I was looking at this recent question.
Out of curiosity, what's the deal with removing "Thanks!" and the meaning of the question in the topic? (I think version 1 was perfectly fine.)
Including "Hi", "Thanks in advance", "This post by Michael Mrozek", etc. is highly discouraged -- these are supposed to be references, not conversations. There's a recent change that will automatically try to strip out salutations at the beginning of posts, but it doesn't check for things like "thanks" at the end yet.
When it comes to editing it out of existing posts, the accepted practice is "go for it if there's other stuff you want to edit, but don't bother if you're editing just to remove that one thing, it's not important enough". Personally I don't care if people want to edit just for that though
As for editing the title, the original poster did that separately and I'm not exactly sure why. There's a push throughout the network recently to have complete sentences in titles, so I edited it again
As the most prolific Remover-Of-Thanks on U&L, perhaps I should weigh in here. I feel fairly strongly that the assortment of "TIA" type sign-offs are a distraction to the purpose of the site. I remove them with vim and vigor (quite literally on the
I generally don't edit if a "thank you" removal is the only change pending. If there is a signature or salutation as well, then I go for it. However it is a very rare post that I don't see something else to improve. There are always punctuation and formatting issues to smooth out, tags to be added, etc. I have taken to always opening the question editor right away on brand new questions, particularly from lower rep users. Rather than reading all the way through, then going back to edit, I just fix up the little details as I read through the question.
In the case of the post in question, I thought I was going to be able to format it better, but when I got done I realized I wasn't sure I could make any improvement. There was no real point in canceling the edit just because it was minor, so I saved.
One of the most significant drawbacks to editing questions is that they get bumped to the home page. Most of the posts I edit are only a few minutes old, so they are on the homepage already and I don't consider this a drawback. It also means the OP is likely hanging around and will see the change and learn for next time.
Particularly troublesome are the "I would be eternally grateful if you could just give me any idea how to fix my problem." type epic sign-offs. Removing these helps users understand that rewarding the community is done by upvoting, posting answers, awarding bounties, etc. It's not a social site and works as well as it does partially because it tries to eliminate as many of the social aspects as possible.
Lastly, you mentioned in a comment that the "Thanks" can serve as a kind of closure to the question so it doesn't leave you hanging. My idea on that is that if the question feels like that without a thanks, then it could be re-worded to be clearer. Sometimes there is extraneous information tacked on to the end that should be worked into the post so that the question comes through full force at the end. Sometimes that data just needs to be formatted so it's clear where where the question ends and the random details begin. Having to have a "thanks" in every post for closure seems like a prop for an otherwise poorly worded or formatted post.