Please do NOT overuse boldface
In an encyclopedia, boldface should be used sparingly. It is NOT correct to use it to call attention to lengthy passages that one happens to like. I appreciate the work people have done to collect these many George Eliot quotes but urge contributors to check out reliable, reputable encyclopedias to get some idea of the formatting which is appropriate. 220.127.116.11 03:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- It is important to call attention to the fact that this is NOT an encyclopedia, but is a collection of QUOTATIONS. Quotation is the very act of calling attention to a statement one finds notably amusing, inspiring, irritating, or in some other way interesting. As I have pointed out a few times before, this is inherently a process of selection and emphasis, and I believe bolding is a further refinement of the process which should remain an option here. There can sometimes be contentions over what is most notable, which can sometimes be resolved by consensus, but I reject the idea that all additions that are made should be kept at a single bland monotonous level, and encourage the use of bolding. ~ Kalki 13:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Could you please refer us to some collections of quotations that are published by reputable companies in which boldface type is used in a way similar to this page? Failing that, could you please refer us to some well-designed web sites which use boldface in a manner similar to these George Eliot quotes? Bolding most certainly has its place but in all collections of quotations that I'm familiar with this is used either for things like headings, author names, or keywords or else is applied uniformly to all quotations. The mix of bold and normal formatting here is jarring rather than emphatic. Especially distracting is the use of bolding for only certain portions of a block of quoted text.
- One way to avoid a "single bland monotonous level" is not to rely on boldface type but instead to use an index (nominal or thematic) to help guide the reader. I think most people familiar with published collections of quotations would find the formatting on this and other similar pages to be haphazard, unsightly and distracting. Far better would be to select a small number of quotations and include them in boxes or print them with a larger typeface. Such practices have precedents and are more consistent not just with encyclopedias, which wikiquote is not, but also with collections of quotations.
- I'm also curious to know just how far contributors are allowed to depart from "single bland monotonous level". Is it acceptable to use a variety of different colors for text? Font sizes? Fonts? Emoticons? There are precedents for each of this online, but I'm not sure that this is what Wikiquote aspires to.