Timeline for How does correcting grammar and removing conversational language "deviate from original intent"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 2, 2017 at 8:31 | comment | added | Michael Kay | Editing a question to "improve" the use of language should only be done if the question is otherwise unclear to the reader, not because you prefer a different style of writing. I hate having my own posts edited to use words or phrases that I would never use in my own writing. | |
| Jun 1, 2017 at 23:44 | answer | added | jpmc26 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 1, 2017 at 23:32 | comment | added | jpmc26 | @NathanTuggy Not wrong, but disheartening. If flagging doesn't work, you may want to consider bypassing the flags and send an e-mail to staff if you can build a strong case for it. | |
| Jun 1, 2017 at 23:30 | comment | added | jpmc26 | @xDaizu And yet, none of those words are better for what the OP means. "Fixed grammar and awkward phrasing" would have sufficed as the edit description. | |
| May 31, 2017 at 20:16 | comment | added | Nathan Tuggy | Is it wrong that I knew who one of the reviewers was going to be before I opened it? I already flagged them months ago about their terrible rejections, but nothing was done. | |
| May 31, 2017 at 20:15 | comment | added | SH7890 | @xDaizu I said "for lack of a better word", because I liked that word the best, but it didn't sound the most professional. Should have said, "for lack of a word I like better" I guess. | |
| May 31, 2017 at 14:59 | comment | added | xDaizu | "The reason I edited it was to get rid of the (for lack of a better word) "child-like" language used" Lack of words? What about Colloquial? Informal? Vernacular? Conversational? Natural? Plain? Demotic? Chatty? Dialectal?.... Words, there are plenty, and I'm sure native speakers can think of even more! :) | |
| May 31, 2017 at 13:00 | comment | added | krillgar | @JoshCaswell That's why I said "severely improved upon". There was a LOT in there that needed fixed originally, but the change to "how di I make it open at 32 bit by default?" needs to be rewritten enough as well. | |
| May 31, 2017 at 11:31 | comment | added | jscs | I disagree, @krillgar; the second edit is already a substantial improvement. If it was a suggested edit, I would have accepted it but added to it. | |
| May 31, 2017 at 11:30 | history | edited | jscs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
More specific title and link text.
|
| May 31, 2017 at 11:30 | comment | added | krillgar | @JoshCaswell Second as well, or at least severely improved upon. | |
| May 31, 2017 at 11:26 | comment | added | jscs | The third edit to that question should have been rejected (if that was possible). | |
| May 31, 2017 at 10:07 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Active reading. [<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/to_each_his_own#Proverb>] - or should it be "to each his own"?.
|
| May 31, 2017 at 9:42 | vote | accept | SH7890 | ||
| May 31, 2017 at 6:11 | comment | added | Mr Lister | The review looks like an audit at first sight. | |
| May 31, 2017 at 5:25 | history | edited | Jonathan Leffler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improve title
|
| May 31, 2017 at 5:16 | history | edited | Pang |
Added 'suggested-edits' tag.
|
|
| May 31, 2017 at 5:06 | answer | added | Tas | timeline score: 83 | |
| May 30, 2017 at 19:50 | history | edited | Braiam |
edited tags
|
|
| May 30, 2017 at 19:37 | comment | added | NathanOliver | I would have approved it. Interestingly, one of the people who rejected your edit has approved 579 edit suggestions and rejected 1836 edit suggestions. Makes me think they might be too picky or they just skip the easy approves and look for suggestion to reject. | |
| May 30, 2017 at 19:33 | history | asked | SH7890 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |