What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 127 Stack Exchange communities.

I recently suggested this edit, which was rejected: http://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/1838028

Background information:

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:

  1. Was I right to suggest this edit, and to do so in the precise way that I did?
  2. Were the three reviewers who rejected the edit right to reject it?
  3. 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.
share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Was I right to suggest this edit, and to do so in the precise way that I did?

Since you were following what suggested by the author of that answer, you were doing it in good faith. I don't see anything wrong in what you did, but I would expect the author of the answer to first make it a CW.

Were the three reviewers who rejected the edit right to reject it?

They did what they would have done when you edit an answer to include what its author said in a comment. If you don't explain in the description for the suggested edit that you are incorporating what the answer's author said in a comment for that answer, they will reject it as changing too much of the original post.

Can a mod please overturn the rejection and implement the edit?

A moderator alone can approve a suggested edit, but once it is rejected, moderators cannot change its status.

What you can do is suggesting the edit once again, and hope three users accept it. Be sure you make clear you are doing what the user who wrote the answer suggested to do.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Was I right to suggest this edit, and to do so in the precise way that I did?

From the edit privileges

When should I edit posts?

Any time you feel you can make the post better, and are inclined to do so. Editing is encouraged!

Some common reasons to edit are:

  • to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes
  • to clarify the meaning of a post without changing it
  • to correct minor mistakes or add addendums / updates as the post ages [emphasis mine]
  • to add related resources or hyperlinks

This edit clearly falls into the case I bolded. So this would be a correct edit. However as a suggested edit it's problematic because

  • Many suggested edits that modify code are wrong
  • People have an itchy trigger finger in the Suggested Edit queue because of competition for the review badges.

Possible ways to deal with this.

  • Earn 2K rep and get the edit privledge
  • Bring it to Meta
  • Add another comment to the original answerer pointing them to the suggested edit so they can update their answer with the new information
  • Add another answer
  • Tell the original answerer to mark their question as CW
share|improve this answer
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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