7

I am feeling increasingly iffy about where the line should be drawn with regard to certain edits on formatting.

For example, this edit struck me as sensible because the editor @Maryam highlighted the words in question for the OP and italicized book titles, which I thought would help the readability of the post. I especially appreciate book/film/article/magazine titles in italics, because they are eye candies in blocks of text. However, that edit was rejected by @ColleenV. I take it moderators' reviews are definitive, so there is no third opinion. I thought I'd come here and ask, along with several other reviews I am not so sure about.

Make no mistake, I have rejected other format edits that I consider inessential, e.g. this edit from the same editor. I thought they changed the grammar and style of the OP in this edit, thus making it difficult for answers to assess the OP's English proficiency. Unfortunately, the other two reviewers disagreed with me.

Another example is this edit. I also held a minority view that the edit was inessential in reformatting. The original post, though arguably taking up too much space, doesn't affect reading. I prefers quotes in blockquote.

|
  • 1
    It's true that a moderator review is binding and effective immediately, but that doesn't mean there can't be a third opinion. Your first and third ones look like borderline cases that could have gone either way. I agree with you on the second one (about sunshine) – that should have been rejected, because the revision nullified much of the answer. However, I can see how that realization may have slipped past some reviewers. – J.R. Jul 17 '18 at 17:51
4

I rejected that first suggested edit because it was a trivial edit, not because it was bad formatting. The existing formatting was fine in my opinion and there was no need to bump the post or reward the suggester with 2 reputation points for a trivial edit.

If you have earned the privilege to make edits without peer review, you should feel free to improve posts even with minor formatting improvements (and even if a similar suggested edit was rejected). There's a difference (in my mind) between rejecting a trivial suggested edit and taking issue with minor formatting tweaks by community members that have earned the privilege.

I would just encourage folks to be restrained and think about whether they are really making the post easier to understand or if they are just making it more to their liking. I personally find highlighting a lot of words with bolding hurts readability, but it's a style choice and I wouldn't change a post if it was just to make it more to my preference.

I also had qualms about the "sunshine" edits, but decided to let the community handle it. I didn't have time to review the comments and wasn't sure if the edit was incorporating information from a discussion with the author.

I also agree with your rejection of the third suggested edit. The edit highlighted the prepositions that the question was about and in that sense made it a little clearer, but it changed one of the example sentences to add an article which should always be a rejection in my opinion.

|

You must log in to answer this question.

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