This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
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.
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.
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.
Flag a page that has drifted: if you notice a maintained page has information that is outdated (dates that have passed, regulatory changes, new evidence) post a flag so the maintainers see it.
Picking up post #94: that is the part I would want checked first.
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.
Coming back to post #96, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Scope creep: if you think a page is attempting too much and should be split into multiple pages, that is a reasonable suggestion.
post #98 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
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.
Worth separating two things that post #96 runs together.
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.
post #100 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Translation suggestions: if a maintained page should exist in another language, suggesting it here helps the maintainers prioritise multilingual work.
Format suggestions: if you think a maintained page could be clearer in its presentation (different section structure, different examples, added graphics) suggest the change.
Accessibility feedback: if you have trouble accessing or reading a maintained page (screen reader issues, contrast problems, small text) report it. Accessibility matters.
post #104 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.
Flag a page that has drifted: if you notice a maintained page has information that is outdated (dates that have passed, regulatory changes, new evidence) post a flag so the maintainers see it.
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.
Cross-referencing: if you notice two pages that should reference each other but do not, suggest the cross-reference.
I read post #109 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.
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 #113, 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.
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.
Scope creep: if you think a page is attempting too much and should be split into multiple pages, that is a reasonable suggestion.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
About the Wiki requests category
Request a new maintained page, or flag one that has drifted out of date. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author and a note.…
|
+3 | 7 | 655 | 19mo |
|
Splitting an overlong document into two
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Splitting an overlong document into two Everything below is what sits behind that. Nominating something for promotion into the documentation commons. The topic in…
|
+30 | 34 | 6.2k | 1d |
|
A request that was declined, and the reasoning — a second dataset
A request that was declined, and the reasoning — a second dataset Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Process question about how this site works. I have read the…
|
+89 | 98 | 31k | 11mo |
|
Merging two pages that cover the same ground — the long version
On the subject in the title: Merging two pages that cover the same ground — the long version Working notes rather than a conclusion. Process question about how this site works. I have read the guidelines and…
|
+5 | 9 | 209 | 20mo |
|
A page that has drifted out of date and needs a maintainer
On the subject in the title: A page that has drifted out of date and needs a maintainer Working notes rather than a conclusion. Nominating something for promotion into the documentation commons. The topic in…
|
+95 | 104 | 1.2k | 14mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Follow-up: Review cadence: how often is a page actually re-checked?
The question in the title: Review cadence: how often is a page actually re-checked? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Nominating something for promotion into the…
|
2 | 64k | 16mo | |
|
Request declined, with reasoning
Request declined, with reasoning — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Process question about how this site works. I have read the guidelines and the trust-level page and I…
|
+2 | 6 | 173 | 13mo |
|
About the Wiki maintenance category
Review dates, orphaned pages, maintainer handovers, and revision disputes. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author and a…
|
4 | 42k | 15mo | |
|
About the Feature requests category
Requests for platform and documentation features, with the reasoning that justifies them. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its…
|
4 | 28k | 9mo | |
|
Coming back to: Request: tag synonyms surfaced in search
Request: tag synonyms surfaced in search Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Process question about how this site works. I have read the guidelines and the…
|
2 | 26k | 13mo |