If a great answer is marred by a single typo, is it worthwhile to perfect the answer by fixing that one error? In Defense of Editing seems to say yes, but two editors rejected my suggested edit:
What is meta?
- Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
- The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
- Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates
I think this is more a case of the reviewer not looking through the edit to see why this specific typo being fixed is important to the post. In the following line, he does use
So now you have reviewers thinking you only fixed a typo (as per your message). They see the one tiny fix and immediately assume it's either too minor or invalid. I think a better thing for you would have been to explain why this typo needed to be fixed in the message, rather than just saying "fixed a typo" which isn't very descriptive.
You'll always have reviewers who don't care enough to read the context of the post being edited. You can always just submit the edit again. I'll keep an eye out for it if you do.
I do that all the time.
Good answers that have a small typo should be fixed - whether it is in code or not.
If it were just a normal typo in prose, rejecting the edit would be understandable. Low reputation users are discouraged from minor edits, due to the review work involved.
A variable called
I went ahead and edited it myself again.