I'm not sure if I should write it in the answer directly, but I could also say that when an OP simply rolls back an edit without preemptively stating any reasoning in a comment etc., that tends to create the impression that OP is misguidedly claiming "ownership" of the content or feels entitled to reject changes without needing a reason.

In fact, I think this self-answered Q&A of yours was already quite good by the standards of the site, and very useful - I've used it to close other duplicates several times. As someone who wears a "curator" hat around here, I want to make questions like this even better - as good as they can be - and make it clear to others that this is the right duplicate target to use when someone else asks the same question.

Then I gave the question a longer, more descriptive title: I made it an actual question (with a question mark and everything), and replaced the term "lazy evaluation" with a more concrete description. The goal is to make the question more recognizable and more searchable. Hopefully this way, people who need this information have a better chance of finding it with a search engine; people who click through to it from a search page (either on Stack Overflow or from external search) will take less time to verify that it's the question they're trying to answer; and other curators will be able to close duplicates more quickly and more accurately. This edit also improves visibility for some related questions (and I made similar changes elsewhere to promote this one appropriately).

the correction is appreciated, but please keep the reasoning behind the edit in the metadata text, or as a hidden comment in the source (using <!-- comment here --> syntax); putting it in huge bold print in the post itself can be considered defacement, and is probably why the initial suggestion was rejected.

I've also deleted your comment as the remainder of it is the opposite of a constructive discussion.

I edited the post twice to remove the broken link /react-js-the-king-of-universal-apps/ (with the edit-comments clearly mentioning that it is a broken link), but the peers have rejected the edit both the times. Can someone guide me what's wrong in editing an answer and removing a broken link?