« first day (3284 days earlier)      last day (850 days later) » 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 23:00

3:10 PM
Or rather, Reject and Edit and correct the spelling mistake they made.
 
Why Reject and Edit?
 
Because the edit is not that substantive; suggested edits should improve multiple things.
 
They made a typo. Prime case for "Improve Edit".
 
Seems ok to me
 
But simply adding three articles to the post isn't the type of suggested edit we're going for. Suggested edits, by their nature, are expected to be substantive. As a binding edit it would be OK, but not so much as a suggested edit.
 
3:13 PM
Who is... we?
 
@SonictheAnonymousWizHog amazing that this person is English teacher. I mean.... such obvious and major grammar mistakes... :/
 
More critically the edit and improve hopefully acts as a teaching moment...
 
@JourneymanGeek From what I've seen, many editors just focus on the approval and corresponding rep gain, than on the improvement.
 
IMO the edit should have been rejected, they don't deserve to get rep for adding typos.
 
@SonictheAnonymousWizHog If you're going to get reputation 2 points at a time... its going to be a loooooong time coming
 
3:15 PM
@JourneymanGeek Those 2 rep are awarded equivalently whether someone makes an extremely minor edit or a very substantive edit.
 
@SonictheAnonymousWizHog and?
 
So in principle, I'd reserve the rep gain for the substantive edits.
 
Its two points
There's no deserve. There's "Hey, we want you to get into the habit of making edits"
 
Edits are edits.
 
I'm based on principles, so whether it's two, one, or half a point, I still think only substantive edits should qualify for the full rep, no matter what that value happens to be.
 
3:18 PM
Why the heck should it matter how "substantive" it is if it addresses the issues in the post? Don't penalize them because they made a typo, approve and improve the edit because they're acting usefully, and unintentionally made a typo.
 
If you don't bother to check your edit for obvious grammar mistakes and typos simply don't edit. Do something else with your time. That user has other bad edits, it's not his first.
 
Well, or potentially made an easy to spot typo to get over the minimum word limit...
 
@Mithrandir To be clear here, I'm not referring to the typo; I'm referring to the fact that all the edit did is add in a few articles.
 
That's all that was missing in the post.
 
Can anyone tell me why suggested edits need to change at least six characters in the post?
(hint: the answer is in the FAQ)
 
3:19 PM
The "too minor" reason was nuked for a reason.
People can make minor edits, but better without glaring new errors.
 
@SonictheAnonymousWizHog on the other hand - if its an error that bothers you, and you're like "eh, its useful..."
 
That's just waste of the reviewers time.
 
(Of course, we wouldn't be having this conversation if we just trusted the review queue to be, well, reviewed)
 
Had I not clicked on the regular Reject button too soon, I would have R&E'd it.
 
Well, that's entirely your fault
 
3:21 PM
!!/blame
 
@ShaWiz It's Pseudohuman's fault.
 
@JennaSloan is Pseudohuman still active?
@ShaWiz What was I supposed to "promise"?
 
@SonictheAnonymousWizHog only in Den
(and the Top Secret room)
 
Anyway...my answer went from being -4 to the top-voted answer there
 
uhh... congrats?
 
3:26 PM
congrats!
 
uhm
your other answer is -4
and there's one other
 
 
1 hour later…
4:50 PM
Hiya. I'm dropping in to get some opinions on a matter raised in comments :)
@rene If I know of a user who lost 19k in one go, but due to voting reversal, is it inappropriate to link to them? The info is public (it's on their rep tab), but I wouldn't seem to be name-calling. — Jenayah 1 hour ago
@Jenayah it is always tricky. If it is not reasonable obtainable with a SEDE query or via the Stack API I consider it as something that is best left to be discovered by everyone on their own. I don't fancy a wiki answer here where we keep a reputation lost league. But that is just my opinion. Do query in the tavern if you want more point of views on the issue. The info being public anyway is a viable stance as well. — rene 1 hour ago
For what it's worth, I knew of that figure (19k lost has got to be some kind of record?) because it was linked to in a per-site meta comment. No query involved...
I won't lose sleep over it, but I'm curious about what others may think.
 
You have my point of view already ... ;)
 
Meh. In this particular instance, I don't think that user was the one at fault, so...
 
@Mithrandir it is an up or a down vote. There is no meh vote
 
There was on Imgur this April 1...
 
totally missed that.
 
5:04 PM
It was literally a "meh" vote. It was blue, and popped up with a "meh" GIF when you pressed it.
 
5:20 PM
They should do a retro style next year ...
 
back to 80-column ...
 
@Jenayah I'd say when in doubt, don't... Just because it's really hard to estimate how the person this is about will take people talking about it.
 
Stumbled upon this as part of a Skeptics question
I like how Prague is hugging Moscow, and Brussels Berlin.
Not even Berlin, more like Warsaw.
 
5:35 PM
Anyway, remember when this happened..?
 
Holy crap, what's wrong with a bloody legend?
 
@MetaAndrewT. whoa, what's the story? :-)
@Tinkeringbell noted.
 
@Jenayah Nicael was a . . . fine . . . tester
 
 
1 hour later…
6:38 PM
Should this edit have been approved? As far as I can tell, it only made three types of changes: 1. change inline link formatting to footnote formatting, 2. incorrectly change a bullet list item's level (fixed in a later edit), and 3. move the word "a" outside of bold formatting.
Since it's an anonymous user, I would have done what Martijn did, since there was no rep to award. But if it were a registered user, is it worth awarding rep for?
1 is purely cosmetic and doesn't affect the rendered output, 2 is incorrect, and 3 was partly cosmetic and even if evaluated semantically, doesn't matter either way.
(cc @ShaWiz)
 
"worth awarding rep for" -don't worry about the rep, worry about the quality of the edit and that's it.
 
@Mithrandir True, but is it a high-quality edit?
8 mins ago, by Sonic the Anonymous WizHog
1 is purely cosmetic and doesn't affect the rendered output, 2 is incorrect, and 3 was partly cosmetic and even if evaluated semantically, doesn't matter either way.
 
7:16 PM
> Of course you can speak German everywhere. But you will be understood only in those cities where people speak German.
 
8:03 PM
@SonictheAnonymousWizHog Pseudohuman is active, yes.
Also it still only has 1 reputation on the meta
 
 
1 hour later…
9:23 PM
stroopwafels
Sorry, mistaken ping; I meant to press Backspace but pressed Enter
10
Q: Congratulations to our 29 oldest beta sites - They're now no longer beta!

CatijaIf you're a user on a long-toiling beta site that's been waiting 7-8 years to get out of beta, this may be the post you've been waiting for. The 29 Beta sites that are 7+ years old no longer have the "Beta" label! I'm on record as saying that we need to ditch the "beta" label for our older site...

 
9:54 PM
@SonictheAnonymousWizHog We're very much getting rid of the concept of graduation, which is why I didn't use that tag.
 
Alright, true. But is the wrong tag, given the other uses for the tag.
 
:sigh: That wiki is really, really bad.
It means desktop view...
 
Good, that onebox no longer shows "beta"
Old logo bug still exists.
 
10:27 PM
Not really a bug. Someone would have to manually recreate them.
 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 23:00

« first day (3284 days earlier)      last day (850 days later) »