This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1 · go to the accepted answer.
This settles it for me, at least until somebody posts a reason it should not.
Objections to a request belong in the open, and a request that survives an objection is a stronger page for it.
Somebody will have a better source than mine, and I hope they post it.
This follows post #33 rather than contradicting it.
The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.
I had written a reply contradicting post #33 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
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Flag a page that has drifted: if you notice a maintained page has information that is outdated (dates that have passed, regulatory changes, new evidence) post a flag so the maintainers see it.
I have left out the parts I could not verify.
Picking up post #37: that is the part I would want checked first.
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.
It reads as pedantry until the day it does not.
Scope creep: if you think a page is attempting too much and should be split into multiple pages, that is a reasonable suggestion.
Posting it because the silence on this was starting to look like agreement.
Second this, and I would have said it less carefully.
Post #38 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.
The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.
The number is defensible. The precision I gave it is not.
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.
Name a willing maintainer in the request. Point three of the criteria stops more nominations than the other three combined.
Filing this under things that are true until someone shows me otherwise.
Post #45 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
The literature is thinner on this than the confidence in the thread implies.
The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.
The disagreement above is smaller than it looks once the terms are fixed.
I had written a reply contradicting post #48 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
That distinction has done more work for me than anything else in this category.
Answering the question post #47 raises rather than the one it answers.
Scope the request narrowly. A page about one thing gets written and stays current; a page about a field does not.
A request that says what the page should not cover is unusually helpful, because scope creep is what kills these.
That is all the detail I have. Someone else will have more.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
That is my reading. Someone else read the same page differently and was reasonable.
Post #51 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
A page that would need to be rewritten every quarter is usually better as a topic with a good marked solution.
Adding the measurement that post #55 says would settle 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.
The most useful requests here identify a specific confusion that keeps recurring rather than a subject that seems important.
This is where my knowledge stops and I would rather mark the edge than blur it.
Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.
Stating my assumptions rather than smuggling them in.
Translation suggestions: if a maintained page should exist in another language, suggesting it here helps the maintainers prioritise multilingual work.
One case, stated as one case.