This question already has an answer here:
- Should spam posts be edited? 3 answers
The Question I flagged as spam this morning was of poor quality (off-topic) but did contain a link to an app store, along with a few glowing words of self-endorsement.
First I voted to close, then I flagged for moderator attention (spam).
In the meantime apparently a high-rep User edited the Question and removed the spam link (and made the glowing words of self-endorsement into more of a question than a claim). It's possible that when a Moderator looked at my flag, the connection with the advertising link was no longer immediately evident. In any case my flag is "disputed".
While I'm not proposing that every case should fit neatly into one rule or another, it seems to me (after looking at previous Meta Q's on the topic), that a policy of preferring spam flagging versus editing out advertising links (or conversely) is ripe for a Community pronouncement.
The issue was mooted before in the context of a proposal for automatically converting any links to plaintext, but I believe this threshold issue might be easier to find a consensus about. Essentially the argument is that leaving the spam links intact helps the Moderator who gets the flag ping to quickly resolve the complaint, while removing the spam links deprives the spammer of benefits more quickly.
Given the high priority assigned to spam flags, I tend to think conserving Moderator attention is more important.