What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 133 Stack Exchange communities.

I'm learning about meteor and going through StackOverflow questions.

A number of questions have been closed in April 2012, because meteor was in its infancy, and the questions seemed off-topic. However, the meteor team advises using StackOverflow, and indeed, later questions have been left alone.

Some of these questions had answers that were correct at the time, but are now incorrect (e.g. "Is there a Windows port" - a Windows port was launched in August). A new user may stumble upon these answers, and learn an inaccurate state of matters. I cannot post new, correct, answers, because the questions are closed.

I've attempted to fix these issues; however all my recent edits have been rejected with reasons that immediately appear uninformed (such as This edit introduces spam, defaces the post in some way, or is otherwise inappropriate. - when I linked to the Windows port, or This edit changes too much in the original post; the original meaning or intent of the post would be lost. - well, duh, the original answer is now wrong).

Please review these edits, and kindly advise the moderators of the situation.

Note: I've read My edit was rejected for incorrect (and seemingly random) reasons. How do I justify and resubmit it without starting a little edit fight?, but I can't resubmit any edits, because I was banned for having too many rejected edits.

share|improve this question
    
Related: Edit old answer and obsolete methods - Bart's answer there is excellent. –  Yannis Oct 7 '12 at 5:42

1 Answer 1

Your edits are problematic. Let's take a closer look at them:

  • http://stackoverflow.com/review-beta/suggested-edits/765765

    You are completely changing the answer. I get that your intention is to update it, but why completely remove the old answer? Better yet, why not just post an answer of your own?

  • http://stackoverflow.com/review-beta/suggested-edits/765763

    Same edit, on a different answer to the question, again removing the original answer. Had those two edits been accepted, we'd have two identical answers.

  • http://stackoverflow.com/review-beta/suggested-edits/765761

    Same edit, on a different answer to the question, but this time you didn't completely change the answer (that's something, I guess).

  • http://stackoverflow.com/review-beta/suggested-edits/765746

    No, please don't do that. Edits are supposed to fix posts, and not so much to add information to them. You are adding a tutorial to the answer, but had that edit been accepted it would appear as if the original poster of the answer was recommending the tutorial, and we have absolutely no idea if that's the case. Again, why didn't you post your own answer, or a comment to the question?

  • http://stackoverflow.com/review-beta/suggested-edits/765737

    This one is tricky, the original answer is only a quote from Meteor's FAQ, and since the FAQ was updated, I guess your edit makes some sense. Personally, I'd avoid that edit, and post a comment to the answer informing the answerer that the FAQ was updated and that they should update their answer. Or, I'd go for the cheap rep and post an answer of my own.

In all your edit suggestions you are adding links, that are not spam, but since your edits were very close to each other and mostly incorrect, you can't really blame the reviewers for thinking there was something fishy going on. There isn't any malintent in your edits, obviously, but that doesn't mean they should have been accepted.

Please thoroughly review our editing guidelines, as outlined in the "Edit questions and answers" privilege page. Always respect the original author and avoid changing the original meaning or intent of posts, especially answers. The edit ban is not permanent (afaik), you'll be able to suggest edits again at some point, but please be a little bit more careful with your edits in the future.


Just a note, since a few of the questions you've been editing are closed and you can't add new answers: If you feel they should be re-opened, flag them for moderation attention and clearly explain why they should be, if not, you can still comment and ask answerers to update their obsolete answers.

share|improve this answer
2  
The OP can't add new answers : " A new user may stumble upon these answers, and learn an inaccurate state of matters. I cannot post new, correct, answers, because the questions are closed" and " A number of questions have been closed in April 2012, because meteor was in its infancy, and the questions seemed off-topic.". Would is be sensible for someone to revisit some of these questions and re-open those which are with hindsight, both on-topic and of satisfactory quality? The OP would then be able to follow your "post new answers instead of editing" advice. –  AndrewC Oct 7 '12 at 8:47
1  
@AndrewC The first question, the one where the first three edits I mentioned were made, is open. I don't know what goes on in the [meteor] tag, but it certainly sounds that at least some of its closed questions should be closely examined, and perhaps re-opened. –  Yannis Oct 7 '12 at 11:05
    
(Thanks. Sorry for not checking.) I checked the top meteor users and I count only four that could cast a reopen vote, only one of whom answered a question this month. I don't think the meteor subcommunity can fix these answers itself. –  AndrewC Oct 7 '12 at 14:02
2  
@AndrewC I took a quick glance at the tag, and it seems there are only 13 closed questions from a total of 497 and most of the closed ones aren't really a good fit for Stack Overflow. Just a quick glance mind you, but I don't see anything in there that would justify further examination. The SO meteor community will grow naturally, as meteor itself grows, and I think any such issues will be taken care of in due time. –  Yannis Oct 7 '12 at 20:52
1  
Oh you're right, yes. Most of them are not of good quality. Thanks for taking the trouble to look into it. The great giant SO cares. Justice is served. –  AndrewC Oct 7 '12 at 21:15
    
I've flagged all the closed questions for re-opening, yet none has been reopened. If I post a new answer, it will have 0 votes, and there are a few incorrect answers above with more votes, so my answer won't solve much. I'm still banned for 7 days simply because I wanted to make things right. This may be the letter of the SO rules, but is it the spirit? Are you happy with the outcome? –  Dan Dascalescu Oct 7 '12 at 22:43
1  
@DanDascalescu As I've already mentioned, the closed questions don't seem like good candidates for re-opening. That said my opinion on the matter doesn't mean much, if you feel they should be re-opened, you could post another Meta question about them, clearly explaining why they should be re-opened. If you post new answers, and they are good, they will eventually get upvoted, it won't be immediate, but what's the rush? Lastly, I'm not happy you were edit banned, but I disagree your edits were rejected because of some rule, and I've tried to explain the spirit in my answer. –  Yannis Oct 7 '12 at 22:49
    
I should "be a little bit more careful with your edits in the future"? How about the reviewers be a little more careful about how they wield their power? Maybe suggest they actually be knowledgeable of the topic they've reviewing? Does it matter that I'm experienced in Wikignoming myself, being a Wikipedia editor since 2006, with over 1000 edits? Apparently it doesn't, because Wikipedia reputation doesn't carry over to Stack Exchange. –  Dan Dascalescu Oct 7 '12 at 22:50
    
@DanDascalescu This, however, is not Wikipedia. I've tried to explain why in my opinion your edits were invalid, and apparently the community seems to agree with me. You don't have to agree with me, obviously, and I don't really have to convince you of anything, I only tried to explain, and only because I felt the intent behind your edits was good. If you disagree with my answer, any part of it, just downvote it. –  Yannis Oct 7 '12 at 22:52
    
I just think the current policies could be improved: 1) suggest/mandate that the reviewed pass on questions they don't have specific expertise in; 2) review the guidelines that encourage keeping incorrect answers on the site 3) in this particular case, unban me, since as you mentioned, I had no malintent, and I've been the victim of less than careful reviewers. –  Dan Dascalescu Oct 7 '12 at 23:07
    
@DanDascalescu I can't unban you, and any suggestions you might have would be more appropriate as separate Meta posts. Just a note, I did say that you had no malintent, but I never said that you were a victim of less than careful reviewers, quite the opposite. The fact that your intentions were good doesn't necessarily mean your edits were valid. –  Yannis Oct 7 '12 at 23:12

You must log in to answer this question.

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