Minor vs Major edit distinction

Question

There are similar questions to this one, but they were made a long time ago and maybe the response will be different now.

I think there could be added a tick box as there is in Wikipedia (that's a nicer argument than it may seem, StackExchange websites are basically QA subject specific Wikipedias) to mark an edition as minor, or perhaps an automatic system that would count changes and show in the post something like "2 major and 5 minor edits". When you change a post of your own you can (and should) be able to make minor edits, but your disencouraged to do so in the post of another person. Maybe a different amount of reputation should be required to make minor edits.

There are lots of hypothetical features, however, I'm not suggesting a specific one; I'm suggesting one or more that distinguish smaller from larger edits, for the simple reason that posts often need small clarifications, that, unlike in Wikipedia, aren't made. That's losing precious contributions, and thus should be avoided by adding such features.

Answer 1

While there is some sense to this, Stack Overflow got more than enough users to handle all the required edits. Don't see any need to add yet more users to the circle.

Also:

• There is already the "retag" privilege requiring quarter of the reputation needed for a full edit.
• Anyone, including anonymous visitors, can suggest edits and there are more than enough 2K+ users willing to review those.

Bottom line: the system works, no need to fix it. :)

Answer 2

Wikipedia's "Make this edit minor" isn't really that helpful. On Special:Recentchanges (this is the Wikipedia page to review all recent edits), there's an option to hide minor edits. And that's pretty much the only function of it.

Nothing wrong with our edit system now, as Sha has pointed out. And, like Wikipedia, this wouldn't really serve a great purpose. Don't fix what isn't broken ;).