1

How much of an edit should be allowed when it seems the proposed editor is ripping the personality out of a post, or adding correct punctuation and grammar?

These edit for example:

https://expressionengine.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/8361 https://expressionengine.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/8369

Code changes: absolutely, we've all done it.

Capitalisation: We always like to see expression engine written correctly ;) But taking the time to change capitalisation in references?

It's the additional edits where the person asking politely has been edited to the basic - and although I've only given two examples above there are loads of these types of edits that come through from different users. What's wrong with personality and politeness in a question? How does a new user feel when their grammar and tone is corrected on their question?

Should the moderated edits be re-edited to re-introduce the original posters fluff, or should we applaud the trimming down and grammatical perfection?

1

Good questions!

How much of an edit should be allowed when it seems the proposed editor is ripping the personality out of a post, or adding correct punctuation and grammar?

From the help center:

Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it. Common reasons for edits include:

  • To fix grammar and spelling mistakes
  • To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)
  • To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place
  • To correct minor mistakes or add updates as the post ages
  • To add related resources or hyperlinks

In the case of the first suggested edit you mentioned, the post is improved by the addition of code formatting. This helps other users by making the post easier to read. And it helps the original poster in two ways 1) it teaches them to add code formatting and 2) it increases the chances of them getting a good answer (because the post is easier to read).

Spelling or grammar corrections that make a post easier to read are substantive enough to be warranted, in my opinion. And if while they're making a substantive improvement (like adding code formatting), I think it's fine to do some really minor grammar or spelling corrections, as long as the spirit of the original post is unaltered.

For the second suggested edit you linked to I think the edits improve the readability of the post without changing the spirit of the post, so I agree that it's helpful.

What's wrong with personality and politeness in a question?

Nothing, in my opinion. I don't think editing a post for the sole purpose of removing a "thank you" at the end qualifies as a good edit, since it doesn't substantially improve the post. I don't feel it's necessary to remove a "thank you," but there are differences of opinion on that!

How does a new user feel when their grammar and tone is corrected on their question?

I think if the post is edited carefully, so that the changes don't alter the original spirit or tone, it should be OK. But I think you're right it should be treated gingerly.

  • 2
    Thanks for the clarification. I love the comments to the question on the link you included: "Whats wrong with hi or thanks? Boy what is this world coming to. Mundane mutes who just want answers." with 91 up votes. versus "Kill it with fire. You want to do social you get on Facebook. :) I like the questions just to be questions (without any noise)." with 82 up votes! – Peter Lewis Dec 15 '15 at 16:27

You must log in to answer this question.

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