What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

In the process of rejecting a suggested edit, a reason must now be given (copied content, invalid edit, radical change, too minor, or vandalism).

If we select vandalism for the reason, does this mark the post in any way to be checked by a mod? Should this be something that is reported?

The particular case that I'm thinking of was a tag wiki edit so, it can't really be flagged. Whether that example is actually vandalism is perhaps up for debate, as I suppose it could have been a misunderstanding, but I ask this for the generic case where there is no question of the intent of the editor.

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 11 down vote accepted

No, there is no automatic flagging of any sort triggered by using the vandalism edit rejection reason. For otherwise isolated incidents, it isn't entirely necessary to alert the moderators, either. It's a bit like spam flags - we get alerted if the spam flags are live and so the post is still around, but once you've blasted the post to smithereens with enough spam flags, we no longer get alerted. This is because when the post has been obliterated, the problem is solved. Same with rejection - if the rejection goes through, the vandalizing edit is eradicated and so the spam is already handled.

Now, if a user was consistently providing a series of vandalizing edits, that would be a fine time to flag for moderator attention - we may have to step in and take stronger measures. If they're editing a normal post, you should flag it directly - otherwise, flag down a post of theirs or a post of your own and simply include relevant links to at least one such suggested edit in your custom reason.

share|improve this answer
    
I guess it would be tough to know if a user was consistently attempting to vandalize, then, unless you saw a bunch of rejections in a row. –  jonsca Oct 14 '11 at 12:30
    
As far as I know, if someone consistently gets their suggested edits rejected, they get blocked from the queue automatically anyway. –  lunboks Oct 14 '11 at 12:32
    
@lunboks I think that is a temporary 7 day lockout from editing, though. It's not long term. I don't think we should put users that perhaps miss a few items in a post and get an edit rejected in the same boat as those who are malicious. –  jonsca Oct 14 '11 at 12:34
2  
@jonsca At the bottom of any suggested edit link is the "Editor Stats" which tells you about the latest bunch of suggested edits from that particular editor. In this scenario, for example, you can notice that the user in question tried again, though the links used were different for the second round. –  Grace Note Oct 14 '11 at 12:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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