okay! thanks :)

When I'm reviewing suggested edits, I will often encounter a fair edit, but one, say, using \displaystyle in the title. I click on "Improve Edit", and modify the title. Re: edit summary: If I edit a post with a suggested edit, I the editor's summary. Can I respond there, to give the pointer: "\displaystyle, \dfrac, etc are not to be used in titles in order to keep all titles appearing on the front page similar in vertical height."

In another case, just today, I reviewed three suggested edits in which the editor enclosed unformatted equations, functions, within dollar signs. But they would consistently write, essentially, $f(x)$ = $g(x)$ = $h(x)$., or `$x$ = $0$. So i tried to use the summary to get across that entire equations should be enclosed within one or two $ at the very beginning, and one or two $ (respectively), and the very end of the equation.

I'm just not confident that the editor of the suggested edit gets this feedback. In the past I've typically just fixed such incidents, unless a post is so riddled by dollar signs/ and other errors. And rarely left messages. But if such editors receive feedback in the comments, they're going to learn more quickly than repeating the same behavior unknowingly.

@amWhy I do not think that there is a dedicated way to communicate with users that suggested edits. If you want to inform them I am afraid you need to resort to comments (with which you can notify them even though they are not proposed by auto-complete). It is still a good idea to write an edit summary.

I am not certain if I understood your concern correctly.

@quid You answered my question very well. I'll try to comment below the post with the suggested edit, pinging the editor. Though I will likely do so only when I've seen the same editor suggesting two or more edits which have problems.

Also, @quid. I miss the reason for deleting an answer "This should be an edit to the question..." when an asker uses an answer field to clarify or answer to comments." Maybe it wasn't applied very often. I also miss an older reason for rejecting an edit: "Not thorough enough"... something like that. Sometimes I've seen the same editor suggest three separate edits. Title edit only. Then body edit. Then tag edit.

@amWhy re the latter yes I think this 'too minor' was canceled some time ago. Not sure about the details. Regarding the former I am not sure at the moment.

@quid Ahh, yes, yes, I remember "too minor". Okay, the quiz is over! ;-) . (Seriously, that's all I'll ask about today...).

@amWhy ohh, just as I got into the flow. :-)

@quid =P How do these changes in menus get made? Are all menus common to each site? Or are there site specific items on menus (close reasons, rejecting edit reasons, deletion reasons, etc.)? If they are generally common to all sites, I'm guessing the discussion or feature requests would happen on meta.se?

oops!!! No more questions!

@amWhy I'll suspend you right away for circumventing a ban!!! Self-imposed? In chat? Who cares! :-)

@quid hahahaha!!

There are the "per site" off-topic reasons the rest is common. Yes, the main meta is where these things get discussed and anounced.