What I mean is: some missions have additional objectives, e.g. destroy a shipkiller base, etc, the number of those additional objectives seems like it doesn't change (e.g. Kasio's Rest will always have 2, but I am not 100% sure that is consistent for all missions, maybe it can be a range 0-2?). It would be useful to see how many additional objectives each one has. That way, when people are farming mods from fighters can see which missions to avoid going to.
I can't figure out how to do that on the template, nor if I am able to, and a page said to message you, so here I am!
I was actually considering having that be on there. I will definitely see about adding it because I know myself that there are a few missions I've wanted to go to and went "Wait, how many objectives were there?"
As for the missions being consistent? They are on how many additional objectives they have, but they're not static on what they were for.
Your edits note's passive aggressiveness isn't polite nor required. But that aside, information regarding the patch notes for these pages were most likely obtained automatically through an application I wrote as per commented on the User blog page regarding the patch note history project. It appears there is indeed an error within the application about hotfixes here and that has since been corrected. I did do some tests on pages to see what was outputted and checked it by hand it came back fine to me, so it appears the pages i hand-checked had either minimal updates to them so it wouldnt appear in certain places or other issues have arised. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
In the event these pages patch history weren't actually acquired through the use of the program, then the 9.6 update may have been an accidental typo that I didn't catch from using the numpad to enter the number manually.
As for including everything, I did my best to do that, if anything was missed up to patch 19.5 (if that was indeed the version that was latest at the time. I do not personally recall which 19.x version it was) then I take no blame other than it not having been found through my methods of CTRL+F and searching for keywords like the item name, general broad changes to items and the like. As I am only human and I am sure some things may be missed.
Edit: Upon looking at it closer, it appears the edits most likely were from the program, as from update 9.6 onward it was using a newer system to indicate the version number (IE: |update number =...) and if it was a hotfix (IE: |type =fix), prior to it it was using normal header tags to indicate the version number and if it was a hotfix or not (See "==Update 6.3==" and "==Hotfixes 6.3==") and this wasn't taken into consideration that this was the case. Again, changes have been made to ensure the issue shouldn't arise again.
As for what version I was using, it appears the linked blog post has that file updated to 220.127.116.11 which is most likely what i was up to at the time, if any patches came out afterwards then it wasn't updated and the file i was using was out of date and the newer stuff wouldve been missed