I have no financial interest in anything named in this thread and I want to say so before I comment on per-category review queue, because it is the sort of subject where it matters.
2 likes 6d
Meta · Feature requests · continued
Request: a per-category review queue posts 121–137
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
buffer_margin, post #15: Post #14 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different. Deprecation requests: if you think a feature should be removed or changed, that is also a request. Explain why you think it would improve the site. Go to post
Practical answer on per-category review queue, since the theoretical one is upthread: do the simplest check first, write down the result, and only then decide whether the complicated explanation is needed. It usually is not.
Post #122 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Use case: explain why you think the feature would help. "I would use this to..." makes the request concrete.
Take the reasoning and check the arithmetic; I do not always get it right.
26 likes 6d
Nothing to add, except that this is the answer I would give if asked.
0 likes 5d
Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised.
That is the version I use. It may not be the version that is correct.
4 likes 5d
r.coelho, post #3: Coming back to the opening post, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer. Request that would help newcomers more than regulars: show the subcategory description on hover in the category list. The names are terse and the descriptions are good. The number is defensible. The precision I gave it is not. Go to post
Per-category review queue is a question about a distribution, not about a value, and treating it as a value is what produces the confident wrong answers.
Bookmarking this. I will come back when I have something worth adding.
0 likes 4d
On post #125 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Feature request I expect to be refused, stated anyway: a private notes field on a topic, visible only to me. I keep those in a text file and the text file loses the link.
That holds for the case as described. Change the assumptions and it may not.
0 likes 4d
j.baptista, post #14: I read post #12 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite. I would keep per-category review queue and the decision it usually gets used for separate in this thread. They are related and they are not the same question, and merging them is why the last one went badly. Go to post
This follows post #126 rather than contradicting it.
That would also make review dates far more meaningful. A document cited by forty topics and a document cited by none need very different amounts of attention.
No disagreement from me. Posting only so the question does not look ignored.
18 likes 3d
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
I disagree with the framing of per-category review queue above, and I think it is a substantive disagreement rather than a terminological one. Setting out why, so it can be checked.
The reasoning depends on an assumption that is doing a lot of work and is never stated. If the assumption holds, the conclusion follows. I do not think it holds generally.
Source for the per-category review queue figure, since it was asked for. It is in the discussion rather than the abstract, which is why the version circulating is stronger than the paper is.
Reading the surrounding paragraph is worth the two minutes. The authors are more careful than their summarisers.
22 likes 2d
DSakamoto, post #129: This follows post #126 rather than contradicting it. That would also make review dates far more meaningful. A document cited by forty topics and a document cited by none need very different amounts of attention. Go to post
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.
I read post #132 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Staff view: this is a good request and a larger one than it looks, because the citation is currently a link rather than a relationship. Recording it properly is the work, displaying it is trivial.
mira.patel, post #100: That is exactly the objection, and it is not a refusal on principle. Anything the site stores about you is something the site has to look after, and the bar for adding a new category of that is high. On balance I think that is right, and I would not bet much on it. Go to post
Deprecation requests: if you think a feature should be removed or changed, that is also a request. Explain why you think it would improve the site.
Request from the analytics side: allow a table in a post to be marked as data rather than layout, so it can be copied without the formatting. Half the tables here are worth pasting into a spreadsheet.
30 likes 21h
Coming back to post #135, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Request with a caveat attached: a compare view for two vendor pages side by side. The caveat is that it would encourage exactly the ranking-by-number reading the pages are written to discourage.
I would not lead a decision with this, but I would not ignore it either.
3 likes 2h
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Request: show the solution author in the topic list — what changed since
Request: show the solution author in the topic list — what changed since — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Bringing the figures rather than the impression, since a process…
|
+81 | 91 | 20k | 3mo |
|
Request: export my own posts — one year on
Request: export my own posts — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A methods question rather than a substantive one, about export. Everyone quotes the same figure…
|
+62 | 70 | 14k | 4mo |
|
Request: export my own posts
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Request: export my own posts Everything below is what sits behind that. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin export down and I want to set out where I have got…
|
2 | 57k | 6mo | |
|
Follow-up: Request: a per-category review queue
On the subject in the title: Request: a per-category review queue Working notes rather than a conclusion. A follow-up question about per-category review queue that I did not know to ask the first time. The…
|
2 | 14k | 4mo | |
|
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 |
Related topics — sharing the tags site feedback, translation, wiki post
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
What to include when your question involves a chromatogram — one year on
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: What to include when your question involves a chromatogram — one year on Question in the title. Context below, and I have tried to include the…
|
+69 | 75 | 862 | 14d |
|
Request: show the solution author in the topic list
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Request: show the solution author in the topic list Everything below is what sits behind that. Process question, and I have read the guidelines before asking. I…
|
2 | 2.4k | 10mo | |
|
Second pass at: Asking a follow-up: new topic or new reply?
The question in the title: Second pass at: Asking a follow-up: new topic or new reply? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Posting a small dataset on Asking a follow-up. It is…
|
4 | 81 | 8mo | |
|
Request: a diff view for wiki revisions
Request: a diff view for wiki revisions — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I would like to know what people here actually do about diff view for wiki revisions, as distinct…
|
+25 | 30 | 3.1k | 19mo |
|
Coming back to: What happens when a maintainer goes quiet
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: What happens when a maintainer goes quiet Nomination for promotion into the documentation commons, with the criteria addressed one by one. The…
|
+6 | 10 | 400 | 10mo |