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?

1
  • 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. – Mou某♦ May 17 '20 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.

5
  • 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 '20 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 '20 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 '20 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 '20 at 1:01
  • You're welcome. – lly May 24 '20 at 1:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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