# How does this suggested edit “address the author of the post”? [duplicate]

Rejection reason:

This edit was intended to address the author of the post and makes no sense as an edit. It should have been written as a comment or an answer.

What does the word “post” mean in this context?

My edit does address the author of the question. That’s what an answer is supposed to do, right? My edit clearly does not address the author of the answer.

The question ends with this statement:

However this is not correct I don't believe.

But it is correct. And I think it is appropriate to clearly say so in the answer:

The solution given in the question is correct.

My edit also corrects obvious problems with the answer, particularly the line:

$$1, $$-1>x$$, or $$-\sqrt{3}

This line speaks for itself. It clearly needs to be corrected.

I did find one possible answer:

Two problems:

1. No one could possibly figure that out from the rejection reason. It took a ridiculous amount of searching for me to find it.
2. This answer’s author was “last seen” in July and hasn’t actually done anything (at least on math.se) for over a year. Asking them to make changes doesn’t seem productive.
• I think the close reasons are suggesting that instead of editing the existing answer, you should write a new, correct one yourself. (I am not sure I agree, considering there are other answers there. However, they all do fail to mention that the OPs answer is correct!) As a general rule, I believe that changing the maths in an answer should only really be done by the poster themselves (there are exceptions, e.g. obvious typos). I don't think you should lose sleep over this though :-) Nov 4 '20 at 14:39
• @user1729 This answer would have been reasonably complete and correct, if my edit had been accepted. So what would be the point of me adding another one? (This would be the case regardless of how many other answers there were.) Nov 4 '20 at 14:45
• If you do not want to write an answer, then instead of putting words in an answerer's mouth, point out the error in a comment below the answer. Nov 4 '20 at 14:50
• The consensus on MSE seems to be that edits should fix typographical or formatting errors, but should not change the underlying content of a question or answer.
– Xander Henderson Mod
Nov 4 '20 at 15:21
• I agree with you that the reason given for rejecting your edit doesn't make sense. My guess is that the users who rejected the edit missed some context clues and read your sentence, "The solution given in the question is correct" as information for the benefit of the answerer rather than the asker. Nevertheless, I would have rejected your edit because "The solution given in the question is correct" is not a true statement. The solution given in the question is equivalent to the empty set, and that is not right (as you yourself imply in the rest of your edit). Otherwise, your changes were fine. Nov 5 '20 at 14:17
• @WillOrrick My upvote doesn’t do your comment justice. It’s the only one that even comes close to answering my question. Unfortunately the question is now closed, so you can’t post it as an actual answer. amWhy: How am I “putting words in an answerer's mouth”? Clearly the answerer meant to say what I said in my edit, but didn’t express themselves well. Xander Henderson: I didn’t change the underlying content, so I don’t see how this comment (or the suggested “duplicate” question) is relevant. Nov 5 '20 at 14:22
• Note that the author of the post for which you suggested an edit was on StackExchange (at another community) within the past month, and that (given the time that answer was posted) a Comment about the issue you felt needed correction would likely be seen by that person without undue delay. Nov 5 '20 at 17:45
• @Brian, I think you mean to say Will provided the only comment that echoed your opinion. Most all comments here answered your question. Don't ask questions on meta, unless you are open to consider perspectives other than your own. Nov 9 '20 at 23:18