There seems to be some difficulty by many here in understanding what it is you want. My own interpretation is that you would like access to a repository of nodes which take apart pieces of code (or algorithm implementations) and explain them in a spoken language, in terms that are understandable by a layman.

The problem with this IMO is the misconception that code expressed in English would be clearer than the same code expressed in Perl. Spoken languages are unsuitable for explaining algorithms in a concise and unambiguous manner. Think about it, if code could be expressed well in English, don't you think somebody would have written a complier to translate (a limited subset of) English to executable code? Contrary to what you may believe, Perl is not a limited subset of English, rather it is a language designed to express algorithms while achieving a reasonable compromise between a.) translatability of these expressions into machine code and b.) being intuitively understandable and learnable for speakers of natural languages.

Your problem (I think) is that you haven't made the jump to "thinking in Perl", which is necessary to program anything more than trivial. The translation route "Problem" -> "English description of the solution" -> "Perl implementation of the solution" will only get you so far, you need to get rid of the middle step. Accordingly, a "cheat sheet" translating Perl idioms into English (which I think is what you're after) is only of very limited usefulness and I don't think you'll get too many people excited about it.

BTW, your update seems rather counterproductive to me, since you are proposing an addition to this site and thus it is is your obligation to explain to people here why you think your idea is a good one, not the other way around.

The problem with this IMO is the misconception that code expressed in English would be clearer than the same code expressed in Perl. Spoken languages are unsuitable for explaining algorithms in a concise and unambiguous manner. Think about it, if code could be expressed well in English, don't you think somebody would have written a complier to translate (a limited subset of) English to executable code?
Does Lingua::Romana::Perligata ring a bell? Ok, it's Latin, not English but...

I think that there already are such books. And I think you are making a fundamental error. Comp-sci has very little to do directly with Perl. Comp-sci is like math. It has various applications in various areas of computing. Such material is not well suited to a site like this. I think that when you find a concept or term that you dont understand you should go to other places to find out what its all about. A perl implementation is just that, a perl implementation of a generic idea. This site is about perl specific materials, not about computer science as practiced by perl programmers.

Having said that i think some of what you are asking about falls pretty nicely into the tutorial category. We do need more people writing tutorials but creating a new section isnt going to encourage them I should think.

I suggest that you buy Algorithms In Perl and the perl cookbook as it sounds like they would cover a lot of what you feel you are lacking.

We already have such a section. It's called Seekers of Perl Wisdom. But even if we added another comparable section with more focus on explaining code, what use would it be? You wouldn't read it anyway.

I don't think you get what Win means... I'm not sure I do. But get the impression it should be a cross between FAQs AKA Q&A, and the series of "Perl Idioms" in Meditations. I'm not convinced it truely deserves a new section, but my feeling tells me SoPW is not the best place.

Other people have tried to address the idea of the new section you propose.
I'd like to address the whole issue of new sections.

Creating a new section is a non-trivial thing. I think the gods would only consider creating a new section if there was a clear, desperate need for one. I suppose, if you were saying "I have a ton of articles that I'd like to write for PerlMonks, and they don't fit in an existing section," they might at least consider whether creating a new section would make sense. In your case, you're saying you want a new section and you want other people to start filling it in. But really, you're the only one in the world who perceives a need for this new section. So I don't think it's going to happen.

I must confess, I'm a little disappointed that you didn't think to search the site for previous discussions of similar subjects... for example, the following, which I found by simply searching for "section" in titles of PM Discussions:

A CPAN related modules section, Careers section?, a proposal for a new section on PerlMonks, RFC: Preaching section on PM, New section for Regex Q's?, RFC: "Best Practices" code review section, Job Posting Section?, New Section: Obfu Art Gallery?, perl6 section on PM, Classifieds section?, New section: Revelations?, Off topic section?, Bookmarks Section, Proposal for new section: Code Improvements, Idea for 'Code wanted section', A bad scripting section for teaching examples?, Special paid section for 'write me a program' posts, New Section: Challenges?, Proposal about game section., Uber-newbie section, New section: Witchcraft, Section for Posting Modules, "Off Topic" Section?, Perl articles section, Off Topic section, Perl 6 section?, Topic Sections Considered Harmful?, A PerlMonks 'Community' section?, New Section Suggestion: Tip of the Day, New sections and move one, New Golf section?, New Section: Announcements, New section/play area for code reviews, Proposal for a new section: System Administration, Possibility of a new CGI/HTML section dealing w/ code style and asthetics, Separated JAPH/Obfuscation sections, New Gathering section?, Monk Project Section, Code Review section, anyone?, Perl Golf - A proposal for a new section of PerlMonks.org, New Section for PM?, Code Ideas Section, New jobs section, JAPH Section, Sysadmin Help Section,
and lastly proposal for the Clarification Code section, which is very similar to your proposal.

In reading these, you'd discover one interesting fact: even when suggestions for new/changed sections get a favorable concensus from the general monkulace, it still doesn't result in the change being enacted. I think you'd need to have not only a very strong case, but a huge groundswell of popular support and substantial buy-in from the site powers-that-be to get a section change proposal pushed through to reality.

I don't think that this needs a new section, I think what you are looking for is better indexing and searching on the existing nodes. A single page containing an index of useful snippets would not be particularly useful or maintainable (and would balloon out of all proportion potentially). Something hand-crafted would be guaranteed to be out of date and incomplete. Much better is the output from search or super search.

The Monastery Guidelines go a long way to suggesting how people should make node titles friendly to the search facilities. Granted newbies won't generally reach for search or super search (or Google for that matter), without some prompting.

Maybe integrating the keyword notelet with (super)? search might be a way to start, but there's still the issue of getting people to use it to classify the nodes.

Funny... I'm a little new here and was just reading about how the janitors have to clean up really bad node titles to make them sensible and searchable. Faced with (very roughly) similar issues in handling the differences between what “regular folks” and “professionals” call things in the world of public libraries, we also employ trained database janitors to mind our metadata.

Perhaps what the OP really wants (better context for programming newbies, is my guess) might best be implemented as a new kind of metadata for all nodes? I'm not suggesting this is needed or easy to do (in fact I know it could come only through considerable ongoing effort), but imagine a clickable thingy other than Reply that would allow privileged monks to add controlled keywords and subject phrases to a node (and perhaps even an abstract) to make it more searchable. Controlled metadata, edited by pros, usually beats the pants off of keyword searching, at least for data sets of nontrivial size.

Then again perhaps accurate titles and other existing navigational features really are totally sufficient in the PM environment. I'm finding everything that I need, anyway, and the point raised about real newbs not even knowing how to search in the first place is ceratainly valid too. I guess the bottom line in my view is that the ability to ask a monk for help any time day or night pretty much obviates the need to go to great lengths to cater to newbies in the search interface.

There are a number of suites in the Monastery that provide this sort of information:

• Seekers of Perl Wisdom: questions people have asked and answers they have received.
• Tutorials: Introductory (and not so introductory) materials covering Perl and Perl idioms, and much more
• Snippets Section: snippets of code that solve specific problems in an interesting or elegant fashion
• Cool Uses For Perl: full blown (by generally small) Perl solutions to various problems that demonstrate cool ways to do stuff with Perl
• Code Catacombs: large scale Perl applications and modules that solve high level problems using Perl
• Categorized Questions and Answers: a FAQ sorted by category with in depth answers to questions covering many different areas of Perl use

I don't think that adding yet another wing to the building is going to make the trail to find an answer to any particular question any shorter. A good way to save shoe leather and search all the material here is to use super search. Super search is your friend!

See Snippets Section.

I think that you want: "Someone to explain algorithms and constructs in plain english."

Seeing as you clearly states that you have no computer science background, it's clear that this is what you are asking for in order to learn, when in fact there are plenty of material already available in books and on the net and ready for consuming.

I can see where this proposed new section can help you - and others like you - but this is a Perl site, not programming 101.

I'm not saying that this place doesn't teach programming (heck, I learned most of what I know from here) but I don't imagine that for someone who wants to learn programming, visiting perlmonks would be a very obvious choice.

Just my 2 cents

It would aid those that answer routine questions (under seekers of Perl wisdom) to point to other nodes that contain these definitions, in order that the novice could better understand their suggested code