I know short edits are discouraged, and rightly so, but I don't think they should be completely disallowed. Sometimes a single character can make a large difference. For example,

"Frodo was Sam's employee"

is wrong and in a discussion about their relationship, the edit to fix it to be "employer" is relevant and not, in my mind, a "bad" edit.

| |
  • Yes, I've often wondered about that. – Donald.McLean Jul 25 '12 at 14:26

It's really rare that a single-character change is the only thing that can be improved in a post. Look for other possible improvements: fix other spelling errors, add links for references, etc. If all else fails, leave a comment.

The topic has come up multiple times on the main meta site. The answer is always no, the limit won't change: Should tiny edits be accepted or rejected in review?Remove trivial edit restrictionWe're discouraged from fixing typos and misspellings on SE sites?How to overcome “Edits must be at least 6 characters”?pure code formatting, to enhance a question, is impossible (without 2k rep) — (and many more).

| |
  • 1
    Oh look, a one-character edit... Are you sure there's a limit still in place? – Izkata Jul 26 '12 at 0:54
  • 3
    @Izkata The limitation applies only to suggested edits, not to unsupervised edits by users with 2000 rep. – user56 Jul 26 '12 at 0:55
  • 1
    @Izkata that also is a one character edit the system sees as deleting 6 characters and adding 5. 11 character change by how it shows the diff. – Kortuk Jul 31 '12 at 0:32

This is a restriction on users with less than 2000 rep. This shows a serious dedication of time an effort, and is meant to stop people with very few reputation points make too many small edits.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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