1

I recently visited a question with unformatted code. Before I could format it however, a low-rep user made an edit that was basically what I was going to do.

Here's the problem: I'm now not given the opportunity of just fixing the question like I normally could. I can only approve their edit, which requires it to sit in a queue and gather more approvals.

Why is it that I'm now blocked from simply fixing a question because someone else made an edit before me that requires approvals? If I can be trusted to carry out arbitrary edits on a question, it seems to follow that I should also be trusted to single-handedly approve an edit (or at least be allowed to still make my own). It's the same result: a single user allowing/causing an edit to happen to someone's post.

I think posts should be allowed to be edited as normal, even if there are pending suggested edits. I also think any user capable of making unchecked-edits to a post should also be allowed to single-handedly approve other edits.


I'll note though that this problem only seems to exist on the desktop site. When there's a pending edit, the edit button is replaced with a edit(#) button that brings up a review window instead of a direct editing screen.

In the app however, I can still make edits freely even when there's a pending suggested edit. The functionality doesn't change (likely due to limitations of the app).


(This stemmed from SO, but I believe it applies to the entire network.)

marked as duplicate by Shog9 feature-request Jan 31 at 20:08

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 3
    Isn't there an option to "improve edit" which will de-queue and accept the current edit and then add your improvement as an edit on top of it? From the faq "The Improve button allows reviewers to apply changes to the edited version of the text, so they can make further changes. The revised text is published when the improver saves their changes, and the edit will be considered 'approved'." Would this not fit your need? – scohe001 Jan 31 at 19:54
  • 1
    @scohe001 Doh. I don't know how I didn't realize that. Well then yes, that does make sense. – Carcigenicate Jan 31 at 19:54
  • Why though does a straight approval still require other approvals though? I still stand that it seems there's a disconnect there. – Carcigenicate Jan 31 at 19:56
  • 2
    An approval can be given by anyone. And since pending edits show up in the edit queue, which people not familiar with the subject material may be looking at, I'd say it's probably a good thing an approval/rejection requires 2 votes. If you have an edit you'd like to make, then it's clear you're familiar with the material, so you can immediately "Improve Edit" or "Reject and Edit" which will instantly approve/reject the queued edit with only your vote. That's my take on it at least. – scohe001 Jan 31 at 19:59
  • @scohe001 I suppose that makes sense. – Carcigenicate Jan 31 at 20:00
  • @scohe001 Lots of people, myself included, regularly edit posts outside of our areas of expertise. Reviewing edits also doesn't require domain knowledge to do (by design). Domain knowledge has nothing to do with why the edit review system exists as it does. – Servy Jan 31 at 21:50

Browse other questions tagged .