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

Possible Duplicate:
Minor edit of posts: allow typo correction for low-rep users

I often come across posts containing really irritating typos, but the post is otherwise ok.

This has been asked before in different forms (eg here), but previous requests have included things like a tick-box for minor edits that would automatically fill out the comment box with 'minor edit/typo'.

I would like to suggest a modification of the existing edit function so that edits below a certain threshold (say 5 characters?) are automatically applied without

  • prompting for a comment
  • requiring approval
  • bumping the question
  • putting the 'last edited by' box on the post
  • contributing to the number of edits made by a user
  • gaining reputation

I know some people will think this doesn't matter and isn't worth the effort to implement, but typos/grammatical errors can throw off a fluent reader of a language quite badly. This would also allow for fixing tiny but vitally important errors in code.

Perhaps there could also be an acknowledge button 'are you sure there is nothing else to fix?' to avoid people submitting a tiny edit accidentally.

Edit: I do not believe this to be an exact duplicate, though if others disagree on the utility of the suggestion that is fine. But to make it clear, I suggest this to be a modification of the existing edit function, available to users with sufficient rep to do normal edits, which would cut out some of the effects of editing for very minor edits only to avoid spamming the board or getting 'too minor; reject' reviews.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Toon Krijthe, BinaryMisfit, Bo Persson, hims056, ThiefMaster Nov 28 '12 at 11:20

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

"This would also allow for fixing tiny but vitally important errors in code."... that does not really sound like a good idea. – Bart Nov 28 '12 at 9:46
I suspect that most people will object on the grounds that unverified edits are dangerous rather than not wanting grammar and spelling corrected. – ben is uǝq backwards Nov 28 '12 at 9:47
@Ben I appreciate that, which is why I suggested limiting it to a very small number of characters. I'm not sure how much damage could be done within such a limit. – jam Nov 28 '12 at 9:50
Especially code edits are something one might better avoid. Certainly in questions. So that imho is not a great support case for what you propose. That said, we have a great amount of editors. And with enough reputation you will be able to make the edits you propose anyway. So I don't really see a need for this. – Bart Nov 28 '12 at 9:55
If we allow multiple, unreviewed 10 character edits from new users, that would likely be a great spam magnet. – Bo Persson Nov 28 '12 at 10:38
@BoPersson Updated OP to make it clearer that is not what I was suggesting. – jam Nov 28 '12 at 14:24

I don't think that hiding the edit done by a user without enough reputation to edit any post is the right thing to do.

Leaving out the fact I don't see a reason for which editing any post should not be a privilege users gain, the proposed feature request would make a difference between users with the privilege of editing any post, for which even a single character edit would bump the question to the front page, and users without the privilege of editing any post, for which a 10-character edit would not bump the question.

If the suggestion applies to every user who makes a minor edit, or only to the users who has the privilege of editing any post who make a minor edit, I still think it is not what I would want to see happening. Even if I have the privilege of editing any post, I would not like if my edits are not be visible in someway. (This is what would happen if "last edited by" is not changed, and the question is not bumped on the front page.) There is still the possibility my edit is not correct, and I want other users to catch my edit, and correct it when it is wrong.

share|improve this answer
Sorry, my post may not have been clear enough but this is not what I was suggesting at all. I intended this to be a modification of the existing edit function so that edits of less than 5 chars from users already able to do edits do not spam the board with bumped questions. – jam Nov 28 '12 at 14:19
Your question says: "I would like to suggest an 'automatic' minor edit function, where edits below a certain threshold (say 5 characters?) from users above a minimum rep threshold are automatically applied without prompting for a comment, requiring approval, bumping the question, putting the 'last edited by' box on the post, […]." If the question is not bumped, the "last edited by" field is not changed, and the edit doesn't require approval, then the edit is barely being noticed. – kiamlaluno Nov 28 '12 at 14:25
I'm not sure I follow your comment sorry. I have updated the OP, does that make my intent clearer? – jam Nov 28 '12 at 14:29
The only reason an edit is noticed from other users is that the question is bumped to the front page, and "last edit by" is updated with the username of who edited the post. If the question is not bumped on front page, and "last edit by" is not changed, there would be few users who notice the edit, and that is not what I think desirable. Probably the author of the post would be notified of the edit, but that would mean just a user out of all the existing users would notice the edit. – kiamlaluno Nov 28 '12 at 14:42
For trivial typo corrections, I don't believe it matters whether people notice it has been corrected? It's more for people who read the post from then on, IMO. I thought allowing trusted users to do minor house-keeping without disrupting the normal functioning of the site could be desirable. Obviously the majority disagrees with me, but I felt it worth suggesting. – jam Nov 28 '12 at 14:50
Somebody still needs to check if the edit was fixing a typo, or it was completely wrong. Who made the edit cannot be the only one judging the edit. The fact the edit bumps the question, or changes the name shown for "last edit by" has not stopped users from correcting typos, so far. – kiamlaluno Nov 28 '12 at 14:56
In my experience, the desire to correct single character typos mostly goes away when increased rep gets you access to review queues with posts having much morse problems... – Bo Persson Nov 28 '12 at 16:10

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