7

A user suggested an edit to my answer on this question of theirs.

They removed relevant, useful information from my answer because (presumably) it incriminates them of spamming. Fortunately, because they didn't have the privilege, the edit was rejected by two established users.

Is this behavior acceptable?

If not... What, if anything, could be done to help discourage malicious edits such as these?

2
  • 2
    Are you asking if it's okay, or what can be done to stop it? Your title and body disagree. Dec 25, 2014 at 1:01
  • @TheGuywithTheElfHat Fixed.
    – Mooseman
    Dec 25, 2014 at 10:55

3 Answers 3

11

If the user doesn't have the privilege to edit, you or two users who do have editing privileges will reject the edit.

If the user has the privilege to edit, it will go through and you (or anyone else watching, actually) can roll it back if you feel that it's necessary. ( though I find it rare that users with 2K rep will edit maliciously like that; by the time they get the privilege, they're usually deserving of it, in my experience )

Why isn't the regular editing system enough?

5

I think putting the edits in the triage queue is overkill. We have a edit queue already.

Let the community reject that edit or do it yourself. If it was approved already: just roll it back. If you come in an edit war: flag it for moderator attention.

-1

I propose that substantial/suspicious edits by users over 2k be added to the triage queue. To be considered suspicious, the edit would have to either

  • Remove a significant amount of text (>~30%) without adding much (<~5%) or
  • Add a significant amount of text (>~100%)

Because of the way the triage queue works, no useful action may be blocked (Especially important for the removal of offensive content), but malicious actions will be peer-reviewed.

You must log in to answer this question.

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