Timeline for Please don't just approve trivial suggested edits - rather improve the edit per the scope
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
73 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2021 at 17:15 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 7, 2021 at 21:18 | |||||
| Mar 7, 2021 at 16:58 | comment | added | Henke | Does this answer your question? "Too minor" edits - better to leave poor quality on the site? | |
| May 23, 2017 at 12:38 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:55 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://ell.stackexchange.com/ with https://ell.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 9:34 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackoverflow.com/ with https://meta.stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Nov 10, 2015 at 15:54 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Copy edited (e.g. ref. <http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/4645/is-it-ever-correct-to-have-a-space-before-a-question-or-exclamation-mark#comment206109_4645>).
|
| Oct 25, 2015 at 18:06 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 25, 2015 at 20:01 | |||||
| May 29, 2015 at 4:46 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | R.I.P English... | |
| May 28, 2015 at 18:08 | comment | added | The Blue Dog | This 'editor' (and all those responsible for approval) should be perma-banned from such activities for multiple crimes against the English language. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 20:52 | comment | added | The Blue Dog | And here is another one, what the hell is 'upgradation'? | |
| May 7, 2015 at 16:43 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Formatted
|
| May 7, 2015 at 16:03 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Tried my level best to remove any confusion with this edit
|
| May 7, 2015 at 3:21 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @j08691 - If it is an improvement at all. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 18:20 | comment | added | j08691 | An improvement is an improvement, no matter how big or small it may be. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 17:31 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @TankorSmash but it shouldn't be rejected. Did you even look at the original question? Are you sure the example in the question had an appropriate review for the suggested edit? The one-character edit as an addition of question mark actually made the edit even worse. Please follow the original question link, and the complete description in the question. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 16:59 | comment | added | TankorSmash | Minor edits should be fine, this isn't a great edit, but it shouldn't be rejected. If the problem is that it'll get added to the recently updated pile or something else, that's a problem with the recently edited filter. This is an example of a rather redundant edit, but many one character edits are just as valid. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:42 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @IanLewis That's the reason I added an update Update 2: Regarding the debate about the grammar | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:30 | comment | added | Ian Lewis |
In my original comment above an error crept in. In the second I meant to suggest How should I go about updating multiple records in Oracle? rather than the original garbled version using the non-word 'updation'. Apologies, as I can't edit my original.
|
|
| May 6, 2015 at 11:13 | comment | added | Ian Lewis | @LalitKumarB I would say that this post is a rant because the initial point of it is purely to complain without suggesting a proper grammatically correct solution. Additionally later on in the post there is use of exclamation marks which is another indication of ranting. The OP is correct that a single character edit (in this case) was incorrect but totally fails to note that the grammatical construction of the question title is wrong. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:57 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added link to original question
|
| May 6, 2015 at 10:53 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @TLama No problem buddy. I have added a link to the original question, just in case if someone gets confused. Probably, the 23 downvotes might be because of similar confusion. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:52 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added link to original question
|
| May 6, 2015 at 10:50 | comment | added | TLama | @Lalit, I'm sorry. I should have take a look closer (the review shows it formatted). Taking back my comment... | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:49 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @TLama Except rewording the title, there's not much to improve on that question. Did you even look at the edit history? If not, then this is how the original question looked like stackoverflow.com/revisions/30023028/1 And now look at the question. There was a scope of improvement, like formatting the code, grammar in the body, spelling mistakes. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:45 | comment | added | TLama | @Lalit, so what? What shall we do? Except rewording the title, there's not much to improve on that question. I've seen many fellows suggesting and approving edits like this (and some of them were approved just because the people were from the same country, I guess). | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:43 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Edited the title
|
| May 6, 2015 at 10:12 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @IanLewis What is ranting in this post? To ask not to approve an inappropriate edit? Rather improve the edit to genuinely review. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 9:44 | comment | added | Ian Lewis |
Surely this post is a rant. The real issue is that the grammar of the title is incorrect and that should have been the subject of the edit. From How to do multiple record updation in oracle to something akin to What's the best approach to multiple record updates in Oracle? or How should I go about updation multiple records in Oracle?
|
|
| May 6, 2015 at 9:22 | answer | added | jwg | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 6, 2015 at 6:16 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Exlained about the grammar
|
| May 6, 2015 at 6:10 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @ArtjomB. Exactly. Question mark is appropriate for How do I Perhaps the 20 downvoters don't understand this. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 6:03 | comment | added | Artjom B. | I'm not a native engish speaker, but adding a question mark to a "How to ..." title is not a grammatical improvement. It's wrong, because "How to ..." is a statement and not a question. | |
| May 5, 2015 at 11:22 | vote | accept | Lalit Kumar B | ||
| May 5, 2015 at 10:52 | comment | added | Brian Topping | There's an implication that people will follow the rules. Meta on meta adds nothing. It seems the basis of the OP is that you are annoyed by having to approve trivial edits. I can appreciate that, maybe the answer is for the system to do some basic semantic analysis and decide if there is a semantic change and only queue when there is. | |
| May 5, 2015 at 10:40 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | Strive to refine existing rules, not create new ones And why do you think I am advocating to create new rules? I am just saying that we already have the well-defined rules(rather alternatives) like improve edit, reject and edit etc. So, when it fits in the existing rules, why not judge properly and make use of the alternatives. | |
| May 5, 2015 at 10:37 | comment | added | Brian Topping | Less is better. Strive to refine existing rules, not create new ones. As such, the issue this duplicates should be improved with your comments instead of creating new issues like this one. The moment one finds themselves defending their differences, they should also be asking whether they could be integrated as a "better same". | |
| May 5, 2015 at 10:35 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Formatted
|
| May 5, 2015 at 10:34 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @BrianTopping So what is your opinion? | |
| May 5, 2015 at 10:30 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Formatted
|
| May 5, 2015 at 10:28 | comment | added | Brian Topping | Are there any exceptions, say, for when there's a full moon? The absurdity of all this is rather unbelievable. It does nothing to improve the quality of the site and distracts from more important questions. | |
| May 5, 2015 at 10:25 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Disagreement with being marked as duplicate
|
| May 5, 2015 at 10:22 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @BrianTopping It is not a misspelled word, it is adding a single-character which make sit trivial. | |
| May 5, 2015 at 10:17 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 5, 2015 at 12:27 | |||||
| May 5, 2015 at 10:07 | comment | added | Brian Topping | Saying that this isn't a duplicate because the issue it duplicates does not focus on the quantitative aspects of the change (i.e. 1 character) is a bit absurd. If a word has a single character misspelling, is that suddenly too trivial to accept an edit without additional "improvements"? | |
| May 5, 2015 at 9:00 | history | reopened |
Lalit Kumar B Maroun moooeeeep Luke Toto |
||
| May 5, 2015 at 8:25 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @moooeeeep Thanks, you could vote to reopen then. | |
| May 5, 2015 at 7:14 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Formatted
|
| May 5, 2015 at 4:56 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @moooeeeep As you suggested the possible duplicate, and that the question is now marked as duplicate, I have added an edit to the question as a disagreement. Thanks. | |
| May 5, 2015 at 4:53 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Disagreement with being marked as duplicate
|
| May 5, 2015 at 3:54 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| May 5, 2015 at 9:00 | |||||
| May 4, 2015 at 19:01 | history | closed |
moooeeeep HaveNoDisplayName user000001 Kevin Brown-Silva Luke |
Duplicate of "Too minor" edits - better to leave poor quality on the site? | |
| May 4, 2015 at 18:28 | history | edited | Zaz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
ironically trivial edit
|
| May 4, 2015 at 18:17 | comment | added | Brian | @CoolGuy Edits to the post body have to be at least 6 characters. Editing tags or titles don't have the same restriction. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 18:16 | comment | added | Brian | @NisseEngström Not just redundant, it actually breaks the grammar, because that title isn't phrased as a question. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 17:58 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 4, 2015 at 19:01 | |||||
| May 4, 2015 at 17:55 | answer | added | moooeeeep | timeline score: 19 | |
| May 4, 2015 at 17:41 | comment | added | moooeeeep | Following the guidelines given in the MSE FAQ on good question titles (meta.stackexchange.com/q/10647) the title should have received a complete rewording, instead of an additional, (imo) redundant question mark. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 17:32 | answer | added | user743382 | timeline score: 28 | |
| May 4, 2015 at 17:16 | comment | added | The Blue Dog | It should have been Reject and Edit, 'updation' is not a word. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 17:14 | comment | added | Nisse Engström | I would've chosen "Reject and Edit", or "Reject" if there was nothing else to edit. The question mark in the title is almost completely redundant. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 7:53 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added more explanation
|
| May 4, 2015 at 7:23 | history | edited | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added an update regarding the specific case when there is only single character edit and no scope of improvement.
|
| May 4, 2015 at 7:01 | comment | added | martin | @CoolGuy Well, the last editor might have changed it (which is why it was approved by Community), he still marked the edit as helpful? | |
| May 4, 2015 at 7:00 | comment | added | Spikatrix | Huh? I thought that edits( <2K rep ) has to be at least 6 or 7 characters long. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:59 | comment | added | icktoofay | I think I agree with what Maroun Maroun is getting at—I thought the only reason we were rejecting ‘trivial’ edits is if it wasn’t going far enough to improve the post. If, however, it’s nearly perfect and a ‘trivial’ edit makes it perfect, I see no reason to reject it. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:59 | answer | added | Maroun | timeline score: 15 | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:57 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @MarounMaroun No, as I said, I don't see a reason to approve a "question mark only" addition as an edit. And it is my personal opinion. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:55 | comment | added | Maroun | @LalitKumarB I agree with that specific question, but I would like to know if you would had approved it if it was the only edit that should be done to the question. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:54 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @MarounMaroun I don't see a reason to approve a "question mark only" addition as an edit. By the way, this question had a scope of improvement and a reviewer did try and improve the edit. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:52 | comment | added | Maroun | Let's assume that there's no room for more edits in that question except for the question mark. Would you still approve it? If it was me, I would differently have added the question mark, the question is.. Why should I disapprove it if I would had added it myself? (again, if it was the only edit that should be done). | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:52 | comment | added | Lalit Kumar B | @BoltClock At first, I thought to leave a comment in the question suggesting my opinion to the editor and reviewers, but then I found it important to post it here at meta. Because, next time I will post a link to redirect them here to make them understand better. | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:46 | comment | added | BoltClock Mod | You know what, I've always wondered if us mods should post more PSAs like this... | |
| May 4, 2015 at 6:41 | history | asked | Lalit Kumar B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |