This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
I read post #89 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
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.
This follows post #89 rather than contradicting it.
Cross-referencing: if you notice two pages that should reference each other but do not, suggest the cross-reference.
Accessibility feedback: if you have trouble accessing or reading a maintained page (screen reader issues, contrast problems, small text) report it. Accessibility matters.
Format suggestions: if you think a maintained page could be clearer in its presentation (different section structure, different examples, added graphics) suggest the change.
Coming back to post #93, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Suggesting content for a page: if you know a maintained page is missing something important, post a suggestion with specific content you think should be added.
I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.
The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient.
post #97 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Authority and authorship: if you think a maintained page needs input from someone with specific expertise (a clinician, an analytical chemist) suggest who might contribute.
Correction requests: if you spot an error in a maintained page, note it here with the specific correction. The maintainer will review and update if justified.
Format suggestions: if you think a maintained page could be clearer in its presentation (different section structure, different examples, added graphics) suggest the change.
I read post #101 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
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.
This follows post #101 rather than contradicting it.
Correction requests: if you spot an error in a maintained page, note it here with the specific correction. The maintainer will review and update if justified.
On post #101 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Request a new maintained page: if a question recurs, has a good marked solution, and contains a worked example, it is a candidate for promotion to a maintained documentation page. Post your nomination in this subcategory with a link to the topic.
Scope creep: if you think a page is attempting too much and should be split into multiple pages, that is a reasonable suggestion.
Picking up post #105: that is the part I would want checked first.
Cross-referencing: if you notice two pages that should reference each other but do not, suggest the cross-reference.
post #109 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
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.
I read post #110 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
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.
Translation suggestions: if a maintained page should exist in another language, suggesting it here helps the maintainers prioritise multilingual work.
Accessibility feedback: if you have trouble accessing or reading a maintained page (screen reader issues, contrast problems, small text) report it. Accessibility matters.
Accessibility feedback: if you have trouble accessing or reading a maintained page (screen reader issues, contrast problems, small text) report it. Accessibility matters.
post #116 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Cross-referencing: if you notice two pages that should reference each other but do not, suggest the cross-reference.
Scope creep: if you think a page is attempting too much and should be split into multiple pages, that is a reasonable suggestion.