Timeline for Can anything be done about mods robo-rejecting edits that are objective improvements?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 2016 at 15:25 | comment | added | Sven Mod | @TRiG: The community builds the policy for this. We don't like effectively useless edits to clutter the homepage, ergo it's our policy to rejects those. | |
| Jul 11, 2016 at 15:06 | comment | added | TRiG | "I reject edits on questions that are old and that don't correct important factual errors." This is, as far as I know, contrary to policy. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 3:44 | comment | added | Katherine Villyard | Yeah, I bitterly missed "too minor" and put it in as a custom comment a couple of times, but there were SO MANY OMG. | |
| Dec 7, 2014 at 0:10 | comment | added | sysadmin1138 Mod | The front-page problem is a big one, I agree. When I was doing big edits, such as those needed for re-tagging things, I kept it to two at a time and waited until a few organic questions arrived before doing any more. It was really slow work, but needed in order to keep visibility for the new stuff that actually needs visibility. | |
| Dec 6, 2014 at 19:11 | history | answered | SvenMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |