Timeline for Edit approval window makes no sense
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:51 | history | edited | Rinzwind | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 143 characters in body
|
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:50 | comment | added | Rinzwind | ah dang of course those audit review test got me again. I failed again _O- @JorgeCastro :D | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:50 | comment | added | Seth Mod | @Jos They're mostly just there to make sure you are paying attention. There are people who will just sit there clicking approve on every single edit as soon as they can. Those people won't notice the obvious ;-) | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:46 | comment | added | Jos | @JorgeCastro That finally dawned on me, too, after I did what Rinzwind suggested and I "passed". Not very subtle, though. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:26 | comment | added | Jorge Castro | Maybe it's an audit review test? | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 11:42 | comment | added | Wilf | this is a fairly wacky edit - where on earth they got that from I don't know... | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 11:34 | comment | added | Jos | Thank you. BTW good band name: Gnome Gnome Org and the Edits. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 11:33 | vote | accept | Jos | ||
| Jul 9, 2014 at 11:30 | comment | added | Rinzwind | Good question. I asssume this is deliberate :) But if it is a bug the edit needs to be reversed anyways so tagging it is the best course. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 11:28 | comment | added | Jos | Are you saying that this is not a bug, but a deliberate attempt to mess things up? Or is the editing system flawed in some known way? | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 11:20 | history | answered | Rinzwind | CC BY-SA 3.0 |