Guidelines for reviewing Suggested Edits

Basic workflow

Before starting, try to set filters (little link on the top of the screen) so that you are shown edits on topics you know something about. It's more easy and faster to evaluate edits to those posts.

1. Review the differences between the original post and the suggested edit, and the edit summary above the differences.
2. If you aren't able to ascertain if the post is better or worse after the edit, click Skip.
3. If the edit improves the post, click Approve.
4. Verify if the suggested edit is complete. If there is anything else to edit, click Improve Edit.
5. If there's clear evidence that the edit makes the post worse or that it doesn't solve critical issues click either Reject or Reject and Edit.

Common reasons to Approve

• Edits that attempt to add clarification to an answer, like “this doesn’t work in Windows 8”, or addendums to the post should be approved.
• Edits that fix grammatical mistakes or make the post easier to understand by others.
• Edits that include additional information only found in comments.
• Edits that include updates as the post ages, or correct minor mistakes.
• Edits that add relevant resources or links.

Common reasons to Reject

• 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.

Explicitly check URL changes: This is an easy way to sneak spam in, so do not assume a link update is correct without verifying. If any link is changed, the system will automatically show the Markdown view by default. Note, however, to check to ensure that the formatting is correct by viewing the rendered output.

Check the edit summary before rejecting: Occasionally a poster has provided information in a comment or other answer that cannot be seen on the edit review screen, and the editor is bringing that content into the post. This should be mentioned in the edit summary. You can click the question link (it’s probably best to open it in a new tab) to see the full context.

It helps if you know what the post is about: Sometimes an edit fixes a minor mistakes that was obviously hand-typed by the answerer (typos in questions should only be fixed if that doesn't invalidate the question). It’s a challenge to know the difference between a typo-fix and an actual change if you don’t know about the topic or context of the post. For example, in Perl, a single character can change the entire meaning of a line. In C++, changing == to = can also have a dramatic impact. You don’t always need to understand the content of an edit to review it, since suggested edits could be about changing the format without changing the meaning, but if you are not sure, skip the edit and leave it for someone who knows.

For specifics about reviewing tag wiki edits, see this answer to How do I review tag wiki edits for new tags?.

Be aware that if the post is community-wiki, the author waives authorship and changing the meaning isn't as important as improving the post.