A page that has drifted out of date and needs a maintainer

On the subject in the title: A page that has drifted out of date and needs a maintainer Working notes rather than a conclusion.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 question keeps being re-asked, has a good marked solution, and contains a worked example that would be more useful on a page with a review date than buried in a reply. That is exactly the promotion criterion as written.

Objections welcome and genuinely wanted — the whole point of discussing promotions in public is that a bad promotion is harder to undo than a bad reply.

Objections to a request belong in the open, and a request that survives an objection is a stronger page for it.

The step people skip is the one I have spelled out.

Review cadence should be part of the proposal. A page about a fast-moving area needs a shorter cycle and somebody willing to honour it.

The conclusion is tentative; the arithmetic underneath it is not.

Requests for a page summarising a supplier are declined, because that is what the vendor documentation set is for and it has its own standards.

That is the honest state of it as of this week.

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

Say what would make the page wrong. A page whose failure conditions are stated is much easier to review honestly.

I checked the source rather than the summary, and they differ.

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.

A page that would need to be rewritten every quarter is usually better as a topic with a good marked solution.

It is the kind of thing that is obvious once and never again.

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 would put the burden of proof on the interesting explanation, not the dull one.

Flag a page that has drifted: if you notice a maintained page has information that is outdated (dates that have passed, regulatory changes, new evidence) post a flag so the maintainers see it.

Marking that as an opinion rather than a finding.

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.

I would be interested in a counterexample if anyone has one.

The arithmetic in post #11 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.

The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.

Good question, well framed, and I would like to see it answered properly.

Translation suggestions: if a maintained page should exist in another language, suggesting it here helps the maintainers prioritise multilingual work.

That holds for the case as described. Change the assumptions and it may not.