Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

14
  • 7
    Note that 2 reviewers is only true for Stack Overflow. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:06
  • 3
    @YannisRizos: Indeed, but I'd be more than annoyed if someone started adding code-tags to random words on Bicycles. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:07
  • 1
    People who do it thinking it's a good way to emphasize, will do it regardless if they are on Bicycles, or, don't know, Biblical Hermeneutics, Gaming, etc. But I'm more thinking of Programmers, were edits are approved by one user and we have valid uses for code blocks. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:10
  • 2
    @YannisRizos: I guess the easiest thing to do there would be to increase the number of votes needed for it to be approved? Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:11
  • 1
    I agree that the approvers are a problem, but getting more eyes isn't realistic when we're struggling to keep up with the queue. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:12
  • 4
    You all realize backticks were just an example of one kind of bad edit, right? Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:13
  • @Gilles: If it's any consolation, controversial edits are only a small percentage (6.4%, based on last months #) of the total. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:15
  • 1
    @BoltClock'saUnicorn You realize that focusing on the tree and completely ignoring the forest is what MSO is about, right? ;P Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:16
  • @BoltClocksaUnicorn: Indeed. I was just re-enforcing the point. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:16
  • 3
    @Matt I wonder how many edits were unanimously wrongly rejected/approved. I should go through a statistical sample. When I have the time, in six to eight eons. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:17
  • 3
    @Yannis Rizos: I knew that. I was just performing a counter-productive sanity check on the insane people of Meta. Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 19:19
  • 20
    "The fact that 2 reviewers have voted to approve the edit should (note, should) indicate that the edit is acceptable." Or it could indicate 2 reviewers have no clue what they're doing and/or are gaming for badges and should be banned from accepting edits. Commented Nov 16, 2012 at 18:07
  • 1
    What what might be the impact if after an approval, there were a limited amount of time during which reject votes could still affect the result? Commented May 24, 2014 at 16:44
  • 1
    I agree, it may lead to abuse. My suggestion is to implement this feature request only for rollbacks made my the OP or a moderator (who still have a binding vote when reviewing suggested edits), and leave rollbacks as they are for normal 2K users. Commented Mar 1, 2017 at 21:43