@ryanyuyu To be fair, there are only 16 edits and those were over a 20-30 minute period of time. There are human reviewers/editors that do more than that.
@ryanyuyu SO's average approval rate is 80.43%. I'd be doing incredibly well if a machine can achieve that, so I think it's probably better to start with something lower. Once it's doing a majority i.e. over 50% good edits, it's definitely worth something and we can start looking at hitting that 80.
@ryanyuyu Ideally. But we're working in the field of computer science and artificial intelligence, where that doesn't happen in the majority of projects. We target being worth something first, then we target achieving average, then we target being better.
There's also been a suggestion to check for "DO NOT USE THIS TAG" in the wiki, though I'm not sure how useful that is - not all bad tags have it, and it uses API quota.
@ArtOfCode other SEDE query might exist, but here's a starting point for determining your bot's accuracy once the data makes it to SEDE. Feel free to use/edit/ignore it. data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/385100/…
@ArtOfCode You might also want to keep track of tags that have been nominated for burnination. To save the API quota, you could just store these in a database or cache (as @Braiam suggests for the "DO NOT USE" tags).
> This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability.