Editing someone else's question is wrong in my view. The comment facility should be enabled to any question without a time limit. If there is anything wrong with a question, then the reviewer should notify him/her by commenting on the question, not by editing it.

Editing the first question is a bad practice, because it changes the motive of any problem. Suppose I wrote a question in a hurried pace, and I mistakenly wrote wrong code. If an editor corrects my question to a modest way, and corrects the code bug, then the whole answers below the question will be for nothing.

That's why editing someone's code/question/answer should be prohibited in my view.

  • 7
    When have you ever seen someone correct the code in a question? Usually they just correct the formatting not the code itself?
    – Josh Mein
    Commented Oct 20, 2012 at 15:38
  • 10
    I went through your questions, couldn't find a single instance where the code was altered. Do you have any specific examples? Commented Oct 20, 2012 at 16:47
  • 7
    Before you posted this, did you consider that you've stumbled into a very well established community with over a million users who have successfully been editing each others questions for years? Just because you are ignorant of how or why something works, doesn't make that thing wrong.
    – user229044
    Commented Oct 20, 2012 at 16:57
  • 2
    I have occasionally seen code edits in the review queue, but I nearly always end up rejecting them.
    – Collin
    Commented Oct 20, 2012 at 17:17
  • 9
    I see a legitimate question here. The concern (as I read it) is not about edits, per se, but about changing the intention of the post with an edit. We absolutely do not endorse edits that change the intention of a post. Those edits should be rejected or rolled back. I suggest you retag this with discussion as I think that's what you're really trying to get at.
    – casperOne
    Commented Oct 20, 2012 at 17:19
  • 5
    @casperOne I addressed that issue in my answer. Though the OP also seems to imply that he wants edits to be made by the author only, based upon comments received. A feature-request which I think is pretty poor and potentially harmful.
    – Bart
    Commented Oct 20, 2012 at 19:37
  • 1
    Thanks casperOne for being to-the-point. And thanks all you guys for not being so rude to any question/comment. Question is the key to the new pathway. I thought a way, it may wrong, but need the patience. That's it. Thanks. Commented Oct 21, 2012 at 4:55

5 Answers 5


Any editing should be non-destructive. It should not fundamentally change the question/answer or make it something it's not. Especially with regards to the editing of code in a question, one should be careful to not alter the question or perhaps rather stay away from the code altogether.

Collaborative editing is however one of the main components of this Q&A which ensures content is of significant quality. This should not be disabled or disallowed at all. We already have reviews in place to weed out bad edits from users with a lower reputation. And we have the means to roll back particularly problematic edits. Other than that I see no need to limit editing as it is in place.


Editing questions by others is built into Stack Overflow and is unlikely to be removed. Most people who are upset by it don't know these things about it:

  • You can roll back any edit you don't agree with. When you see the notation on a post that it was edited at a specific time (or 4 minutes ago or whatever) click that time stamp to see what was changed. If the edit changed your meaning, click rollback to undo the edit.
  • Edits by users with lower reputation points have to be approved by higher-reputation points users. One of the reasons for rejecting a suggested edit is that it changes the meaning of the post or that it should be a comment.

Good edits fix grammar, spelling, and formatting, adjust tags, and generally make the question or answer more useful to other people. Bad edits can be reversed, so there's less to worry about than you think.

  • 8
    Agree, though one note for the OP: Use rollbacks with caution. Don't roll an edit back because you disagree with the concept of edits. Roll back an edit if it fundamentally changed or harmed your question.
    – Bart
    Commented Oct 20, 2012 at 15:26

This is well covered by the FAQ, section "Other people can edit my post?!"

If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.


Editing is a key concept of Stack Exchange sites. That way, we can keep the quality up as much as possible.

But editors should not change the spirit of the question. And code sample should be unchanged with a few exceptions (for example, sensitive information can be edited out).


Editing the first question is a bad practice, because it changes the motive of any problem

Well, assuming this happens from time to time, that is certainly not the common use of the editing tool. You need to have certain rep to be able to edit. While gaining that rep you most probably learn how to use the tool the correct way. The tool exist to help, not to destroy.

You must log in to answer this question.

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