Template talk:Talk quote block

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Template talk:Talkquote)

Edit of 30 May 2012[edit]

I believe that this edit broke the template, see WT:N#Proposal to remove "and list" from a sentence in the lede of WP:N, which has two examples where the background has been reduced to a single line, and the text is now pushed down onto the second line without a background color.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:31, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted my previous edit. Both edits discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Two paragraphs in wikitext rendered as one. The wikitext parser gets confused when the closing blockquote tag does not start on a new line if the template is called with a wikilist (and no final newline) in the calling parameter. — Richardguk (talk) 01:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oldid/newid[edit]

Is it possible to accommodate a diff with both oldid and newid parameters for instances where an editor posts a comment and then makes corrections/edits to their comment, so that the link can show the final version was posted by the quoted user? Currently, there's only provision for the oldid so you have to choose between specifying the first edit (which does not reflect the final version that the editor intended) or the last one (which only shows the last edit marked up). sroc 💬 02:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is possible to use the diff= parameter to give the URL of a diff, so you can to link to any diff you like. For example:

The timestamp links to a diff that includes both your comment and a post from an earlier commenter on this page. 02:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Here's the code: {{talkquote|...|ts=02:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)|diff=//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Talkquote&diff=597315913&oldid=495219808}} – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 22:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect. Thanks! sroc 💬 15:11, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Change the TQ template font colour[edit]

There is an RfC at Template talk:Tq#RfC: Change the TQ template font colour proposing the change the formatting of both {{tq}} and {{talkquote}} to unify their format/colours and distinguish from the colour of the {{xt}} template. Comments would be most welcome there. sroc 💬 18:42, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Contents[edit]

Am I doing something wrong here? For some reason the contents box is recognizing my talkquote sections as headings in the page itself. But it only does it for the first talkquote and not the second. I'm confused.

Also, while I'm already here. Is there a reason spans nuke a talkquote? Is there additional markup needed to use a span within a talkquote? TimothyJosephWood 14:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Play nice with ordered and unordered lists[edit]

  • Lorem ipsum

Is there a way to get this template to function when used at the beginning of a list item? For instance * {{talkquote|Lorem ipsum}} will turn the bullet (or number) into a regular indent, rather than showing the bullet/number. It's fine if you put something between the bullet and template, but it'd be nice if it didn't need the hack. I am no longer watching this page—ping if you'd like a response czar 23:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: As you can see by your own example above, this is now fixed. (It was fixed some time ago, I'm not sure exactly when.) Lists now play nicely with the {{tq}} templates, or vice versa. You can even colon-indent them on Talk pages, now!

I suspect the colon-indenting was the real motivation for fixing this.
— FeRDNYC (talk) 14:31, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

👏👏👏 Thanks! czar 20:11, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Color[edit]

It'd be nice to have a few different color options—say blue/red/yellow—in lieu of just the green when comparing quotes czar 22:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 January 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. No opposition and it has been relisted. (non-admin closure)Ammarpad (talk) 13:06, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]


— Rationale: I have never once remembered which of these templates is the block and which is inline. Moving the templates (and keeping the redirects) would make it easier for editors to save those extra few seconds of brainpower without adversely affecting editors with a better memory than mine.

Note: If this gains consensus, I would anticipate that

OwenBlacker (talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 18:38, 16 January 2018 (UTC)--Relisting.  samee  talk 19:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support This drives me nuts, too.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  19:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per nom. Definitely clearer than the status quo; and the short versions ({{tq}}) aren't changed. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:17, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • SUPPORT – It's a little thing, but it's so annoying. 142.161.81.20 (talk) 08:05, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Don't generally get them confused (using aliases of tq and tq2 only), but it is still confusing as hell. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:34, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Documentation updated[edit]

I noticed that Template:Talk quote inline/doc had been updated to reflect the new canonical name ({{Talk quote inline}}), but Template:Talk quote block/doc had not, and still referred to the template as {{talkquote}}. Should be all fixed up now. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 06:36, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Colors don't preview in Visual Editor[edit]

I noticed that when this template is used with the Visual Editor (even in wikitext source mode), the background coloring doesn't show up in the "Show preview" rendering. Presumably this is due to the use of Template Styles, specifically Template:Talk quote block/styles.css. Regardless the reason, it's still fairly disconcerting. Is there any way we could get the styles to be applied correctly in the preview? -- FeRDNYC (talk) 06:49, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quoted URLs with query strings break the template[edit]

I'm having trouble quoting URLs that contain query strings, like: http://example.com/over/there?name=ferret

This is particularly a problem when quoting Wikipedia diff URLs, like: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IamNotU/sandbox&diff=904787385&oldid=904785977

For example, this:

{{tq2| This here article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1927_Chicago_mayoral_election }}

Shows up ok as:

This here article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1927_Chicago_mayoral_election

While this:

{{tq2| This here diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IamNotU/sandbox&diff=904787385&oldid=904785977 }}

Doesn't display at all:


The same goes if I use square brackets for the URLs. Am I doing something wrong? As a workaround, I used:

{{tq2| This here diff: [[Special:Diff/904785977/904787385|https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IamNotU/sandbox&diff=904787385&oldid=904785977]] }}

Which displays ok, though it's inconvenient and looks different (doesn't have the external link pointer):

This here diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IamNotU/sandbox&diff=904787385&oldid=904785977

Can this be fixed? --IamNotU (talk) 15:12, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@IamNotU: When your template arguments contain an equals sign, you can't use implicit positional parameters because everything preceding the first equals sign gets parsed as the parameter name. The trick, in those situations, is to make the assignment explicit, so that your entire argument is unambiguously parsed as the value being assigned to that parameter. IOW:
{{tq2|1=This here diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IamNotU/sandbox&diff=904787385&oldid=904785977 }}

This here diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IamNotU/sandbox&diff=904787385&oldid=904785977

Writing the transclusion as {{tq2|1=...}} puts the entire URL on the right-hand side of an assignment to the first unnamed parameter, rather than it being parsed as a template parameter named This here diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title that's being assigned the value User:IamNotU/sandbox&diff=904787385&oldid=904785977 -- FeRDNYC (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
FeRDNYC, that makes sense, thanks for the tip! --IamNotU (talk) 13:50, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Background color[edit]

It would useful if the background color could be set for this template. I see that one other editor has brought this up before (Czar) Does anyone have any objections to adding such a parameter? If not, I would like to submit an edit request. - MrX 🖋 17:38, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 13 June 2020[edit]

Overhaul[edit]

Sandbox:

<includeonly><templatestyles src="Talk quote block/styles.css"/><!--
--><blockquote class="talkquote"<!--
---->{{#if:{{{style|}}}|<!-- In-line style handling.
------> style={{{style}}}<!--
---->}}><!--
---->{{{text|{{{1|<p><br/></p>}}}}}}<!-- Quoted text.

Attribution:
---->{{#if:{{{by|{{{2|}}}}}}|<!--
---- [Clause 0] User:
------><br/><span class="talkquote-by"> [[User:{{{by|{{{2}}}}}}]]</span><!-- User name.
------>{{#if:{{{ts|}}}|<!-- Timestamp.
-------->&#32;<small><!--
-------->{{#if:{{{oldid|}}}|<!-- Revision to display. (as the main document)
------ [Clause 1] Linked Timestamp:
---------->[[Special:Diff<!--
---------->{{#if:{{{diff|}}}|<!-- Revision to compare, explicit.
------------>/{{{diff}}}<!--
---------->}}/{{{oldid}}}|{{{ts}}}]]|<!--
------ [Clause 1] Unlinked Timestamp:
---------->{{{ts}}}<!--
-------->}}</small><!--
------>}}|<!--
---- [Clause 0] Source:
------>{{#if:{{{source|}}}|<!--
--------><br/><span class="talkquote-source"> {{{source}}}</span><!--
------>}}<!--
---->}}<!--
--></blockquote></includeonly><noinclude>
<blockquote class="talkquote">
	{{lorem ipsum}}<br/>
	<span class="talkquote-by"> [[User:Example User]]</span> <small>[[Special:Diff/{{REVISIONID}}|{{#time:H:i, j F Y|{{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}}}} (UTC)]]</small>
</blockquote>
{{Documentation}}
<!-- PLEASE ADD THIS TEMPLATE'S CATEGORIES AND INTERWIKIS TO THE /doc SUBPAGE, THANKS -->
</noinclude>
  • Revised logic. (see the testcases)
  • Enhanced capability. (diff, style)
  • And a bit more to come. (if granted permission)

Wikipedian Right (talk) 21:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done (yet). Please take a look at the testcases page and adjust the sandbox appropriately. If you are proposing new functionality, add more test cases to the testcases page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:30, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting this template to function decently[edit]

I was trying to get this template to function just now in a situation where I wanted the first line to be text, the next to be a bullet, and all of it to be indented. After playing around with it for several minutes and reading through a bunch of the documentation here (again, as I've encountered trouble frequently, as I'm sure many Wikipedians have), I gave up and just left out the indentation. This is a pretty absurd situation – to be useful, this template needs to actually work as expected, not break anytime you try to indent it or use a list item unless you fiddle with it to get it formatted in a special way. Is there really no way to do that? I see Wikipedian Right proposed some changes above — would those do anything to help? {{u|Sdkb}}talk 05:31, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Emphasis added and the like[edit]

Sometimes you just want to put something after the timestamp like {{ea}}. Should that feature be added here? –MJLTalk 20:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reflist[edit]

Is there a way to make {{reflist}} work inside this template as with {{quote frame}} (see example below)? It seems to break indentation when used like this (example diff).

Sample text here.[1][2]
  1. ^ Citation
  2. ^ Citation

Thanks. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC) edited 18:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Talkquote" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Talkquote and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 13#Talkquote until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 10:07, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 23 August 2022[edit]

Could the italics please be removed from the "talkquote-source" style in the CSS? It seems like an odd deviation. And it's preventing me from using the field to cite the book from which I'm quoting. Thanks, Graham (talk) 03:55, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't understand. Clue me in editor Graham – if you are quoting from a book, shouldn't its title be italicized? as in Grimms' Fairy Tales? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 04:53, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Paine Ellsworth: The title should be italicized, but to cite a book you would at least have to include the author's name, and preferably also the publisher, year of publication, and page number (or section/paragraph/folio/etc. number, depending on the work). Graham (talk) 05:01, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...man evolved on the African continent from carnivorous, predatory ancestors who distinguished themselves from apes by the use of weapons.
— African Genesis

To editor Graham: what I wonder is why the italics style has been used since the css style subpage was created in July 2018? Could it be that only titles that are italicized are supposed to be used in the |source= parameter? Also, what widespread effects might a change like this have? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 05:57, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) My guess is the parameter was originally created with the intention of being used solely for pages on Wikipedia (policies, guidelines, maybe articles) and the italics were intended to be decorative. I don't think the parameter was originally intended for the title of a book because how often does one quote a book without even including the author's name?
But this decoration renders the template unusable for anything else (without hackily using {{no italics}}, I suppose, which most of the template's users probably wouldn't think to do).
Here's an example of what I was trying to do:

The "childfree" (as they now styled themselves) viewed parenting as an all-or-nothing proposition. They defined parenting as a zero-sum game, only available by giving up on something else, and that something else was almost always called "freedom." Having children, they reported, would come at the cost of just about everything they cared about: a job, a good marriage, financial solvency, even competence. ...

Furthermore, American child-free advocates began to argue that childlessness was not only an acceptable path but also a better choice than parenthood.


— Rachel Chrastil, How to Be Childless: A History and Philosophy of Life Without Children (New York: Oxford University Press, 2020), p. 75

Graham (talk) 06:17, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Re the addition to your reply (Also, what widespread effects might a change like this have?): I had thought about that, and I can't conceive of any effects beyond the obvious (i.e., that where a quotation would have previously ended with "— Wikipedia:Verifiability", it will now read "— Wikipedia:Verifiability"). Graham (talk) 06:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seems harmless enough. Shall cede the final word to editor Izno, who created {{Talk quote block/styles.css}} back in 2018. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 06:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The italics of interest have been present since the parameter was introduced in 2012. I simply transferred them to the TemplateStyles. Izno (talk) 17:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Graham: If quoting an external source such as a book, in a talk page discussion, it may be more appropriate to just use <blockquote> and provide a citation externally. The "talk quote" formatting templates seems as though they were intended to style internal quotes, in the manner of a "quoted reply" in email or a forum discussion. (Hence the colored border line on the left edge of the quoted block, commonly associated with quoted text in email threads.) The attribution styling is just that, attribution to the source (wikilink to a user or policy page), not really a citation per se. FeRDNYC (talk) 07:07, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The "talk quote" formatting templates seems as though they were intended to style internal quotes Which is why the existence of this parameter in this template confuses me personally, since I got pinged above. It is more or less outside the scope I perceive also. Izno (talk) 17:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then since we have an editor, Graham, who would like to off the italics, we can try that and see if it brings more input.
 Done. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 22:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Paine Ellsworth! Graham (talk) 02:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
my pleasure! Paine  04:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks also. This was a good change. This idea of italicizing entire blocks of attribution data is some nonsense that WHATWG came up with, and it makes no sense to anyone but them.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  03:37, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help! Happy to help!  Paine  05:30, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment links support[edit]

Now that there are comment links (they work in enwiki already, but timestamps are not linked yet, but will be soon I suppose), we can make a link from the timestamp to the comment in this template. I suggest to add an |id= parameter for that purpose.

Two more points:

  1. When there is a comment link, you can easily access the quoted comment. No point to make the author into a link then – it would just contribute to MOS:SEAOFBLUE.
  2. Actually, there is no point to link the author when a oldid or diff is linked (using |oldid= and |diff=) as well. Seeing the author's userpage is not the most relevant link for me when I see their quote.

P.S. There is a mistake in the docs currently: they state

  • |diff=: The revision ID of the diff comparing target.

But |diff= currently requires a full link. Jack who built the house (talk) 10:47, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ugly bottom padding[edit]

Is there a way to remove the ugly bottom padding

e.g: look how the top space and bottom space are unequal!

while still being accessibility-friendly? Aaron Liu (talk) 23:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a side effect of the fix for T352875 that did not account for this case. I have adjusted the css for this template, which is a hack, but it doesn't seem to have worked (I don't see the change applied when I inspect the style; a real fix is welcome). If that bug gets another patch, my attempted css change may have to be adjusted or removed. See also Template talk:Quote_box#bottom-of-box sizing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:12, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the selector should be .talkquote p.
Or something like (based on the loader's css in my debug console)
.mw-body blockquote > :last-child {
	padding-bottom: 0.2em;
}
Aaron Liu (talk) 15:12, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Jonesey95, would you kindly take a look at this? Aaron Liu (talk) 20:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried to implement this change in the sandbox, but it is not doing anything for me; I still get padding-bottom=0.5em. I don't really understand CSS as well as I should. You are welcome to fiddle with the sandbox version of the template and the sandbox version of styles.css. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonesey95 I think I've fixed it! (insert happy child squealing )Aaron Liu (talk) 03:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have put that version in the live CSS page. I think the resulting bottom padding may be too small now. What do others think? As far as I know, we are trying to work around a change to MediaWiki that amounts to a bug in an edge case, but I could be wrong. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]