Meta · Feature requests

Request: a diff view for wiki revisions — the long version

Meta › Feature requests translation site feedback wiki post

Solved

Solved by j.rasmussen in post #9

Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible.

Jump to the accepted answer →

BirkelandTL3Regular9 May 2025#1

Posting this under the heading it deserves: Request: a diff view for wiki revisions — the long version Everything below is what sits behind that.

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.

12 likes 15mo

s.ostergaardTL2 Moderator16 May 2025#2

Alternatives: if you have thought of a way the current site might already serve your need, mention it. It helps assess whether the feature is truly missing or just not obvious.

16 likes 14mo

bias_varianceTL4Biostatistician21 May 2025#3

Duplicate requests: if several people request the same feature, the requests often get merged. Check whether your feature has already been suggested before posting.

0 likes 14mo

d.ferreiraTL2 Moderator26 May 2025#4

s.ostergaard, post #2: Alternatives: if you have thought of a way the current site might already serve your need, mention it. It helps assess whether the feature is truly missing or just not obvious. Go to post

Feature scope: some requests are for the site itself (search, filtering, navigation). Some are for the documentation (new topics, different formats). Scope helps prioritise.

1 like in reply to #2 14mo

batchlogTL3Regular30 May 2025 · edited#5

post #4 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Tracking: staff will update the status of feature requests (under consideration, planned, implemented, declined). Checking back lets you know the fate of your suggestion.

3 likes 14mo

c.chowdhuryTL2 Moderator3 Jun 2025#6

Worth separating two things that post #2 runs together.

Requests for platform and documentation features, with the reasoning that justifies them. If you think the site would be better with a feature, suggest it with enough detail that it is actionable.

10 likes 14mo

two_year_lineTL3Regular7 Jun 2025#7

Birkeland, post #1: Posting this under the heading it deserves: Request: a diff view for wiki revisions — the long version Everything below is what sits behind that. 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… Go to post

Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications.

31 likes in reply to #1 14mo

i.balogunTL2 Moderator10 Jun 2025#8

bias_variance, post #3: Duplicate requests: if several people request the same feature, the requests often get merged. Check whether your feature has already been suggested before posting. Go to post

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.

0 likes in reply to #3 14mo

j.rasmussenTL2Regular Solution14 Jun 2025#9

Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible.

15 likes 13mo

y.adeyemiTL2 Moderator17 Jun 2025#10

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.

30 likes 13mo

ppm_errorTL3Analytical chemist20 Jun 2025#11

Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised.

32 likes 13mo

b.vanheckeTL2 Moderator24 Jun 2025#12

Deprecation requests: if you think a feature should be removed or changed, that is also a request. Explain why you think it would improve the site.

16 likes in reply to #1 13mo

m.strand_rphTL3Pharmacist27 Jun 2025#13

On post #9 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Requests for platform and documentation features, with the reasoning that justifies them. If you think the site would be better with a feature, suggest it with enough detail that it is actionable.

6 likes 13mo

d.eriksenTL2 Moderator30 Jun 2025#14

Tracking: staff will update the status of feature requests (under consideration, planned, implemented, declined). Checking back lets you know the fate of your suggestion.

1 like 13mo

o.lindgrenTL2Regular3 Jul 2025#15

Deprecation requests: if you think a feature should be removed or changed, that is also a request. Explain why you think it would improve the site.

24 likes 13mo

n.cardosoTL2 Moderator6 Jul 2025#16

o.lindgren, post #15: Deprecation requests: if you think a feature should be removed or changed, that is also a request. Explain why you think it would improve the site. Go to post

Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.

11 likes in reply to #15 13mo

preregisteredTL3Research methods9 Jul 2025 · edited#17

Worth separating two things that post #13 runs together.

Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised.

3 likes 13mo

r.petrovTL2 Moderator12 Jul 2025#18

post #17 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible.

0 likes 13mo

a.kowalczykTL2Regular15 Jul 2025#19

Coming back to post #17, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

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.

17 likes 12mo

c.haddadTL2 Moderator18 Jul 2025#20

Use case: explain why you think the feature would help. "I would use this to..." makes the request concrete.

7 likes 12mo

buffer_sheetTL3Regular21 Jul 2025#21

ppm_error, post #11: Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised. Go to post

Picking up post #18: that is the part I would want checked first.

Duplicate requests: if several people request the same feature, the requests often get merged. Check whether your feature has already been suggested before posting.

0 likes in reply to #11 12mo

f.lindholmTL2 Moderator23 Jul 2025#22

n.cardoso, post #16: Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up. Go to post

Coming back to post #20, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Feature scope: some requests are for the site itself (search, filtering, navigation). Some are for the documentation (new topics, different formats). Scope helps prioritise.

3 likes in reply to #16 12mo

bench_entryTL3Regular26 Jul 2025#23

Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications.

17 likes 12mo

b.friskTL2 Moderator29 Jul 2025 · edited#24

Alternatives: if you have thought of a way the current site might already serve your need, mention it. It helps assess whether the feature is truly missing or just not obvious.

32 likes 12mo

VPoulsenTL3Regular1 Aug 2025#25

ppm_error, post #11: Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised. Go to post

Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible.

0 likes in reply to #11 12mo

i.wojcikTL2 Moderator3 Aug 2025#26

I read post #24 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised.

1 like 12mo

crossref_checkTL36 Aug 2025#27

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

post #26 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Use case: explain why you think the feature would help. "I would use this to..." makes the request concrete.

j.falkTL2 Moderator9 Aug 2025#28

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.

24 likes 12mo

sterile_fileTL3Regular11 Aug 2025#29

Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications.

3 likes 12mo

l.cabreraTL2 Moderator14 Aug 2025#30

j.falk, post #28: 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. Go to post

Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.

10 likes in reply to #28 11mo

Sponsored Sigma-Aldrich — certified reference materialsReference standards, analytical reagents and certified materials for method calibration. If you are validating a method, this is where the standard comes from.Reference standards →