Inconsistent text formatting

[akordowski]

Code of Conduct

• I have read and agree to the GitHub Docs project's Code of Conduct

What article on docs.github.com is affected?

Multiple articles.

What part(s) of the article would you like to see updated?

I noticed that there is a inconsistent text formatting regarding the text **Keyword**: Text (559 results) and **Keyword:** Text (331 results).

I don't know if there are any conventions regarding using a colon with a bold text, inside or outside. But from the formatting/style perspective the **Keyword:** Text seams to make more sense, as the keyword and the colon are a unit in the text.

EDIT:
There is also a inconsistent usage of the dash — character. There are usages of Text—Text and Text — Text, even in the same article.

Additional information

I could provide a PR for this issue.

[nguyenalex836]

@akordowski Hello! 👋 Thank you for opening this issue!

But from the formatting/style perspective the Keyword: Text seams to make more sense, as the keyword and the colon are a unit in the text.

As I couldn't find anything in our style guide referencing guidelines for this, I'm inclined to agree with you 💛

I'll get this up for review just so we can get a second opinion on this, as well as the inconsistency between usage of Text—Text and Text — Text

[subatoi]

Hi @akordowski 👋

You're correct that this isn't consistent 👍

I don't know if there are any conventions regarding using a colon with a bold text, inside or outside. But from the formatting/style perspective the Keyword: Text seams to make more sense, as the keyword and the colon are a unit in the text.

The main reason we use bold is for emphasis (see https://docs.github.com/en/contributing/style-guide-and-content-model/style-guide#emphasis). Generally speaking, as long as we're consistent, it shouldn't matter which we use, and I agree with you that **Keyword**: Text makes more sense (and is the most common one as of now, anyway).

It's possible there are some minor edge cases which may require one or the other. As such, if you're interested in making this contribution, if possible, I'd recommend splitting it into multiple PRs so it's easier for us to review.

There is also a inconsistent usage of the dash — character. There are usages of Text—Text and Text — Text, even in the same article.

I agree with you here, too, but if you're interested in a contribution for this, as well, then I'd kindly request that you open a new issue so we can separate the work.

Thank you again!