Following this. I have the same question and no better information than the first post.
0 likes 7mo
Documentation · Wiki requests · continued
Revisiting: A page that has drifted out of date and needs a maintainer posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
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.
Second-hand, so weight it accordingly.
3 likes 7mo
n.ekstrom, post #14: I had written a reply contradicting post #12 and deleted it. Here is what survived. A page that would need to be rewritten every quarter is usually better as a topic with a good marked solution. I am not the right person to answer the follow-up to this. Go to post
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.
Posting it because the silence on this was starting to look like agreement.
Everything in post #30 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
It reads as pedantry until the day it does not.
24 likes 6mo
a.finnegan_rd, post #27: Post #25 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one. Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change. The number is defensible. The precision I gave it is not. Go to post
Building on post #32 rather than restating it.
The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
6 likes 6mo
steady_state, post #12: Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change. Go to post
Translation suggestions: if a maintained page should exist in another language, suggesting it here helps the maintainers prioritise multilingual work.
It is worth checking rather than assuming, which costs nothing.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
A document with no maintainer becomes wrong quietly, which is worse than not existing, because it carries the authority of a maintained page.
It is a small point and it changes the answer, which is an awkward combination.
s.vukovic, post #13: The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important. That is the version I use. It may not be the version that is correct. Go to post
Useful. I have added it to my own notes with the date on it.
Worth separating two things that post #38 runs together.
Scope creep: if you think a page is attempting too much and should be split into multiple pages, that is a reasonable suggestion.
Reading it back, the second half matters more than the first.
2 likes 6mo
p.ostergaard, post #24: The arithmetic in post #21 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check. Name a willing maintainer in the request. Point three of the criteria stops more nominations than the other three combined. That distinction has done more work for me than anything else in this category. Go to post
This follows post #41 rather than contradicting it.
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.
This is the sort of thing the wiki should carry and currently does not.
No disagreement from me. Posting only so the question does not look ignored.
19 likes 6mo
v.milanovi, post #40: Useful. I have added it to my own notes with the date on it. Go to post
On post #44 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
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.
Not disagreeing with anyone above, just adding the bit I keep having to look 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.
Not the answer, but possibly the question that gets there.
26 likes 6mo
Post #47 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
Adding a source would improve this post and I do not have one to hand.
12 likes 6mo
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.
Worth checking against a second source before it gets quoted onward.
1 like 6mo
v.rautio, post #19: The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important. Take the reasoning and check the arithmetic; I do not always get it right. Go to post
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.
c.vermeulen, post #32: 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. Second-hand, so weight it accordingly. Go to post
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
Picking up post #54: that is the part I would want checked first.
Format suggestions: if you think a maintained page could be clearer in its presentation (different section structure, different examples, added graphics) suggest the change.
Adding it because I spent an afternoon working it out and nobody should have to twice.
0 likes 6mo
On post #52 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Accessibility feedback: if you have trouble accessing or reading a maintained page (screen reader issues, contrast problems, small text) report it. Accessibility matters.
1 like 6mo
The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.
If the premise is wrong, everything after it is decoration.
9 likes 6mo
l.sarkissian, post #8: 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. That is one dataset and I would not build a rule on it. Go to post
This follows post #57 rather than contradicting it.
The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.
customs_ledger, post #21: Accessibility feedback: if you have trouble accessing or reading a maintained page (screen reader issues, contrast problems, small text) report it. Accessibility matters. If that is already documented somewhere, ignore me and link it. Go to post
Grateful for the specificity. Vague answers to this question are what sent me looking.