Meta · Wiki maintenance

Citation sweep results: how many references did not say what was claimed

Meta › Wiki maintenance moderation maintainership citation check wiki post

hana.satoTL4 Moderator24 Oct 2025#1

On the subject in the title: Citation sweep results: how many references did not say what was claimed Working notes rather than a conclusion.

Process question about how this site works.

I have read the guidelines and the trust-level page and I still have a question about the mechanism rather than the rule. Specifically, I would like to understand the reasoning behind it, because I suspect the reasoning is better than the rule sounds.

Not a complaint. If the answer is "because of a failure mode you have not seen yet", I would like to hear about the failure mode.

46 likes 9mo

r.mcalisterTL3Regular30 Oct 2025#2

Review dates: each maintained page has a review date (the date by which it should be checked). If a page is past its review date, flagging it here alerts the maintainer.

0 likes 9mo

m.steinerTL2 Moderator3 Nov 2025#3

hana.sato, post #1: On the subject in the title: Citation sweep results: how many references did not say what was claimed Working notes rather than a conclusion. Process question about how this site works. I have read the guidelines and the trust-level page and I still have a question about the mechanism rather than the rule. Specifically, I would like to… Go to post

post #2 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Orphaned pages: if a page has no incoming links and is not reachable from navigation, it is orphaned. Such pages should either be linked or deprecated.

1 like in reply to #1 9mo

batchlogTL3Regular7 Nov 2025#4

Worth separating two things that the opening post runs together.

Maintainer handovers: if a page's maintainer is inactive and needs a new one, discussing that here can facilitate the transition.

7 likes 9mo

h.friskTL2 Moderator10 Nov 2025 · edited#5

Picking up post #2: that is the part I would want checked first.

Revision disputes: if you disagree with an edit a maintainer made, discussing it here invites resolution rather than conflict.

0 likes 9mo

a.thorneTL2Wiki editor14 Nov 2025#6

Redundancy: if two maintained pages cover largely the same ground, consolidation might improve clarity. Pointing out redundancy helps maintainers see the issue.

0 likes in reply to #1 8mo

i.balogunTL2 Moderator17 Nov 2025#7

Cross-referencing: if two pages should reference each other but do not, suggesting the cross-reference helps the maintainer see the connection.

4 likes 8mo

j.rasmussenTL2Regular20 Nov 2025#8

On post #4 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.

The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.

12 likes 8mo

n.laurentTL2 Moderator23 Nov 2025#9

i.balogun, post #7: Cross-referencing: if two pages should reference each other but do not, suggesting the cross-reference helps the maintainer see the connection. Go to post

This follows post #6 rather than contradicting it.

Outdated external links: if a maintained page links to external sources and those links are broken or pages have moved, reporting that helps keep the page current.

0 likes in reply to #7 8mo

compounding_ruthTL4Pharmacist25 Nov 2025#10

n.laurent, post #9: This follows post #6 rather than contradicting it. Outdated external links: if a maintained page links to external sources and those links are broken or pages have moved, reporting that helps keep the page current. Go to post

I read post #8 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Evidence synthesis: if you think a page should cover recent evidence or a new development, suggesting specific content helps the maintainer prioritise updates.

1 like in reply to #9 8mo

s.grimaldiTL228 Nov 2025#11

Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above

Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.

The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.

dr.villanuevaTL3Physician1 Dec 2025#12

Authority: if you think a page needs input from someone with specific expertise, suggesting that person helps the maintainer recruit contributors.

12 likes 8mo

ro.zielinskiTL2 Moderator4 Dec 2025#13

Scope creep: if a page is attempting too much, suggesting it split into multiple pages can improve clarity.

2 likes 8mo

sourced_claimsTL3Regular6 Dec 2025#14

r.mcalister, post #2: Review dates: each maintained page has a review date (the date by which it should be checked). If a page is past its review date, flagging it here alerts the maintainer. Go to post

This follows post #11 rather than contradicting it.

Authority: if you think a page needs input from someone with specific expertise, suggesting that person helps the maintainer recruit contributors.

0 likes in reply to #2 8mo

m.kjaerTL2 Moderator9 Dec 2025#15

Redundancy: if two maintained pages cover largely the same ground, consolidation might improve clarity. Pointing out redundancy helps maintainers see the issue.

19 likes 8mo

priorauth_notesTL2Regular11 Dec 2025#16

For anyone arriving from a search: the marked solution above is the direct answer, and the replies underneath it add the caveats that make it safe to use.

8 likes 8mo

a.adeyemiTL2 Moderator14 Dec 2025#17

Coming back to post #15, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Scope creep: if a page is attempting too much, suggesting it split into multiple pages can improve clarity.

0 likes 7mo

microgramsTL2Regular16 Dec 2025#18

batchlog, post #4: Worth separating two things that the opening post runs together. Maintainer handovers: if a page's maintainer is inactive and needs a new one, discussing that here can facilitate the transition. Go to post

Picking up post #15: that is the part I would want checked first.

Cross-referencing: if two pages should reference each other but do not, suggesting the cross-reference helps the maintainer see the connection.

0 likes in reply to #4 7mo

j.ivaturiTL2 Moderator19 Dec 2025#19

Worth separating two things that post #15 runs together.

Outdated external links: if a maintained page links to external sources and those links are broken or pages have moved, reporting that helps keep the page current.

0 likes 7mo

revision_historyTL3Wiki editor21 Dec 2025#20

post #19 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Evidence synthesis: if you think a page should cover recent evidence or a new development, suggesting specific content helps the maintainer prioritise updates.

25 likes 7mo

ms_hollowayTL4Mass spectrometrist24 Dec 2025#21

Review dates: each maintained page has a review date (the date by which it should be checked). If a page is past its review date, flagging it here alerts the maintainer.

0 likes 7mo

e.iyerTL2 Moderator26 Dec 2025#22

Two things before anyone answers the substance.

First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.

1 like 7mo

dr.villanuevaTL3Physician28 Dec 2025#23

h.frisk, post #5: Picking up post #2: that is the part I would want checked first. Revision disputes: if you disagree with an edit a maintainer made, discussing it here invites resolution rather than conflict. Go to post

Picking up post #20: that is the part I would want checked first.

Orphaned pages: if a page has no incoming links and is not reachable from navigation, it is orphaned. Such pages should either be linked or deprecated.

7 likes in reply to #5 7mo

ch.correiaTL230 Dec 2025#24

Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above

Coming back to post #22, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Maintainer handovers: if a page's maintainer is inactive and needs a new one, discussing that here can facilitate the transition.

sourced_claimsTL3Regular2 Jan 2026#25

For anyone arriving from a search: the marked solution above is the direct answer, and the replies underneath it add the caveats that make it safe to use.

0 likes 7mo

r.bruunTL2 Moderator4 Jan 2026 · edited#26

Revision disputes: if you disagree with an edit a maintainer made, discussing it here invites resolution rather than conflict.

3 likes 7mo

h.oyelowoTL2Regular6 Jan 2026#27

m.steiner, post #3: post #2 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit. Orphaned pages: if a page has no incoming links and is not reachable from navigation, it is orphaned. Such pages should either be linked or deprecated. Go to post

Revision disputes: if you disagree with an edit a maintainer made, discussing it here invites resolution rather than conflict.

11 likes in reply to #3 7mo

m.radichTL2 Moderator8 Jan 2026#28

I read post #26 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Redundancy: if two maintained pages cover largely the same ground, consolidation might improve clarity. Pointing out redundancy helps maintainers see the issue.

24 likes 7mo

b.solbergTL2 Moderator11 Jan 2026#29

post #28 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

Authority: if you think a page needs input from someone with specific expertise, suggesting that person helps the maintainer recruit contributors.

1 like 7mo

h.mbekiTL2 Moderator13 Jan 2026#30

Review dates: each maintained page has a review date (the date by which it should be checked). If a page is past its review date, flagging it here alerts the maintainer.

6 likes in reply to #5 6mo

Sponsored PeptideMeter — peptide analytics and supplier verificationPurity analysis and structured supplier verification, published as dated records rather than scores. Referenced throughout our sourcing documentation.View analytics →