In a comment attached to this question, @PietrGeerkens asserts
Extensive rework of a question's existing text is discouraged, as it invalidates answers already submitted in good faith.
Let's examine the cost/benefit of rework. If SE is intended to serve as a reference source, if we want SE Q&A to float to the top of search engines, and if we want the periodic self assessments to indicate that SE Q&A are better research sources than comparative sources, then we need to edit those questions, sometimes extensively.
@Pietr Geerkens is correct to be concerned about invalidating answers submitted in good faith; if we were a simple Q&A site, I would agree wholeheartedly. But if we are to serve as a reference source, then we need to edit questions to remove extraneous matter. Assertions like (loose paraphrase) Western printing is better than Eastern because we know the name of the inventor diminish the value of the question. Poor English grammar and spelling will diminish the ability of search engines to find, index, and correllate questions. (For a while my girlfriend made a living by buying things on ebay that were spelled incorrectly and selling them with the spelling corrected.)
Since it is early in the AM, and I haven't yet had my caffiene, let me offer the following explicit disclaimer; Mr. Geerkens' question is interesting and nontrivial, and although I challenge the details of Mr. Thio's question, I am interested in the answer to his question. This is not a strawman question for argument, it is a serious question about how do we reconcile the goal of being a premier research site with the desire to avoid invalidating good faith answers.