Wikipedia talk:Style noticeboard

Where to place the discussion
I suggest that it would be better to follow the method used for WP:RM or an RfC, rather than the WP:RS/N. Ie the discussions remain on the talk page of the articles rather than being placed in a central area. -- PBS (talk) 20:15, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Let's keep the discussion on these matters in the RfC, for the sake of transparency. RGloucester  — ☎ 21:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * @RGloucester you wrote "Undid revision 653935913 by PBS (talk) No one would even make that mistake. I'm not sure why you're interpreting this noticeboard proposal as having anything to do with the RM procedure."
 * If you think that then the addition does no harm. If you are wrong then it will. Let me give you an example, Should names with initials in place of forenames have full stops after them. If they do should they have spaces after the full stops? -- PBS (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

We need to tell them what "style" is.
How do we edit the header? If we just say "style," new guys won't know what we mean. "Style" can mean writing mechanics but it can also mean panache, clothes and fashion, dancing... The header would be the best place to say, "This is the place to ask questions about style, which includes spelling, punctuation, formatting, article organization, and other parts of the mechanical side of writing Wikipedia articles." (details negotiable) Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:13, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I provided a link. RGloucester  — ☎ 17:16, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Never mind. Found it!
 * For a new editor who's already clicked through six and seven and ten pages trying to find the right place to ask a question, a sentence saying "yes you're finally in the right place" is going to be more welcome than another link to check. Let's do both. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you think the list I gave is representative enough? It looks to me like if we say "spelling, punctuation...organization/mechanical," then someone with a capitalization question will reasonably infer that they're in the right place. What do you think should go on or off the list? Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree. This is not a dictionary. RS/N does not define "reliable sources". We provide links to the appropriate guidelines. It is made clear below, where links to the MoS are provided. The additional link I provided will make it even more clear. We don't need an exhaustive list of items one could raise here. RGloucester  — ☎ 17:23, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Reliable sources" and "neutral point of view" don't have other obvious English meanings that differ from their Wikipedia meanings. "Style" does. An uninitiated person will think that this is the clothes and fashion board or the formatting and font color board.  If you want to go shorter, I'm game, but a few words saying "style as in spelling ... and writing mechanics" are necessary.  Remember, our target audience is new guys who need help with this sort of thing. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:26, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree, because we are dealing with fashion, merely that it is the fashion of words. The usual meaning stands, and regardless, a link is provided that explains exactly what "style" is. There is no need for clutter. RGloucester  — ☎ 17:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I've added a note that provides the appropriate elucidation. RGloucester  — ☎ 17:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it would be easier to find where I put it, but this might be good enough. We'll just ask a few newbs for feedback once we get newbs. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:35, 11 April 2015 (UTC)