I like #1. I don't like #2 or #3.

WRT #2: if the reasons are at all useful, it's likely people will simply pick whichever default comes closest and leave it at that, rather than spell out his concern. Though considering the valid reasons would probably be something like "Trolling / Excess profanity / Yes, there really is another reason to delete:" (last one for supplying a freeform reason), we might see less misconsidered nodes so I'd be all for it. *grin* For editing, preset reasons don't offer much either: most editing considerations seem to be for markup fixes and title changes. But in case of retitling, it is a good idea to propose a new title with the reason, so the dropdown would only contain "fix markup" which seems like a waste..

WRT #3: Most of the time, retitling requests already include a new title in the consideration reason. The only real change would be voting on edited content proposals, and I expect that will lead to occasionally having to keepvote against a bad proposition before someone else can reconsider with a better edit. In contrast, I trust the editors to do a good job of editing nodes that need fixing without trial and error. Voting for actual edits might have merit if it was felt that the editors are overburdened, but I don't see that.

Bunch of updates later: I hope this post is actually coherent now..

Makeshifts last the longest.