This question already has an answer here:
- Why are trivial edits discouraged? 7 answers
Minor edits should be easy. I don't mean trivial edits, but rather low character count grammar and spelling edits. Changing a few characters to clean up the site makes the Internet better. Discouraging users from making productive minor edits allows ugly obvious errors to persist.
Many answers or comments on questions on this subject are awfully negative: e.g.,
- revisiting too minor edits
- How to fix one letter typos?
- Is 2000 Rep really needed to change one letter?
- http://stackoverflow.com/privileges/edit – Edit spelling mistakes or not?
- What is the proper way to correct a typo?
- How to overcome "Edits must be at least 6 characters"?
- Minor edit of posts: allow typo correction for low-rep users
- Are we discouraged from fixing typos and misspellings on Stack Exchange sites?
- Allow low-rep users to suggest edits
If someone sees a minor error and wants to fix it, why would we stop them? If the issue is rep, just don't give any for such edits. If the issue is bumping, don't bump such edits. If the issue is that too many people have to review the edits, lower the rep limit for minor edits. If you think that 2k rep users will somehow find it on their own or that flagging is the proper solution, you're introducing unnecessary bureaucracy. If you think that everyone can see a grammatical error without cringing, you don't know developer types. If you assume that there's always five more characters to change, you're encouraging gaming of exactly the sort you're trying to avoid.
Surely there's a better way?