Hot answers tagged

8

Good question, the general guidance in this case is to not edit the post. Looking at the answer below it's different; you stumbled upon a suggested edit adding spam and inadvertently approved/improved it – the right course of action is to reject it as spam/vandalism, and only then edit it. This issue (whether to edit spam or not) comes up frequently ...


4

Here’s my side of things: I saw the question (before any major edits) and wanted to quote some of the Wikipedia article for context. I tried to do that but stopped when it looked like the edit would have answered the question, by having a link to a page with a definition of the term. It was at that point that I voted to close the question, the fourth close ...


1

If we assume this is what the OP meant, That is what should have been done. Despite the poor syntax, we have Can someone tell me where this word comes from? I can’t see that there is much that is unclear about that. It is not a matter of whether or not the OP comes back – EL&U is creating a reference source, so, for what it’s worth: The word starts in ...


1

Regarding your update: This particular item of spam was not part of the original post. It was a suggested edit. The spam wasn't posted by the question asker, so if I had flagged the post as spam it would have put a black mark against the wrong person. This is why I edited out the link. I'm glad you didn't edit out the link and flagged it, because that ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible