2

I do a lot of editing.

I sincerely seek the balance between being respectful to the post and its poster, and making the post readable and understandable. It sometimes takes a lot of time, if I doubt, I lookup information on the subject to exclude misinterpretation.

From the people who review my review I excpect that they at least READ the edit. That is why this makes me furious:

I ran into this post on bad blocks. Two of the most experienced people had been looking into it, asking for the output of dmesg | tail. The OP returned it in a comment, mentioning he did not know how to put it into his question in an appropriate format. I did it for him.

The edit was rejected by two out of three:

This edit is incorrect or an attempt to reply to or comment on the existing post

Excuse me? Did you even look at the post?

It was not the first time this week that a perfectly decent edit was (nearly) rejected. Last time because of the same reason, while I literally did not add or remove any of the post's meaning.

As mentioned, I do my edits seriously and with a conscience. If I make a mistake, I am on the edge or an edit is too minor, perfect! I would agree. But if an edit is rejected because of bad reading by reviewers; please don't waste my time with superficial reviews.

6
  • 1
    Why I'm not surprised
    – Braiam
    Commented Apr 16, 2014 at 21:50
  • In general I think people are rejecting minor edits for no reason. Here's a good one: askubuntu.com/review/suggested-edits/248373
    – Jorge Castro
    Commented Apr 16, 2014 at 22:18
  • 3
    @JorgeCastro Good what? That doesn't appear to be a good edit to me.
    – Seth Mod
    Commented Apr 16, 2014 at 22:49
  • 2
    @JorgeCastro that was in a question, at could be perfectly the cause of OP problems. I wouldn't "fix it".
    – Braiam
    Commented Apr 17, 2014 at 0:24
  • 1
    There is something that I didn't know until I started reviewing edits myself: reviewers see only the post and the suggested edit, they don't see the comments that you incorporated.
    – guntbert
    Commented Apr 17, 2014 at 20:42
  • @guntbert That makes it indeed a bit more nuanced than how I looked at it yesterday. Even many first posts / late answers (my area so far :)) make a different impression if they are separated from their own setting.
    – Jacob Vlijm
    Commented Apr 17, 2014 at 21:02

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
5

I'm not surprised your edit was rejected, because you didn't explain where you got the output from.

By looking at it, how do we know whose output that is? I've seen a good many edits by people with the same problem attempting to add their output to someone else's question. I can very well understand how this got rejected.

When submitting an edit, make sure the edit summery contains all the information a review needs to review the edit. Not everyone is going to check the question for information they need to review your edit, and they shouldn't have to.

So ultimately, your edit was useful, but because it was a potentially confusing edit and your summery didn't contain the clarification information necessary to approve the edit it got rejected.

Always provide your motivation and source of information on more substantial edits.

2
  • In general: good point, and I will make more work of my summaries. However, in this particular case: IF you have your mind on the job, how can you think of something else than that this had to be an output from OP.
    – Jacob Vlijm
    Commented Apr 17, 2014 at 5:17
  • Also @Dan As a follow up, now I am in "the other room", I must say I can understand how my edit was rejected then. Even after not too many reviews, it is amazing to see the "free style" of editing in some cases, seemingly ignoring the fact that someone else took the effort to write the post. Good chance I would reject my own edit now if it was presented without appropriate edit notes.
    – Jacob Vlijm
    Commented May 8, 2014 at 7:35
2

This is how I review edits myself.

I check the difference between the two edits, if it is just a formatting fix, or few spelling fixes, etc., I accept it, or improve it.

If something in the content was changed, I check the summary of the edit. If it it doesn't explain why the extra info was added, I would most likely reject it.

As Seth said, if you see the amount of extra information that are added to questions with no apparent reasons on a frequent basis, it becomes a habit to reject it directly. It's just that it gets frustrating after a while, if we had to go to each post to check the comments on the posts.
And speaking of comments, during the edit review, you cannot see any of the comments on the post.

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .