Review: a draft on reconstitution arithmetic, with objections posts 121–130

Picking up post #118: that is the part I would want checked first.

Fact-checking: if you see a factual claim in a maintained page that you have evidence contradicts, post the evidence here. The maintainer will review and correct if you are right.

Coming back to post #120, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Citation checking: if a maintained page cites a paper, the citation should match what the paper actually says. If you notice a mismatch, post it here.

Review date disputes: if a maintained page's review date is approaching and it has not been updated, post a note so the maintainers notice.

Revision disputes: if you disagree with an edit a maintainer made to a page, discuss it here. The goal is accuracy and clarity, not authorship.

This follows post #122 rather than contradicting it.

Interdependencies: if updating one page requires updating related pages, posting that connection here helps the maintainers see the scope of work.

Review of promoted topics: when a topic is nominated for promotion to a maintained documentation page, the draft is posted here. Community review happens before promotion. Objections are welcome.

Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.

Worth separating two things that post #124 runs together.

Evidence synthesis requests: if you think a page should summarise the state of evidence on a question, and you think the information exists but is scattered, suggest how it could be brought together.

New maintainer recruitment: if a page's maintainer is inactive and updates are needed, suggesting a new maintainer here can help transition responsibility.