Forum:Manual of Style: Community discussions edition
Yeah my thread name was strange but believe it or not it's actually a legitimate topic.
Seeing as we've switched to the forum system for community discussions, I'd like to know what everyone would think of establishing an ideal formatting style (yeah like our MOS :P) for a discussions thread (note: this doesn't include any other forums, just this one). Ideally I have this in mind:
Proposal here.
== Discussion ==
Point 1 here.
Point 2 here.
Possible reply 1.
Possible reply 2.
Possible reply 3 and so on...
Point 3 here.
== Conclusion ==
Conclusion/"thread closed" note here.
This is what I think would work for a thread ideally aimed at discussions (anything containing a vote would follow the same structure plus the vote as a different header).
The reason I'm proposing this is really down to making discussion threads look cleaner and so they can accommodate more at any one time. For example, the structure I've created above shows that if a user has something to say in response to something another user said, they can do so without having the entire discussion aligned to the right hand side of the page, making everything look cleaner and easier to understand.
All in all, I think this would be a nice thing to implement and it relates to a primary reason why we switched to a forum-based discussions system - to accommodate more detailed discussions. If anyone has anything they wish to say related to my proposal then they are more than welcome to do so.
So what does everyone think? Lost Labyrinth .svg){kind=small}
• (c) • (b) 19:48, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
Discussion[edit source]
I think that this layout looks pretty good at a glance. Kinda reminds me of how the RfA's look. I'm in support of this. ―ฬђ talk 21:49, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose this should be used when we are having discussion thread, or just like how we've done it in community talk page. So yeah, I just hope this doesn't limit the layout usage throughout all forums. Nikel Talk – Vote! 10:17, November 22, 2012 (UTC)
- I think this format works fine. But I also don't think this needs to be the "official" format, since I think whichever way people choose to organize discussions works, so long as it is organized in some way. -- LiR speak ~ read 04:41, November 23, 2012 (UTC)
- Substitute "official" with "ideal". I think it would be good to give an "ideal" format (such as the one I proposed) as a recommended formatting style but as long as the forum doesn't look like it's in a mess, it's not worth killing anyone over; I just felt my proposal would help towards making things a bit more streamlined. Lost Labyrinth
• (c) • (b) 22:02, November 24, 2012 (UTC)
- Substitute "official" with "ideal". I think it would be good to give an "ideal" format (such as the one I proposed) as a recommended formatting style but as long as the forum doesn't look like it's in a mess, it's not worth killing anyone over; I just felt my proposal would help towards making things a bit more streamlined. Lost Labyrinth
- I think this format works fine. But I also don't think this needs to be the "official" format, since I think whichever way people choose to organize discussions works, so long as it is organized in some way. -- LiR speak ~ read 04:41, November 23, 2012 (UTC)
Conclusion[edit source]
It has been decided that the format shown above is the ideal format for starting and conducting discussions within the Community Discussions forum. Users should use the format unless there is a reason to deviate from it. -- LiR speak ~ read 01:08, December 14, 2012 (UTC)