@WYSIWYG should I not be approving these edits? because they technically improve the formatting of the question so I do not see anything wrong with those edits but clearly it seems the user is doing it for the reputation...

@WYSIWYG @TanMath read carefully before approving. Edits that appear to be grammar or style may be changing the meaning. If you don't fully understand a post, it's easy to think something is a mistake that isn't. See for example, the edit to my post "the relevant test is transfer from" changed to "the relevant test is transferred from". The test isn't being transferred.

Generally, anyone editing that volume of posts that quickly is bound to make errors. Read carefully before approving.

I've gone back and rolled back a few of this users edits where they have introduced new errors, changed the meaning, modified the text in block quotes so that it is different from the quoted source, or changed formatting in non-traditional ways.

@Chris just a heads up, I happened upon some that you approved (e.g., here). It's a poor answer regardless, but the edit was to a block quote and did change the meaning/introduce an error (from "after all sorts of incidents" to "after all, sorts of incidents"

@DeNovo I think all this should have been posted in "The Biosphere" :)

@TanMath As @DeNovo said, check carefully before approving.

@user237650 I posted this message here because I wanted to ping the mods to send cell0 a message for not editing recklessly :-P

Many of their edits are fine but I also see a lot of superfluous edits (especially on closed questions) which is just unnecessary. This issue was also raised by @DeNovo on meta.

@user237650 I first tried biosphere but they were not active there and therefore not pingable.