I suggested this edit and it was rejected/edited, with the following message attached:

This edit did not correct critical issues with the post - view the revision history to see what should have been changed.

Naturally, I looked at the revision history to see what I'd missed. Surprisingly, almost no real content had been changed from my edit. The two biggest changes I saw were changing "deserts" to "desserts" and adding a period after one of the instances of "Dr," which, I acknowledge, I missed.

However, since literally every other change I proposed was left alone (aside from choosing to use "will" instead of "would," which does absolutely nothing to change the meaning of the post and works just fine either way), I don't see why this was rejected and edited, rather than simply improved. I was under the impression that Rejection + Editing was due to the edit being inherently bad, while acknowledging that edits to the original posts were necessary. Was my proposed edit really that bad?

  • Most likely by mistake. Have you seen the editing interface?
    – Hakase
    Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 20:47
  • @Hakase, yes, I review posts on Arqade daily. Even if you click Reject and Edit by mistake, you can cancel. Similarly, Rejecting a post requires you to select a reason. I also am pretty sure the order of buttons is Accept, Improve, Reject, then Reject and Edit, but I may be mistaken...
    – Vemonus
    Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 20:51
  • I rejected it because I didn't understand why you removed the link. Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 21:06
  • @ShayminGratitude It wasn't attached to anything and there was no way to access it. I didn't see a purpose in it being there...
    – Vemonus
    Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 21:12
  • @ShayminGratitude In fact, the link is still inaccessible even with your edit.
    – Vemonus
    Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 21:13
  • Well, I'd say I made a mistake then. When I read your edit comment, I thought you meant that the video link was dead, which wasn't the case. Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 21:15
  • 1
    There was a major problem in there, being that you left the [2] reference in there and didn't change it to [1]. Obviously, that would have been an approve and edit though, not a reject and edit. Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 21:16
  • @ShayminGratitude then that was my bad. I was about to click submit edit with the link still included but removed it at the last second. Forgot to alter the numbers afterwards. I'll be more explanatory in my edit comments going forward to avoid this, though.
    – Vemonus
    Commented Nov 4, 2016 at 21:18

1 Answer 1


The reviewer was probably thinking along the lines of the removal of the link being in conflict with the author's intent. Given the age of the post, it is unlikely the original poster was going to go back and edit that link back in. Thus, it seems the reviewer made a mistake. Clearly the reviewer should have reviewed the edit more carefully.

  • 2
    "Given the age of the post, it is unlikely the original poster was going to go back and edit that link back in" i do get notifications when my posts get edited and i do check out the edit history when it happens. it's just that this all occurred and was resolved while i was asleep. as of posting this comment the edit was suggested 9 hours ago, as i am in Australia's Eastern Side (AEST Time = GMT+10) and it's 3:30 PM now the edit was suggested at ~6:30 AM and i didn't wake up till 8:30 AM (it's saturday for me, no work = sleep in)
    – Memor-X
    Commented Nov 5, 2016 at 4:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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