I tried fixing a typo of one letter in this post - A Word To Represent The 5 Senses

The answerer wrote 'night' instead of 'might'. I just want to fix it to make it right, not for magic unicorn points. Minimum change is 6 characters, the prompt says "is there anything else that can be improved?" to bump it to the quota. I don't want to overhaul the post just to fix the typo.

This is not the first time I've tried to fix typos but been turned back by the 6 character quota.

  • 1
    In case anyone finds it confusing... Because the particular question under consideration is already "active" with four closevotes (not mine), and because my rep allows me to unilaterally apply a 1-character edit, I've taken it upon myself to make the change. Although it wouldn't clog up the review queue anyway (my edits don't need "approval") I wouldn't always do this because it does bump the question up to the top of the "active questions" list. Jun 26, 2014 at 17:30

1 Answer 1


Editing is a privilege that is earned once you have 2000 reputation.

Until you reach that point, you have to submit edits to the suggested edit review queue, where people with the edit privilege can review your edit and accept/decline based on their assessment. There is a minimum amount you must edit a post to get into that queue.

Obviously the edit you want to make is helpful, however it is also very small. The problem with small edits is that they could easily flood the review queue. There are so many posts with small typos on this site, we'd simply be inundated!

So until you have 2000 reps, the best alternative is to put a comment on the post, telling the poster that they've made a typo. Generally posters are quite grateful that you've spotted a typo and will fix it when they see your comment.

Thanks for caring about the quality of the site.

  • 2
    While I appreciate you can't just let 'risky' users have free reign of the site, I think this approach of putting the suggestion to fix it in the comments creates dead ends as my comment will be irrelevant after the poster fixes the typo. Maybe a lower threshold for low risk edits would be acceptable. Anyone can edit Wikipedia and their quality is still pretty good. It seems a relatively proven model at this stage. Are there really that many vandals trying to get their kicks on StackExchange?
    – GenericJam
    Jun 26, 2014 at 15:46
  • 3
    I think that the amount of work that goes into keeping Wikipedia functional is quite significant. Comments get deleted as a matter of course when people notice they're obsolete. I understand your frustration, but eventually you'll get to 2000 and not worry about this anymore. If you'd like to propose a change to the system, you should post to Meta Stack Exchange. Jun 26, 2014 at 16:00
  • 2
    @GenericJam In order to meet the 6 characters limit, one thing you could do is to substitute inverted commas, and words in bold, with italics. Delete all caps, replacing capital letters with lower-case letters and vice-versa; delete the two or more exclamation marks in a row, and (sad but necessary at times) the "thanks" comments. If you take a look at how RegDwight and tchrist edit posts you can learn a lot.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Jun 26, 2014 at 18:42
  • 1
    @Mari-LouA I don't mind picking up trash if I see it on the ground but I'm not going to walk a mile out of my way to do it. Thanks for the suggestions though.
    – GenericJam
    Jun 27, 2014 at 1:16
  • 1
    @GenericJam You can delete your own comments, and you can click the "flag" button to mark someone else's comment as obsolete (and a mod will eventually come by to delete it for you). May 1, 2015 at 15:32
  • @GenericJam: The idiom is free rein, not free reign. I'm guessing that was not a typo, but a usage error. But it's only a one-character edit. So this supports your point—a six-letter minimum does not eliminate only trivial edits. May 23, 2015 at 5:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .