See: https://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/1581133.

I clicked Improve to see what exactly has been changed in the title. And then StackOverflow told me that I failed a review audit.

Now, what should I do?

  • And by the way I wanted to uppercase these lowercase i's!
    – nalply
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:25
  • 1
    Look at the mark-down difference to see the difference, you don't need to click on Edit. Clicking on Edit will be registered in the system as making an action on the post, which I think is a bit stupid here.
    – nhahtdh
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:26
  • 1
    This does not work for titles.
    – nalply
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:26
  • 5
    You really don't have to do anything. Well, besides being more careful next time. It's a terrible (fake) suggested edit, which should really have been rejected.
    – Bart
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:26
  • 1
    The preview clearly shows the new title as: "How to running can i forcing invalidate valid stop a TimerTask Handler?" — what would be there to check, really?
    – slhck
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:28
  • @nalply: Sorry, I think I mistook that for the markdown diff in regular post.
    – nhahtdh
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:28
  • Duh, I am stupid, now I understand the title... :-)
    – nalply
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:29
  • 6
    The edit was completely bogus, but I don't understand why trying to Improve a suggested edit counts as an audit failure, given that the question did have things that could have been improved, and the suggestion can be marked "unhelpful" and thus rejected from the Improve interface.
    – jscs
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:41
  • 1
    Related: The weirdly-titled meta.stackexchange.com/questions/156938/… since audits aren't pass/fail on submission but rather first action.
    – Troyen
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:51
  • Just wondering: Is that user who "suggested" the edit real?
    – Rob W
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 22:24
  • @RobW - Yes, they're randomly selected (I believe from people who've recently submitted suggested edits), same with the edit captions, which are pulled from real ones. The content is total Markov chain garbage, though. Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 22:56

2 Answers 2


I think that clicking "Improve" should not trigger automatic failure of the audit as it's not always approve.

Only if you leave the "Suggested edit was helpful" checkbox ticked and click "Save Edits" then you'll fail the audit, otherwise you'll pass.

  • 1
    It is still possible to bypass the audit when one is not editing the post properly, but still uncheck the checkbox...
    – nhahtdh
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 20:47
  • @nhahtdh, perhaps this can be caught by a threshold set for that post. If someone spends little time and also edits very little, he fails the audit. But I think we should keep the review audit system as simple as possible and accept some false positives like mine.
    – nalply
    Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 21:32
  • I personally think it would be even worse to finish a full constructive edit, only to find out it was a review audit and your work was wasted.
    – Wildcard
    Commented Oct 18, 2015 at 5:54
  • @Wildcard good point which I totally missed! Will have to rethink this answer. Commented Oct 18, 2015 at 6:15

Okay, I messed up. I am going to suck up the consequences of my mistake.

It happened this way:

  1. I opened the fake edit suggestion.
  2. I didn't understand the title.
  3. I stopped reading at the title.
  4. I clicked the mark-down difference.
  5. This does not help for titles.
  6. Then I decided to "enter" the post and see what I can do and clicked Improve.
  7. BOOOM. It was a review audit.

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