2
\$\begingroup\$

I've made this suggestion that fixes an error in a question. It's pending since about 15 minutes, but maybe this delay is normal for this site? If not, is there a way to stimulate the review process?

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Be patient!!!!! \$\endgroup\$ – Anirban Nag 'tintinmj' Nov 28 '13 at 12:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ Done ... post to meta and someone will see and review \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Nov 28 '13 at 12:28
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ I did mean that comment to be in jest.... but, re-reading it, it sounds like a 'real' suggestion.... DO NOT post to Meta as a general practice for 'bumping' a suggested edit. \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Nov 28 '13 at 12:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ @tintinmj: This means No to my question? It really wasn't a rhetorical one. \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 12:38
  • \$\begingroup\$ @rolfl ...and this means Yes? What about adding a real answer (even short) that I can accept? \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 12:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ This link should show you what the wedit-review screen looks like: codereview.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/14744 \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Nov 28 '13 at 12:45
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Wolf Good point about actually answering your question. We're sorry for commenting about the wrong things. I edited my answer which actually might answer your question. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Nov 28 '13 at 15:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ Upvoted because this ought to be faq \$\endgroup\$ – Mathieu Guindon Nov 28 '13 at 16:34
4
\$\begingroup\$

I approved the question. For me the question of "too minor" is not about how many characters you changed, but rather how fundamentally you changed the nature of the question. In this case although it was a minor textual change, it was a major change to an important detail of the question.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I approved as well, for the same reasons. \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Nov 28 '13 at 12:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks, this is just my idea of the minor-major relation. But it may be better style in this very case to suggest the change via comment. \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 12:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ I agree that too minor perhaps wasn't the best rejection reason, I mostly miss the links to back the edit. If I would have seen a link to the problems 32 and 34, I would have checked the links and decided whether or not it was a correct edit. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Nov 28 '13 at 12:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SimonAndréForsberg the links are really invisible? \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 12:41
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wolf Now I see that you included a link to Problem 32. Sorry, didn't see that before. I do however think that it is better to first post a comment about such "issues" with a question \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Nov 28 '13 at 12:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Wolf - the links work in the edit review window, but there are multiple displays, one display shows the way the edit visually looks compared to before, and this is great for all the 'fixed formatting' edits that come through. The links are available there, but because of the change, there is highlighting on the link that 'blends it in' to the other changes. The other view allows you to see the markup changes, and the links there are obvious, but not-clickable. Most people review from the 'how it looks' perspective \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Nov 28 '13 at 12:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ @rolfl and this means, that they sometimes don't give much on the edit comment? \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 12:45
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Wolf editors are often a PITA (like you... ;-) ) and leave comments that don't help. My pet peeve is people (like you) who add/change links but do not say what and why in the comment, or people who add tags and make other small changes to the text, but don't mention the tag change in the comment. IMHO, no link or tag edits are minor, and they are the hardest things to 'spot' in an edit review \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Nov 28 '13 at 12:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ @rolfl does this mean, I have to tell the change itself in the edit comment? I wasn't aware of this, because that wouldn't be a help for me (provided that the changes are shown by the software - as I know it from, say, Wikipedia). \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 13:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Wolf - no, you don't have to, but a comment saying corrected problem number, added link is more useful than It's about Problem #32, not #34 ... because, the change from 34 to 32 is obvious, but the link is not ... ;-) \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Nov 28 '13 at 14:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ @rolfl thanks for the clarifying example. I'll try to improve my edit comments. \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 14:56
4
\$\begingroup\$

That speed is normal for this site. We are not StackOverflow (and I feel that the speeds for suggested edits on StackOverflow has been increasing lately).

I myself rejected your edit as "Too minor" (Other people will probably approve it though). I would suggest that you instead post a comment on the question stating that you believe it's about problem 32 and not problem 34, and include links to the different problems. It is very hard to verify an edit comment saying "It's about Problem #32, not #34"

To answer the actual question: There is not really a way to speed up the process. The only things you can do is to post on meta (not recommended, because in that case we would have plenty of such requests sooner or later). Another option is to visit the chat room which tends to be quite active actually and let the people there know that you have a suggested edit pending, and while you are there you can also star some of our very interesting conversation messages.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks, I understand that it is formally indeed minor, and I already thought about better commenting this suggestion instead. BTW: Is there a way to "rollback" a rolling suggestion? \$\endgroup\$ – Wolf Nov 28 '13 at 12:33
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I would have rejected it as incorrect or an attempt to comment - i.e. "is that not problem 32?"; but I agree with too minor. \$\endgroup\$ – Mathieu Guindon Nov 28 '13 at 13:49

You must log in to answer this question.

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