I've recently come across a number of cases in reviewing where a suggested edit is made which would be too unilateral to approve of because it interferes with the original poster's implicit wishes - for example, the last case was when a small paragraph of guesswork the OP had, which constituted their work or "what they had tried" basically, was deleted and the edit description was something like "removed guess" - but here the OP of the question was unregistered with single-digit rep and had only been around a couple of days, so I surmised the anon and OP were one and the same and approved the edit.
Is this acceptable practice? There are no clear boundaries, and there's always a possibility of being wrong, but at the same time it would aggravate and impede those who want to edit their questions but aren't registered, forget their login info, etc. Furthermore, there is no direct way to find out if the user or anon are the same person if in fact it is someone with only a fleeting existence here, and if their edit isn't approved it may send the wrong message to the user. Maybe a comment explaining the dis/approval action on the question itself would suffice here?