3
$\begingroup$

From the help center:

Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged - try to make the post significantly better when you edit, correcting all problems that you observe.

I often run across suggested edits in the review queue which seem quite trivial, often just correcting one or two punctuation or spelling mistakes. Sometimes the suggested edits aren't even fixing anything technically wrong, just adding a tiny word or something that makes it read better.

From the above quote it seems obvious that these are discouraged. But that doesn't say anything about what to do with these types of edits pop up in the review queue. Should I approve them?

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

I typically approve these if I don't see any other problems with the post.
I like to rate the triviality of an edit proportionally to the number of things the edit could potentially fix.

For example, if the post is riddled with typos grammar errors, poor tag choices, unhelpful titles, etc. and the edit corrects a tiny punctuation mistake, then I would likely reject and edit.

If the post has a couple grammar errors and "help: blender question" for a title, and the suggested edit fixes the grammar issues, then I would pick improve edit.

On whole I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the editor. If an incomplete edit touches on only a few small issues, yet fixes them the same way I would likely fix them, and it would take me longer than e.g. 1 second to type up the same thing, then I'll choose improve edit.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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