6

For example, this: https://gis.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/154910

It's just a minor edit "for grammer" to a question that is over 4 years old. I know this has been raised before, but it feels like an edit just to gain reputation/badges. And won't it bring the question to the top of the pile when nothing really has changed?

So I guess my question is, would it be wrong to reject minor grammar edits on very old questions? I don't see any benefit to accepting it.

13

Changing

How do I re-run the model

to

How can I do a re-run to the model

is not an improvement at all. This suggested edit should be rejected.

However, I would not generalize this to "grammar edits on very old questions". Many posts that were written a long time ago are being read today by people coming from search engines. If poor writing makes those posts hard to read, it should be corrected.

7

New users are encouraged to make edits to gain reputation to unlock privileges such as commenting. Sources:

To be consistent with the accepted answers to those questions, we should allow minor edits that only correct spelling or grammatical errors.

Based on the comments on those question pages, it seems that many new users are frustrated at their inability to participate by commenting. I think that any new user who makes the effort to build up their reputation on this site should be encouraged. Of course with the disclaimer that truly unhelpful edits should be discarded.

After all, the Suggested Edit Review Queue on GIS SE is not exactly overflowing with minor edits.

enter image description here

(sound of crickets)

TL;DR: If an edit makes a positive change, even a minor one, go ahead and approve it.

You must log in to answer this question.

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