I am a regular user of physics.SE, and I usually come here because of the HNQ list. Mostly, because I see a question whose title is completely meaningless and says nothing about the actual question. I click on the post, read it, and suggest a much more descriptive title. See here for a recent example. I generally try to include the most important formula in the title, because it makes it much easier to find related posts/possible duplicates by looking at the "Related" tab.
I have suggested a more descriptive title more than a hundred times, and only eight times were they rejected. Four out of these eight rejections were actually on the last week, which may have been a coincidence (I believe the edits were good and should have been accepted, but I know that sometimes reviewers err: I am a very active reviewer on physics.SE, and I sometimes get suggestions wrong myself; no big deal).
I've been suggesting these edits because I believe they are useful to your community, but the fact that I got four rejections this week kinda puts me off. Not only because it is discouraging, but also because it makes me think that perhaps you people don't generally like my edits, and perhaps some of you got tired of them.
Thus, my question: do you think my edits are useful? Should I keep on suggesting them? Do you agree those four edits should have been accepted? Or was the rejection the way to go?
For reference, here are the rejected edits:
You can have a look at the rest of my suggestions (accepted and rejected) on my userpage. If you generally think my edits are useful, I'll keep suggesting them. Otherwise, I'll stop. I'll do as you say.
$4$red balls and
$2$white balls" are some examples of what I consider to be superfluous edits. Some editors, after all, may be looking "quicky edits" to score a couple of points with the least amount of effort to do so. I like to see meaningful edits, that improve a post, and aren't merely superfluous. When I see an editor in the suggested edit reviews whose suggestions run back to back for four or five consecutive questions, someone needs to slow down. $\endgroup$