Best answer formats?

Question

I edited this question (see edit history) to remove strikeouts and to generally, as I saw it, make the answer a little easier to read. The change was approved, but the original author of the answer then rolled the changes back. I have no interest in a roll-back war, but I'm wondering what is considered best practice for this site.

I recognize that each SE community will have different ideas of best practices, so I have no strong feeling on this for this site. That said, I would argue that blog-style strikeouts do not work well in a Q&A format. I would say it clutters the answer, makes it harder to read, and tends to hide (rather than highlight) the important information.

On a similar note, when quoting information on outside pages, should we generally bring the relevant parts (properly cited and linked) into the answer in case the external page disappears or changes or is a link-only answer OK?

Please note, I am in no way trying to criticize or flame. I'm just wondering what is considered best practice on this particular SE site.

Answer 1

Sorry for the trouble caused, when I rolled-back to my original answer I did it to preserve the old link and to keep the original meaning of my answer. I was, however, doing it from my cellphone, and the mobile site interface is not very handy for editing, formatting and basically anything except writing down plain text.

I have already corrected my answer to give it a better looking while also keeping all informations that were deleted from the suggested edit.

And, of course, I also had no desire to flame or argue :)

Answer 2

I think the edit (removing the strikeouts) was appropriate. The author of the answer in question should have either removed the incorrect text or added an edit to explain the correction. Because there has already been one edit and rollback, I think the best approach in this situation is probably to leave a comment explaining the concern. I have just left a comment along those lines.

That said, thanks for not engaging in a rollback war and bringing this to Meta -- this is the right way to handle the situation.

Answer 3

To me SO and SE all have a similar feel, probably caused by the carry over the experience members going from one site to another.

I actually rejected your edit, as I think that from a certain rep¹, you should trust that a user knows about formatting and does something on purposes. My general rule of changing (for myself) is: the higher the rep, the smaller the changes you should make. Obviously other people thought differently and accepted your edits.

Obvious typos and grammatical errors should always be a target for an edit. So are inconsistencies within a post (casing, English vs. American, formatting). I also think a user (as original poster or as editor) should be consistent in what they are doing (e.g. blockquoting acronyms in one post, but not in another, hurts my sense of aesthetics), but that kind of consistency should primarily be ones own responsibility.

¹ _{I mean total rep over all the sites, not just here on ebooks, as an indication of a user 'knowing what they are doing'}