4
$\begingroup$

An edit I proposed was turned down with this explanation: "edit did not correct critical issues with the post". After revisiting the post, I saw that the individual (other user listed as "community") who felt my edit was not beneficial, changed only the way in which a link was displayed and deleted the word "blender", but included the edits I made.

If you look closely, you can see we both missed correcting the last word of the post. I feel this speaks to a need of leniency for rejected edits, as even reviewers miss mistakes.

My edit:

My edit

Other user's edit:

Other user's edit

Without the edits I made, the question is uncomfortable to read. If I hadn't caught the mistakes, the question would have had less traffic, since the natural inclination is to steer away from an uncomfortable read.

Since both edits are useful, wouldn't it make most sense to award partial credit? Maybe one point instead of two? Or perhaps, instead of a rejected edit: the edit is accepted and no points are awarded, but the user receives a warning with synthetic rejection reason, and a link to guidelines? In this way, the user is not discouraged but learns for next time.

In addition, I almost edited the post to include a word-link as well, but decided against it since I felt my edit might be rejected for changing redundant features. This brings me to my second question:

Prior to editing, I did a search to find some guidelines, (since I couldn't find any on my home page), and gathered an idea of beneficial editing. However, none of the pages I read suggested changing the way in which a link is displayed. I've edited over a dozen questions since then, and every time I missed seeing the helpful sidebar (displayed while editing) with guidelines for editing. I now realize this is because my attention is immediately drawn to the post in need of editing, since my mind is holding the editing ideas as the page loads.

To remedy this, wouldn't it make most sense to have a "Guidelines for Editing" page which can be accessed on a user's homepage? I feel not everyone will know to look for the sidebar while editing, as it did not occur to me.

My primary question is my first question though, since I feel not all users would struggle with noticing the sidebar while editing.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Note that users with the privilege to review edits do not receive reputation upon editing. So it's not especially in their interest to reject and re-edit suggested edits. $\endgroup$ – gandalf3 Apr 10 '16 at 22:11
  • $\begingroup$ The number of "points". Points are called reputation $\endgroup$ – gandalf3 Apr 10 '16 at 22:22
  • $\begingroup$ So one can assume that an editing user with a reputation of at least 2000, does not gain reputation points for their edit? It might be helpful to include that in the privilege to review edits page. $\endgroup$ – 360ueck Apr 10 '16 at 22:27
  • $\begingroup$ That's correct (there are a couple of other considerations as well) $\endgroup$ – gandalf3 Apr 10 '16 at 22:36
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. I've edited my post to reflect this info. $\endgroup$ – 360ueck Apr 10 '16 at 23:51
5
$\begingroup$

I'm the one who reviewed your edit, and I will chalk it up to a mistake.

I think what I did was when switching back and forth between the markdown and normal views (in the review page), and looking at the question (something I do when reviewing) and the review page; I got confused at what was your edit was and what the old question was. I recall after hitting the "reject and edit" button that it did not look quite as I expected it should.

I apparently then proceeded to correct the post putting back many of the same changes you made, and I had just seen. ("reject and edit" rejects your edit and then opens up a place to edit the question)

Here is the revision history for the question we are discussing. If you click on the "side-by-side markdown" button, you will see I actually did cahnge a bit more then the inline view makes it appear.

As for the rep, sorry this edit review was my bad. But don't worry you will gain way more then 2 rep!

Keep up the good edits! (and I'll be more careful reviewing them)

I like your "Guidelines for Editing" idea. Maybe we can get something like that up on the meta.


Here are a few tips on editing. (and things that can be changed in nearly every post)

  • good image alt text. That is the text that describes what the image is, it goes where the "enter image description here" text is usually in images in questions. ![enter image description here][1] is.
  • wiki links, back around Jan of 2015 blender switched from using the wiki, to the new manual system. That broke nearly all the wiki links, and many on BSE are still broken.
  • This is a little delicate, but cutting out useless info (this includes things like "thanks" at the end). Say there is a whole paragraph that adds nothing to the question, (we don't really need to know that somebody spent all week trying to figure out their problem) then delete it.
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, that helps clear my uncertainty. The additional editing tips are useful, i'm still trying to navigate the "cutting out useless info." $\endgroup$ – 360ueck Apr 13 '16 at 0:35

You must log in to answer this question.

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