Often we notice questions that are in essence valid and constructive with respect to SE criteria, yet they are poorly written and thus need improvement.

Sometimes the defects may be simply because of a lack of care or due consideration to SE rules by the OP. In such cases the OP can be encouraged to improve the post accordingly to survive the question.

But in some other cases, for example, in cases of poor phrasing and language, such as this, it seems unlikely that the OP can further improve the post. Can we edit such questions on sight and affect necessary improvements, or is it better to still wait for the OP's response? Maybe the drawback for the former reaction is that new OPs are not prompted to learn about rules of writing high-quality questions for themselves, yet leaving the question intact gives the site a bad appearance and there are users who rush to cast close votes for an otherwise productive question.

1 Answer 1


I will quote goldPseudo's comment which in my opinion, answers your questions perfectly:

Editing posts without questioner consent is fine for the most part, as long as the edits don't fundamentally change the meaning of the post (i.e. what the questioner is actually asking). Even if the questioner rejects your edits and insists on his own version it should be read critically to see what (if any) meaning is actually being lost (it's not uncommon for even well-intentioned edits to lose important nuance that's present in the original post)

  • So, did you see "any meaning lost" in edits I made to the title of question #13221 that prompted you to restore the previous title? Please explain if you think so.
    – infatuated
    May 28, 2014 at 6:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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