Don't count your own changes as editing conflicts

dpratt wrote:
It's annoying when you edit something you edited before, but now it's grayed out. I don't see the point? It's not an editing conflict if the data your editing is your own edit. Maybe this could be changed so that editing conflicts are only counted when you change someone else's edit. It would take longer for fields to get grayed out this way which would mean a better overall quality of data in the end.

One example where this happens a lot is when you need to swap two episodes in episode order. You change episode 1 to 3 and then 2 to 1. But when you go to change episode 3 to 2, now it's grayed out and you have to submit an edit request which can take hours to get fixed.

Sounds like an idea. Off hand I can't think of how it could be misused by someone with nefarious intent but, if technically possible, just to be safe pick a number of non-counted edits, say 5 in the same field by the same person, before the count begins again.

If you've edited a field multiple times, it's probably because it's not that clear what it's meant to be.

Swapping episodes is a special case as you're intentionally creating multiple edits in order to to complete a single change (that's just how the system is right now), not because it was unclear.

Really, that system (of re-ordering) is what needs to change.

gazza911 wrote:
If you've edited a field multiple times, it's probably because it's not that clear what it's meant to be.

Swapping episodes is a special case as you're intentionally creating multiple edits in order to to complete a single change (that's just how the system is right now), not because it was unclear.

Really, that system (of re-ordering) is what needs to change.

+1

Would there be any downsides to allowing unlimited edits by the same user? If one keeps editing the same property over and over again, something is probably fishy too. Only count your own edits for 50% (or something) could be a good compromise.

david wrote:
Would there be any downsides to allowing unlimited edits by the same user? If one keeps editing the same property over and over again, something is probably fishy too. Only count your own edits for 50% (or something) could be a good compromise.

Maybe it's better to put the efforts on the episode re-ordering improvement? :)

I can't see the other reason for a single user to re-edit the same thing over and over again.

david wrote:
Would there be any downsides to allowing unlimited edits by the same user? If one keeps editing the same property over and over again, something is probably fishy too. Only count your own edits for 50% (or something) could be a good compromise.

I don't see any downside to allowing unlimited edits by the same user. Because there is no conflict with another user. But agree that unlimited edits are probably not needed. What happens to me frequently is the need to correct my own mistakes. This is especially true in the longer fields like summary but is still true for the shorter fields.

tnt wrote:
Maybe it's better to put the efforts on the episode re-ordering improvement? :)

I can't see the other reason for a single user to re-edit the same thing over and over again.

On bad days I've edited summaries multiple times ... grammar errors, spelling errors, missing words, wrong tense, forgetting to remove actors names, finding a longer and/or better summary deeper in the network site, etc.

I think having some leeway would be good, set a limit on the number of edits that don't count and/or how often you can make a change (like if I made 20 edits, so what, unless I did it in 10 seconds which means it may be part of a DoS attack of some sort).

A reordering improvement would also be welcome.

Maybe it could be something like an "edit streak." Allow the same user make unlimited edits, until another user makes an edit, and lock the field then? And also allow user to delete images, uploaded by themselves, as a general courtesy :)

IDK if it's easy to implement or if it's possible at all :)

As a trial, consecutive edits from the same user will now only count towards the threshold for 50%. Let me know your thoughts!

Thanks David!