Since a while I've being an active member of AskUbuntu and Unix & Linux. As such I often edit Q&As. But I'm lost in some aspects and details of specific edition standards.

This post an this post are, in my opinion, just related, not duplicates (though are parts that address my concerns), since there are not really answers, but suggestions.

• Wall of text: posts of this characteristic are for me unreadable, and I think this happens to almost averyone. Should we separate paragraphs to make them more readable?

• Paths/file names: should paths/file names be edited as code?

• Errors: code or quotation? Or depends on the length of the error? My criteria would be: if it shows on the terminal screen, then it should be code.

• Quotations: when to use them?

• Bold: why not use bold to highlight important text such as: "I'm using Ubuntu 19.10". For me this would make easier to grasp fundamental information in the posts, but it seems allowed just in the colloquial sense. Obviously not abusing it, just the right amount.

• Links: should them be shortened within a descriptive text? Example: "I followed this link" instead of "I followed https://foo".

• GUI paths: like for example Preferences > Foo > foo. Should it be code, quotations, other thing? Does it matter if the separator is >, ->, → (this I copied I dunno how to type it).

This list may not be exhaustive. I navigate through it intuitively since I see sometimes contradictory editions.

I would like to have specific criteria over this aspects of the edition process, to be consistent and ultimately helpful across my editions.

Or should I, once I've gained the reputation to edit freely in AU (as I did in U&L), just follow my instincts?

@Eliah Kagan :)

I've being an active member of AskUbuntu and Unix & Linux for some time now. As such, I often edit Q&As. But I'm lost in some aspects and details of specific editing standards.

This post and this post are, in my opinion, just related, not duplicates (though there are parts that address my concerns), since these are not really answers, but suggestions.

1. Wall of text: posts of this type are for me unreadable. I think this happens to almost everyone. Should we separate walls of text into paragraphs to make posts more readable?

2. Paths/file names: should paths and file names be formatted as code?

3. Errors: code or block quotes? Is the length of the error a factor? My criterion would be: if it shows on the terminal screen, then it should be code.

4. Block quotes: when to use them?

5. Bold: why not use bold to highlight important text such as: "I'm using Ubuntu 19.10". For me this would make easier to grasp fundamental information in the posts, but it seems allowed just in the colloquial sense. Obviously not abusing it, just the right amount.

6. Links: should they be shown like "I followed this link" or like "I followed https://foo".

7. GUI paths: For example Preferences > Foo > foo. Should it be code, quotations, or something else? Does it matter if the separator is >, ->, → or something else?

This list may not be exhaustive. I navigate through it intuitively since I see sometimes contradictory edits.

I would like to have specific criteria for the editing process, to be consistent and ultimately helpful across my edits.

Or should I, once I've gained the reputation to edit freely in AU (as I have in U&L), just follow my instincts?