I suggested an edit to a question which was trivial in the small picture but was a grammatical punctuation mistake that I fixed. A few minutes later I find my edit rejected and a nearly identical edit made by a user with huge rep. Now I can't make any edit suggestions for 7 days for suggesting an edit that was clearly right (check this).
Could anyone help me regarding this? is there a fault of mine or am I overlooking a guideline?
The edit that was rejected was replacing ,with , in something that's intended to be CSV, for consumption by computers rather than humans, where you shouldn't have spaces after the commas. I think it was correct for that edit to be rejected, and the similar edit that someone else made (removing spaces) was the right one.
What's stranger is that two other edit suggestions you'd made shortly before were rejected, for no reason I can fathom. (You suggested adding spoiler markup to two answers that didn't have it, and both suggestions were rejected.)
What got you (automatically) blocked from suggesting edits was that run of multiple rejected edits in rapid succession. Since they seem to me obviously benign, I have unblocked you.
Sorry, I only saw this meta post just now. As one of the people who voted to reject all three of your edits, I thought it's fair that I should post an answer here to explain my decisions:
This edit is misguided, and you're mistaken to say your edit was "clearly right" based on English punctuation rules which don't apply here as that's not a set of English sentences but a CSV list, in which (depending on the code used to interpret it) either spacing doesn't matter or there should be no spacing. It was pointed out to me after rejecting your edit that the list had an inconsistency, as one space was included in the original post, so I made a small edit to remove that one space (kind of the opposite of your attempted edit).
These two edits are more borderline. We do have a general practice of putting spoilertags in answers, and sometimes edits are made to add spoilertagging to older posts which didn't have it, but I don't feel that such edits are always necessary. Who's going to be "spoiled" by seeing an incorrect low-voted answer to a 5-year-old puzzle without needing an extra click to see it? It's one of those things where I think it's far too much effort (and too little gain) to bring all older posts into alignment with current practice on spoilertags.
I'm just one of two rejecters on each of those suggested edits, as edits can't be rejected singlehandedly except by mods and OPs. I didn't realise that you'd be edit-blocked as a consequence of those rejections - in fact, I didn't even realise that automatic edit blocks are possible!
By the way, you can see the reasons for rejection in the review item which still exists as a link, and you can see a list of all your own suggested edits from your profile (that's how I found the three items mentioned above to check and discuss them). Sometimes people don't bother writing a custom explanation for rejection ("The edit does not improve the quality of the post. Changes to the content are unnecessary or make the post more confusing." is just a boilerplate text), but for this one I did.
