0

This question already has an answer here:

If reviewers make a decision to accept/reject a suggested edit, does the original poster have a way to overturn their decision?

I've made a few edits that were rejected by reviewers. I thought they were improvements to the site that would help others in the future, but it seems they did not fit within SO policy.

It is my impression that the OP is in the best position to decide whether or not an edit is an improvement because rather than being responsible for impartially interpreting a policy, they need only to decide whether the change improves their question or answer.

So, I would like to know if the OP is notified of edits and given an opportunity to accept or reject them, should they have an interest in doing so.

marked as duplicate by Martijn Pieters, Richard Tingle, David Robinson, Shadow The Coffee Wizard, Bart Oct 8 '13 at 14:09

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 2
    Yes, owners are notified and have veto rights. But only when the suggested edit is still actively being reviewed. – Martijn Pieters Oct 8 '13 at 14:01
  • From the duplicate "The owner of a post may cast a binding vote to accept or reject any modification of their post." – Richard Tingle Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
  • @MartijnPieters why can they only veto during the review? My last edit was rejected in less than an hour: stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/3087108 Very few OPs would be active enough to be able to intervene during such a short time window. – Nathan Oct 8 '13 at 14:16
  • @Nathan: The OP is still notified. They can look at your suggestion and edit the post themselves if they feel it was a change worth making. – Martijn Pieters Oct 8 '13 at 14:18
  • "Very few OPs would be active enough to be able to intervene during such a short time window" ....yes, I definitely don't usually have sub 5 minute response times, yes, yes – Richard Tingle Oct 8 '13 at 14:21
  • "It is my impression that the OP is in the best position to decide whether or not an edit is an improvement" Considering the mangling I see done to English in far too many posts, I disagree with this statement. – ale Oct 8 '13 at 15:21
4

OPs do not have the ability to veto an edit once it has been accepted, but they do have the ability to rollback. As such, if an edit fundamentally changes the nature of what was written, they can rollback the revision.

The downside, of course, is a reversion war - because a high rep user can rollback a rollback.

  • ...but then it would be expected that the higher rep user will have the common sense to take a step back and call in a moderator if he really believes the edit is necessary. – user213634 Oct 8 '13 at 14:08
  • When the edit is still active (i.e. has not been accepted or rejected), the OP does have a veto ability. – Bart Oct 8 '13 at 14:09
  • 1
    "If reviewers make a decision to accept/reject a suggested edit, does the original poster have a way to overturn their decision?" <- The OP makes it sound like the edit has already taken effect, not that voting is still in progress. I think Affable Geek's interpretation is correct. – JDB Oct 8 '13 at 14:14
  • Hmm, yep. True in that case @Cybȫʁgϟ37. (Minor edit to the answer to clarify. Roll back if you don't agree with it ;) ) – Bart Oct 8 '13 at 14:19

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