I'm quite new to reviewing, and I'd like some advice on the following matter.

While reviewing suggested edits, several times I stumbled into the same user ($\ >1000$ reputatio) proposing edits on several-months-old posts. Most of them were irrelevant.

Of course, I rejected them (for old posts I tend to do it even when the changes concern, for instance, only grammar).

I hypothesized this user might be "badge-hunting", but I don't really care about his reasons.

Can this be considered a misbehaviour of some sort? What can I do about it? If so, in all honesty, should I do it or would I be too draconian if I did?

PS: I did search an answer to this, but I might have missed it. In which case, I apologise.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Why do you reject it if they correct the grammar (If the grammar was wrong)? $\endgroup$ – user99914 Jun 3 '15 at 9:38
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Sometimes it's just small type-os. And it might be a (+5) question dating June 2014 and having already 3 good answers. So I deem it unnecessary. For some more subtle matters, for instance some that concern a specifical way of arranging a sentence, I am not a native English speaker, and so I tend to opt for the conservative approach "If the OP wrote it like that, a lot of people understood it and no one in 5 moths felt the need to correct it, then the pros of changing it are not worth the risk of a misjudgement of mine". $\endgroup$ – user228113 Jun 3 '15 at 10:25
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ This older thread seems related: When a low-rep user suggests many edits to old posts? I should add that I consider improving old posts a good thing to do, although it has to be done in moderation. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Jun 3 '15 at 10:43
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I would suggest that if you are not sure about the edit (related to grammar, for example), you can skip the review. But if the edit is a valid one, I personally prefer to approve it. There are people out there who want to make previous post better. You can also improve their edit if you think that the post can still be improved. $\endgroup$ – user99914 Jun 3 '15 at 10:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Fact is that I once got questioned for a "petty and unnecessary" edit on an old question (I had just improved someone else's edit that was meant to fix a minor imprecision in the notation). This led me to believe that edits on older posts were discouraged, which doesn't seem to be the case at all. Thanks for the help. $\endgroup$ – user228113 Jun 3 '15 at 11:02
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Indeed, "petty and unnecessary" edits are discouraged, rightly so, and all the more so when they concern old posts. $\endgroup$ – Did Jun 3 '15 at 11:48
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I will just point out that if an old question has been bumped anyway (by adding a new answer, by Community user, etc.) then the suggested edit certainly did not do any harm. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Jun 3 '15 at 11:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have always found the discouragement of the edits of old content to be silly. Any improvement to the content is a good thing. If there are issues with people editing older content (like bumping or malicious edits maybe), find other means to solve the problem, rather than discouraging the edits itself. $\endgroup$ – Aryabhata Jun 13 '15 at 14:43

You must log in to answer this question.