Right now I can say "good" or "bad" to a proposed edit at my discretion, but is anyone able to see this decision and moderate it?

I recently saw a good edit that I was going to approve, but when I clicked 'approve' it said that the edit was already rejected. So, I had to go to that post and make that exact same edit myself.

Is there any moderation in place for this?

  • To see: yes, if you know the number. Also, this might be linked one day: really need some better auditing linked directly from the history. – Arjan Feb 3 '11 at 18:52
  • @Arjan, cool! Edit approval stats! – jjnguy Feb 3 '11 at 18:54
  • @Arjan, so this info can be found. But it seems like it would be impossible to find unless you were the one approving or rejecting. – jjnguy Feb 3 '11 at 18:57
  • True, I think (though if you know the approval timestamp, and assume not too much time passed since the proposal, you can do some quick sort to get close). But like waffles commented: really need some better auditing linked directly from the history. – Arjan Feb 3 '11 at 18:58
  • 3
    That's the opposite problem I have -- I keep seeing terrible edits that get approved – Michael Mrozek Feb 3 '11 at 19:00
  • Ah, I WAS SO CLOSE! stackoverflow.com/edit-suggestions/1808 – Arjan Feb 3 '11 at 19:01
  • @Arjan, haha. I can't approve any more tag wikis though it looks like... – jjnguy Feb 3 '11 at 19:02
  • 1
    As an aside: the message about having to go into the post to edit yourself is a nice solution for peer review being too active! – Arjan Feb 3 '11 at 19:05
  • Waffles also suggested to use the permalinks in comments, when you disagree about some edit/approval/rejection. Sounds good to me. (Though then you cannot always use @name to notify the approver/rejector, and nor the editor if the edit was rejected.) – Arjan Feb 3 '11 at 19:25
  • 1
    Please, please don't ever add the string "Have you meta-moderated today?". :) – Ether Feb 3 '11 at 22:08
  • Somewhat related: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/197552/… – Johnny Bones Dec 11 '13 at 22:09
  • How about flag button? Could it be used to receive more attention to the problematic rejects? There are prejudjed reviewers who reject improvements considering them superfluos however a lot of changes have been made, including styles applying to related things. They also state, that edit does not improve readability, but in that cases it improves readability hugely. If couples of rejectors review an edit, it is leaved without changes, or one of these rejectors reedit it almost the same way. It is not about stackoverflow, but about askubuntu or superuser, but the problem could be met here. – Gryu Jan 4 '20 at 13:18

Yes. The suggested edits includes information on who approved or rejected each edit, as well as some extra info on the approver's history.

Diamonds get access to extra information on that screen such as links to similar approvals/rejections by the approver. Furthermore, they have access to a tool that gives them stats on both sides - users who are submitting edits and what has been approved/rejected, and users who are approving/rejecting edits and how frequently. I only have it on Gaming, so I don't have all that much data to see anything of importance, but from the sheer volume of data we have there, we have quite the arsenal on our hands to monitor the review process. It's also pretty easy to navigate.


New user comment meta-moderation, eh? But who will moderate the meta-moderators?

Any users who have edit moderation privileges could just vandalize posts themselves if they actively wanted to be malicious. As for honest mistakes, we're all human, mistakes will be made. They'll be sorted by the next editor in time.

  • 3
    but if a 2k editor makes a change, there is a public history. This suggestion history just seems to disappear. – jjnguy Feb 3 '11 at 18:52

I imagine it wouldn't be too hard to add pages for "recently approved edit suggestions" and "recently rejected edit suggestions" to the 10k-tools "links" section.


I presume that if approvals were being made without due care it would show up as an increased number of roll-backs.

  • 1
    But wouldn't we only see this if the post owner had the rights to rollback edits? I'm seeing a lot of low-rep to low-rep editing. – chibacity Feb 3 '11 at 19:07
  • @chibacity: I thik you'd see it most emphatically where the owner has roll-back privileges, but when I see a bad post that already has edits, I sometimes look at the edit history in hopes of discerning if the edit made the situation better or worse---and I believe that (at least some) other high rep users do the same---so I'd expect some signal even with low-rep posters. No idea how significant it would be. – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Feb 3 '11 at 19:09
  • 2
    @chibacity Post author always has access to rollback. – Grace Note Feb 3 '11 at 19:11
  • @Grace IC - thanks. I wonder how often users actually roll back edits that they disagree with e.g. when they do not understand how the system works when they are low rep\new. Does the editor get notified if ver edit is rolled back? – chibacity Feb 3 '11 at 19:17
  • 2
    @chibacity Ohoho, rollbacks occur fairly often, sometimes to fix an inappropriate edit but also in refusal to accept the edits of other users. Rollback wars are horror stories of the early years. To answer your precise question, there is no direct notification of a rollback to the other editors. – Grace Note Feb 3 '11 at 19:20
  • ...and by horror stories, Grace means posts with 30+ edits, most of the roll-backs. – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Feb 3 '11 at 19:24
  • @Grace Thanks for the info. Rollback wars - oh dear :( – chibacity Feb 3 '11 at 19:24
  • @chibacity, don't know how often it happens, but a nice example of multiple bad rollbacks: stackoverflow.com/questions/4888097/… – Arjan Feb 3 '11 at 21:09

You must log in to answer this question.

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