5
$\begingroup$

I suggested an edit which added alt text for the image of that question.

It was rejected by 2 users giving the following as the reason:

This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability.

I don't know which part of easier to find did they not understand.

There is a reason for alt texts to exist.

The fun part of this is that one of the users approved another similar edit of mine. (Huh??)

I think I was under the wrong impression that Stack Exchange wanted traffic from search engine queries and alt text helps in that (though their contribution is small).

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Ahem...I was the other user. I saw your second edit added something to the post, while the first one didn't. (And adding something useful to the post is the main point we have in mind when reviewing edits) And that message is an auto message from SE, not our content. Just jumping in and questioning our understanding isn't very constructive...Just sayin'. $\endgroup$ – M.A.R. May 5 '15 at 18:12
7
$\begingroup$

For one, edits to a question bump the question to the top of the Active page, so they should be reserved for more serious changes. If it's relatively new, I don't think it's a big deal, but definitely for old questions, we don't want to be pushing them to the top of the list for edits that don't make substantial changes to the content. There are probably hundreds of images that don't have proper alt tags (and I'm guilty of doing that when I'm in a rush), but we don't necessarily want to cover the front page with them just to fix that.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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