I know I wrote this template, but the reason I'm writing to request a change is that it would involve a change in our policy, particularly of the use of italics in example sentences. By doing so I hope not so much to push through my suggested style changes as to establish this template or its new home as an authoritative source on style. That the move may be premature as the template is still unprotected, and in fact has yet to be reviewed, is of no concern to me. It was written following guidelines from entry layout and from what I've seen commonly used on entry pages, and where it differs, especially in the employment of small new templates, I expect that the proper corrections will be made.
The following code:
# ] ] of the entry. #*'''1999''', Author, ''Title'', Publication #*:''Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections.'' #*'''2000''', Author, ''Title'', Publication #*:''Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections.'' # A ] ]; a ] possibly ] from the first. #:''Example using '''entry name''' or its inflections.''
appearing as:
should be replaced with:
# ] ] of the entry. #*'''1999''', Author, ''Title'', Publication #*: Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections. #*'''2000''', Author, ''Title'', Publication #*: Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections. # A ] ]; a ] possibly ] from the first. #:* Example using '''entry name''' or its inflections.
so that it looks thus:
Besides the removal of italic text, the other change is an alignment of examples with quotations. Davilla 08:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC) Edited to reflect corrections made in template. Davilla 05:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
# ] ] of the entry. #*'''1999''', Author, ''Title'', Publication #*:“Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections.” #*'''2000''', Author, ''Title'', Publication #*:“Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections.” # A ] ]; a ] possibly ] from the first. #::‘Example using '''entry name''' or its inflections.’
would appear as:
Both suggest can be refined simultaneously. Any comments? Davilla 05:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
The other style I've seen used, by Muke in particular, is a separate quotations section. I have no objection to this, especially in cases where several quotations are required. Combining some of the ideas above, one proposal is:
# ] ] of the entry. # A ] ]; a ] possibly ] from the first. #:<tt>“</tt>Example using '''entry name''' or its inflections.<tt>”</tt> ===Quotations=== '''first definition''' *'''1999''', Author, ''Title'', Publication *:Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections. *'''2000''', Author, ''Title'', Publication *:Quotation of '''entry name''' or its inflections.
On my system, the quotes appear much nicer this way:
first definition
Thoughts? 59.112.41.161 03:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I have a slight preference for no quote-marks, for a couple of minor reasons:
Not terribly compelling reasons, to be sure, but no worse than the reason for quote-marks. I think quotations and examples already stand out enough as non-definitions in Davilla's first proposal above -- definitely quotations with reference lines right above them, but even examples that are just indented-plus-bulleted. Keffy 21:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
If this template is established as an authoritative source on style, then the talk page should be used for instructions/how to. To try to put all the instructions into the template as a Tutorial would be too complicated and confusing. Thus we will still need another page to discuss any possible changes/improvements to the template. At least, that would be my assumption. --Richardb 09:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
--Yecril 15:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Is this still used anywhere, even as a preload template. I can't find any evidence of it. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:04, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
This seems like a really old preload, maybe non-preload template. It uses loads of obsolete syntax, for example {{see}}
instead of {{also}}
. I was gonna clean it up, replacing almost the entire content, then decided it was way better to delete it. I would speedy it, but it's been around for quite a long time. Last modified in 2010. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)