17

https://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/2143000

None of the reasons given make sense given the edit:

This edit is incorrect or an attempt to reply to or comment on the existing post.

The post contained a dead link, and I updated the link to the correct current page for the resource. I stated as much in my edit summary.

  • 19
    You are right to feel annoyed about this one, there seems to be no reason other than reviewers not paying attention. You should resubmit the edit (a higher rep user could also do it, but then you don't get the +2 rep for the suggestion). Maybe the issue was a transient one, possibly the URL wasn't reachable when the edit went through the review queue? – slugster May 22 '13 at 4:16
  • 1
    I just went ahead and edit it in anyway. Your edit is correct and shouldn't have been rejected. – nhahtdh May 22 '13 at 4:35
  • @slugster: Not so much annoyed as puzzled -- the reasons for rejection didn't help me understand where I went wrong, or how to correct it or amend my future behavior. So it was one of those 'what the...?' moments. =) In any case, if the new URL was unreachable ATM, it would have been helpful if the rejection reason stated that rather than the ambiguous ones that were used. Not being a StackExchange guru, I don't know what is possible or even normal with the review system. – Inactivist May 22 '13 at 14:00
  • 3
    I'm afraid that we have now robo rejecters after robo approvers. – BalusC May 22 '13 at 14:00
  • 1
    Changing links (and code) when you have so little reputation on the target site is a "smell". The majority of people changing links are doing it incorrectly or for the wrong reasons. Doesn't mean you did anything wrong, because your edit was great. Just reviewers seem to just reject them on that basis alone. – user7116 May 22 '13 at 14:07
  • @sixlettervariables -- I can understand the 'smell' aspect, and to be fair, the appearance of reflexive rejection lacking relevant feedback gives off another kind of smell. Clearly, StackExchange is filled with awesome, it's just that this kind of stuff is puzzling and frustrating to the aspiring contributor. – Inactivist May 22 '13 at 19:01
13

I'd chalk this one up to the reviewers not being careful. I could perhaps understand a rejection without a clear description of what the problem was. Many editors are not as diligent as you have been in writing a description of the edit. But even that is not the case.

There is no problem with the edit being unclear in the "rendered output" view, while being clear in the markdown view. Nor is your edit "too minor" (though that was not the reason chosen anyway), so I'm at a loss at trying to come up with a reason to reject it. And I'm usually pretty good at that.

I would have most certainly accepted it and think it should have been accepted. Luckily the edit has now been made. Should you bump into a similar problem next time, then don't hesitate to make a similar edit.

You must log in to answer this question.

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