually leave them as replacement text. If they apply only to certain cases, like newer versions of the software, or pretty much anything of a bigger scope, I re-edit if necessary to make it supplemental text. I add attribution so it is clear that they are not the original author's words. The author can always re-edit to incorporate the change.

  • If a substantive edit is from an anonymous poster, it gets a lot of scrutiny. I usually reject it unless there is clear and convincing evidence that it is correct, in which case, I follow the above guidelines.

If the edit under a different username appears to be (or claims or implies to be), from the OP, I add to the above guidelines.

  • If it is apparent or probable that it is the same author (like that question), and the edit doesn't conflict, I'll accept the edit as if it's from the OP, and leave a comment on the question alerting the author to the potential need to roll it back and advising them to get the accounts consolidated.

  • If I'm not confident that it's from the same author, I treat it like any other edit but add a comment to the question as above.

  • If the edit conflicts with the original wording and the poster implies that he is the OP, I generally reject it and add a comment that those kinds of changes need to be done under the original user name.

  • In this case it was a good edit - additional info narrowing the issue down. Next time I will edit and attribute. Thanks for the tip of adding a commment suggesting to consolidate. – Jan Doggen Jan 1 '15 at 12:48

You must log in to answer this question.

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