How do I edit a post correctly?

Question

Edit Overload

I've requested several edits that I thought were decently positive improvements, and more than half of them were rejected. So now I'm getting a warning that I could have an edit ban placed if I had too many more edits rejected.

My Theory

I have a feeling my edits are being rejected because of one of the reasons listed below:

• It was suggested during one of my 'edit frenzies'

I'll suggest several edits in a short period of time; most of them being just a few characters added and/or removed from the title and/or body.

• It wasn't very helpful, or it harmed the post

I'll suggest an edit thinking it was an improvement, but others (and me, after reading the edited post ;-;) see it as a negative change to the post, or it stayed exactly the same, just said in a different way.

• It was only posted for the reputation

I don't do that anymore, but when I first joined stackexchange, I thought of your reputation count as the most important variable you have. (until I learned what the word meant XD) So I used to do anything I could to raise it, (although that was how I got a question ban placed on my earth science account) and editing was one of them.

• The post I edited was just insufferable through an edit; my post just made it worse

I would edit a post, and then later realize the post was beyond editable, and my edit just made it even worse than it already was.

Question

To prevent myself from backing myself into an edit ban, I've stopped suggesting edits for awhile.

But I'm worried that when I suggest an edit again later, It will be rejected and I'd be banned fro editing.

So what I'm wondering is:

How can I suggest a necessary edit that will actually benefit the post?

Answer 1

Your question contains its own answer:

How can I suggest a necessary edit that will actually benefit the post?

Your edit should be necessary, and should actually benefit the post. If you can't find anything that needs editing, don't edit. To take some concrete examples:

1. I rejected this edit because your edit just added a huge quantity of unnecessary bold and italic formatting, which confused the text rather than clarifying it.

2. I rejected this edit because you added unnecessary italics, and actually modified the data in the question incorrectly, possibly on the basis of a misunderstanding of the comments.

3. I rejected this edit because you changed the meaning of the question: sea water carrying "small amounts of salt" into the atmosphere is not the same as "carrying its salt" into the atmosphere; you changed "metal on the outside of our house" to "metal that makes contact with salt water", which is a very different thing.

In short, when editing:

1. Edit only if the question or answer needs it, not because you want more imaginary Internet points.

2. When in doubt, leave things as they are. Your rephrasings often change the meaning of a question, even if you're unaware of it.

3. Do not invent and add new information to a question.

When we review edits, there is a menu of "reject" reasons to choose from. One of them runs as follows.

This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability.

This description applies to many of the edits I've seen from you. Generally it's fairly clear that you're editing for the sake of editing, not in order to improve the question itself.

As others have pointed out in other discussions: this isn't a computer game. Your reputation score is an incidental side-effect of your participation here. It's not the whole reason for participating. Please remember that when you modify content on this site, it's not part of some imaginary challenge or competition. The words in a question are written by a real human who really wants an answer; please have some respect for that human and their words, and don't treat their prose as just some random raw material from which to wring reputation points.