I have come across a situation that when I edit someone's post, it is kept on hold for 'peer review' and after the approval of the author it reflects on the site. But when someone suggests edit to my posts, I don't receive any type of prompt and it automatically gets approval. I have gone through the site for last an hour but haven't found any type of setting that can change this. So, can anyone please tell why is it happening?
You're unable to force the system to allow you to stop people editing your posts, this is a feature of the StackExchange model, that anyone in the community is free to improve upon posts (once they reach a high enough rep to do so). Generally, its a great system which ensures the quality of questions and answers here.
Usually, edits are for minor things such as spelling, or adding MathJax formatting, and should be preserved, however, I grant that there are some users here who edit excessively (if you search meta there have been several recent discussions on this).
If you are against someones edit, you can re-edit your post, or roll-back the post to its original state. Generally once you do this, the person who edited it should get the idea and not try to change it again (avoiding so-called 'edit wars').
Do be aware though, that if you're choosing to roll back perfectly good edits which leave your question poorly worded/formatted, then people are also quite within their right to vote to close.
Also note that until you have a certain amount of reputation, your edits will be placed into a queue for moderation (this is to prevent new users from trashing the site). Once you have sufficient rep, your edits will be applied instantly.
Your question is approaching the ‘issue’ from the wrong angle and is probably based on a misunderstanding.
The model of Stack Exchange is indeed that anyone can suggest an edit. When an edit is suggested, it enters a review queue and it also drops a note in the OP’s inbox. The edit can be approved or rejected by:
- two votes for either approve or reject from the review queue
- the OP who has the power to flat-out reject or approve an edit.
- (there is a third possibility which I’ll address in a second).
Furthermore, Stack Exchange believes in community moderation, so anybody who has passed a certain community contribution threshold may go to the review queues and vote to accept or reject edits.
Requiring approval for your edits is tiresome. Some people have been around and contributed so well (as measured by their reputation) that Stack Exchange trusts them that their edits won’t be spam, plagiarism, superfluous or anything else that they shouldn’t be. These people’s edits are applied immediately i.e. without prior review. This priviledge is gained by reaching 2000 reputation.
Since Stack Exchange trusts these people to edit well, these are also the people entrusted to the suggested edit review queues, i.e. they also have the power to judge over other people’s edits.
This trust can even be used to single-handedly rule good or bad — if they decide to further improve the post at the same time. This option is presented by the two review options accept and improve and reject and improve — in both cases the person with edit priviledges has a clear view of the state of the post, what the edit does and what it does not (although it should be done). These single-handed overriding buttons basically mean ‘if I had found the unedited post, I would put it here’, which may help to explain why they exist.
So to sum this up:
You get notified of a pending edit suggestion if the suggestion was made by a user without the priviledge.
- The suggestion also enters a review queue where others can decide if the edit was helpful or not.
- If the review queue is faster than you, you will either not receive any notification (reject) or a notification of a successful edit (accept).
You get notified of a recent edit if the edit was performed by a user with the priviledge.
Neither variant can be configured; both are hard-coded into the system.