Update troubleshooting-required-status-checks.md

[cb-shivamagarwal]

Why:

Closes #24181

What's being changed (if available, include any code snippets, screenshots, or gifs):

Added more information

Check off the following:

• I have reviewed my changes in staging (look for the "Automatically generated comment" and click the links in the "Preview" column to view your latest changes).
• For content changes, I have completed the self-review checklist.

[welcome]

Thanks for opening this pull request! A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

[github-actions]

Automatically generated comment ℹ️

This comment is automatically generated and will be overwritten every time changes are committed to this branch.

The table contains an overview of files in the content directory that have been changed in this pull request. It's provided to make it easy to review your changes on the staging site. Please note that changes to the data directory will not show up in this table.

---

Content directory changes

You may find it useful to copy this table into the pull request summary. There you can edit it to share links to important articles or changes and to give a high-level overview of how the changes in your pull request support the overall goals of the pull request.

Source	Preview	Production	What Changed
repositories/configuring-branches-and-merges-in-your-repository/defining-the-mergeability-of-pull-requests/troubleshooting-required-status-checks.md	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.4 ghae	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.4 ghae

---

fpt: Free, Pro, Team
ghec: GitHub Enterprise Cloud
ghes: GitHub Enterprise Server
ghae: GitHub AE

[cmwilson21]

@cb-shivamagarwal Thank you for opening a PR and linking it to your issue! ✨

I'll get this triaged for review! ⚡

[cb-shivamagarwal]

@cmwilson21 Thank you for getting this triaged for review.

[cb-shivamagarwal]

Hey @cmwilson21 ,
It seems this has not been reviewed yet. May you please help ?

[cmwilson21]

@cb-shivamagarwal Thanks for checking in! This is on the board and waiting for writer review. Someone will have eyes on it soon 👀

We appreciate your patience as we are working through our backlog. 💖

[github-actions]

This is a gentle bump for the docs team that this PR is waiting for technical review.

[zxieroblox]

curious - if one workflow passes (the one that is no-op with paths-ignore) and the other (the real workflow with paths) failed, will the branch protection block the merge? I cannot find documentation on if branch protection works as a need-all-to-succeed or at-least-one. Thanks.

[cb-shivamagarwal]

curious - if one workflow passes (the one that is no-op with paths-ignore) and the other (the real workflow with paths) failed, will the branch protection block the merge? I cannot find documentation on if branch protection works as a need-all-to-succeed or at-least-one. Thanks.

Yes, it will block the merge. Even I could NOT find the documentation. Hence, this PR was created.

[cb-shivamagarwal]

Closing this PR as the docs have been updated

[cmwilson21]

@cb-shivamagarwal Thanks so much for coming back and closing it out 💖