###Suggested Edits Users without enough reputation to edit have their edits placed in this queue. If two users approve an edit (if one rejects and one approves then it waits for more users to review it), then it is published. If you feel that the edit is:
- too minor: not much added, the post was fine without the edit
- vandalism: it made the post worse
- radical change: it modified the post so that it may no longer be what the author meant it to be
- invalid: it was probably supposed to be a comment or an answer
- plagiarism: the edit is just a copy-paste from an external source without block-quoting and attribution
then, reject it as such.
You can also Improve a suggested edit when you notice that the post has other things which need to be fixed. While applying your further edits, you may also choose whether or not to mark the suggested edit as "helpful" (if not marked as such, the edit is rejected, though your improved edit still goes through). Too many rejected suggested edits block a user from suggesting more for a while; keep this in mind while rejecting edits.
You gain access to this queue with the ability to edit questions and answers.
See Also: How do suggested edits work?
##Guidelines for reviewing Suggested Edits
- Review the differences between the original post and the suggested edit, and the edit summary above the differences.
- Check if there is any reason to reject the edit. If you find any, Reject or Reject and Edit.
- Verify if the suggested edit is complete. If there is anything else to edit, Improve Edit.
- Otherwise, Approve.
- Edits that introduce formatting (code, bold or italic) where such additions just don’t make sense or don’t make any difference. Reject as no improvements whatsoever, vandalism or causes harm, depending on the case.
- Edits that change an answer’s explanation or code to a supposedly better alternative. Even if the proposed solution is better, it should be added as a comment or a separate answer. Reject as clearly conflicts with the author’s intent. If the edit summary specifically mentions that these changes are from a comment by the author of the post, the edit can be accepted.
- Edits that attempt to add clarification to an answer, like “this doesn’t work in Windows 8”, or add further questions to an answer should be rejected as attempt to reply.
- Edits that modify code or correct code typos in a question, with the exception of indentation changes and other white space modifications (in non-whitespace sensitive languages), should be rejected as clearly conflicts with the author’s intent or causes harm.
- Edits that plagiarize content from an external source without proper attribution. Reject as causes harm. (Always check for plagiarism from common sites such as wikipedia when a tag wiki/excerpt is created!)
- Edits that add content that doesn’t belong (e.g., “thanks in advance”, “please help me”, “SOLVED” in the title).
- Edits that add irrelevant tags.
- Edits that change URLs to link to unrelated content (hover changed links to make your browser show the actual URL) should be rejected as spam or vandalism.
Explicitly check URL changes: This is an easy way to sneak spam in, so do not assume a link update is correct without verifying.
Check the edit summary before rejecting: Occasionally a poster has provided information in a comment or other answer that cannot be seen on the edit review screen, and the editor is bringing that content into the post. This should be mentioned in the edit summary. You can click the question link (it’s probably best to open it in a new tab) to see the full context.
It helps if you know the language: Sometimes an edit fixes a minor typo in the code that was obviously hand-typed by the answerer (typos in questions should not be fixed as mentioned above). It’s a challenge to know the difference between a typo-fix and an actual change if you don’t know the language. For example, in Perl, a single character can change the entire meaning of a line. In C++, changing
==to=can also have a dramatic impact. You don’t always need to understand the content of an edit to review it, since suggested edits should mostly be about changing the format without changing the meaning, but if you are not sure, skip the edit and leave it for someone who knows.For specifics about reviewing tag wiki edits, see this answer to How do I review tag wiki edits for new tags?.