0

While generally a force for good, this user needs to be sat down and taught not to bite the newbies or to leave the edit queues alone, especially if they don't understand basic English grammar.

This needful edit to repair a user's broken English ("If using with...") was rejected with the snide "This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability."

Some mod kindly handle this and restore some version of the correct English to the post.

Edit: Song has replied here and just dug in their heels even more. Could we get some second and third opinions here?

| |
  • 2
    lly, I’ve seen your posts here and on other @SE sites in the past. You strike me as someone quite attentive to detail and fairly methodical. These are great traits to have. I can see why you submitted these edits and how they would improve the quality of our site. At the same time, though, as it is with many people employing foreign languages we cannot strive for perfection. If the sentences are intelligible then I think we can manage. Again like songyuanyao said you can totally resubmit edits and maybe I, or someone else will look at them and give you different feedback. – Mo. May 17 at 20:58
2

While the edit is indeed a grammatical correction, it's also a minor issue. It's the kind of edit I'd do stealthily when the question has already been bumped, otherwise it's somewhat disruptive (particularly if done in large numbers). I've certainly learned to let go when people say things like "it's a slang" and "I'm a Chinese"; a lot of communication nowadays is done through broken English.

Some people will say it's too minor to be worth it, while others will say it's worthwhile making this edit (and maybe even say it's good to maintain site activity). And yeah, the automatic message is inaccurate in this case, even a bit gruff. In any case, we need to learn to continue working together while encountering these disagreements.

If you're looking to help the site through editing, I encourage prioritizing question titles; these are highly visible because it's what's primarily seen when Googling.


Side note: I encourage being less pointed when raising complaints in the future; i.e., focus more on the problem, less on the user.

| |
  • There's nothing wrong with the automatic message. It points out that it should not have been used in this case since the edit did make the answer even a little bit better. It's fine that people have to prioritize but when someone does improve the English in the answers or adds English to a fully Chinese answer, that is never a reason to deny the edit. It's a reason to approve it. – lly May 24 at 0:57
  • If editors such as Song or yourself have gotten confused on that point, again, it's a reason to have an intervention by the main mods to remind you that you've gotten confused about how this site works and who its audience is (Anglophones, for the most part). – lly May 24 at 1:00
  • As for 'less on the user', the problem was the user's behavior in this instance. As for the user themself, I was complimentary. They have certainly contributed quite a bit to the project and deserve praise and thanks for that, as I mentioned. – lly May 24 at 1:01
  • I'm not entering into a debate about this. You asked for a response, and the correct reply is "thank you". – Becky 李蓓 May 24 at 1:01
  • You're welcome. – lly May 24 at 1:01
0

I rejected it because (1) I can't see much improvement and (2) why the edit is important (then should be approved). You sugguested the edit from "If using with counting percentage", to "If used to describe a percentage", the original sentence seems understandable and fine to me; and you change the verb from count to describe, I'm afraid it might change OP's intent subtly.

I just think if an answer conveys its points well and truly then it's fine, it doesn't make much difference the English grammar is strictly correct or not.

| |
  • Well... exactly. If you have no idea how English grammar works; actively avoid using it correctly; and are so dishonest as to edit my post to hide the original error... you should take a break from any role in approving/rejecting any edits until you've stopped acting this way. – lly May 16 at 16:32
  • Beyond which, no, you don't "count" percentages. – lly May 16 at 16:35
  • @lly I made the edit to show your suggestion edit (from "using with counting" to "used to describe a") more clear; what do you mean hide the original error? BTW: The original text is "If using with..." but not "For using with..." as you posted. – songyuanyao May 16 at 16:45
  • @lly Sorry, you still didn't convince me that it's not a minor edit. – songyuanyao May 16 at 16:59
  • I understand you don't see your error. I understand I am not going to be the person to change your mind on that. That's why I was messaging the mod crew to stage an intervention. You don't know what you're doing and it presumably affects other posters and answers besides me and mine. – lly May 17 at 3:34

You must log in to answer this question.

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