Rejection of edit

Question

I recently suggested an edit and I would like some more information on why it was rejected, since the reasons given seem to be the same template text. I'd also appreciate some guidance on how I could have done this better.

The issue I was trying to edit: The question and answer are about Li-ion safety. As part of this, the answer links to a video that, according to the answer, shows the effect of water on a Li-ion battery cell. However, this is not what is shown in the video: this shows the effect of water on pure lithium metal, extracted from a primary lithium battery cell, not a secondary Li-ion battery cell. I therefore wanted to remove the link to this unrelated video. I also don't agree with the assertion that "throwing water on lithium does nothing good, at least in terms of fire reduction" if this is not further explained or supported with a different source (the cooling effect of water would be a major help in preventing thermal runaway in a battery pack).

Thus, without this video to support it, the entire sentence became a kinda weird, unsupported afterthought, so I opted to remove the whole sentence. Apparently, this was too drastic an action.

So, what should I have done?:

• Nothing.
• Remove just the link, leave the sentence untouched.
• Do what I did, the reviewers are incorrect.

Answer 1

I would remove the sentence, and add a link and a sentence on why putting out LiPo battery fires with water is not a bad idea, and how at least it can reduce the temperature of a fire, while not always being capable of putting out larger fires. I think BatteryUniversity has a nice synopsis. Perhaps a warning about how this isn't right for Lithium metal batteries would be important.

I think the declined edit wasn't quite right, especially as this is a matter of safety. Having people unnecessarily avoid the most readily available means of fire extinguishing is not a good idea.

Answer 2

While I agree that this does need to be added to the post somewhere, this could probably be best served as a comment or writing a better answer than the posted answers, instead of directly editing the question or answer as it could conflict with the authors intent. I wasn't the only one.

The guidelines for reviewing are here: What are the guidelines for reviewing?

While a reason to approve an edit is to 'provide information found in comments' I still think that this information could conflict with the authors intent.