Template talk:Quote
We switched to this smaller format ~ 1 week ago. Original is @ {{bigquote}} - Derik (edit summary)
- Why so ugly, then? [It doesn't even look smaller to me, because the font is bigger & monospaced] - SanityOrMadness 20:41, 18 March 2009 (EDT)
- What I said before, plus the note that the English language doesn't use single-guillemots in my experience, preferring inverted commas... - SanityOrMadness 15:06, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
You know, I vastly prefer how this looks to the original quote style. THAT gets lost in the profile text, especially when the double-break isn't used. The light-shaded box sets the quote apart nicely, and makes the font change work better. The only things I'd fix are replacing the brackets with quote marks, and right-justifying the attribution text. I say we go with this. --M Sipher 15:51, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
The guillemots are negotiable... I guess. :( The appeal (to me) is the way they allow you to stick quotes inside of the template without looking skin-crawling-ly wrong.
"Oh please!"Megatron is outraged to be struck in the face but Optimus Prime doesn't have time for his vanity, "Protection"
| “ | "How dare you!" "Oh please!" |
” |
—Megatron is outraged to be struck in the face but Optimus Prime doesn't have time for his vanity, "Protection" | ||
(actually looking at that, I have an urge to adjust the spacing-offset on the first character... right now it's reverse-indented a half space, but i think a whole-space would look better, because the line-starts would line up.) -Derik 02:04, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
- I was thinking that multiline quotes would look thusly:
- Then it wouldn't matter if they were guillemots or quotes (But you'd need to have different arguments on the template. I didn't get as far as working out the best way to do that) --abates 02:32, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
- *shrug* Yet this solution still means no quotes inside. If you ever wanted to quote a passage from a book that included both speech and narration, it'd look weird. (I dont' insist on guillemots-- but they ARE a legitimate quotation mark, and there are benefits of having an 'embracing' quotation mark that doesn't conflict with content it contains.) -Derik 03:30, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
One very big vote against
I'm not going to lie; I am utterly baffled that this {{quote}}/{{bigquote}} controversy exists at all. The colored box is ugly, the monospace font is ugly (especially with the mix of non-monospace quotation marks), it occupies no less space than the so-called "bigquote", and I see absolutely no point to having two different quote-templates anyway. To my mind, there is only one time the quote template should ever be used, and that's in the article intro. And that should be a single line by the character in question, no more. Called-out quotes don't belong in subsections, and the "Quotes" section works just fine without any calling-out. I vote for making this template look like {{bigquote}} again and then deleting {{bigquote}} altogether. - Jackpot 04:07, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
- What he said. Hooper_X 12:35, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
