Meta · Feature requests

Request: show the solution author in the topic list — what changed since

Meta › Feature requests site feedback wiki post translation

KAnderssonTL3Regular29 Apr 2026#1

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.

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.

29 likes 3mo

d.nwosuTL2 Moderator29 Apr 2026 · edited#2

Picking up the opening post: that is the part I would want checked first.

Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible.

6 likes 3mo

j.habermannTL3Regular29 Apr 2026#3

d.nwosu, post #2: Picking up the opening post: that is the part I would want checked first. Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible. Go to post

Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.

1 like in reply to #2 3mo

r.oyelaranTL2 Moderator30 Apr 2026#4

Use case: explain why you think the feature would help. "I would use this to..." makes the request concrete.

0 likes 3mo

n.torrenceTL3Regular30 Apr 2026#5

Feature scope: some requests are for the site itself (search, filtering, navigation). Some are for the documentation (new topics, different formats). Scope helps prioritise.

10 likes 3mo

e.krastevTL2 Moderator30 Apr 2026#6

This follows post #3 rather than contradicting it.

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient.

3 likes 3mo

s.poulsenTL3Regular30 Apr 2026#7

n.torrence, post #5: Feature scope: some requests are for the site itself (search, filtering, navigation). Some are for the documentation (new topics, different formats). Scope helps prioritise. Go to post

Worth separating two things that post #3 runs together.

Requests for platform and documentation features, with the reasoning that justifies them. If you think the site would be better with a feature, suggest it with enough detail that it is actionable.

0 likes in reply to #5 3mo

a.petrovTL2 Moderator30 Apr 2026#8

Tracking: staff will update the status of feature requests (under consideration, planned, implemented, declined). Checking back lets you know the fate of your suggestion.

31 likes 3mo

r.marsdenTL3Regular30 Apr 2026 · edited#9

KAndersson, post #1: 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. 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… Go to post

Alternatives: if you have thought of a way the current site might already serve your need, mention it. It helps assess whether the feature is truly missing or just not obvious.

29 likes in reply to #1 3mo

j.marchettiTL2 Moderator30 Apr 2026#10

a.petrov, post #8: Tracking: staff will update the status of feature requests (under consideration, planned, implemented, declined). Checking back lets you know the fate of your suggestion. Go to post

Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications.

15 likes in reply to #8 3mo

preregisteredTL3Research methods30 Apr 2026#11

Duplicate requests: if several people request the same feature, the requests often get merged. Check whether your feature has already been suggested before posting.

0 likes 3mo

n.cardosoTL230 Apr 2026#12

Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above

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.

ppm_errorTL3Analytical chemist30 Apr 2026 · edited#13

j.marchetti, post #10: Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications. Go to post

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

4 likes in reply to #10 3mo

a.pereiraTL2 Moderator30 Apr 2026#14

On post #10 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Requests for platform and documentation features, with the reasoning that justifies them. If you think the site would be better with a feature, suggest it with enough detail that it is actionable.

12 likes 3mo

m.strand_rphTL3Pharmacist30 Apr 2026#15

Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications.

26 likes in reply to #5 3mo

b.vanheckeTL2 Moderator30 Apr 2026#16

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.

0 likes 3mo

j.mwangiTL4 Moderator1 May 2026#17

m.strand_rph, post #15: Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications. Go to post

post #16 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Tracking: staff will update the status of feature requests (under consideration, planned, implemented, declined). Checking back lets you know the fate of your suggestion.

2 likes in reply to #15 3mo

d.eriksenTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#18

Worth separating two things that post #14 runs together.

8 likes 3mo

n.haddadTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#19

Picking up post #16: that is the part I would want checked first.

Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible.

19 likes in reply to #8 3mo

s.kimaniTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#20

Coming back to post #18, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised.

0 likes 3mo

ZieglerTL3Regular1 May 2026 · edited#21

Coming back to post #19, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

1 like 3mo

m.dumitruTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#22

Picking up post #19: that is the part I would want checked first.

Duplicate requests: if several people request the same feature, the requests often get merged. Check whether your feature has already been suggested before posting.

0 likes 3mo

diluent_watchTL2Member1 May 2026#23

ppm_error, post #13: I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological. The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient. Go to post

Feature scope: some requests are for the site itself (search, filtering, navigation). Some are for the documentation (new topics, different formats). Scope helps prioritise.

16 likes in reply to #13 3mo

z.vogelTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#24

Use case: explain why you think the feature would help. "I would use this to..." makes the request concrete.

6 likes in reply to #8 3mo

f.fenwickTL3Regular1 May 2026#25

I read post #23 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Alternatives: if you have thought of a way the current site might already serve your need, mention it. It helps assess whether the feature is truly missing or just not obvious.

3 likes 3mo

ar.petrovTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#26

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

0 likes 3mo

r.scholtenTL2Member1 May 2026#27

d.eriksen, post #18: Worth separating two things that post #14 runs together. Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive. Go to post

Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised.

22 likes in reply to #18 3mo

g.verhoevenTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#28

n.cardoso, post #12: 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

post #27 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Effort estimation: some features are trivial to implement; others are substantial work. Staff will estimate effort when assessing whether a feature is feasible.

10 likes in reply to #12 3mo

endpoint_lineTL3Regular1 May 2026#29

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.

5 likes 3mo

z.adeyemiTL2 Moderator1 May 2026#30

Tradeoffs: every feature has a cost in maintenance and complexity. Acknowledging tradeoffs shows you have thought through the implications.

1 like 3mo

Sponsored PeptideMeter — peptide analytics and supplier verificationPurity analysis and structured supplier verification, published as dated records rather than scores. Referenced throughout our sourcing documentation.View analytics →