7

Look at this answer: https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/1708/864

It contains a single character error, but a quite substantial one - it cites Gen 34:4, when it is clear that the author meant to cite Gen 33:4 instead. So I go click "edit" to correct it, and get this message "Edits must be at least 6 characters; is there something else to improve in this post?"

Honestly, this message is particularly stupid. There is nothing else I want to change in their answer. Why should I have to think up something else to change simply to correct a single character error?

1
5

You are right that is sometimes an unfortunate limit. However, cases like this were a one character mistake are worth fixing independent of any other edits are very rare. Commenting on it like you did was the right thing to do. On a low traffic site like this you could also flag it with a note for a mod to make the fix.

Usually minor edits like that are discouraged because on larger sites it disrupts the flow of questions on the home page and is more often than not an attempt to draw attention to posts by bumping them. Those things aren't nearly so much an issue on this site (yet) and, as you have found, in rare cases the rule is even problematic.

I would suggest that in most cases you could find a way to change some other part of the answer ... add an adjective or change the wording ever so slightly to get around this. There is a way to really cheat in the future if you need to by adding &nbsp; somewhere (or a <!-- comment -->), but that is discouraged unless really needed.

Thanks for the fix. I've implemented the change for you.

You must log in to answer this question.

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