Judging by the comments, I might be in the minority here, but I do not have a huge problem with this specific suggested edit.
Is this a poor question that probably should be be closed? Absolutely!
Did the edit fix everything wrong with the post? No, but he made a good attempt. The question is bad enough that is would be impossible to fix everything
However, what should he have done instead?
Flagging is of course the appropriate action, but if he only flagged the question, and not edited it, you still have a very poorly written post now with a flag on it it. We have 71+ thousand questions in the review queue. That means someone would have gotten around to seeing in a 3 years from next Tuesday.
The time frame for the review is an exaggeration based on the size of the review queue, but in generally, flagging (or voting to close) does not guarantee that the question will get closed. If the question was kept open, then there was a wasted opportunity to at least make the question look better, or at a minimum, it can at least look like a real question, while the flag is waiting for review.
And as an indirect result of the edit, the question has had more attention from people who can actually doing something about it. Ultimately the question
will (hopefully) be closed due to the edit (3 close votes as of this writing) was closed so the edit was helpful.
My more general answer to this situation is I believe it depends on the context, but if the edit fixes as much as it possible with the post, then it should be judged on that that criteria alone.
The quality of the post and the age shouldn't be determining factors as the editor will not be qualified to make those judgements on his/her own.
Now, if someone is zipping through old posts making numerous small edits and leaving other problems in posts, that is a different story. This editor does appear to be doing targeted editing, looking for posts that have the phrase "I want to ask if", but he is making an effort to fix everything, not just removing that specific phrase.