Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 157 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 this post and decided that it could do with some improvement. I suggested an edit which was subsequently rejected by three users all with the same reason:

This edit changes too much in the original post; the original meaning or intent of the post would be lost.

I don't see how the original meaning or intent of the post would be lost with the changes I made though. Can someone help explain this to me for future reference when editing?

share|improve this question
Why did you remove the links? They were useful and probably the reason for the rejection. – Oded Apr 9 '13 at 11:34
I didn't remove them. See the markdown difference. – Ren Apr 9 '13 at 11:35
Fair enough. But at first glance, they are gone. Many reviewers don't really put enough time into properly reviewing. – Oded Apr 9 '13 at 11:36
Yes, they are hard to see with rendered difference now that you mention it. Perhaps the CSS could do with updating to make links stand out more in this mode? I'll make a request for this. – Ren Apr 9 '13 at 11:37
You should say "embedding links" first thing, personally I always check and look for the links but as you see many won't do that and just assume you removed the links. – Shadow Wizard Apr 9 '13 at 11:45
I would try reediting and put a comment in why you changed and hope you get better reviewers as making links is a good thing - however I doubt reviewers who did not check hat would read the reason :( This would make a good audit question – Mark Apr 9 '13 at 11:46
@ShaWizDowArd will do so in the future, thanks. – Ren Apr 9 '13 at 11:46
@Mark It would be a good audit I think :) I've made a suggestion here though that may make it a less effective audit if implemented though. – Ren Apr 9 '13 at 11:55
Looks like a solid edit to me. I would have aproved it (and I reject a lot). – Toon Krijthe Apr 9 '13 at 11:58
Related:… – Manishearth Apr 9 '13 at 12:01
I have resubmitted the edit and it has since been approved. I made it clear with my description that I embedded the links as @ShaWizDowArd advised. – Ren Apr 9 '13 at 12:07
Nice, 100% success this time. :) (i.e. not a single rejection) – Shadow Wizard Apr 9 '13 at 12:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .