32

I did a search on Meta for this, but didn't find a concrete answer. I have found very diverse opinions instead.

The situation happens when I'm presented with a Suggested Edit review, and I see that the edit is correct and valid. However, it's an edit to a question that should be flagged for deletion rather than edited.

I'm new at approving edits so not sure what the correct behavior is. Right now, I'm skipping the edits because I don't know what to do, but I'd like to know exactly what to do, and in case of rejection, which option to choose. Should I use "Invalid Edit"? Should I only care about the edit and let other people handle the rejection or approval of the question or answer?

In any case, any help would be greatly appreciated

8
  • 6
    It should be deleted doesn't mean that it will be deleted. Commented Sep 1, 2014 at 18:03
  • 19
    If nothing else improving formatting, spelling and grammar of the post should help make it easier for other reviewers to determine if the post should be deleted. Commented Sep 1, 2014 at 18:08
  • @user000001 you're correct, what I mean is if I consider the post SHOULD be deleted. Since I'm required to do this, my subjectiveness comes in play, and that's a given. But I'm wondering more about the objective part rather than the subjective side of things Commented Sep 1, 2014 at 18:25
  • 3
    @Fabio yes what I meant is that since the post could stay around anyway, improving it is not necessarily futile. Commented Sep 1, 2014 at 18:27
  • 1
    You should certainly flag the bad posts, or cast a close vote once you have the privilege. Beyond that, I've partly been wondering as well. What I've mostly done so far is skip the edit review if the question clearly looks like a lost cause. If the question isn't that bad, and it's a really good and comprehensive edit, I would be more inclined to approve the edit anyway. Commented Sep 1, 2014 at 19:20
  • 5
    I normally would reject those edits. In the long run it makes not much difference though. If the post is deleted then the +2 from the approved edit is lost anyway. Commented Sep 1, 2014 at 22:09
  • 5
    Overmeta: Is “don't polish turds” a valid edit rejection reason? and some related questions. Commented Sep 2, 2014 at 1:46
  • 3
    If it’s useful, approve, please. Commented Sep 3, 2014 at 0:49

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
12

Pointless edits should be rejected.

An edit that doesn't improve a low-quality post to the point that it no longer needs to be deleted is too minor. It's pointless.

3
  • 6
    i find it funny that this answer was edited to change the wording Commented Sep 2, 2014 at 17:02
  • @pnuts (i) Great! (ii) Review is a lot about VLQ and flagging, not that has anything to do with this. (iii) No, just delete. Commented Sep 3, 2014 at 8:10
  • (i) No. (ii) Oh, that was a typo. But reviewing VLQ flags and CVs is a huge part of review. Still not seeing the relevance of it tho. (iii) Everybody can flag VLQ/NAA, I don't see how editing helps. Commented Sep 3, 2014 at 9:43

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.