Timeline for Should people with more than 2000 rep write an edit summary?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 15, 2014 at 0:47 | answer | added | Elder Geek | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jul 10, 2014 at 14:01 | vote | accept | Tim | ||
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:54 | answer | added | OliMod | timeline score: 22 | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:31 | comment | added | Tim | @Wilf wow - hadn't realised! :D very proud :p although a lot of that (230+) was from a not very good post (not amazing, not auful) that got a lot of traffic... | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:29 | answer | added | Jorge Castro | timeline score: 12 | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 11:37 | comment | added | Wilf |
I think the edit summary is there so you can put what the edit was and why you did it - this is useful when looking at the revision history of post, and can inform the owners of the posts you are editing of good practice and formatting - e.g use code blocks for terminal output. (well done by the way - your almost top here :D
|
|
| Jul 9, 2014 at 9:46 | history | asked | Tim | CC BY-SA 3.0 |