0
\$\begingroup\$

I am facing the following issue:

I approved an edit for the following question: need high current in output of multiplexer for activating relay

But at the same time, somebody else rejected the edit because it was only typos and grammar improvements.

I am not 100% ok with the reject but anyway. Thus I wanted to edit the question to improve it further.

My question is: How can I do that?

The issue is: I have "edit (1)" below the question, if I click on it, it will display the review result and not the editor. Finally, I can't edit the question in order to improve it.

Is it because the previous edit case is not solved at the moment? Do I have to wait until that review is finally approved or rejected by somebody else and then re-edit with my improvements?

Is it an intended feature?

\$\endgroup\$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3
\$\begingroup\$

To answer your questions:

How can I do that (edit a question while there's another edit pending review)?

You can't. Unless you're a moderator, that is. You'll have to wait for the edit to be accepted or rejected before you can edit the post. That's not usually a problem here, as the Suggested Edits review queue is almost always empty (sigh!). Wait 5 or 10 minutes and the post will be free for editing.

Is it an intended feature?

It's a feature, I suppose. There's got to be an order to how the edits are applied so that the posts may be improved collaboratively.

One could argue that edits by users with more reputation (>2000) could overwrite edits from those with less reputation that are waiting in the queue. By doing that however, we would just be dismissing valuable work done by volunteers. By treating them that way, those junior editors may not stick around to become senior editors.

Again, whenever I get into that situation, I usually mark the post as favorite (i.e., I bookmark it) and get back to it later to make my edit when it's my turn.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ Actually, there is a way: if you're a 2k user, just press the "Improve" and "Reject and Improve" buttons respectively. But if the user is sub-2k, yes, this answer is correct. \$\endgroup\$
    – hichris123
    Commented Sep 18, 2014 at 21:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ @hichris123 The "Improve" and "Reject and Improve" buttons are new features that seem to have just been added - so they were not available at the time of this writing. But yes, they are improvements over the "Reject" and "Accept" only buttons - in the way you mentioned - as well as they make editors to work a little harder and contribute more. \$\endgroup\$
    – Ricardo
    Commented Sep 18, 2014 at 22:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ The "Improve" button was available before this, IIRC. They just changed it to add an individual "Reject & Edit" button. \$\endgroup\$
    – hichris123
    Commented Sep 18, 2014 at 22:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ @hichris123 - well, then you have a point. Well spotted! \$\endgroup\$
    – Ricardo
    Commented Sep 18, 2014 at 22:33
0
\$\begingroup\$

Beautification1 edits in the thread in question were premature. We are still waiting from the O.P. for a schematic, or diagram, or any other clarification.

--

1 A polite term for "putting lipstick on a pig". @Jared and @JYelton, I'm looking at you.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm not aware of any edits I made to the linked thread. However, I agree with the edits, as the question was a total mess. What exactly is the problem? \$\endgroup\$
    – JYelton
    Commented Aug 19, 2014 at 6:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JYelton Here's an example of the problem that I'm talking about. Your cosmetic edits made a grossly substandard question look prettier than it should be. That question was going down in a hand basket (as it should), and your edits were just a waist of your own time. \$\endgroup\$
    – Nick Alexeev
    Commented Sep 11, 2014 at 17:42
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Seriously, I fail to see the problem here. The question you linked to had a misspelling of one word and two letters to capitalize. Granted, the context does not change, which is a homework question with no effort to solve. I voted to close it on those grounds. However, I see no reason to leave a silly misspelling intact, regardless. \$\endgroup\$
    – JYelton
    Commented Sep 11, 2014 at 17:46

You must log in to answer this question.

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