Maybe some context in the beginning. It is my second year in university so I am far away to be good enough to answer questions here, but from time to time I enjoy reading questions and answers. I guess over the time MathOverflow existed the possibilites of formatting the answers and the questions changed a lot (for example it is possible now to typeset commutative diagrams in mathjax via AMScd).

I am searching for some nice questions (presumably with nice answers) which "need" a make over with ${\rm\LaTeX}$. Is such a behaviour welcome and if so on which questions ?

• As I have said elsewhere, I am not a fan of reformatting old answers just to add LaTeX if the original was legible and easily parsed. (For instance, I personally believe the edit on mathoverflow.net/a/4564/763 was unnecessary and just serves to bump a dead question.) – Yemon Choi Jul 15 '13 at 8:38
• Also, you should make that LaTeX symbol upright, surely – Yemon Choi Jul 15 '13 at 8:39
• However, it appears I am in a minority, so if the consensus is that the editing you propose is beneficial, then fair enough I suppose – Yemon Choi Jul 15 '13 at 8:45
• @YemonChoi: not to insist on this but for readers not reading everything, also in this case one might or might not have a different opinion regarding mathoverflow.net/posts/4575/revisions another answer to the same question, which was done at the same time. – user9072 Jul 15 '13 at 14:26
• @quid that was the reason I fixed the others too. As I was setting one new I thought about refreshing them all – Dominic Michaelis Jul 15 '13 at 15:38
• Here is a related question (but this may be the wrong place to ask). Does anyone know about the status of Scott Morrison's feature request for non-bumping minor edits subject to review? [This question is partly due to my unfamiliarity with the procedures of the stack exchange network regarding feature requests.] – Ricardo Andrade Jul 15 '13 at 19:09
• @RicardoAndrade There are quite old similar feature requests at meta.SO, some of them tagged status-declined, so I doubt this gets implemented. See for example meta.stackexchange.com/questions/122567/… and meta.stackexchange.com/questions/26483/… (And you can surely find many more discussions on this there and on per-site metas.) – Martin Sleziak Aug 17 '13 at 9:29

There were some old "fancy ways around the html/LaTeX/markup conflicts" like doubling the backslash, etc., which now may screw the formulae to the extent that they are no longer legible. I think you should fix those for sure when you see them. However in the cases when the reading is easy and nothing strikes the eye, I would just leave things as they are.

Just so we can see how out of sync I am: please vote this answer up if you think this revision, or also to compare to the original one, made an improvement significant enough to warrant doing years after the event; and please vote this answer down if you think the improvement was not significant enough to warrant doing this (or even if you think the revision wasn't an improvement.

I should note that this is being posted merely as a weathervane, not to rebuke Dominic in any way.