We don't have many edits, but we have some. My overall impression is that they fall into two categories:

• Substantial improvements to the item. Fixes language and generally tidies up the question
• Nitpicks. Fixes spelling of a single word or three, or adds some minor formatting.

I have rejected quite a few edits of the last kind. Fixing capital letters of a word here and there doesn't significantly change the post; if it was unclear before, it's unclear after the proposed changes as well.

However, I'm interested in what the community thinks should be the threshold for such actions, as I see that other reviewers have differing views on things.

So in short; what threshold should we apply when approving or disapproving edits?

We don't have many edits, but we have some. My overall impression is that they fall into two categories:

• Substantial improvements to the item. Fixes language and generally tidies up the question
• Nitpicks. Fixes spelling of a single word or three, or adds some minor formatting.
• Additionally, the clear rejects: attempts to reply.

I have rejected quite a few edits of the last kind. Fixing capital letters of a word here and there doesn't significantly change the post; if it was unclear before, it's unclear after the proposed changes as well.

However, I'm interested in what the community thinks should be the threshold for such actions, as I see that other reviewers have differing views on things.

So in short; what threshold should we apply when approving or disapproving edits?