What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 129 Stack Exchange communities.

I made a much necessary cleanup on a very popular CSS question (46k+ views).

It was a big edit but nevertheless got approved by three users. Then a fourth user rolled back to the previous low-quality version.


How can I proceed? Is it possible to ask a moderator to restore my edit? Or should I copy-paste and re-submit my edit?

share|improve this question
Why did you move code away from SO and into jsfiddle? –  Bart Jan 13 '13 at 0:05
There are loads of robo-reviewers in the suggested edit queue unfortunately. The fact that your edit was approved doesn't make it a correct edit. –  Martijn Pieters Jan 13 '13 at 0:08
@Bart The full code was illustrative. The code that matters to the question is included in the post. Moving illustrative code to jsFiddle is better than having searchers copying code from the OP themselves. Also makes the question cleaner. –  caiosm1005 Jan 13 '13 at 0:12
No, no, no. Add the JSFiddle link, but leave the code alone. Posts should be self-contained and not rely on external content. And don't "improve code" as your edit message suggests. That is an even bigger no no. –  Bart Jan 13 '13 at 0:14
@Bart I can understand that. But what about code indentation, is that allowed to be edited? –  caiosm1005 Jan 13 '13 at 0:15
If it is for a language for which code indentation makes no functional difference, then I would have no problem with that. But just indentation. No brackets, no other characters. –  Bart Jan 13 '13 at 0:16
@caiosm1005 - I agree with Bart. Adding indentation is fine. Changing code is absolutely unacceptable, as is moving code out of a question and into a fiddle; ideally we want the question to be as self-contained as possible, and not require clicking to an external site to see the code. –  Adam Rackis Jan 13 '13 at 0:19
@AdamRackis That's a common sense I failed to realize. Shouldn't this be added as a notice somewhere on the editing layout? That would be helpful IMO –  caiosm1005 Jan 13 '13 at 0:23
@caiosm1005 - I would say not. Too many notices like that can clutter the site. The real solution is to have better reviewers in the queue. It's amazing that 3 3K users approved your edit. –  Adam Rackis Jan 13 '13 at 0:25
@AdamRackis I see. Hence I thought my edit was perfectly fine. –  caiosm1005 Jan 13 '13 at 0:25
@caiosm1005 There is in fact already a notice in place for users who try to ask a question without code, but containing a jsFiddle link. They are kindly requested to include their code. –  Bart Jan 13 '13 at 0:26
And @caiosm1005 I've said this before in other situations, but you now get the flack for this edit, while in all honesty it should have simply been caught by the reviewers. It's a frustrating problem, but at least I hope that our clarifications make sense to you. –  Bart Jan 13 '13 at 0:32
@Bart I've submitted another edit following your advice. In all honesty I think leaving not-related-to-the-question bits of code might confuse CSS beginners, but I can perfectly understand the point you made. –  caiosm1005 Jan 13 '13 at 0:42

1 Answer 1

up vote 11 down vote accepted

Your edit was approved, but wrongly so in my opinion.

You removed the full code as posted by the OP and replaced it with a jsFiddle link. And you actually modified other parts of the code. (the .jqbox_innerhtml) You should not have done that.

Perhaps the jsFiddle link is helpful, but then add it to the content. Don't remove code from the site. Links should be in support of the content of posts, not a substitute for them. And whatever you do, don't change the code. Ever.

I am guessing that is what triggered the rollback and I can't say I disagree. You could perhaps make some of your corrections once again, but don't "destroy" content and don't move it to another location altogether.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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