I recently suggested this edit, which was rejected: http://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/1838028
The edit brings up-to-date an obsolete answer to a question about jQuery. The answer currently given in the question was correct for jQuery versions prior to 1.6. It also works for most versions prior to 1.9, although the approach used is officially deprecated since version 1.6, so the answer has been sort-of-obsolete for some time. For versions 1.9+, the answer given will not work, making the answer well-and-truly-obsolete. (jQuery is currently on version 1.9.1.)
That the answer was using a deprecated approach was noted in the comments, and the post owner invited others to edit the post to bring it up to date.
I drew attention to the comments in my edit summary, though I did not explicitly mention that the answer's owner had invited others to edit it.
The edit was approved by two reviewers, but rejected by three, on the basis that:
This edit changes too much in the original post; the original meaning or intent of the post would be lost.
I have two questions, and a request:
- Was I right to suggest this edit, and to do so in the precise way that I did?
- Were the three reviewers who rejected the edit right to reject it?
- Can a mod please overturn the rejection and implement the edit? It's a fix to a highly-upvoted obsolete answer on a highly-viewed question, so I figure it's reasonably valuable.