Timeline for Are there tests of suggested edits which should be approved?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 25, 2013 at 0:42 | vote | accept | A. Rodas | ||
| Mar 19, 2013 at 23:46 | comment | added | Lance Roberts | Actually, it should only be rejected as too minor if they missed other stuff that needed editing. If it only needed one minor edit, then let it be. | |
| Mar 19, 2013 at 23:10 | comment | added | Doorknob | By the way, keep rejecting as too minor if you think it is too minor. | |
| Mar 19, 2013 at 22:52 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | These audits are not acting as guide to train reviewers but rather as "honeypot" to catch those who don't pay attention at all. | |
| Mar 19, 2013 at 22:50 | answer | added | Lance Roberts | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 19, 2013 at 22:50 | history | edited | Shadow Wizard |
edited tags
|
|
| Mar 19, 2013 at 21:41 | comment | added | Martijn Pieters | The problem is with people auto-approving everything, so no, there are no audits that require an approve. | |
| Mar 19, 2013 at 21:40 | history | asked | A. Rodas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |