My reviewing of questions is declared "blatantly bad"; why, and how can I improve?

Question

I've started seeing this strongly worded message recently when clicking the Review link:

You have approved numerous edits or first posts that were blatantly bad and needed editing or should not have been posted. We have the review queues for a reason, and you are not living up to that reason.

Checking back my edits I cannot see what is so blatantly bad about them. There were a couple of occasions when someone else added a tag to questions that I had edited. None of my edits were rejected; none of the questions and answers I reviewed were downvoted or closed. I'd like to understand what is it that I'm doing blatantly wrong and what I should do to improve.

Some examples:

Multiple SELECT vs single SELECT over TCIP

• I edited the question
• question not downvoted, edit not reverted, question has an accepted answer

PgBouncer Uncertainties

• no action needed
• question not downvoted, has an answer

Cube processing either takes too long or fails

• edited answer, edits accepted
• answer not downvoted

https://dba.stackexchange.com/posts/66653/revisions

• edited answer, edits accepted

Compare two similar Postgres databases for differences

• no action needed
• question later edited (tag added), has an accepted answer

SQL Server instance using only a few hundred MB. Well below the minimum server memory setting

• no action needed
• question later edited by author, has an accepted answer

Redo log size results into performance degrade

• no action needed
• question lated edited (tag added), has an accepted answer

https://dba.stackexchange.com/posts/66543/revisions

• made an accepted edit
• question not downvoted, has an answer

Answer 1

Your edits and revisions seem to be mostly OK but I noticed these:

1. A question that was closed: Canceling SQL Server Support where you simply added/removed a tag, while the question could have been edited for several more things.

2. Another revision by you: Need to implement some logic in DB2 where you simply changed "login" to "logic". The question could have been improved much further besides the trivial edit.

3. Added mysql tag: What is the strategy of query evaluation in DBMS when Limit is used in query?

I cannot say if 3 not very good revisions can lead to this strongly worded message (never knew it existed!) but generally, it's better to do not edit a post just for a minor typo or mistake. Or, once you decide to edit, fix everything you can in that post. Remove typos, improve code format, edit grammar, spelling mistakes, remove tags from the title, etc.

Answer 2

We do have issues with folk sometimes doing pointless edits or putting in minimal effort because they are after a badge or something, so we sometimes get a bit trigger-happy. In this case, I think you've taken the flak for others and your own edits are mainly fine so I've lifted the review ban.

Thanks for not getting huffy about this and bringing it to meta in a constructive way. I hope the result will be more editing not less, and that this question and ypercube's answer will encourage anyone who reads it to edit well rather than go the other way and be hesitant about editing at all!