1

The current system of suggested edits is problematic in the following case:

  • User A posts a question/answer
  • User B(who does not have enough rep) makes a suggested edit
  • User C (with >2000 rep) reads the post, and sees that the post needs editing. But he can only approve or reject the suggested edit. He has to wait for that suggested edit to be approved by another person, before it is applied. If the suggested Edit is not enough, he has to wait till it is approved/rejected by another before making the correct edit.

What I don't understand is why 2 votes are required. If User C has enough rep to make the edit on his own, why is approval needed from another high rep user? And why make User C wait, till someone else approved the edit, to make the correct edit?

5

When a user ( with rep > 2K ) reviews the suggested edit queue, He/she sees four option for suggested edit

  • Approve
  • Reject
  • Improve
  • Skip

In case of "Approve" As the Suggested edit work with multiple approval for proposed edit, the actual edit need to wait for other reviewer.

In case of "Reject" again it needs multiple approval for proposed edit.

Now In case of "Improve" if the user ( with 2K reputation ) chooses this option than he/she can Add/delete the part of proposed edit with option "suggested edit helpful checkbox". After doing this operation there is no need to be wait for another reviewer to review the proposed edit.

  • 1
    Okay, but this still does not explain why a >2k rep user cannot simply approve an edit without improving it. – Richard Apr 3 '14 at 21:18
3

The point that you are missing is that users with editing privileges can see a Improve button on the posts as well. So, the user doesnt have to wait for the edit to get approved before making further improvements, but can click on Improve and then make any further edits, which get published instantly.

You must log in to answer this question.

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