Rationale for rejecting suggested edits is very confusing
Two months ago @aCVn asked:
A month ago the same user asked:
In a Comment under the more recent Q @HDE226868 wrote there aren't really many other tags (particularly meta tags) like science-based that are clearly redundant. I agree and note no others have been suggested for removal, so far. That's not to say there aren't others that should be removed and if so, clearly the sooner the better.
[science-based] and [reality-check] have been addressed. In answers from two months ago to the earlier Q @MonicaCellio wrote: [science-based] is implied by this site's scope and doesn't add anything and I suspect what I just said applies to [reality-check] too and @HDE226868 wrote: [science-based] almost certainly should be removed and I think we could make a similar argument for [reality-check]. These are the only two As so far to that Q, neither has any down votes at present and they are sharing 5 up votes.
Neither of [science-based] and [reality-check] tags has been removed automatically yet, nor do there seem to be any plans to do so, but the possibility has certainly been raised.
So, I suggested an edit to the more recent Q:
i) to insert ", other than [science-based] and [reality-check]," into the Title
ii) to remove "Are there tags that should be removed globally from the site? Is science-based one of them?" from the body.
The response was:
This suggested edit was rejected 14 days ago by HDE 226868:
Reality-check hasn't been discussed or agreed upon as a possibility for removal - an answer proposing it might be helpful.
I appreciate the provision of some explanation and that space for that is limited, but would nevertheless be grateful for clarification. Regarding "Reality-check hasn't been discussed" – what about https://scientific-speculation.codidact.com/questions/275792), and @HDE226868's own comment "I think we could make a similar argument for [reality-check]"? If the As to https://scientific-speculation.codidact.com/questions/275792 do not count as "an answer proposing it" then what exactly is required – and in which thread?