I fixed the typo in the title, and corrected the units. However, the edit was rejected.

The [standard] reason given doesn't really seem to apply:

This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability.

I'm not particularly bothered about this specific rejection, nor am I trying to pick a fight. I am merely, respectfully, asking whether, or not, to attempt fixing typos, grammatical errors and incorrect units in future, in particular on the beta Review queues - only 650 points to go!

2 Answers 2


I recently drafted up a guide for a 3rd party about when to edit posts. It included this brief passage:

  • Make titles clear
    Sometimes folks are hesitant to edits something others have written, but titles carry a bit more importance than making someone's copy clear. Questions are the entry point for search and it helps draw people into content that may interest them. When you see a title like "Can someone help me with this problem?", don't assume users will open every questions they see. If you can improve a title to make it even a little bit more clear about what post contains, you should edit it. Always. (and encourage users to the do same)

I know the title error was just a typo, but consider also that titles define the front entryway to your site… and you want to keep that pristine. Being that you also went in and corrected various typos throughout the post, I (personally) would have approved that edit many times over.

We have to get over this aversion to touching people's stuff in a wiki-collaborated system… especially if it gives the original author (and the site) a bit more credibility.

My opinion.

  • That's a great point about the post title. I've never really thought about it like that.
    – Adam
    Mar 17, 2016 at 20:51

I rejected that edit because, as the end of the reason states, the changes were superfluous. Looking back at it, the only thing really changed was capitalization aside from single, minor punctuation and spelling corrections.

My personal edit philosophy is that edits should only be made if something is seriously getting in the way of how a post is presented, and this being my personal philosophy, I don't consider capitalization to be in that scope. Now of course everyone has their own opinion on this, and that's perfectly okay. I try not to clash with other opinions too much.

Since it's been brought up, I suppose we could get some input from more people on what we might consider to be superfluous when it comes to making edits on this site. Glad you brought this up!

You must log in to answer this question.

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