Timeline for Compulsive question editing
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2020 at 22:01 | comment | added | efs | @YCor. Well, I'm not a native english speaker, and in spanish "mathematical concept" can be understood as "mathematical object" in the context of my question. My mistake. | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 17:46 | comment | added | YCor | @EFinat-S $T$ in the question is not a concept, it's a mathematical object. | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 14:02 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | In the past, I have had some success by leaving a comment on a question to notify a user that 13 edits in the span of a few minutes is way excessive and it's better to do three or four a day. On other occasions, I have flagged a question for moderator attention and pointed out in the flag that a user was on an editing spree. | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 11:07 | comment | added | efs | @YemonChoi I totally agree with you. By the way, in Logic, isn't it common to use "plain text" for some concepts (metaconcepts?)? | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 6:21 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek | I took the liberty to fix the post in question. The original edit can be found in the question history. | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 5:56 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | I posted a comment on this user's question to let them know about this thread meta. (Even if the discussion on meta typically tends to be about more general issues than about one specific user, I still consider making him aware of this thread useful.) | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 5:20 | comment | added | YCor | In the linked post's edit, what's converted in math mode is should indeed be in math mode. The main problem is indeed, as Yemon Choi mentions, that it's badly done and makes output worse at some places. (I also agree that I'm not sure such edits, if well done, are so opportune: better do them when the question is bumped to the front page.) | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 5:14 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | Disclosure: I have negatively reviewed several suggested edits by this user. I would feel more kindly disposed if the user had first contributed some answers or some mathematical comments on this site | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 5:11 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | This may be a distraction, but I note that the user being referred to has done of the things that drives me up the wall about a certain kind of MathJaxHappy edit: namely, to change something like Mod(T) in plain text to $Mod(T)$ when it should be $\operatorname{Mod}(T)$ (using \operatorname for semantic purposes and not just writing 'M' times 'o' times 'd' | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 4:57 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | BTW I have edited into your post link to the list of revisions of the linked question - to make it easier for others to see what was actually changed. If you prefer, you can use link directly to the suggested edit. (Although the link to the suggested edit is available in the revision history, too.) | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 1:26 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | Since I was also criticized for being too active in editing, perhaps I could have also linked to my answer in that thread: Restriction on Number of edits. (Although in that thread mostly other topics are discussed, not LaTeX-ifying posts.) Since I have mentioned screen readers, here are two posts on Mathematics Meta related to the topic: To what extent is Math.SE accessible to a blind user? and Is Mathjax accessible for people using screen readers? | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 1:17 | comment | added | efs | Thanks fot your comments @MartinSleziak. He is noy helping with his minor editions, he is just transforming plain text to math mode. I have already negatively reviewed some of his edits, but for some reason some of his edits have been accepted. | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 1:08 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | There are several related discussion on this meta - I'll mention a few, you can certainly find more: What's our consensus on people resurrecting old questions just to edit formatting?, Minor edits, subject to review, Editing titles to include $\mathfrak{LaTeX \; Math}$, Do we have an unofficial quota on how many old questions one should bump for minor edits in a single day?, Editing etiquette. | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 1:08 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | There are several things to consider. For example: Is this a kind of edit which helps users who use screen readers? Are those edits to recent posts or to old posts? Is it only a minor edit, or did the edit correct some other important problems with the post? Is the user bumping many old posts at the same time? | |
| Jan 10, 2020 at 0:57 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added link to the revisions
|
| Jan 10, 2020 at 0:51 | history | asked | efs | CC BY-SA 4.0 |