5

Just a thought, been noticing in the past half year that the majority of edits have been very very minimal, and not very high quality.

For example, a question that has some grammatical issues with the poster having some issues with English or formatting, and having incorrect tags and a bad title, most edits will simply fix one thing and ignore the rest.

It seems most low rep users will go for the tags since they can get their +2 points for an edit quicker that way, but a lot of users on this site are losing focus of improving the question as a whole if it fits our guidelines.

Anyone else noticing this?

Also seeing a lot of "backseat commenters". Instead of going for an edit to help the post, they just add a comment saying "well you should do x, why didn't you do y, and don't do z please"

  • It's been debated a lot on SO and SE meta what to do with minor edits (check Shog's answer on this question ) and the community want to approve them despite the time it needs to be reviewed. Yes my last edit was too minor, should have corrected all the spelling too, you edited the answer as a whole. – Jonathan Drapeau Jul 31 '15 at 18:49
  • 1
    I think the issue is the reward. I don't want to be rewarded for making an edit and never want to change the way rep and edits work, but I feel a lot of users think "this is too much work, I'll leave it someone else" and "if it's quick edit, I can easily grab rep and leave the rest of it to someone else" – senpai Jul 31 '15 at 19:04
  • 1
    I have also noticed the 'backseat commenters' - but the ones I'm concerned about is the ones that say "You should improve your grammar", or "I get what you're saying but there's a lot of stuff here that isn't needed". If it's so bad, why do we not just edit it into shape? – Robotnik Aug 1 '15 at 5:47
  • 1
    @Robotnik Exactly! The people who complain are often the ones who do not take action. For me it's often the other way around; I take the time to do a full edit then comment later. – senpai Aug 1 '15 at 5:51
  • I often find myself rather commenting than doing the edit when the edit would require interpreting the poster's intent, usually from an unpuctuated wall of text. I freely admit this is mostly lazyness, but these (admittingly edge cases in this discussion) can be quite a head ache to go through. Sometimes literaly, – DJ Pirtu Aug 1 '15 at 19:08
  • do they get the +2 rep if they make a half-asses edit, and someone else improves it, before posting? I've had a few suggestions up that had left obvious content issues to be improved. – user106385 Aug 2 '15 at 4:45
  • @Timelord64 A successfully approved edit rewards the editor with 2 points. – senpai Aug 2 '15 at 7:20
  • IMO edits are going through too easily. Ever since "too minor" was removed as a reject reason, I've noticed a lot more small suggested edits and grammatical edits that only fix part of an answer going through. I've personally started using more custom reject reasons, which is good because it provides more detailed feedback, but I wonder whether suggesters ever see it, especially if their edit gets eventually approved. – Schism Aug 6 '15 at 5:01
  • 1
    @Schism - perhaps that's something that needs to be fixed? A notification that "Your edit was rejected, please view the reasons why and try and do better next time" would be good – Robotnik Aug 6 '15 at 6:21
  • @Robotnik I'd actually like a notification even if your edit is approved if it gets reject votes. Time to bug MSE... – Schism Aug 6 '15 at 15:46
  • 1
    @Robotnik Perhaps some would-be editors leave comments instead because they have had edits rejected in the past and are trying to apply "How to Edit [...] ► always respect the original author" to avoid another edit ban. – Damian Yerrick Aug 6 '15 at 23:16
  • @tepples - if SE did any analytics on whether people click through to their reject reasons, we'd be in a much stronger position to say that's probably the case – Robotnik Aug 6 '15 at 23:43

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .
https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10757/been-seeing-way-too-many-minimal-edits
gaming.meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-39
116161
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:YKK2BXQXTCLZQQPHPR3SD5TYPU7EFCM5
<urn:uuid:0a32814a-6602-44a1-b6e0-859c6095a4b5>
2019-09-21T17:32:38Z
151.101.65.69
text/html
sha1:WVMHPNQFQA2XYKNDNX7BVCPUP2S2MPQO
<urn:uuid:de8909a2-0d2f-4b76-bdfa-288600c5cb1d>
https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10757/been-seeing-way-too-many-minimal-edits
response
<urn:uuid:f895fded-cdc0-463f-90cd-2ff2a867d716>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-39
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for September 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-8.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/