I recently submitted this edit suggestion. It makes some small but obvious improvements to the question:

  • The title "SQL Server Service Broker" is not a question and gives no clue as to what you're asking about Service Broker. I edited the title to basically repeat the question in the body.
  • The question is not about SQL (no code, queries, etc.) so I removed that tag. The question is specific to SQL Server 2008 so I added that tag.

I guess these simple improvements were not as obvious as I thought they were because they were summarily rejected by two reviewers who gave the following reasons:

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

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


  • How do I talk to these reviewers to understand their reasoning? Should I even bother?
  • What controls the quality of a reviewer's decisions?
  • How do I resubmit my edit without triggering a little edit fight? (Or is my edit really that bad?)
  • 1
    OK, I just did the edit, taken care of. (and cast a close vote). Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:03

3 Answers 3


Just resubmit it. While the question should be closed as 'Not Constructive', your edit looked just fine. Who knows why they rejected it, especially the plagiarize reason, but everyone makes mistakes on those.

  • 8
    I think plagiarized gets picked frequently because it's the default and people are too lazy to go through the list looking for a real reason Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:00
  • 11
    The plagiarize reason is checked by default, strangely, so in practice it's the didn't-pick-a-reason reason. This has already been noted and formally requested. Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:00
  • 2
    @Giles - Amusingly, the OP on that request is one of the rejectors here. Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:25
  • 1
    @ire_and_curses not amusing, that is clear abuse.
    – waffles
    Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:32
  • 3
    @waffles - not sure I understand. Can you expand the context? Who is abusing who? Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:33
  • 3
    @ire - I think he's suggesting that since the rejector is clearly aware of the problem, he's actively abusing the system by refusing to pick an appropriate reason.
    – Shog9
    Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 0:08
  • @ire_and_curses what shog said
    – waffles
    Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 0:48
  • 1
    @waffles The guy who made that feature request chose invalid edit though, not copied content.
    – a cat
    Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 0:55

This happened due to a bug of mine. Hopefully the change I am just about to deploy will make sure it does not happen in future.

Change default selection in edit rejection dialogue box from "copied content" to "invalid edit"

I agree the specific edit should be rejected:

  • The word "cool" in the title is really not needed.
  • Closed questions really do not need to be bumped, there is little value in improving it.
  • The question was closed after I asked about it here. :) And yes, the word is cool is not needed, but rest of edit to the title gave it some more value (where it had little before). Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 0:58
  • @Nick fair enough don't dwell on it, the big reason for this mistake was just fixed. In general question asking for shopping lists should be avoided.
    – waffles
    Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 1:01
  • I agree, the Service Broker question was ultimately inappropriate for SO. My question here about reviewer actions is independent of that, though. Anyway, thank you for tweaking the relevant UX. And nice freehand. Heh. Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 1:08

Question is too old for such edit to really matter. No need to bump it to the front.

There is no "question too old" reason so they just chose in random, the "plagiarizes content from an external source without proper attribution" is simply the first and default reason.

  • 3
    That seems like an odd default reason. Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:18
  • 5
    So you say, but it's pretty annoying when searching for a solution to something and you get a bunch of results that have non-descriptive titles or are mistagged.
    – Troyen
    Commented Nov 1, 2011 at 23:55
  • I'm with @Troyen. I edited the post simply to improve it, not to bump it to the front page. (Given that the question, ultimately, is not appropriate for SO, is beside the point.) I came across it in the "Related" sidebar and found the title to be utterly useless. Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 1:02
  • 2
    Would an "edit-but-don't-bump" feature be reasonable and/or feasible? Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 1:46
  • @KeithThompson No
    – a cat
    Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 1:57
  • @Troyen sometimes it's true, but personally I don't think it's true in case of that question. It can always be edited with 2K+ member who think it should be changed, I won't start Rollback fight over this just won't approve such suggestion. Commented Nov 2, 2011 at 7:43

You must log in to answer this question.

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