Return to Answer

1. Review the differences between the original post and the suggested edit, and the edit summary above the differences.
2. If there's clear evidence that the edit makes the post worse, that it doesn't solve critical issues, or that the changes to the post or the edit summary contain Code of Conduct violations, click either Reject or Reject and Edit. For Code of Conduct violations, raising an "in need of moderator intervention" flag on the post and explaining the issue is beneficial.
3. If you aren't able to ascertain if the post is better or worse after the edit, click Skip.
4. Verify if the suggested edit is complete. If there is anything else to edit, click Improve Edit.
5. If the edit improves the post and there is nothing else that could use revision, click Approve.
   • If the buttons show as Approve and leave closed and Approve and reopen, follow the guidelines for reviewing reopen votes to determine whether the edited question should be reopened, and choose the appropriate option.
6. If an approved edit addresses comments in a way that makes them no longer needed, flag those comments as such.

1. Review the differences between the original post and the suggested edit, and the edit summary above the differences.
2. If there's clear evidence that the edit makes the post worse, that it doesn't solve critical issues, or that the changes to the post or the edit summary contain Code of Conduct violations, click either Reject or Reject and Edit. For Code of Conduct violations, raising a "looked at by a moderator" flag on the post and explaining the issue is beneficial.
3. If you aren't able to ascertain if the post is better or worse after the edit, click Skip.
4. Verify if the suggested edit is complete. If there is anything else to edit, click Improve Edit.
5. If the edit improves the post and there is nothing else that could use revision, click Approve.
   • If the buttons show as Approve and leave closed and Approve and reopen, follow the guidelines for reviewing reopen votes to determine whether the edited question should be reopened, and choose the appropriate option.
6. If an approved edit addresses comments in a way that makes them no longer needed, flag those comments as such.

On suggested edits to closed questions, the suggesting user will have the option to indicate whether their suggested edit resolves the close reason(s) and makes the question reopenable. If this option is selected, the Approve button will change to Approve and reopen and Approve and leave closed. Selecting the former option will add the question to the reopen review queue.

On suggested edits to closed questions, the suggesting user will have the option to indicate whether their suggested edit resolves the close reason(s) and makes the question reopenable. If this option is selected, the Approve button will change to Approve and reopen and Approve and leave closed. A single reviewer selecting the former option will add the question to the reopen review queue.

• Edits that introduce formatting (code, bold or italic) where such additions don’t make sense or don’t make any difference. Reject as no improvement whatsoever or causes harm, depending on the case.
• Edits that change an answer's explanation or code to a completely different alternative. If the proposed edit is an improvement of the current answer, you need to be able to ascertain so, by going to the question and verifying that the answer still has the same intended effect as before.
• Edits that modify code or correct code typos in a question, unless it clearly doesn't invalidate the question, should be rejected as clearly conflicts with author’s intent.
• Edits that plagiarize content from an external source without proper attribution. Reject as causes harm and write an explanation. (Always check for plagiarism from common sites such as Wikipedia when a tag wiki/excerpt is created!). For tag wikis and excerpts, there's a special reason copied content, so you can just go ahead and use it.
• Edits that add content that doesn’t belong (e.g., “thanks in advance”, “please help me”, “SOLVED” in the title). Reject as no improvement whatsoever.
• Edits that add irrelevant tags.
• Edits that change URLs to link to unrelated content should be rejected as spam or vandalism. The review page will automatically display the Markdown source whenever a link is changed.
• Edits which introduce text which would be a Code of Conduct violation or edit summaries which contain text which are Code of Conduct violations.

• Edits that introduce formatting (code, bold or italic) where such additions don’t make sense or don’t make any difference. Reject as no improvement whatsoever or causes harm, depending on the case.
• Edits that change an answer's explanation or code to a completely different alternative. If the proposed edit is an improvement of the current answer, you need to be able to ascertain so, by going to the question and verifying that the answer still has the same intended effect as before.
• Edits that modify code or correct code typos in a question, unless it clearly doesn't invalidate the question, should be rejected as clearly conflicts with author’s intent.
• Edits that plagiarize content from an external source without proper attribution. Reject as causes harm and write an explanation. (Always check for plagiarism from common sites such as Wikipedia when a tag wiki/excerpt is created!). For tag wikis and excerpts, there's a special reason copied content, so you can just go ahead and use it.
• Edits that add content that doesn’t belong (e.g., “thanks in advance”, “please help me”, “SOLVED” in the title). Reject as no improvement whatsoever.
• Edits that add irrelevant tags.
• Edits that change URLs to link to unrelated content should be rejected as spam or vandalism. The review page will automatically display the Markdown source whenever a link is changed.
• Edits which introduce text which would be a Code of Conduct violation or edit summaries which contain text which are Code of Conduct violations. (In this case, also flag the post being edited for moderator attention with a link to the suggested edit review, or one of your own posts if it's a tag wiki edit.)