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

I came across the following suggested edit in the review. It looks like a radical change at first glance.

I did't understand the full context of the edit from within the review queue. So, I visited the question to understand the reason behind the edit.

It looks like the OP has left the code in the comment instead of actually editing the question. A user took OP's code in the comment and added it to the question to make it more meaningful. Initially, this whole edit seemed out of context until I visited the question. However, three others users rejected the suggested edit because they thought that the change was radical.

I have enough reputation to actually improve the edit but I don't know anything about to provide a meaningful edit. To be frank, I didn't expect it to get rejected. I thought that others might realize the intention behind the edit and will approve it. Since the edit was rejected, I visited the question to add the code myself but someone else has already fixed it. It has been taken care.

My question:

What is the recommended approach in these type of situations where not visiting the post might give a contradicting impression to reviewers about the suggested edit?

share|improve this question
The user should have left a comment stating that the OP had posted the code in a comment, and he just relocated it to the question. Under that context, the edit most likely would have been approved. – Josh Mein Feb 28 '13 at 5:10
He should have left a comment in the suggested edit explaining where he got the code. If the reviewers saw the edit reason, it most likely wouldnt have been rejected. – Josh Mein Feb 28 '13 at 13:55
up vote 1 down vote accepted

On the surface, this was an invalid edit, since code "just came out of nowhere". Had I only looked at the revisions, I wouldn't have seen any immediate evidence that this code existed in the question beforehand, either. However, you're right in that the code was buried in a comment instead.

If it was noted that this was left in a comment instead, then this edit would have been readily accepted. Context is pretty important in these situations. It's important to look at all aspects of the edit, and not just what history tells you.

share|improve this answer
@Siva: Made a note of that, edited my answer. – Makoto Feb 28 '13 at 5:16

You must log in to answer this question.