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

Possible Duplicate:
Do you fill in an edit summary?

As of late, editing questions hasn't had the same pizazz as usual (though I still do it) So I began to put humorous edit descriptions such as "Made OCD compliant" and "Pimp my question" Is it wrong to do this? When looking at most edits, they usually have no description, (and on these I wouldn't give a description normally).

So is it wrong to put a funny edit description instead of putting no description?

Also, if this is ok and other people have done it, then feel free to share your own funny edit descriptions :)

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by random, perbert Apr 4 '10 at 17:45

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

You haven't been on Meta very long, have you? – mmyers Mar 31 '10 at 22:27
Nobody ever reads those edit thingies – Mark Henderson Mar 31 '10 at 22:27
you and random should, like, hang out together and stuff – Jeff Atwood Mar 31 '10 at 22:28
sounds Like… – random Apr 1 '10 at 1:39

You say they're humorous, but looking over your recent activity pages says otherwise:

edited tags
edited title; edited title
added 248 characters in body
added 139 characters in body

Yes, it is wrong to call these funny.

share|improve this answer
/facepalm....... – Earlz Mar 31 '10 at 23:29


share|improve this answer

I think it is better to keep the description fairly succinct and accurate. That said, I suspect most people don't look at the edit comments, so it won't do much damage.

share|improve this answer

Have you ever checked anything in to a version control repo? If so, you'll know that filling in those change logs can be very, very, very tedious. This is much the same.

share|improve this answer
Yes, and I've written funny change logs too before.. usually they actually half way pertain to what changed even! – Earlz Mar 31 '10 at 22:33
I've seen some classic checkin comments. Nobody ever seemed to mind, especially if it's a simple change that anyone with a diff tool and half a brain can see what happened. Thankfully SO provides at least one of these tools. – Mark Henderson Mar 31 '10 at 22:35
That last sentence made me LOL – AaronLS Mar 31 '10 at 22:58

Probably the only other people to read the edit comments are going to be other people who also want to make things "OCD compliant". So an explanation of what you've done in a humorous way is probably fine!

share|improve this answer

Is it wrong to do this?


So is it wrong to put a funny edit description instead of putting no description?

Not at all. The only time I bother explaining my edit is if I believe others might want to revert it, or may have questions about why.

Otherwise it's pretty much free rein.

share|improve this answer

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