Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

When I review suggested changes, the revision quite often would benefit from a slight alteration (typo in the altered text, for example, or inappropriate use of backticks). If I go and fix that with the Improve option, then I get the credit for all the changes. Is that fair to the person making the original improvement? Do they get any credit for the original changes? Since the Improve option is present, we must be intended to use it, but I sometimes wonder whether it is a good idea? (I don't want/need the credit for the change; I just want the best appearance for the question/answer.)

Any thoughts?

Would it be possible for the 'edit summary' to automatically include the name of the user who made the original change. For example, it might be pre-loaded with:

original comment by suggested editor (@Suggested.Editor)

leaving me to add comments about what I changed. The unparenthesized part of that is already provided; the gimmick would be adding the credit for the person who made the original change.

share|improve this question
up vote 4 down vote accepted

If it was unfair, the option wouldn't be there now, would it ;)? It's much better to make tiny incremental (even extremely minor) edits as an "improve" because

  1. The person who suggested gets their +2 and an edit credit.
  2. The question is going to get bumped anyway, so make the most of it and improve the appearance.

In addition, you get an edit credit, if you're interested in working your way to the Strunk & White or copy editor.

share|improve this answer
The key point which I had not found is "the person who suggested it gets their +2"; that was what worried me, and why I was concerned about fairness at all. If the original editor gets that benefit, I've no qualms about editing their handiwork. – Jonathan Leffler Aug 18 '11 at 17:04
The edit gets auto-approved by Community. Here's a very recent suggested edit that was auto approved because a 2k+ editor chose improve. Here's the revision, and you can see that the revisions from the original suggester and the editor have the same timestamps. – Lorem Ipsum Aug 18 '11 at 17:11
@Jonathan: Indeed, the person whose edit you're "improving" does appear as having edited the post in the revisions history and gets their +2 reputation points. In fact, the bigger problem for me (and others) is that there's no "Reject & Improve" button. – Cody Gray Aug 19 '11 at 4:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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