Hot answers tagged

24

Personally I would not touch the posts as said in the Meta.SE post, and I would encourage everyone to flag spammy posts, even if they are already in the low quality queue. Flagging automatically deletes the post, does not require much reputation, and helps the system to automatically recognize spam. EDIT: Charcoal, our friendly neighbours that actively ...


13

That particular edit is not appropriate. It has been reverted. Passive-aggressive language that does not significantly clarify the question being asked and serves only to "invalidate" an answer the asker doesn't like is not the right way to deal with a poorly-worded question that isn't getting the specific answer desired: Either a new question should be ...


11

No comment on the right/wrong spelling, but to avoid a continual edit war flag the answer for mod attention with a custom message describing the problem, and if need be, we will lock the answer to stop further edits.


11

Ideally you would find a new source of the same information and edit that in, but failing that it might be better to remove the link or indicate it is now dead. Incidentally, this is why we prefer the relevant information to be quoted in an answer alongside the link, rather than just include a link.


10

Personally I am against it if it is done just for reputation farming, as it seems it is done now. I am not totally against it if now and then a user suggests or makes one such edit, but 10+ such edits from the same user in the span of a couple hours I feel it is excessive, especially if these are edits that grant reputation and do not add anything of value ...


10

I, personally, DESPISE smart/unicode quotes. Bear in mind when composing questions and answers that not every system is the same as yours - in particular, not every system has full unicode support (I occasionally read Stack Exchange sites in a terminal based web browser, with a terminal font that does not support smart quotes, so they look like this: �). ...


9

Unless the two users who clicked approve care to comment, it's hard to know what they were thinking. In this case, it does seem like they should have hit reject. Unlike Stack Overflow, we don't generally have much sitting in the review queue, so it's hard to tell if someone is acting like a robot or genuinely had some reason to believe the edit should be ...


9

I second Federico in that we should not edit spam -- flag it and move on. This puts the post in the autodelete department, requires very little rep to do (compared to any other action), and helps train the Stack's own spamfilters to recognize the spam in the future. It also puts the Stack system on notice that the user is acting spammy (so that the Stack ...


8

Griping about Unicode is a lost cause. It’s no longer the wave of the future; the future is already here. Back in 2012, Google reported that 60% of the web uses Unicode—a figure that is doubtless higher today. Complaints about smart quotes are legitimate—in some contexts. Word processors and other publishing software with the smart-quotes feature attempt to ...


8

What went wrong? Nothing. ♦ moderators have superpowers™. If a ♦ moderator accepts or rejects something, no other review is necessary.


8

It's funny, questions like this remind that Stack Exchange is becoming more and more diverse as time goes by. I think that if this were Stack Overflow the answer would be "the OP can do whatever they need in order to answer the question they have." But here on Aviation.SE, I'm not sure that's the case. Personally, I think that's because on SO questions ...


8

Edits to closed questions that do not make the question more likely to be re-opened should not be accepted. Accepting them only increases the noise, both on the main page and in the reopen queue.


7

Nope. It's not feasible to scan and change user input to the site - if we were to do it for aircrafts people would want it done for supposably, irregardless, alot, and many other words that cause people to twitch and foam at the mouth. We could blacklist the word aircrafts from the site (prohibiting its use anywhere on Aviation Stack Exchange), but that ...


7

I don't think it's appropriate to make large modifications. The Help Center says: Some common reasons to edit are: to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes to clarify the meaning of a post without changing it to correct minor mistakes or add addendums / updates as the post ages to add related resources or hyperlinks Nothing about a ...


7

The Help Center says: Some common reasons to edit are: to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes to clarify the meaning of a post without changing it to correct minor mistakes or add addendums / updates as the post ages to add related resources or hyperlinks Tiny, trivial edits are discouraged - try to make the post significantly ...


7

When I made the edit I didn't realize (until now) that despatch is an alternative spelling. So in this case, let it go. In other cases, where there would be a wrong spelling, I have no idea! I couldn't find an answer on MSE. Side note: tags are to be in American English, and the tag is already dispatch :)


7

No, I don't think we need an up-to-date fleet count in the tag wikis. Tag wikis are intended to describe the usage of a tag, not to be an encyclopedic description of the concept. Active fleet counts don't contribute to actual instructions on how to use the tag. As such, I'd reject those edits and remove the fleet count.


7

We don't have any specific policy about how using headers for screen reader accessibility. In general, we're (unfortunately) not great when it comes to accessibility on this network but we do want to improve in our accessibility. Years ago, when I first started using the site, I didn't actually know about headers. I used bold to create sections like the OP ...


6

You got 1,000 from edit suggestions (2 points per), that's the limit. Sean had 502 edit suggestions approved, and 25 edit suggestions rejected


6

I think it's appropriate - "useful" would be a better word - for the OP to edit the question based on comments and votes, to make it clearer or on-topic. I don't think it's useful to completely change the meaning of the question after it's already got upvotes and good, well-received answers. Doing that deprives everyone of useful information, even if that ...


5

I guess since I dug myself into this commenting on @Federico's answer, I should state my position on this. I don't feel that linked text "ruin the flow of a post". Indeed, I feel like they improve posts. I like the edits @GypsyCosmonaut made to this post (not to mention his/her cool moniker), which seems to be the one in question. That said, I think ...


5

I fully agree with you and I rejected the suggested edit for exactly that reason. I choose the following reason for the reject: This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability. I don't think this text fully explains ...


5

I had a similar problem on another Stack Exchange and asked about it here. There was a single zero-width space at the end of the post body. These are stripped on submission now... Unfortunately, that's done before the system compares the revisions to see what has changed. So it saw the tag edits and a one-character body edit. As a sub-2k user, you can't ...


5

Does personal preference take precedence over accessibility? No. Making this answer accessible to people who use screen readers is important. Making text slightly smaller, because you think it's prettier that way, is not important. In particular, in my browser, the only noticeable difference between a level-3 heading and a bold paragraph is that the ...


4

Personally, I agree with Notts90's comment. While I think adding some text to note that the link is dead is fine if you can't quickly find a replacement, I think just removing outright is harmful. Perhaps someone else will find another source for the resource if they see the link is dead, whereas it will likely never be fixed if you just remove it. For ...


4

This question itself is an interesting case, because there's a lot of incomplete data and assumptions inherent in the question (among them that the aircraft are "mid-flight" and not enroute to a nearby airport). I've partially-reverted the question with a synthesis of what appear to be the most relevant edits (where you saw the aircraft, and a map showing ...


4

I think adding references to everything ruins the flow of a post - I dislike it anywhere it is done. In general I'm okay with esoteric acronyms or terms being linked to a reference page, but other than that I wouldn't expect anyone to edit them in unless a commenter asks for clarification. I would reject any edit that didn't improve the post, and it's hard ...


3

To me Kevin's answer is marginally correct, but I'm glad he got all this reputation at once, as I'm sure he deserved more on his other answers. But let's be honest: If someone asks about how to recognize from the inside an A380 or a B747, every one will mention the engines or the two levels... and if someone just says "look at the safety card!", comments ...


3

I don't really see it as a reason to reject edits that improve the post - particularly in the case of duplicates. Duplicate posts are basically a sign that says "Go look here for the answer", and these edits are basically a fresh coat of paint on that sign. For the other kinds of closure I think cleaning up minor issues with a post may encourage someone to ...


3

The best source of info here is probably this Q/A How do suggested edits work? And a quote for a direct answer Can I earn reputation? When a suggested edit is approved, the user who suggested it gets +2 reputation. The regular daily reputation cap applies, and the total cap for reputation gained via suggested edits is 1,000. The +2 is reversed ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible