Ah, contact pages. It's so much fun to try to keep those formatted the same.
Problem is that there are so many of those that all it takes is a minor little change on one that someone else copies to another and then to another... meanwhile, someone picks up on a different change and copies it to an entirely different contact...
Not that those changes are bad, it's just hard to keep track of what the "current" format for the week is.
But I digress!
I'm pretty sure you're correct about what we're looking for there. I do see, however, that in some articles it's been taken one step further and a distinction has been made between when the contact is introducing multiple contacts or only one.
Gordon Stacy is an example of a contact where the two types of introduction have been specified.
I guess at minimum, it would be good to get at least a single line of text in there, but if we can manage to get both, that's even better.
The statements they make are pretty generic, but I can't say that I've ever actually paid enough attention to notice if everyone uses the same ones in a particular level range or anything. I'm usually more focused on
who they introduce than
how they introduce them - that is if I think to actually pay attention.
That being said, I guess if you feel confident that you've seen enough of the introduction texts to be certain that they're all the same, go ahead and fill them in. If we find out they're not all the same later, we can always go back and correct them.
If you're not sure, though, it's probably best to leave the "needs data" or "missing text" in there until we can verify what they really say.