Using https://stackoverflow.com/posts/?/edit-inline while ? is the ID of the post.

Pressing "Save Edits" without changing the textbox on a post that has "Edit (1)", will reject the edit by Community ♦


3 Answers 3


It's intended behavior that a concurrent edit by someone with the edit privilege instantly rejects a pending suggested edit with Community as the rejection user. This often happens accidentally when an editor with the edit privilege starts before the suggested edit is submitted and submits his edit after the suggested edit is submitted.

In such accidental cases, a revision by the user who caused the rejection appears in the post history. This revision could end up being trivial: even if a non-trivial edit was enforced in this case, the editor could change his mind during the 5-minute grace window. (It used to be that in this case the trivial revision wouldn't be shown, but that is no longer the case).

While we're on that topic, when I stumble upon a post with a pending suggested edit and I've used up my daily quota, I'd like to be able to choose to improve rather than reject that pending edit. The daily quota should block access to the queue but not prevent acting on a suggested edit that I find organically, or at least not prevent me from improving or reject-and-improving.

  • 1
    It seems this behavior, though, really isn't "intended." If it were, why is there a suggested Edie queue in the first place? There should be some kind of check to determine whether or not the /inline-edit modification made an actual difference. In fact, when doing the /inline-edit modification to make a rejection by Community, the user making the /inline-edit doesn't show up as a modifier. This is clearly unintended behavior.
    – jeremy
    Aug 10, 2013 at 15:50
  • 1
    @Jeremy It's intended behavior that if someone without the edit privilege and someone with the edit privilege compete for an edit, the editor with the edit privilege wins. Since starting to edit doesn't lock the post (that would open a whole can of worms), the server only takes the edit into account when you submit, so it doesn't distinguish based on when you started the edit. Aug 10, 2013 at 18:46
  • 2
    @Gilles I'll type it again: The server also doesn't add an "edited by Jeremy" at the end of the post when I save an edit that doesn't actual contain anything different than the OP, so why should it override suggested edits? Additionally, we may as well remove the necessity of needing 3 reject votes before rejecting a post - am I right? What's the difference if we can just reject with Community's authority?
    – jeremy
    Aug 10, 2013 at 18:54
  • 1
    @Jeremy You can already reject with Community's authority by reviewing the suggested edit, selecting “Improve” and ticking the “not helpful” checkbox. That is useful when you see a bad edit on a post that needs editing, but differently. I am strongly against removing this possibility. Aug 10, 2013 at 19:04
  • @Gilles I agree that the ability to reject a bad edit while making your own good edit should remain. The problem here is that you can use the Community alias to reject edits without any link back to the person who performed the rejection. Normally when you reject the suggested edit by replacing it with your own, you are identified either by having the new edit in your name, or by showing up with the "Edit" action immediately after Community's rejection. In this case neither happens, community just rejects the edit with now way to determine who caused that rejection.
    – Bad Wolf
    Aug 11, 2013 at 16:30

This has since changed to being .

The problem occurred because there was no check when loading a post's editor form to see if there was a pending suggested edit - save for a single client-side check when a post was loaded.

Per this staff post, there's now a server-side check for a pending edit suggestion when loading a post's editor form, regardless of how it's loaded: one will be directed to review the pending edit first.


As @Sonic notes, this has been fixed now. Except that there is another related situation. I'll post it here since it has some legitimate uses: when you accidentally approved a suggested edit and want to make sure no other reviewers make that mistake. The workaround is a little convoluted since you need the Stack Exchange API to do so, and you need write access. You can either inspect the traffic from the official Stack Exchange Android app (if you still have it) with a tool like mitmproxy or generate your own one.

For science, I suggested an edit here and approved it. I then submitted an edit (with exactly the same Markdown, but that isn't necessary) via this API documentation page (there's an equivalent one for questions):

(key and access token were filled but I've blanked them out) and as you can see from the review item, it was rejected because of the edit conflict.

You must log in to answer this question.

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