Meta Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for meta-discussion of the Stack Exchange family of Q&A websites. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I guess this question was already ask, but neither the site-search nor google brought me any information.
I recently got the required rights to review suggested edits (hooray, more power! ;). A few edits I reviewed left me wondering what I should do with edits to questions which should obviously be closed. Should I still accept them or should I simply skip them? Or should I reject them and if so, should I give any comment (if it applies: Which comment?)?
Annoying answer: it depends.
Somewhat more specific answer: it depends if the question could ever be salvaged and if this edit moves it in that direction.
If the question clearly shouldn't be here then there isn't much point editing it: we don't want people making perfectly grammatically correct spam. Equally if it's just nothing to do with the site, such as "How do I learn sowing" on Stack Overflow then that is never going to be on topic. Reject in all these cases.
The "[on hold]" process is in place rather than an insta-delete process because some questions can be saved; e.g. questions which are unclear or too broad can be made clearer and narrower. If the edit substantially improves the post then accept: this leaves the OP with less to do to bring the question on topic. Use your judgement here, consider what is the best overall result.
If it’s a good edit, it should be accepted.
Why?
In case the question is not (yet) closed:
In case the question is closed:
I think it’s especially important to get the tags right. Retagging (not-yet-closed | closed) questions makes sure that the relevant experts see them, and that these questions won’t show up on (possibly totally) wrong places on the site.
So, if you review a suggested edit to a question, don’t put on your close hat on top of your review hat. Approve the edit if it’s a good edit, then switch hats and vote for close.
