18
$\begingroup$

I thought this definitely would have been asked before, but I searched and couldn't find it.

I was looking at one of my questions I asked a while ago and I realised a very minor typo in it. Actually, a user has already suggested an edit to fix this typo, but it was rejected (not by me), probably because most of the edit was converting from British to American spelling (so the reviewers probably didn't see the one actual typo being fixed).

My question is, should I edit my question to fix this typo? The posts I've read so far (on MetaSE) have said not to do this to others' posts if you have <2k rep (don't suggest trivial edits, and the 6 character limit supports this too), but if you have more than 2k then feel free to edit.

However (this is my main issue), since this is on my own post, I don't want it to be perceived as though I'm unnecessarily bumping my question to get it more views or votes.

If it was an error that substantially affected the post (like a mathematical one), then I feel like this wouldn't be a big problem. On the other hand, all fixes, even a trivial typo, do improve the question.

$\endgroup$
7
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe this could be considered as related: How much (self) editing is too much? and Is too much self editing frowned upon? (Although those posts are rather old.) I'll also mention that I have added the tag (bumping), since it seems one of the issues you mention. But if you feel that the tags is not suitable here, feel free to remove it. $\endgroup$ Oct 3 at 6:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Checking edit summaries with the word typo on main and meta, it seems that some users (including me) do not shy away from fixing typos. The issue with bumping will be rendered moot if some kind of minor non-bumping edits will be implemented, as discussed before: math.meta.stackexchange.com/q/29638 math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/linked/29638 $\endgroup$ Oct 3 at 7:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ (to your first comment) Those questions do seem related; I was using the wrong keywords, searching for "small edit" and "fix typo". However, they seem to be referring to making many frequent edits, and not to old posts in particular. I feel like the fact that I'm referring to an old post is particulalry significant, for the bumping reason I mentioned (since I have been accused of this before I want to double check). Also, back in the days of those questions posts automatically became CW with too many edits and I think that made a difference to the answers. Also, the tag edit is fine, thanks :) $\endgroup$
    – JamesA
    Oct 3 at 7:05
  • $\begingroup$ opinion regarding old posts- when browsing fresher posts on the front page, i edit posts for minor typos with much less hesitation. 2 weeks old is kind of the same as 2 years old for many posts, and I try to refrain from making minor fixes then $\endgroup$ Oct 3 at 7:38
  • 19
    $\begingroup$ Fixing one or more typos in one old post is a good thing. Do it. Fixing typos in several old posts in a short period of time is a bad thing. Don't do it. $\endgroup$ Oct 3 at 12:02
  • $\begingroup$ @GerryMyerson Why does it matter whether you go through your own old posts all at once and fix all typos, or go through them only one per week? Or am I misunderstanding your claim? To me it seems like either fixing old posts has more value than the annoyance a bump causes is bad, or not - independent of the amount? $\endgroup$
    – lucidbrot
    Oct 7 at 7:09
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @lucid, fixing one old post bumps one new post off the front page, a post that was going to drop off the front page very soon anyway. Fixing ten old posts bumps ten new posts off the front page, artificially depriving ten posts of their rightful time on the front page. So, take it easy with the fixes. (but I never suggested limiting to one per week. Maybe three or four per day, I'd say) $\endgroup$ Oct 7 at 8:11

Browse other questions tagged .