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.

I rejected the following suggested edit because it looks like vandalism. I actively participate in and I know it is an inappropriate edit.

http://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/1606784

The user who proposed the edit has not been online for the past 9 hours but the proposed edit was made in the last 10 minutes.

Is there a system in place to catch these kind of spam edits?

Here are the screenshots of the user's last online status and the time I saw the proposed edit in the suggested edit queue.

I reviewed all the suggested edits from this user. I couldn't find anything strange with the edits except that I noticed that all this user has done was editing.

User last seen date and time

User online status

Suggested edit date and time:

Proposed edit time

share|improve this question
    
Something is really weird with the way SO displays the edit. For me it displays "proposed 3 mins ago by Desmonica Sin", when your question (and thus the edit suggestion) are 8 hours old. –  CodesInChaos Feb 27 '13 at 9:41
    
@CodesInChaos: Please read the answer below. It will make sense what is going on here. –  user213400 Feb 27 '13 at 12:15
    
I still think it's weird that weird that I don't get to see the edit in the same form as you did. I would have expected the user to be fixed at test generation time. –  CodesInChaos Feb 27 '13 at 12:22
    
@CodesInChaos: This whole suggested edit that I have pointed out here is total fake to test how a user would react. If it had been an actual edit, I think the times would have displayed the correct values. I don't know if I am making any issue. –  user213400 Feb 27 '13 at 12:24
    
I know the edit is fake. But I think it's strange that the edit appears differently to different people. I would have expected that the fake edit with all details gets generated when the system decided to test you, and to remain unchanged after that. –  CodesInChaos Feb 27 '13 at 12:27
    
@CodesInChaos: Sorry, got it. I have no idea but it keeps changing every time you visit the review audit link. Probably, it has to do with the fact not to associate the inappropriate edit with a specific innocent user. –  user213400 Feb 27 '13 at 12:30

1 Answer 1

up vote 6 down vote accepted

That was an edit review audit; that user actually did not make that edit at all. Any time in the records which suggest when the edit was made are fake, and simply there to make it not-so-easy to determine this was an audit. You were correct to reject it, but that user is not to blame for it.

See at the top of the review's page where it says:

Review audit passed 17 mins ago:
Siva reviewed this 17 mins ago: Reject

share|improve this answer
    
Sorry, I don't understand the relation between the two times. The time in my second screenshot was when the user allegedly proposed the edit. The time that you have stated in the answer shows when I rejected it. Both the times are 3 minutes apart. –  user213400 Feb 27 '13 at 1:17
    
Those times don't matter; the user actually did not edit anything at all. The edit time is fake. You passed the review audit during your 'reject', that's why my above quote shows both times as 17 minutes ago. (That's not really relevant to my answer; the important part is where it says, "Review audit passed" - it was not a real edit. –  Andrew Barber Feb 27 '13 at 1:18
1  
@Siva review audits don't always play by the rules of the game :) –  Jack Feb 27 '13 at 1:21
    
Got it. Today was my first day at suggested edit review after a long time and I had a test on the first day! –  user213400 Feb 27 '13 at 1:22
1  
Also, even if it were an actual suggested edit, the "last seen" date on user profiles is cached and may be outdated. –  bfavaretto Feb 27 '13 at 1:22
1  
@Siva We all thank you profusely for paying attention to the edits, by the way! That 'audit' is designed to catch people who are just breezing through the edits clicking "approve" without reading the actual edit. Glad to know you aren't one of those folks! –  Andrew Barber Feb 27 '13 at 1:24
    
@Siva: A test "on the first day" is not uncommon. I get hit with an audit every 20 or so edits I cycle through. I actually go through several audits per day since I tend to skip through them looking for crappy ones that I really want to reject. –  animuson Feb 27 '13 at 1:27
1  
@bfavaretto: I knew last seen time is cached but always thought it differed only in minutes and not hours. –  user213400 Feb 27 '13 at 1:27
    
@Siva That may be true, I don't know how long it's cached for. –  bfavaretto Feb 27 '13 at 1:29
    
@Siva: To corroborate Andrew's assertion that the review is fabricated: when I look at the review page you've linked, I actually see a different user, User 2106334, having proposed the edit, with the time changed again: Screenshot. –  Josh Caswell Feb 27 '13 at 2:30
    
@JoshCaswell: I don't know how the review audit exactly works. May be it picks a user at random. SO was only testing my audit capability and I passed!!! –  user213400 Feb 27 '13 at 2:32
    
I don't understand them, either, @Siva. –  Josh Caswell Feb 27 '13 at 2:33

You must log in to answer this question.