On 10/16/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 16/10/2007, RLS evendell@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/15/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/15/07, Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
Now now. Let's be fair: it *could* have been a null edit.
If a "null edit" is what I think it is then shouldn't the summary be "didn't make a change"?
I think the point is "made a change" tells us it *wasn't* a null edit. :)
Indeed. The summary contained 1 bit (as in, binary digit) of information. Not completely useless, but as close as you can get without being.
I think "minor edit"[1] is beyond useless. I mean, there's a check-box for saying that.
[1] e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rypin_County&diff=prev&old...
—C.W.