Awa improvement 2

What is the value of providing both the month and the year of the discussion? If you want to avoid ambiguity of headings, providing the year should suffice for an overwhelming majority of cases. On another note, I think colons in headings should be avoided unless there is a strong overriding reason. So "RFD 2014" is something I could perfectly live with. In general, if a piece of information is dispensable in a heading, it should not be there, IMHO.

It may be of use to those who remember what policies/users were around while the discussion took place. Say, in June we vote to change the CFI. Or we have a huge influx of Wikipedians who skew RFDs in an inclusionist direction. Or we get an upgrade to MediaWiki, which makes some template, Lua or JavaScript hacks obsolete. Or some other "huge thing" happens: from my experience, these tend to have a timeframe of months or quarters rather than years. Now you can learn that the discussion took place before that happened just by looking at the header. A minor utility, but utility nevertheless.

I explained myself. How short do you want the section titles and why? Do you frequently type these manually?

Long section headings make the table of contents harder to overview, and make it look messy. The prevalent archiving practice for RFD and RFV was to not provide year and month and it served us well, as far as I know. The year and month information in available in the RFD discussion itself and does not need to be in the section heading, IMHO. The practice has shown that the month and year is not needed; anything else is speculation, IMHO. But I do not think I am going to convince you.