5
\$\begingroup\$

In reveiwing an edit I came across this: (screen snap) enter image description here

If you notice, the editor is different than the OP ... or are they?

I don't understand why the user name would change to anonymous, so I'm not sure what the right thing to do is on this IF it was a worthy edit and would trigger a reopening (the worthiness of the edit is not my point in this discussion).

Say it was a worthy edit, should I accept it as it "apparently" comes from another user? OR is it the same user but under another name?

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Just noticed that, personally I hit skip, the original question is from an unregistered user so probably the same person who's lost their login cookie but hard to know. \$\endgroup\$ – PeterJ Sep 20 '14 at 0:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ good point, never thought of that. \$\endgroup\$ – placeholder Sep 20 '14 at 14:09
4
\$\begingroup\$

I've seen some cases like these, too. I'd normally reject these kinds of edits considering that they change the meaning of the OP. Admittedly, it's a bit too literal an interpretation, but I didn't think there was a better option at the moment.

But that seems a bit harsh on new users - to throw away a potentially good edit like that. Some of those cases is just the OP clicking the "improve this post" link thinking they are editing their own post, unaware that they are not logged on.

I suppose that, if the edit seems to come from the OP and makes overall sense, we could just accept them and leave a comment to the OP asking them to review it. It doesn't really matter if that triggers a reopening or not, I guess, but the reviewer may spend a little bit more time evaluating if the edit is too minor for that.

That seems a more sensible solution to me.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Not being logged is certainly the most likely explanation, thnaks \$\endgroup\$ – placeholder Sep 20 '14 at 14:14

You must log in to answer this question.

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