I made an edit action and I know it's waiting peer review in some queue.

But I found I'm wrong. I want to cancel the edit action.

In this case, any review would be waste of time.

And what's worse, it might pass the review if the reviewer is not careful enough.

So is there any reason why the cancel is not available here?

  • 1
    Linking to the suggested edit is a good way to get it reviewed faster from meta users. ;) – animuson Feb 24 '12 at 5:26
  • 3
    Related: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/80933/… – Cody Gray Feb 24 '12 at 6:00
  • 2
    Also, you might want to retract an edit you know will be rejected so you don't get your editing privileges taken away. (I accidentally submitted after someone else beat me to the edit.) – Noumenon Jun 21 '16 at 23:41

Edits placed in the review queue require two users with the editing privilege to approve it, which means that even if one user isn't careful enough, chances are the second one is.

I say don't worry about it—if it's drastically incorrect, the edit will be rejected. If it's something that the reviewer can fix, they will improve it. What happens in that case is your edit gets accepted, but the reviewer is directed to the edit screen to improve your revision. It's a quick process so you have nothing to worry about.

The fact of the matter is that the editing system doesn't need to be complicated further for users who don't have the privilege already. Like I said above, if it's absolutely wrong, it will be rejected—otherwise, it will be approved by users (and it's good to trust each others' judgement) or improved.

  • 29
    But more or less, it bothered 2 guys. And it need not to. – Ade YU Feb 24 '12 at 5:30
  • 3
    And I don't want to gain any reputation in that edit. – Ade YU Feb 24 '12 at 5:31
  • @AdeYU: If there's nothing else worthwhile or substantive in the edit, then it will be rejected, and you won't get the reputation. If it's helpful except for one part, then it will be improved and you'll get the reputation, but fairly, for contributing the good parts. This works itself out. – Mystery Feb 24 '12 at 5:32
  • 11
    Thanks. I understand it's gonna be OK. And my question is why. Why the site doesn't want me to cancel my edit when I find it is wrong? Why the site bothers 2 other guys to reject my wrong edit, which I myself know is wrong? – Ade YU Feb 24 '12 at 5:38
  • @AdeYU: Because this is a community-oriented website. What you may think is wrong might actually be totally correct. The input from other users is what this site thrives on, so it's a very successful method. – Mystery Feb 24 '12 at 5:39
  • 17
    @Mystery That's silly. A user should have the ability to solely revoke anything he can solely put forward. If he realized he were wrong before making the edit, he wouldn't have made it in the first place. By your logic, everyone should just make whatever edit crosses their mind even when they're sure it's wrong, because it's a "community-oriented" website and the community should decide. – Drazen Bjelovuk Sep 5 '15 at 21:14
  • @Drazen I'm precisely not saying that. Always make edits within reason as long as they aren't blatantly wrong (mistagging a question, for instance). But if you think it's valuable to be able to retract suggested edits, make another feature request and see how it goes. – Mystery Sep 5 '15 at 22:26
  • 2
    @Mystery If you should only make edits within reason, then it stands to reason that you should be able to revoke an edit made without reason. Get my reasoning? – Drazen Bjelovuk Sep 5 '15 at 23:06
  • @Drazen I don't necessarily disagree. I see your reasoning. I feel like it may be redundant since an edit that turned out to be incorrect will just be rejected anyway. Plus, after 2,000 rep, you can already go rollback your own edits if need be. Like I said, put up a new request, and there could be a discussion about it. :) – Mystery Sep 5 '15 at 23:37

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