Timeline for What are our answer editing guidelines?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 2021 at 22:10 | history | edited | Sᴀᴍ OnᴇᴌᴀMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
update wording
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Oct 24, 2015 at 22:38 | vote | accept | amon | ||
| Oct 22, 2015 at 20:13 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackCodeReview/status/657288674602799104 | ||
| Oct 22, 2015 at 13:59 | answer | added | Mathieu GuindonMod | timeline score: 3 | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 10:33 | answer | added | rolfl | timeline score: 15 | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 10:28 | comment | added | amon | @Vogel612 That's true, the only indication is the “answered” vs. “asked” light-grey label over the user card in the review UI. But curtailing the community just because of shitty UI would seem short-sighted. I'd rather put the onus on the reviewer to consider the full context – err on the side of viewing the full post. Or skip the review if you aren't sure what you're doing. | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 10:20 | comment | added | Vogel612 | There also may be a technical difficulty here. I find it rather hard to distinguish questions, answers and tag wikis in the review queue (with tag wikis being the easy one out), so I err on the side of caution and usually apply question standards, so: no code edits | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 10:15 | comment | added | 200_success Mod | Commenting really is much better than editing. I've had erroneous edits inflicted on my answers before. I'm ashamed to admit that I've also inflicted bug-inducing edits on others before learning my lesson. | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 9:54 | answer | added | amon | timeline score: 8 | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 9:46 | comment | added | SuperBiasedMan | This is relevant largely to the original situation, but I was quick to reject when I saw this was a previously rejected edit that was being re-suggested, which is generally a bad practice. It is better to put as a comment if your edit is rejected once so that someone else can respond and determine if it's a good edit. Ideally the OP of course. | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 9:45 | comment | added | Mast Mod | Attempting a disproved edit again is a red-flag for me personally. | |
| Oct 22, 2015 at 9:37 | history | asked | amon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |