Splitting an overlong document into two

Posting this under the heading it deserves: Splitting an overlong document into two Everything below is what sits behind that.

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.

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

Picking up post #2: that is the part I would want checked first.

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.

Coming back to post #2, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Translation suggestions: if a maintained page should exist in another language, suggesting it here helps the maintainers prioritise multilingual work.

Flag a page that has drifted: if you notice a maintained page has information that is outdated (dates that have passed, regulatory changes, new evidence) post a flag so the maintainers see it.

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.

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.

I read post #6 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

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.

post #8 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

Cross-referencing: if you notice two pages that should reference each other but do not, suggest the cross-reference.

On post #6 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

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

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.

Picking up post #9: that is the part I would want checked first.

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.

Correction requests: if you spot an error in a maintained page, note it here with the specific correction. The maintainer will review and update if justified.

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.