I just edited (expanding significantly) William Pursell's answer at Returning value from called function in a shell script.

I now see the question is in "community wiki" status, and the answer above William's, the one that landed this in community wiki in the first place, has the royal green checkmark of approval and somehow also has 19 upvotes. But it doesn't even really address question, let alone provide an answer, and IMO it is barely cognizant.

I've yet to encounter a situation like this... so I did a little homework, and I can't find anything that explicitly dis-allows doing what I propose. I read An elegant solution for "answer-stealing" edits?, and while it seems to have the sentiment of what I'm after here, neither does it doesn't expressly say whether one has leave to replace the answer wholesale.

So basically, can I do a 1:1, copy-paste, swap of answers here, taking William's answer as I've edited it and putting into the accepted answer?

Would such a move be considered a good call, or very bad form? Maybe both?

I just edited (expanding significantly) William Pursell's answer at Returning value from called function in a shell script.

I now see the question is in "community wiki" status, and the answer above William's, the one that landed this in community wiki in the first place, has the royal green checkmark of approval and somehow also has 19 upvotes. But it doesn't even really address question, let alone provide an answer, and IMO it is barely cognizant.

I've yet to encounter a situation like this... so I did a little homework, and I can't find anything that explicitly dis-allows doing what I propose. I read An elegant solution for "answer-stealing" edits?, and while it seems to have the sentiment of what I'm after here, neither does it doesn't expressly say whether one has leave to replace the answer wholesale.

So basically, can I do a 1:1, copy-paste, swap of answers here, taking William's answer as I've edited it and putting into the accepted answer?

Would such a move be considered a good call, or very bad form? Maybe both?

I just edited (expanding significantly) the presently second answer at: Returning value from called function in a shell script.

I now see the question is in "community wiki" status, and the answer above it, the one that landed this in community wiki in the first place, has the royal green checkmark of approval and somehow also has 19 upvotes. But it doesn't even really address question, let alone provide an answer, and IMO it is barely cognizant.

I've yet to encounter a situation like this... so I did a little homework, and I can't find anything that explicitly dis-allows doing what I propose. I read An elegant solution for "answer-stealing" edits?, and while it seems to have the sentiment of what I'm after here, neither does it doesn't expressly say whether one has leave to replace the answer wholesale.

So basically, can I do a 1:1, copy-paste, swap of answers here?
Would such a move be considered a good call, or very bad form?
Maybe both?

I just edited (expanding significantly) William Pursell's answer at Returning value from called function in a shell script.

I now see the question is in "community wiki" status, and the answer above William's, the one that landed this in community wiki in the first place, has the royal green checkmark of approval and somehow also has 19 upvotes. But it doesn't even really address question, let alone provide an answer, and IMO it is barely cognizant.

I've yet to encounter a situation like this... so I did a little homework, and I can't find anything that explicitly dis-allows doing what I propose. I read An elegant solution for "answer-stealing" edits?, and while it seems to have the sentiment of what I'm after here, neither does it doesn't expressly say whether one has leave to replace the answer wholesale.

So basically, can I do a 1:1, copy-paste, swap of answers here, taking William's answer as I've edited it and putting into the accepted answer?

Would such a move be considered a good call, or very bad form? Maybe both?