One real example: I posted a question and, after a first comment, I decided it needs a rework. I can not do it immediately, thus, I've deleted the question to not waste the time of other users.

I'd like to edit it and, after that, undelete. However, the system only allows me to edit an undeleted question. If the undelete is done before to the edit, again some users can read the initial version in the time it takes me to improve the question.

Why are we not allowed to edit deleted questions?

  • 2
    You could undelete, quickly edit to say "Major edit underway, please don't try to answer until I'm done" at the top, and then do your big edit. This minimises the likelihood of someone trying to answer your original question as is. Also, if it gets closed while you are editing it, your edit should make it a candidate for re-opening. [Suggestion as a comment, since it's not an answer, just a work around]
    – Mark Booth
    Commented Jun 13, 2019 at 10:41

1 Answer 1


We have found a form of abuse that is very difficult for the system to counter:

  • Spammer writes a post (not particularly spammy)
  • It is immediately deleted by them
  • Spammer edits the deleted post to make it spam
  • Spammer undeletes the post

Problem with the above scenario is that undeletes like that are not surfaced anywhere, meaning that spam can end up being on the site indefinitely.

To protect against that, we do not allow edits to self-deleted questions.

Posts that are deleted, but not self-deleted can be edited without restriction.

  • 6
    So you say for sure that undelete does not bump the question? Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:31
  • @ShadowWizard - that was the case when this was implemented. I don't believe undeletes bump, not even today.
    – Oded
    Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:32
  • Thanks for your answer. If in the scenario you describe, steps 3 and 4 are inter-changed, which is the difference? (or if only steps 1 and 3 are done). Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:33
  • @Oded well there's a moderator insisting it does bump, can you please check to be 1000% sure? Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:34
  • @pasabaporaqui - if someone edits then undeletes it doesn't bump a post (we don't bump edits on deleted posts), however, if someone undeletes then edits, it does bump (as the edit was on a post that is not deleted).
    – Oded
    Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:36
  • 1
    Sorry for my ignorance, but what is "bump an edit"? Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:38
  • 16
    @Oded spammer can post spam (totally spammy), delete it after less than a second so nobody will notice, then undelete after few days. Spam sticks, system fails. Why not simply have the undelete event bump the question? Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:41
  • @pasabaporaqui - means that the post goes on the homepage.
    – Oded
    Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:42
  • ok, thanks a lot. What about a voluntary self on-hold? It this way, I can on-hold the question and, while all users sees question as hold, edit. Finally, remove the hold state. Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:49
  • @pasabaporaqui being closed/on hold does not prevent downvotes (or upvotes) on the question, only answers. What you ask for is the ability to temporarily lock a question by its author. Commented May 17, 2017 at 12:50
  • 16
    So... why not just add a bump when the question gets undeleted if it was edited.
    – Chad
    Commented Aug 7, 2017 at 15:51
  • 5
    Why doesn't this also apply for answers? Commented Feb 10, 2018 at 18:54
  • @DonaldDuck When a deleted answer to a non-deleted question is edited, the parent question is still bumped, resulting in 10k+ users being able to see what happened. Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 18:43
  • I agree with @Chad. I use the site as a semi-private journal. it's annoying to undelete before editing
    – blue_ego
    Commented Sep 1, 2023 at 18:43

You must log in to answer this question.

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