3

This is not a duplicate of this question, I believe.

I must put much effort into getting it into his pretty useless edits to be in usable state.

Should I Reject and edit, or Improve an edit, thus giving him +2 points?

EDIT1:

I thought I might not get out without an example, so here it is:

https://unix.stackexchange.com/revisions/273497/2

He just added the kbd formatting, while leaving everything else intact.

I had to re-write large text for it to become usable to my standards. Still not perfect, though, I will put more effort into it the next time.

  • It's kind of hard to answer without an example. If the edits are really useless, reject them. If they help, but can be improved, improve them. If it really happens too often, reject I guess. It will depend on the details. – terdon Dec 9 '16 at 9:12
  • @terdon Ok, You have an example there, I have stopped editing his "edits" until I see marginal difference. – LinuxSecurityFreak Dec 9 '16 at 9:37
  • 1
  • You might also appreciate my answer to What to do with mediocre edits ... ? – Scott Apr 23 '17 at 6:32
4

This is largely a question of personal preference. If you feel the editor didn't really put in enough work and is just creating work for the reviewers, you can reject.

If you're in a good mood and decide that, "Nah, at least they made it a little bit better," approve and let them get the rep.

Personally, I've sort of oscillated between the two positions at different times. It comes down to what you feel like. Was this review worth your time? Did it improve the post? Decide and act accordingly.

You must log in to answer this question.

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