Sometimes users will make multiple edits in a short time frame to inhibit article reversion, or to fix a typographical error.
That causes extra workload in either case.
The solution is to condense revision histories.
If a user makes two edits within the same hour, the edits should then be merged.
If a different user makes an edit in between the two edits of the other user, then the edits should not be merged.
less edits, less history, less space...great idea :) Triton (talk) 10:48, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
It Might create complications for example when a user has left 2 or more separate summaries for different controversial edits. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Good idea Andthu (talk) 22:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Only merge sequential edits that lack an edit summary; never mark merged edit as minor. Swpb (talk) 22:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
It looks confusing, but also a good idea! 333-blue 23:29, 17 March 2016 (UTC)