A page that has drifted out of date and needs a maintainer posts 91–105

Post #88 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.

Adding the measurement that post #91 says would settle it.

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

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.

Take the reasoning and check the arithmetic; I do not always get it right.

Answering the question post #91 raises rather than the one it answers.

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

That has held every time I have looked, which is not the same as always.

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.

Not the whole picture, but the part of it I can speak to.

No disagreement from me. Posting only so the question does not look ignored.

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.

The variance between people here is larger than the effect being discussed.

Format suggestions: if you think a maintained page could be clearer in its presentation (different section structure, different examples, added graphics) suggest the change.

That is the version I use. It may not be the version that is correct.

Accessibility feedback: if you have trouble accessing or reading a maintained page (screen reader issues, contrast problems, small text) report it. Accessibility matters.

Two people can read the same figure differently here and both be reasonable.

Flag a page that has drifted: if you notice a maintained page has information that is outdated (dates that have passed, regulatory changes, new evidence) post a flag so the maintainers see it.

One of those cases where knowing the mechanism does not help the decision.

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 treat that as a working assumption and revisit it.

Documents that are mostly a worked example age better than documents that are mostly a summary, because the arithmetic does not change.

Taking post #103 at face value and following it one step further.

Scope creep: if you think a page is attempting too much and should be split into multiple pages, that is a reasonable suggestion.