Editing, compared to asking/answering, seems to have less detailed documentation. After I thought of asking this user to slow down a bit, I noticed that I had no specific documentation or discussions I could refer to. I'd like to know what would the best practice be in this case.
Recently, I've been seeing a lot of minor edits, more often for old posts (couple of years old). These edits typically fixes typo or adds one or two words, which makes these questions only marginally (in my opinion) more readable. These edits seem to come from a user who's been revising their old questions, and by the activity taking up noticeable portion of the top questions, I'm getting slightly annoyed. (I'm not trying to blame this user; I just would like to know how we can agree on the recommendation.)
While I usually see no issue with these minor edits done by those who have the privilege, there are two aspects that I think make this case discussable:
- It is done in larger amount,
- and done for old posts with accepted answers, which would not usually appear in the top questions.
Are these edits be acceptable, or discouraged, or else?
Related discussions:
- Privileges - edit questions and answers - This is the only official documentation I could find on editing. It discourages "tiny, trivial edits" while it lists "to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes" as a common reason for edit.
- What constitutes a 'trivial' edit?
I, for one, feel that edits for old posts with accepted answers should be even more non-trivial. They have their own value regardless and messing up with tiny details does not feel worthy of the attention it draws from us.
