In T318198#8270941, @Alsee wrote:

I think the key is to get back to the fundamental bug I was attempting to report. The current patch mangles the rendering when you copy-paste content from an article to Talk for discussion and work. The expected behavior is consistent and accurate rendering of wikitext when content is copy-pasted. Moving the horizontal line had weird unexpected side effects, like the double-line effect when you have an H2 after an H1, but that should not distract from the underlying issue.

I agree with @matmarex that the metadata looks better below the line, Proposed v1. I suspected that would be the case, but I didn't want to get into that detail without seeing it. The picture was helpful.

To be precise: Sections with zero signatures detected should render exactly the same as they do on article pages. Discussion tools are built on top of talk pages because there was a global-community/WMF agreement that it was important to preserve existing Talk page functionality as a complete-and-accurate workplace for article content. We shouldn't even consider what "looks better" in that case, there is exactly one canonical correct answer.

Sections where signatures are detected should be derived from the baseline header with minimal change. Preexisting elements should be styled exactly the same, only adding the new elements.

Clarifying question: @Alsee, are you able to share link(s) to pages where I can see people using talk pages as a, "...workplace for article content." ?

Next steps

• @ppelberg to propose a path forward on this ticket. Specifically, whether we will revise the initial approach we converged on in T302450#7862086 and make it so that people who have visual enhancements enabled see talk page sections that do NOT contain discussions styled similarly to how they are shown in other contexts.