Close look here didn't reveal that there is currently any expire time for suggested edits.

My request is simple: if suggested edit is not approved or rejected within 24 hours, silently ignore it as if it never existed and maybe notify the one who suggested it so that he can suggest again.

Upon one approve/reject (in SO), extend the period in another 24 hours.

Such thing can happen for edits in uncommon questions that are strictly related to code which not many are familiar with - e.g. suggesting a fix to glaring coding error in some answer, but only few can tell if it's really a fix or not.

Having such thing will help clear the queue and let new edits to be sugggested.

  • 1
    Maybe some 10k users should comment on this, as in, how often do they skip approving or rejecting suggested edits? My feeling currently is that this won't be the case very often. – takrl Jul 15 '11 at 11:53
  • 3
    I often skip when it's saying "fixing coding error.." and I'm not familiar with the programming language used. – Shadow The Princess Wizard Jul 15 '11 at 12:07
  • Makes sense I guess, I'm submitting many edit suggestions myself, but if it's a language I don't know or I haven't used in 15 years, I usually don't do it even though I feel there's things that need fixing. Anyhow, in my opinion the main argument is in the answer of @Cody Gray ... – takrl Jul 15 '11 at 12:11
  • Yep I've seen and approved many of your edits - you're doing good job and soon won't need approval. :) – Shadow The Princess Wizard Jul 15 '11 at 12:14
  • Thanks. It's 2k isn't it? Looking forward to that :) Also, I think it's good fun, and I've stumbled over quite a few interesting posts while submitting edit suggestions, which I otherwise might not have seen. – takrl Jul 15 '11 at 12:20
  • @takrl yes indeed.. just one thing - please try to avoid suggesting edits to old posts (more than 6 months old) unless it's some really glaring code error causing crash when executed, or typo in title which means broken search.. things like grammar or even code formatting doesn't really matter for old posts in my opinion. :) – Shadow The Princess Wizard Jul 16 '11 at 21:15
  • IIRC I've never edited a post just for grammar or spelling (after all, I'm not a native speaker myself). Regarding code, the typical closing brace rendered outside of the code block I wouldn't submit an edit for. But I've seen lots of posts with invisible content (plain xml or html pasted), or simply code that was rendered as text without any formatting - for these things I think an edit is necessary, and sometimes I wonder why nobody edited them in the first place. The only thing that worries me about these is bumping an old thread back to the first page of "active posts" via editing. – takrl Jul 16 '11 at 21:54
  • @takrl I mean such suggested edit - there was no invisible code, it's quite on the "grey line". Of course it would have been better edited when still new but sometimes such sloppy formatting just slip away. – Shadow The Princess Wizard Jul 16 '11 at 22:03
  • Interesting ... I'd have thought that this was perfectly reasonable instead of "grey line". What's the main notion behind such an edit suggestion being "on the grey line"? Is it the thread getting unnecessarily bumped, or is it the additional approval work for +10k users? – takrl Jul 16 '11 at 22:10
  • @takrl only few people will reach those old questions via search, the main traffic is new questions - IMO no point digging such old posts just to fix formatting as it's only "decoration". Makes any sense? – Shadow The Princess Wizard Jul 16 '11 at 22:21
  • Right. I have to say I don't fully agree with this, but I can see your point. Is there any general rule for this, a 'code of conduct', so to speak? (I didn't find anything on this.) If not, I may just post a new question here on meta to get a broader view and not just your and my opinion ... – takrl Jul 17 '11 at 10:13
  • No one place, but found three related questions: one two three – Shadow The Princess Wizard Jul 17 '11 at 11:02

The determining question here is how often a suggested edit really lingers in the queue without any votes for over 24 hours. I suspect that doesn't happen very often, at least not on a site as active as Stack Overflow. There are plenty of 10k+ users on the site at any given time of the day, and in my experience, a large number of them are willing to spend some time processing the items in the suggested edits queue whenever they have a chance to do so. This seems like something that solves itself.

And on the smaller SE 2.0 sites where it seems more plausible that edits go longer between being submitted and being approved, I don't think there's any real benefit to expiring them.

Do you have any particular reason for making this feature request? Have you seen any edits linger around for a couple of days or more? I imagine the queue does fill up, but I suspect it's due to our giant user base submitting bunches of edits nearly simultaneously, rather than stale edits left unprocessed.

  • I've seen couple of edits linger for over 5 hours today, they're gone now so can't post link... but I just assumed that if 5 hours, it might as well become much more. Thanks for the good points though. :) – Shadow The Princess Wizard Jul 15 '11 at 12:09
  • 1
    Some of us are occasionally away from SO for more than 5 hours. Work and stuff... – Bo Persson Jul 15 '11 at 12:49

You must log in to answer this question.

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