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. Jul 25, 2012 at 14:26

2 Answers 2


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, 2012 at 0:54
  • 3
    @Izkata The limitation applies only to suggested edits, not to unsupervised edits by users with 2000 rep.
    – user56
    Jul 26, 2012 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, 2012 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 .