• Made some minor edits on https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Research:Quarry&action=history
• Updated embedded screenshot in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Quarry_screenshot.download_data.png to reflect current data formats
• Question: Listing page schemas from 2014 in linked https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/585 and enwiki_p DB tables from 2016 in https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/279 makes not much sense? see e.g. T59185 why results in the latter query are outdated. Is there a way to mark queries as outdated or delete them or redirect them to a newer one?

Copying in @rook's comment from T311404:

Has some old docs, for instance it has USE metawiki_p; though use no longer goes inside of a query in quarry. This ticket is to track updating that page to match present quarry.

Made minor changes to improve the flow of content, consistency, and clarity. Also reviewed the criteria listed in task description.

In T307011#8029288, @Aklapper wrote:

Copying in @rook's comment from T311404:

Has some old docs, for instance it has USE metawiki_p; though use no longer goes inside of a query in quarry. This ticket is to track updating that page to match present quarry.

As I understand it, this example is meant to demonstrate how to explicitly query an additional wiki (not the one specified in the box above the query) from the same section. So it's probably not outdated or incorrect.

In T307011#7989966, @Aklapper wrote:

• Question: Listing page schemas from 2014 in linked https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/585 and enwiki_p DB tables from 2016 in https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/279 makes not much sense? see e.g. T59185 why results in the latter query are outdated. Is there a way to mark queries as outdated or delete them or redirect them to a newer one?

If the results are outdated, then the best way would be to re-run the queries, right? If the owners of these queries cannot do that, perhaps we should just fork and run them ourselves? If that's what you mean, I think I could easily do that.

From the perspective of this doc, I don't think there is any harm in linking to a query with results from 2014 or 2016. These links exist mostly to demonstrate how to use show table and describe - I don't think anyone would really make use of these results. But I also don't see any harm in removing such links entirely and using code snippets on wiki only.

Looks great. Thanks, @KBach!