User talk:Louis P. Boog/sandbox/proposed CRA
Recommendations on romanization of Arabic and using quotation marks[edit]
The article currently uses several apostrophe and apostrophe-like characters in the romanization of Arabic, presumably to represent ʻayn and hamzah, viz:
- curly apostrophe (’): Qur’anic, Qur’an
- curly open quote (‘): shar‘i, Al-‘Uzzaa, Ta‘ala, ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan as-Sa‘di
- straight apostrophe ('): Qur'an
I believe that the article should use the two symbols ʿʾ instead, or if not, the article should follow a standard consistently. I cannot help further with this.
The article currently uses many forms of quotation marks:
- straight double quotes ("): "classic"
- back tick (`): `abrogation`
- curly single quotes (‘’): ‘nasikh’
Wikipedia calls for using straight double quotes (") except when quotes are nested; a quote nested inside straight quotes should use straight single quotes (').
When double and single quotes run together, the templates {{"'}} and {{'"}} can be used to put a thin space in between, to avoid the appearance of a triple straight quote. For example, Jack said, "I said 'Go away!'" generates Jack said, "I said 'Go away!'", which may be hard for the reader to interpret, and can be improved by using Jack said, "I said 'Go away!{{'"}} to generate Jack said, "I said 'Go away!'" – where the thin space helps the user see a single quote followed by a double quote.
Also, blockquotes are an alternative to using quotation marks, and should not be surrounded with quotation marks. Currently, many blockquotes appear with quotation marks or other punctuation substituting for quotation marks.
—Anomalocaris (talk) 09:41, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
to do[edit]
- check qur'an. use straight apostrophe*
- check quotes for straight apostrophes
- check blockquotes are an alternative to using quotation marks
--BoogaLouie (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2019 (UTC)