Making the year of the date more visible

The date stamps around the wiki are generally in (xx)th Mon 'YR, where the year blends in and doesn't stand out that well. It's unfortunate when a year gap can make a huge difference.

Most pages - page edit history, YKTTW, PM, forum posts - have the above format, showing the year in '12 form. Liveblog and Reviews seem to lack the apostrophe as well. Post history doesn't show the year at all. The only places I'm aware of that uses "2012" are discussion pages for a wiki article or YKTTW article.

I want to suggest making the year pop out more, perhaps having it in bold, or at least displaying the full 2012 to be more readily visible.

This would particularly help in the forums, because I've seen quite a handful of threads bumped up after a year: mostly within same month frame, often the post indicating it wasn't aware of the timespan and was expecting the discussion to proceed normally. Bumping old threads can be valid, but most of these cases the topics didn't really need to be gravedug, or the timespan affected the discussion flow.

edited 28th Nov '12 10:08:10 PM by Trivialis

Support proposal to show the full four-digit year everywhere.

I feel like even if you bolded it, people would still charge on through. If after someone clicks "add a post", a message popped up saying "Hey, no one's posted in this thread for at least two months^* or whatever minimum time you want, [some other useful info goes here], are you really sure you want to add a post to this thread?" then maybe it might let people get the message.

edited 30th Nov '12 11:51:12 PM by nman

Spelling out the year would help, just so people recognize the "20XX" as a year. Bolding it seems like the equivalent of an Obvious Rule Patch. If worst comes to worst, we could completely reverse the display order, so it reads "2012 Nov 30".

Necromancy is not always bad, especially in the Wiki and Forums part of the forums.

Just bumping an Oct '11 thread in Oct '12 isn't an issue, but in most of the cases I've seen, it looked like the user thought that it was an ongoing conversation. If the year is more visible, it would help avoid that.

Honestly, I think when it comes to discussions about the wiki itself, the general expectation is that conversations are ongoing no matter how long it takes between things said in it. I'm not denying that people may be missing the year and jumping to conclusions (though surely being buried fuck-deep in the conversations list would be a tip-off?), I'm just saying that depending on where it takes place, it may not be an issue and the only thing to be looking at is an odd coincidence that's a symptom of something that may be a larger problem.

edited 1st Dec '12 1:02:33 AM by MorganWick

Bumping to see if this is still wanted.

This has been partially implemented. Going all the way and bolding the years would be ugly. I am against this.

Agreed.