Options for rejecting an edit are insufficient

Question

In the suggested edits queue, I found this edit. It added a datetime tag, which I think is not correct, because the question wasn't about the DateTime type (I have no idea whether ActionScript even has one).

When I tried to reject it, this dialog showed up:

Why are you rejecting this edit?

• copied content

  This edit plagiarizes content from an external source without proper attribution.

• invalid edit

  This edit is not an edit, but an attempt to reply to or comment on the existing post.

• radical change

  This edit changes too much in the original post; the original meaning or intent of the post would be lost.

• style opinions

  This edit is about conflicting opinions on style issues, not the actual substance of the post.

• too minor

  This edit is too minor; suggested edits should be substantive improvements addressing multiple issues in the post.

• vandalism

  This edit introduces spam, defaces the post in some way, or is otherwise inappropriate.

But I want to reject the edit simply because I think it is incorrect, which doesn't fit any of the given options.

So, my request is that either:

1. another option is added that says something like “incorrect”, or
2. another option is added that can encompass all other reasons for rejecting an edit, something like “other”.

Answer 1

I just revved it, will be deployed soon.

In particular I simplified the decision process.

As a rejector you now need to decide.

1. Is this wrong => Invalid edit
2. Is this too timid => Too minor
3. Is this too major => radical change
4. Is this spam or vandalism => vandalism
5. Is this plagiarism => copied content

The stats from the weekend are:

 
too minor   244
invalid edit    177
radical change  99
style opinions  67
vandalism   37
copied content  16

Looking through style opinions it seemed that most cases too minor would have worked, in some cases it was an invalid edit others a mistake.

I do not think we are gaining anything by having style opinions hence it is gone.

---

Invalid Edit's new copy is:

This edit is incorrect or an attempt to reply to or comment on the existing post.

Answer 2

Hmm... With all those reasons (I think there are too many already) it seems like there should be a simple "declined" reason. Maybe one of the existing choices can be reworded to include this use case, but here it is in an additional selection:

• declined
  This edit may contain incorrect, confusing, or misleading information.

Answer 3

Agreed (I missed it myself).

Responding to the objection that there are already too many options in that dialog, there's one that doesn't belong here: “copied content” is a major rejection reason for tag wikis, but irrelevant for posts. There should be a separate list for tag wikis, containing “copied content” but not “too minor” nor “style opinions”, and “radical change” should have a different description (something like “unbalanced” — I proposed “Your proposed content does not adequately describe the main use(s) of the tag”.).

Furthermore, until rejection reasons are ironed out, please please include an “other” option. It's better to provide vague feedback like “other” than to have to select a misleading reject reason.

Answer 4

I'd like it like this:

Why are you rejecting this edit?

• invalid edit

  This edit is incorrect, or is about conflicting opinions on style issues not the actual substance of the post, or not an edit but an attempt to reply to or comment on the existing post.

• too minor

  This edit is too minor; suggested edits should be substantive improvements addressing multiple issues in the post.

• copied content

  This edit plagiarizes content from an external source without proper attribution.

• radical change

  This edit changes too much in the original post; the original meaning or intent of the post would be lost.

• vandalism

  This edit introduces spam, defaces the post in some way, or is otherwise inappropriate.

The "invalid edit" description is too long, but covers the plain incorrect edit/retag case.

I don't see a need for a separate "style" option (too many of them already).

Invalid and too minor need to be at the top, they're the most frequent reasons in my experience.