Often I find questions that have small spelling errors, like a transposed or missing character, however I am unable to submit the correction without going and finding other things to change too so that I hit the 6 characters required.

Is there any particular reason that this minimum is in place? It seems to me that it prevents people from fixing small errors

| |
  • Titles can almost always be edited (when it comes to questions) to fit the preferred "Proper Question" form. – Tester101 Jan 11 '12 at 17:30
  • 1
    I guess I just need to work up to the 2k reputation mark so I can make all the silly edit I'd like :) – Steven Jan 11 '12 at 17:33
  • That's the idea ;) – ChrisF Jan 12 '12 at 9:39

This is Jeff's answer when questions like this come up on Meta Stack Overflow.

I agree it's a pain sometimes. However, if there are spelling mistakes then there's a good chance there's something else wrong with the post as well. If you fix those you'll soon get over the 6 character limit.

| |

Just making spelling changes isn't particularly encourage for 1) it bumps the post to the top of the active list, which it might not need to be, and 2) too many will change the question to a community wiki, which it also might not need to be. However, if it is an old unanswered question, bumping it to the top of the active list might not be a bad thing either!

| |
  • 1
    That makes sense. Perhaps the best of both worlds would be that edits under 6 characters would be allowed but not bump the question. Spelling errors and typos just look unprofessional. – Steven Jan 12 '12 at 1:15
  • I'm particularly averse to spelling and grammatical errors. I would like to see Steven's suggestion implemented. – Paul Dec 17 '12 at 21:05
  • +1... spelling errors look unprofessional. A quick edit like that should not bump the post. – Bryce Oct 30 '13 at 4:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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