According to , answers that are earnest attempts at an explanation, but that are technically incorrect, should be downvoted but not deleted.  However, the Low Quality review queue does not offer an easy way to do the right thing:     "Looks OK" is inappropriate: "nothing is wrong" doesn't apply to a wrong answer. "Edit" is inappropriate: Any edit that corrects the answer would also radically alter the meaning of the post. "Recommend Deletion" is inappropriate since it is an earnest but misguided attempt at an answer. "Skip" is, unfortunately, the only way to clear this item from the queue.  However, skipping items isn't letting the reviewer be helpful.   Therefore, the Low Quality review queue needs to offer better choices of actions.
114987
VLQ flagged posts are now being shown in the Low Quality review, which allows:   Looks Good Edit Delete Skip   but no option to vote on the post. My suggestion is to add downvoting as options:   Downvote Downvote/Delete (this would replace current Delete)   There have been times I want to downvote but not necessarily delete a post I see in the queue. This is likely much more common on subjective sites than Stack Overflow. "What is an answer?" is a little less clear.  My current workflow is to open the question, scroll down and downvote, then go back to the review task and hit "skip." It seems this is not really what is intended.  I do this because I cannot rescind delete votes and occasionally someone will edit a post which is VLQ. Yet I still want to take action, in this case downvoting.
8861
It is incredibly rare that I downvote on this or any other community site. I would rather just ignore the item. However, occasionally some very bad advice is given that is worthy of a downvote. Why should this adversely affect the reputation of the person who downvotes?
106852
I came across a  for a Community Wiki post. It was (to me) obvious it was an audit. However, I did not have any options to do anything about the post. My options were to Skip, or to select No Action Needed. The former does nothing to prove I knew how to handle the post, the latter leads to a &quot;You were naughty&quot; message (I tried both). What I wanted to do but was not given the options for, was to flag, comment, or vote down. None of these options were available. This is most likely a bug due to this being a deleted CW post.   ran into this problem as well and managed to create a screenshot:    Added by DragonLord to avoid posting a non-answer to the question  I can reproduce this bug with a review audit item that was a spam post I had already flagged. While this isn't exactly the same as the issue originally described by the OP, I suspect this problem has the same root cause. Click image to view full size  I was able to downvote it, but , so this is a crude workaround at best. Can someone address this?
60766
Here's the situation- someone asks a question, accepts an answer, and then un-accepts the answer, and edits the question, making that answer and other existing answers incorrect...  I've tried to research the issue on Meta and found a few cases of this happening, the general consensus seems to be that its not appreciated and the OP should have asked a new question, but there doesn't seem to be any real mechanism or suggestion as to what to do about it.   Should these cases be flagged for an edit roll back?  Related Questions-      Note- I'd rather not reference the specific case as it would likely draw a lot of negative attention to the asker, and I think keeping it broad would help in other cases.
20562
A while ago I asked , and got an answer which I upvoted and accepted.  Recently the thread about closing 'typo' questions made me realise that's essentially what my question is - no one else is ever likely to have the same problem. Should I vote to close or delete it? If I do, will the guy who answered lose the 25 rep?
42243
Obviously, this suggested edit should never have been approved. Because it's very, very minor.  Is it acceptable for me to "rollback" this edit? Does the suggested editor lose the +2 rep when I roll it back? Should I comment on one of his questions, explaining not to make too minor edits like this?  Is there anything I should do to notify the reviewers that approved  too minor suggested edit?
73693
I've been finding "answers" that are slapped together and submitted, with the sometimes explicit intention of "I'm going to edit this".  e.g.   This seems silly, and I think ought to be discouraged.  Is the proper response "oh, how annoying", commenting, down-voting, flagging?  I'm heistant on the last two becuase sometimes they are edited (sometimes within the 5min grace) and become good answers, and then there's an unnecessary dv or flag.
103066
I've thought about proposing this for a while.  It would be very easy to make or curate "too minor" review audits.  Chances are, many of them are approved.  I don't know how big of a problem it is for too many review items to be approved, but , and think this probably happens way to much.  So proposal is to add "too minor" audits in addition to the spammy fake text ones.  Picking audits shouldn't be hard - how about ones that were unanimously rejected as "too minor" and where the diff is fewer than 5 characters (since yes, these exist I think in abundance).  Note another advantage is this gives us genuine reviews in the audit queue at all.  The fake ones have some efficacy but I've seen people complain about them on various meta-threads, to a greater extent than say, audit close questions.  Note: the linked edit actually breaks the code by dropping a {. All the more egregious it went approved; however I imagine the reviewers didn't notice the breaking change since they approved it...  which more or less means they either 1) didn't read at all or 2) saw a tiny formatting diff and approved it instead of rejecting as too minor.  So, more complicated but, still case in point.
98328
TL;DR  I am requesting that a button be added to the Suggested Edit Review Queue interface to reject an edit and flag the post that the edit was made on.  Background  I started working through the Suggested Review Queue recently, and I've noticed that there are often edits made on posts that should just be deleted or closed. I feel that time spent "polishing turds" is wasted, both for the editor and edit reviewers. I currently handle these by rejecting the edit, visiting the original post, and flagging the question myself.  This three-step process occurs regularly enough that I think it should be made easier.  Therefore, I am requesting that a button be added to the Suggested Edit Review Queue toolbar for flagging posts. I also suggest that this button reject the edit by default, with a message similar to the following:     This edit was made on a post that should have been flagged for deletion or closing.   There is a related discussion on Meta Stack Overflow .  Expected Impact  Pros     Reviewers can get through the queue a little bit faster by reducing the amount of navigation required to help maintain site quality   Having the option more easily accessible will encourage reviewers to consider deleting posts that are not up to site quality standards     Cons   If edit reviewers find it easier to flag posts, the number of posts getting sent into the Low Quality Post and Close Vote queues may increase   My response: We as a community seem to have already decided that the cost of review effort is worth the benefit of having a cleaner site. I believe that this feature request coincides with that sentiment. Additionally, the user that suggested the edit will see this new reason for why their edit was rejected, which will discourage them from making further edits on unsalvageable posts, reducing the size of the Suggested Edit Review queue.   Adding a flag option may muddle the scope of what edit reviewers are supposed to do   My response: I agree with the assertion made by  answer, which is that the purpose of edit reviews is to just the quality of the edit, not the quality of the overall post. However, I am not trying to imply that edit reviewers should necessarily begin judging the original post. But if, in the course of judging the review, it becomes obvious that the whole post is garbage, then I think flagging the post is a reasonable action and we should encourage that behavior.  Side Note I do not have 3k reputation on any site, so I don't know exactly how the close vote and delete vote interfaces work. For users over 3k, I would suggest that the "Reject and Flag Original Post" button be replaced with a "Reject and Vote to Close Original Post" or "Reject and Vote to Delete Original Post" button, or something similar.  Conclusion  I acknowledge that flagging/deleting/closing original posts is beyond the scope of the Suggested Edit Review Queue, but I think it is a useful behavior that we should encourage in edit reviewers by making it easier.
60310
"Good morning.  Here is something awesome that you got last night!", said the Top Bar:    "21?  That must be two answer upvotes and, um, an answer that I downvoted that was deleted?", I thought.  Ok, let's look at the details and find out:    The +20 on my egrep answer is new and I've seen the other Achievements on the list, so where did the extra +1 come from?  In order to avoid confusion, the recent reputation changes in the dropdown should add up to the number in the notification.      I suspect this particular case is a bug.  Assuming the +1 is a downvote reversed by an answer deletion, I could see the argument for excluding it from the Achievements dropdown.  After all, it's not exactly something you accomplished.  Except it kinda is.  Part of the reason for downvoting is to  low-quality content.  The ultimate sign that such content was deemed beneath community standards is when it gets deleted.  I'm not sure that we should , but putting a note in your achievements in such cases seems like it would reinforce positive (albeit negative) behaviour.  This question is a feature request that rep gains from deleted downvotes be listed in the Achievements dialog, without getting into broader issues of displaying other activity on deleted posts such as those discussed in .  Thus, this is not intended to completely address the issue of the Achievements sum not adding up, but is intended to help encourage good community moderation by appropriate downvoting of low-quality content.
37602
Clearly, that was the result of an inexperienced user.  If a question gets a bunch of replies, then the "comment" could easily get lost in the other answers.  I think that if there is no activity on the "comment" (no comments, no votes, etc.), then I think converting the answer to a comment is a valid operation for housekeeping purposes. If there are comments, votes, etc., then the answer should likely be left alone.
86760
The other day I saw an answer which was ok. Not great but not bad. So no reason to upvote or downvote. However the answer already had a single downvote. I felt this was unfair so upvoted the answer to keep it at what I felt was a fair score. It wasn't until afterward that it occurred to me that I should have perhaps solely voted on the content of the answer.  Is this a reasonable reason for an upvote or should I have left the answer alone?
98484
I came across  in the review queue. Sometimes I come across questions of similar form. My thought is to vote to close as "too-broad" because:   Question is very broad, there are many, many ways to perform that task. No code was posted, no specific coding problem was identified.   But, and this is in general, I always get tripped up when I see that these questions have a reasonable accepted answer: I would have voted it too-broad immediately had I seen the question pop up in the new questions stream; but when I see that the answerer seemed to find the question clear enough (and his answer was accepted and deemed satisfactory), I end up going back and thinking "if it was clear enough for the answerer to provide a specific answer, doesn't that mean it wasn't too broad after all?"  How should I handle questions like this?   And, in general, how should I handle questions that, alone, seem too broad, but when answered, seem specific? Should I ignore the answers when considering closing a question, or do they retroactively change the quality of the question?
109034
I just ran across  and immediately thought to myself "yes, that should be deleted." But before I recommended deletion, I took a quick look at the question.  What the hell? A red background? The question is deleted? Must be a review audit... But then I still get a popup when I click the Recommend Deletion button... Ok, now I'm confused...  Taking a look at the , none of the answers under it are actually deleted.  Is this something to do with the question having been posted clear back in 2008? I mean, it wasn't deleted until 2011 (but automatically), so I wouldn't suspect that to be the problem. Is something else going on here? Should we clearly be blaming Sam for this?  If this isn't a bug, I'd say that LQP review certainly shouldn't be picking answers from closed and deleted questions. It's not like anyone can actually see those (and it should be deleted anyways).
112933
I find it not comfortable to have the order of the review sections changing all the time.  Within few seconds it changed from        to        Wouldn't it be better to have all of them in the same position, no matter the number of posts in each queue?  It assumes that the most important part is to lower the queue, although it is said there is no problem in having Close Votes with thousands of items. IMOH, most of us prefer going to one or other section (for example I like "Suggested edits") rather than to the queue with the most items, so having them changing their position makes it not that intuitive.  What do you think?
122780
OK, this question has been asked over and over, and I am still unsure. I am just trying to find the thin line between a substantial and minor edit.  I find myself making edits for grammar and poor formatting, that I can see some reviewers find minor and others do not.  I have also noticed some users with high rep, or moderators will make the similar edits:     If I have edited your post with an edit summary of “ARGH”... ... or   some variation thereof, then you probably used “it’s” when the correct   word was, in fact, “its”.   Can anyone provide a definitive way to establish whether or not one should proceed to edit? It seems to be more a matter of opinion rather than an objective delineation.
82940
I went to a Late Answers review queue that had four items in it and started reviewing the first one by editing it into shape rather heavily.   By the time I was done, someone else had reviewed the same post simply by upvoting it, so I only got a "Next" button, not an "I'm done" button. My edit still counted as an edit; but no longer as a review.  Worse still, the other three items were gone from the review queue as well. Curious, I checked the review tab in the profile of the user who had snatched the first review out from under me. Sure enough, he also "reviewed" the other three items, all within a minute, without even fixing obvious typos, simply by upvoting. I had to go through his review list and review every single post again.   Except, of course, my reviews didn't count as reviews anymore. My review count went up by zero. His went up by four&nbsp;&#8212; for fixing exactly nothing in posts that absolutely could use fixing. To add insult to injury, this was on a site where collecting four review points is incredibly hard because the review queues there are pretty much empty 24/7. (Edit: and now that that is also true of SO, we are seeing the same behavior here.)   So what we get are:   Subpar answers that do not get fixed and get upvoted instead and disappear from the radar of the people who are actually capable of and willing to fix them.  Fastest-gun-in-the-West, single-click, faux reviews that count towards rare Gold badges, while elaborate, actual reviews don't.   This is severely broken.  And I can't think of an easy solution that wouldn't break other things.    Simply not letting upvotes count as reviews is not an option (it discourages upvotes not just on crap, but across the board; and some posts really are fine as is and deserve nothing but an upvote). Simply always counting a review as a review, even if someone else is faster to review the same post, introduces review-point inflation and only solves the problem for one faux review, but not for several in a row, as in the scenario above. Simply letting several people review the same item, like with suggested edits, is not really "simply" anymore, and introduces more review-point inflation still. Likewise, allowing people to reject or override other people's reviews as not substantial enough opens all kinds of cans of worms.   And so on and so forth. I really can't think of anything Solomonic. But perhaps someone else can.