This is how I propose that we handle future font identification requests:

This isn't recommended for copy and paste, but rather as a general method of approach.

We enjoy answering your design questions, we really do. However, we're no more capable than you are of finding the name of a font. Rather than being an intellectual question that we can answer for you, it's merely a chore.

However, in good faith, I've searched a (kinda close) match to your font for you: Vox Wide SemiBold from Canada Type Vox

It might not be the perfect match, but if you want a more precise match, you may need to do some manual searching.

Please see:

Once you've tried all suggested methods of finding the font on your own, we'll gladly help you once you've updated your question to describe your attempts to identify the font.

This should not apply to exceptional cases...

Some font identification requests may be constructive.

In an exceptional case, where the user has exhausted all means of finding a specific font, a font identification request might be acceptable and welcome in the format:

"I have tried and failed to find this font [ ... ] Details of my attempts: [...]"

Relevant threads:

Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not?

  • have you seen the meta-tag for font-identification?
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 9:56
  • Yes, and it's on shaky ground. While font identification may have been appropriate earlier in the site's life, I think we can and should start to discourage the font identification question, and rather "Teach a man to fish". @RandomO'Reilly Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 9:58
  • 1
    I get your intent, which is fine, but probably makes sense to either a) answer the question, then link to further explanation (on an already posted question). Or b) leave a comment redirecting to the further explanation on an already posted question. That way we're not cluttering every single font question with repetitive answers.
    – DA01
    Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 19:10

3 Answers 3


I don't have any problem with this as a personal approach to answering these, but I'm don't think there needs to be a guideline suggesting that all answerers should tell the asker it's a chore.

Mostly because I'm not 100% sure that's true.

It seems like some users are perfectly happy to take on the challenge of finding a font. I think it's great if all users try to get in the habit of highlighting the do-it-yourself solutions, too, but don't really agree that people should try to suggest these questions are a burden.

It seems like we're taking people who sometime alike doing a thing, telling them they should find it burdensome, and encouraging them to be sure to tell askers it's a burden.

I guess it's okay to say that if you feel they are a burden to you, but in that case it seems more logical to just... skip em, and leave them to the folks that know the answer offhand, or enjoy the thrill of the hunt. If they started overrunning the site, things might be different, but that's clearly not the case so far.

To be clear, I really respect the incredibly contructive way the OP here is suggesting expressing his annoyance with these (coupled with any help he can provide, etc.) And I'm very positive on the teaching to fish bit, but see no upside in trying to officially label something as a burden where one isn't apparent.

  • I do not disagree with this as such; I just think it is a good idea to leave a little time between comment (gentle hint to the font-id-tag) and answer. These questions are not really contributing much to the community. I do not want to clamp down on it, I just think that giving people the chance of bettering their questions is worth waiting for. If the OP cannot be bothered to do so, well, no loss to anyone really. And though I know people enjoy the hunt - no problems with that, it seems it is the type of Qs new users have a chance of getting some rep.
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 30, 2014 at 0:01
  • 910/2651 for me, in 27 questions. Generally it seems I give hints for making the request better and pointing to WhatTheFont and the like, but with sub-standard sample images, automated services will struggle and identification requires a the computing power of a human neural network. Commented May 2, 2014 at 10:48

I think your answer is appropriate for this case, because it is a user that has repeatedly asked similar questions with general poor samples. So as you mention, for exceptional cases, yes. Something I don't like, though, is the idea of having this answer practically copy-pasted over different questions. I would however use a different tone for new users.

Font-identification questions are probably something we'll always have around unless our scope changes. Some of them add no content and are generally un-traceable, other can be challenging and even enjoyable. I think we should definitely always point to a font-recognition service first (at least to the tag description), and using comments.

There has been some discussion on the subject, although these threads might be a bit old. Maybe we need to re-ask the quesiton of font-id: on or off-topic?

  • I did have a look at each of those posts. This is my opinion on what should be done. Likewise, I appreciate and respect yours. Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:00
  • I think I'd like to make an edit to that, touching on your answer here: Should all font identification requests begin with: "I have tried and failed to find this font"? (+ details) Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:03
  • have a look at the edited version of the question. Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:09
  • Good. I've added those relevant links to the question, as well. Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:19
  • 1
    And for your mention of the copy and paste: I don't intend that we copy and paste this, only that we use this general, constructive manner of encouraging new users by helping them (be nice, find the font), and directing them to the proper questions, gently explaining the matter in a way that teaches them to use font-identification requests as a last resort. Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:24

Here is how I think it should be handled:

In the comments, point to the font-identification resource tag.

Then give the OP time to use those resources; "force" the OP to go through them before coming up with answers or near-solution. ("this is a near-match")

Edit: If the OP does not give more information; ignore the Q. Then after a suitable period, maybe delete it.

A lot of these questions comes from new users who seems to want others to do the work for them. I think it is a good idea to have them work a little, and list the resources they have tried.

This should result in less of these questions, which I think is a good idea, without obliterating them entirely.

More experienced users do use the font-id resource, and only asks when they are really stuck.

  • 1
    I think this is an excellent way of handling it. Start with a comment, then go for the answer. Fishing by lessons.
    – Yisela
    Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:09
  • Have a look at the updated version of the question and give your opinion accordingly. I'm now suggesting a hybrid format that handles both situations with simplicity. Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:10
  • Rather than having to comment each time a user posts a font identification request, let's train them to ask the right question to begin with @Yisela Commented Apr 29, 2014 at 10:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .