Today my suggested edit of the question User tabs and actions was rejected. The "reason" added to the rejection was like so (I added the 'bold' markup in it here ...): "This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability."

For those who are not authorised to SEE this now rejected suggestion, here are all the details about the actual edit I suggested:

  • Original title = User tabs and actions
  • Title edit I suggested = How to keep user tabs when clicking on an action?

It was reviewed by ONLY the original author of the question, and for some reason (which I don't understand yet), it got rejected status. So without at least a 2nd rejection from another reviewer.

'Something' seems wrong here ... no?

Please read the title of this question again. Feedback?

PS to the question author (and rejector): do not take it personal please, that is NOT why I asked "this" question ... Check with 'Free Radical' to understand what I mean ...


When I first asked this question, this is what I thought the correct answer would be:

I think this is NOT acceptable, in that case at least a 2nd rejection should change the suggested edit status to "rejected".

Taking into account the answers to it in the next 30 to 60 mins or so, I changed my mind and want to rephrase it to something like this:

OK, these are all great and valid reasons/arguments towards the opposite, I.e that it IS acceptable. But in that case https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/editing needs to somehow reflect this also. While waiting for that to be updated, this is asking for confused and frustrated newbees ...".

Note: There is no edit suggestion link on that page, otherwise I'd have tried to suggest an appropriate edit there ...


With the way the system is set up, the original author is considered the owner of the post. This gives them some special powers on that post.

  1. They have the ability to "accept an answer".
  2. They have the ability to accept a duplicate answers their question, which will automatically close the question as a duplicate.
  3. They have the ability to unilaterally accept or reject a suggested edit.
  4. Effective April 2017, the OP has the power to retroactively approve or reject suggested edits (assuming no other edits were made to the post)

In all 4 cases, the reasoning is the OP is the person who knows exactly what their issue is and what they were trying to ask. They would be in the unique position to test the solutions and confirm it solved the problem that caused them to ask the question originally. Similarly, they also know what they were asking and hence would be in the best position to know whether an edit actually improved their question and was consistent with what they were trying to ask.

These abilities also give the users some feeling of control over the fate of their question.

Now occasionally, these powers are not used correctly. Some people dislike seeing their question edited and reject any edit. Some don't know what they are doing and will accept any edit. Some will accept any answer that they think solves their problem (resulting in the occasional bad accept) and some will never accept an answer because they don't understand the feature. But more often than not, these powers are used appropriately.

In your case, your edit seemed reasonable (although I don't know Drupal, so I'm not really in a position to judge the correctness), and the OP rejected the edit. Ultimately, it doesn't matter why. It is their question and they obviously felt that it was not an improvement (or it was a misclick). Given the user has almost 3K rep, it seems unlikely that they did not understand the feature, so it seems extremely likely that they did not feel your edit was appropriate.

In the end, regardless of why, it is just one rejected edit. The best course of action is to move on and continue to try to improve other posts.

  • Great feedback, appreciated. Hang on for more feedback, like to pinpoint a few facts like that 'Now occasionally' ... Check my suggested edit history since about 1 week ... Then look how bad things turned only today regarding all rejected suggested edits. Then investigate WHO rejected ... And the kind of rejections (you might also think like "... your edit seemed reasonable ..." for quite a few of the other rejections ... Understand what I am trying to communicate here (not native English ... Be aware ...)? Any kind of escalation procedures on SE? Extra hint: why did I get +100 bonuses ??? – Pierre.Vriens Mar 14 '15 at 22:51
  • 3
    @Pierre.Vriens I looked. You have a high volume of rejected edits on that site. I have zero experience on that site so I can't given you specific feedback. If you have a specific issue with editing review on Drupal.SE, I suggest you ask on Drupal's meta as they would be in a better position to evaluate your edits on their site. But if you want my opinion, in general, suggested edits are approved quiet frequently on most sites, so if you see a lot of rejected edits, you should look at the edits you are proposing and not blame the reviewers. – psubsee2003 Mar 14 '15 at 23:32

Should a question author be allowed to be the ONLY reviewer and reject a suggested edit?


Let me rephrase that to mean the same thing, but also make it more clear why I said "yes".

Should a question author be allowed to be the ONLY reviewer on their "own" question title, and reject an edit suggestion without it being reviewed by other users who are not the question owners and therefore don't know how author would prefer "their" title to sound?


Barring titles which are bad, spammy, or break the rules, etc, a question owner has and should have a higher authority over their own title and question.

Not sole control, because community do own the title and question, but community allow the author a higher authority over the title because it's their privilege to choose their own subject on the question.

Given this hierarchy, community can try to edit a question title, and community can authorise it too, but author has higher privilege because community allowed author to choose their own question title.

Look at it from the reverse perspective:

Someone has a better title for your question (this one we're on).
They suggest a change, and argued it is an improvement.

Do you reject, because "It is not the title you want 'your' question to have"?
Would you be happy not having this control and letting 3 other users to decide?
Would you not want some kind of higher authority given it is your question and title?

Or are you seething and thinking "Wait, this is MY title and question, I want 'my' title"?
Of course you are, and that is a privilege you and we all should have.

  • Great feedback, ALSO! Appreciated ... ALSO! Hang on for more feedback ... For now: seems to me link a contradiction also with the help link I mentioned in my comment to the other reply, no? – Pierre.Vriens Mar 14 '15 at 22:55
  • 1
    Where is the contradiction? If you mean "anyone can edit posts" then yes, they can. But it doesn't mean they will be accepted. Just like anyone with a driving license can drive a car, but that license doesn't insure you, or guarantee that you won't have a car crash. Life, and Stack, are not and cannot be so black and white. – James Mar 14 '15 at 22:58
  • From the help link: "Two (three on Stack Overflow) accept or reject votes are required to remove the suggested edit from the queue and either apply the edit to the post or discard it.", does this help to understand my point? – Pierre.Vriens Mar 14 '15 at 23:08
  • 2
    @Pierre.Vriens to be perfectly blunt, you are over analyzing the help center. The help center is not a terms of service or a contract, it is a guide as to the rules of the site. There are exceptions to every rule. If a moderator rejected your edit, would you feel the same? Ultimately the OP has some mod-like powers on their own question because it is their question. – psubsee2003 Mar 14 '15 at 23:17
  • @psubsee2003 I do not know what blunt means (not native English ... And hope to not need a dictionary lookup). But from the context I understand what you mean (I think). I somehow agree with your points, but why is a brand new user about 'forced' to go read the help (to get one of the first badges?). I did so, but via this post learned some caveat ... But you know what: From all those tons of questions hanging around and waiting edit reviews, I will think twice before touching a question from somebody with review permission, I will only consider those where there are more then 1 reviewers ... – Pierre.Vriens Mar 15 '15 at 0:30
  • Extra thought related to picking question for edit reviews: I noticed that there are some top users who have not rejected (always approved) my suggested edits. These users give me the impression that I somehow gained their confidence, which makes me feel more comfortable in suggesting edits to their own questions ... Approved in 1 shot ... Collaboration how it should be I think ... – Pierre.Vriens Mar 15 '15 at 0:34
  • 1
    @Pierre.Vriens your experience on Stack will be a much happier one if you take some feedback from the regular users here who are trying to advise you. You keep arguing back as if there are problems, but Stack is a well sorted set of sites. It has niggles yes, but nothing relative to the topics you are talking about. "but why is a brand new user about 'forced' to go read the help" Who "forced" you? You seem to think Stack should somehow magically be "obvious" to use, but it's a complex set of sites and there is a learning curve. Once learned, however, it is an invaluable resource! :) – James Mar 15 '15 at 16:42

You must log in to answer this question.