3

I like this peer review system; though I haven't really contributed to it as a reviewer.

At any rate, I modified a question and a reviewer has flagged it as rejected. I don't see the validity in their stated reason.

The guidelines on editing are fairly short; though, I thought it was a matter of policy to include relevant content and not simply link to it as an external resource. i.e. call stacks and sample output being part of the posted question.

4
  • 4
    Some reviewers just don't pay attention enough to actually look and see what's happening. The only blatant problem I see with that edit is your use of horizontal rules. None of those needed to be added, and some of them are making text render as headers which just looks odd. – animuson Feb 7 '15 at 18:30
  • 3
    Yes, you should edit posts to be self-contained. But reviewers tend to reject large edits. Removing the image would make me wary -- I don't think it's relevant either, but the asker did, so I'd tend to leave it. Also linking to a funny-named .xml at the end is suspicious. I would have skipped this review because I can't be sure, but I'm not surprised that some reviewers would choose to reject it. – Jeffrey Bosboom Feb 7 '15 at 18:32
  • 2
    The edit was subsequently approved by the OP, despite the reject vote. This is why it requires multiple votes to approve, and why the OP gets a binding vote. – Robert Harvey Feb 7 '15 at 18:33
  • 6
    The reviewer thought you made too many changes. You did make a lot, probably enough to prevent him from seeing why this happened. A bit sloppy, but that's why we don't rely on just a single reviewer. Your edit got approved anyway. Everybody happy. – Hans Passant Feb 7 '15 at 18:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/285580/question-editing-policy-on-externally-linking-resources
meta.stackoverflow.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-17
127319
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:U6KHBO2IVCFYW724T6GSSNRVZJGXF5XP
<urn:uuid:edb505f3-a266-4565-b205-70b890555b2f>
2021-04-20T11:39:21Z
151.101.65.69
text/html
sha1:UGWSO7ZD2G6IWPLYZR3KFYJT5UR5LCSS
<urn:uuid:211dd9be-90ed-4ff5-92a3-b2d6bed7e758>
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/285580/question-editing-policy-on-externally-linking-resources
response
<urn:uuid:103c460b-f951-49aa-9a31-977d92355aec>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-17
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for April 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-90.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/