mdn/content - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

The official source for MDN Web Docs content. Home to over 14,000 pages of documentation about HTML, CSS, JS, HTTP, Web APIs, and more.

C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 59/100

External PR Merge Rate: 11%

Response Time: 2h

First Timer Success: -

Frequently Asked Questions

Is mdn/content welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

mdn/content has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. Repositories ranked A typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

Maintainers in mdn/content respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 2.4 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 59.4 C-Rank™ score (A Tier) represent?

The C-Rank™ system evaluates GitHub projects on a 0–100 scale using real data: PR merge rates, review turnaround time, active maintainer presence, and first-time contributor success. A score of 59.4 places mdn/content in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for mdn/content?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for mdn/content is 10.6%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in mdn/content?

mdn/content currently has 5 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

mdn
mdn/contentA•Welcoming10.9k
GitHub
Back to Explorer
mdn

mdn/content

10,937
Active (30d)A•Welcoming(59/100)MAMarkdown

The official source for MDN Web Docs content. Home to over 14,000 pages of documentation about HTML, CSS, JS, HTTP, Web APIs, and more.

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Welcoming Community Builder

Warmth Score
8.8/10
Patience Score
8.8/10
Nitpick Rate
25%

Highly welcoming maintainers in mdn/content. Prompt code reviews with positive guidance for new contributors.

What Contributors Actually Say

Discussions in mdn/content focus heavily on practical implementation feedback, code formatting standards, and issue reproduction details.

Hidden Friction Signals

Unlinked PRs without issue context and changes that fail automated test suites face the highest review friction.

Unwritten Rules

  • •1) Keep PR scope strictly aligned with the linked issue.
  • •2) Ensure local linters pass before opening a review.
  • •3) Maintain full test coverage for modified logic.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Update docs or README when behavior changes
  • •Run the repository formatter and linter locally
  • •Link the issue and include reproduction context in the PR

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not ship user-facing changes without matching docs
  • •Do not submit formatting-only noise with feature changes
  • •Do not open context-free PRs
Response Velocity
2 hours
Standard maintainer review cycle

Average Response Latency

Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.

Merge Efficiency
10.6%
Selective PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
0.0%
No first-timer merges recorded in window

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
59 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
10.6%
Merge Gauge
0.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe32/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.

GetMerged C-Rank badge for mdn/content
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/mdn/content)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/mdn/content?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

MDN URL https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Element What specific section or headline is this issue about? No response What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete? -- What did you expect to see? As the title says Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations? The details are read-only. Do you have anything more you want to share? No response MDN metadata Page report details Folder: en-us/web/api/element MDN URL: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Element GitHub URL: https://github.com/mdn/content/blob/main/files/en-us/web/api/element/index.md Last commit: 868de6e Document last modified: 2026-09-12T19:13:32.000Z

📅 Opened Sep 27, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 75/100Contribute

MDN URL https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn_web_development/Core/CSS_layout/Practical_positioning_examples What specific section or headline is this issue about? #Changes to the existing CSS What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete? "Next we need to make some small changes to the existing CSS, to get the info-box placed and positioned. Change your .info-box rule to get rid of margin: 0 auto; (we no longer want the info-box centered), add position: fixed;, and stick it to the top of the browser viewport." However, in the example code block right below this description, margin: 0 auto; was not removed: What did you expect to see? An example code block with the margin: 0 auto; rule removed: .info-box { width: 452px; height: 400px; position: fixed; top: 0; } Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations? No response Do you have anything more you want to share? No response MDN metadata Page report details Folder: en-us/learn_web_development/core/cs

📅 Opened Sep 20, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 50/100Contribute

MDN URL https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/Elements/img What specific section or headline is this issue about? Supported image formats What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete? For each image format the section claims that it's a good choice except for WebP, which is excellent, and SVG, which has no information on whether the choice is good. Below it recommends some formats over others even though the others are "good choice"s. Furthermore, choices can only be "good" if there are others which are "bad" but there are no "bad choice"s. The summary in Supported image formats may make the reader question things such as: Why is GIF is a good choice for simple images and animations while WebP and AVIF are recommended and perform much better? And what is meant by "simple"? Why are PNG and JPEG good choices while WebP and AVIF perform much better? Aren't they bad choices then? Is WebP and AVIF also recommended over APNG? What does "high performance" in

📅 Opened Aug 22, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

MDN URL https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Element/keyup_event What specific section or headline is this issue about? the keyup event has a non documented and unexpected behavior What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete? With the keydown event, its property, 'e.ctrlKey' will be reported correctly, however with the keyup event, it doesn't set the ctrlKey property at all, regardless of if they keycode is ctrl or not. Is this intended behavior that's simply not documented anywhere? What did you expect to see? I expected to see a disclaimer about this strange behavior. Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations? umm see below Do you have anything more you want to share? super short html snippet that replicates it. This behavior doesn't make any sense and to me is this way on both firefox and chromium, versions 152.0 and 150.0.7871.186 respectively. So I feel like it should be documented. Is this truly the intended ecma standard? <head> <scri

📅 Opened Aug 8, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 100/100Contribute

MDN URL https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Window/screenX What specific section or headline is this issue about? No where is it spelled out this doesn't actually work What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete? As far as I can tell the spec requires screenX and screenY to be the left and top most position on the screen of the web page's content. But, testing Safari, and Firefox, and Chrome, none of them adjust screenX and screenY to take into account toolbars or sidebars. All 3 browsers have options to turn on bookmark bars and sidebars. Turning them on does not change screenX nor screenY even though the web content moves left/right/up/down based on those settings. I don't see anything in this spec which allows this behavior, though maybe I missed it. What did you expect to see? Something that called out none of the browsers implement the spec Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations? You can use the example in the article itself. the blue

📅 Opened Aug 7, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 50/100Contribute
Looking for more Markdown beginner tasks?Explore Markdown GFI

Contributor Community Vibe Feedback

Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.

Have you contributed to this repo?

Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.

3 ratings required
Maintainer helpfulness
Review speed
Beginner friendliness

Contributor Compatibility & Review Speed Analysis for mdn/content

When evaluating whether to contribute to mdn/content, response velocity and maintainer engagement are crucial. GetMerged continuously tracks pull request trajectories, first-comment latency, and code review rounds to help developers avoid submitting pull requests to backlogged repositories.

Currently, maintainers of mdn/content acknowledge new external contributions in approximately 2 hours. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 10.6% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to mdn/content

01

Is mdn/content welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

mdn/content has a recorded first-timer success rate of 0.0%. Repositories ranked Welcoming typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

02

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

The initial maintainer response time averages ~2 hours. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 59.4 C-Rank™ score represent?

The C-Rank™ index scores repositories on a 0 to 100 scale using an objective formula: external PR merge rates, initial response speed, active maintainer count, and first-time contributor retention. A score of 59.4 places mdn/content in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for mdn/content?

The external pull request merge rate is 10.6%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.

05

Are there beginner Good First Issues open in mdn/content?

Yes, mdn/content currently has 5 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.

GetMerged C-Rank™ Indexing Standard

All metrics displayed for mdn/content are automatically retrieved via the public GitHub API and recalculated daily. Insider pull requests submitted by repository owners or organization members are excluded from merge rate calculations to preserve objective external contributor statistics.