I'm not sure why that item is no longer reviewable, but I would say that's a likely candidate for the second one of yours that got rejected. It looks neater when posts have code items highlighted with the inline tags, but in all honesty, you should try to improve as much as you possible can in a post beyond that basic formatting, as in the past, people have abused that functionality to push through "junky" edits.

Most of your edits are reasonable. The other rejection that you had was for modifying the code significantly, which as it seems you did it to match the OP's variable names, it wasn't as much of a cardinal sin as if you had modified it to suit your own purposes. Still, reviewers tend to defend against such practices and will occasionally err on the side of caution (or perhaps be going too quickly, but that's another discussion).

2 rejections isn't a huge deal, so just learn from them, improve your technique, and get back in the saddle.

I'm not sure why that item is no longer reviewable, but I would say that's a likely candidate for the second one of yours that got rejected. It looks neater when posts have code items highlighted with the inline tags, but in all honesty, you should try to improve as much as you possible can in a post beyond that basic formatting, as in the past, people have abused that functionality to push through "junky" edits.

Most of your edits are reasonable. The other rejection that you had was for modifying the code significantly, which as it seems you did it to match the OP's variable names, it wasn't as much of a cardinal sin as if you had modified it to suit your own purposes. Still, reviewers tend to defend against such practices and will occasionally err on the side of caution (or perhaps be going too quickly, but that's another discussion).

2 rejections isn't a huge deal, so just learn from them, improve your technique, and get back in the saddle.

I'm not sure why that item is no longer reviewable, but I would say that's a likely candidate for the second one of yours that got rejected. It looks neater when posts have code items highlighted with the inline tags, but in all honesty, you should try to improve as much as you possible can in a post beyond that basic formatting, as in the past, people have abused that functionality to push through "junky" edits.

Most of your edits are reasonable. The other rejection that you had was for modifying the code significantly, which as it seems you did it to match the OP's variable names, it wasn't as much of a cardinal sin as if you had modified it to suit your own purposes. Still, reviewers tend to defend against such practices and will occasionally err on the side of caution (or perhaps be going too quickly, but that's another discussion).

2 rejections isn't a huge deal, so just learn from them, improve your technique, and get back in the saddle.

I'm not sure why that item is no longer reviewable, but I would say that's a likely candidate for the second one of yours that got rejected. It looks neater when posts have code items highlighted with the inline tags, but in all honesty, you should try to improve as much as you possible can in a post beyond that basic formatting, as in the past, people have abused that functionality to push through "junky" edits.

Most of your edits are reasonable. The other rejection that you had was for modifying the code significantly, which as it seems you did it to match the OP's variable names, it wasn't as much of a cardinal sin as if you had modified it to suit your own purposes. Still, reviewers tend to defend against such practices and will occasionally err on the side of caution (or perhaps be going too quickly, but that's another discussion).

2 rejections isn't a huge deal, so just learn from them, improve your technique, and get back in the saddle.