Possible Duplicate:
Too minor edit reason can sometimes be a little contradictory

According to the FAQ on SO you should not use a signature or tag line ( https://stackoverflow.com/faq#signatures ) and that if you do put one it may be removed.

I came across a question with a signature on it so I put in a suggested edit to remove it however it was rejected : https://stackoverflow.com/suggested-edits/216580

This suggested edit was rejected as being too minor however other similar questions here on meta point to the fact that doing a suggested edit to remove a signature is acceptable ( To remove signature from someone's post, can we suggest an edit or do we have to raise a flag? )

I'd like to know if there was any other reason that the edit was rejected and if not why the users who rejected it are not in line with the FAQ on putting signatures in questions?

Additional Details
Just realized I said 'question' above but it was actually an answer that I edited. Here is the link to the full question Issue with partial refresh triggered twice

As you can see somebody with editing privilege has gone in and made the exact same edit that I had made. Because they have the privilege they don't need to have it approved but their edit was the same as mine but mine was rejected, shouldn't somebody go back in now and reject that edit?

No, I don't want to start another round of Edit Wars. I'm just looking for consistancy

  • 4
    From the linked question: However, you are more likely to get your edit approved if you make other improvements to the post as well, including but not limited to: [....] edits removing only a tagline are an edge case; if there is nothing else to fix, I would tend to leave the contribution alone.
    – Pekka
    Mar 8 '12 at 16:41
  • I would have accepted it. Only the people who rejected your edit can explain why they did so, but it's likely they felt other improvements could be made to the answer, which you failed to make.
    – Matt
    Mar 8 '12 at 16:42
  • 2
    Read the duplicate, but most importantly read: blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/04/in-defense-of-editing - this should be your guiding light whenever you edit on Stack Exchange.
    – Shog9
    Mar 8 '12 at 16:46
  • 5
    @Declan - In addition to the signature, you could have capitalized the first word of once sentence and fixed two spelling errors. Fixing one problem out of four looks "too minor" to me.
    – Bo Persson
    Mar 8 '12 at 17:23
  • What I don't understand is that somebody else has now gone in and made the exact same edit but because they have editing rights it is automatically accepted. Mar 8 '12 at 18:53

This is an open debate. Some people say that just removing a tagline is too minor, and that there's always something else that can, and should be fixed. Others say that any improvement is a good thing.

I'm in the latter group, and would have approved your edit. Ultimately though it's up to the community, and whoever happens to come across your suggested edit first.

  • @Adam-The-Pedantic Challenge u 2 fx dis. (for the record, I'm in the latter camp as well, but I don't handle the approve/reject queue)
    – casperOne
    Mar 8 '12 at 19:20
  • @casper - Pedantic? Really? Awwwww, thanks, man :) Not sure how I could fix this though. Some people just want to hit that "too minor" button for edits that remove only a signature. I suppose Shog could make an official policy that these edits are fine, but I'm sure he wants to minimize drama after the crap he's been through in the last few weeks. Mar 8 '12 at 20:02
  • I don't know that we need a policy, I think it's somewhat codified by the Venn diagram that explains any SE site, we're trying to be the best of those four things, one of them being wikis, and wikis aren't signed in-post or personalized. Just an opinion though.
    – casperOne
    Mar 8 '12 at 20:04
  • @casper - cool. On another note, my meaningless meta rep is getting close to yours. You better go delete some answers so you can post a polite explanation / apology on the forthcoming meta questions ;) Mar 8 '12 at 20:06
  • @Adam-Gold-Medalist You're actually above me now. Which has now made the meta game meaningless to me... The only way for me to win is not complete =)
    – casperOne
    Mar 8 '12 at 20:07
  • And we have a running count of days without moderation issues on meta. It's currently at 2. We're trying to run that up, even at the expense of our precious meta rep.
    – casperOne
    Mar 8 '12 at 20:10
  • @casper - HA!! 2 days without a moderating incident. We're shooting for 5!!! Mar 8 '12 at 20:36
  • Three is our next "milestone", honestly. We'll work on multiple-day milestones when we get some ground beneath us haha
    – casperOne
    Mar 8 '12 at 20:48
  • 2
    Hmm, now I'm tempted to go browse through the list of recently deleted questions and find one I can whine about its having been deleted. Meta people really are a dangerous bunch. (Also, to make this comment on topic, I'll only reject as "too minor" if really glaringly obvious problems are not fixed at the same time, like code formatting or tags in the title.)
    – Cody Gray
    Mar 8 '12 at 21:13

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