While the underlying policy for voting seems quite clear I am not sure how to judge answers that were initially not helpful but then went through a rewrite by an editor.
For example I was reading a new answer to a good question. This new answer was far worse than the already accepted answer while at the same time stating that the user with the original question should "just google it". So unhelpful and unfriendly, my mouse drifted towards the downvote button. Before I could vote a moderator edited this answer heavily, removed all condescendingly language, improved technical details and expanded the text.
So what should I base my vote on now? I want to upvote good answers but not encourage people writing unhelpful pieces that just get fixed by the community. Is there a consensus or recommendation in such cases?