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

According to this answer about suggested edits :

Who can vote on a suggested edit?

  • The owner of a post may cast a binding vote to accept or reject any modification of their post.

When a user with < 2000 rep edits a post it is in queue for review. But if the OP accepts it before it is reviewed by a > 2000 user, he can accept it regardless of the content.

I know you in some part own the content of your own post and can edit it at any time. But what if a new user sees an edit made by and user with more rep and accepts it because it looks good to him but it doesn't fit the standards the post will have to be edited again. So what's the point of letting that happen.

Adding things like :

  • Thanks
  • [Tag] in a title
  • Help me plzz
  • CONFUSED !!!

Any stuff we don't want in a post will almost everytim result in another edit.

This is a review I would have rejected / improved. But it was accepted.

The user corrected 2 white spaces, added what looks like a copy paste of a comment at the end of the question and some unecessary information like Confused !!!!!!.

I suggest users with < 2000 rep only get a vote when it comes to reviewing their own posts to make sure something we don't want doesn't get inserted in the post.

share|improve this question
That specific case is just vandalism. But is this a structural problem? I haven't seen it before (but tbh I haven't looked either). – Niels Keurentjes May 30 '13 at 13:14
@NielsKeurentjes Well I haven't been reviewing edits for a long time but it's the first time I see this. – ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd May 30 '13 at 13:18
It's worth noting that the OP accepted this edit. – Emrakul May 30 '13 at 13:39
I assume he approved out of sheer ignorance, not knowing what this is all about. – Shadow Wizard May 30 '13 at 14:09
up vote 8 down vote accepted

Treat something like this in just the same way that you would treat the OP making such edits themselves. Fix/revert such edits when you see them, and flag for a mod if you see them doing it a lot. Ditto for people suggesting edits like this. Hopefully they'll be rejected most of the time, meaning they'd be edit banned if they did it a lot. If not, reject the edits when you see them, roll them back when they're accepted, and if you believe that it's intentional vandalism (and not just bad editing in good faith) consider flagging for mod attention.

For occasional isolated cases nothing more should need to be done. If we notice a major structural problem in which this type of behavior is happening constantly then perhaps the review system would need to be modified, but I don't see evidence of that being the case at this time.

share|improve this answer
You should also @ the editor (you won't get autocomplete trying to type their name, but it will notify them) encouraging them to change their ways. – Kate Gregory May 30 '13 at 14:13

You must log in to answer this question.

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