Hello, Chongkian, and welcome to the English Wikiquote, a free compendium of quotations written collaboratively by people just like you!
- For a quick overview of what Wikiquote is, read Wikiquote:Wikiquote.
- See also What Wikiquote is not for common activities that Wikiquote does not support.
- To browse Wikiquote, take a look at our browsing start page.
- Before creating new articles, consult our guide. You may practice how to edit a page at Sandbox.
- Please remember to use edit summaries when editing pages.
- When posting to a discussion, please sign with a date by writing four tildes (~~~~) and saving.
- Be bold.
Thank you for all your work on southeast Asian topics. It's an area that is badly needed, and unfortunately one in where I don't know the first thing. I'm glad there is someone here who is interested in it. If I can ever be of any help please let me know, and thank you again. GMGtalk 02:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
- Oh, you're welcome. It is my interest for all of the East & Southeast Asian countries-related people's topics in Wikipedia And Wikiquote. Quite a lot of people have contributed in Wikipedia (in English or in their respective country's official language pages), but still not many in Wikiquote. So far my biggest confusion is the quote writing format, whether to make it bold or not bold in their quote, e.g. as in the case of these two pages which I have written: Andrew Hsia and Chen Chi-chung. By default, I shall write it in bold (Chen Chi-chung), but sometimes got other editors try to edit it and change to non-bold (Andrew Hsia). Maybe you know what is the default/most correct formatting in writing in Wikiquote? I have to say there is no universally accepted article writing format, after I have browse thru people's articles from other different countries around the world. Thanks for the help :) Chongkian (talk) 02:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
- No problem at all. There is currently no clear guidance on the issue at the Wikiquote manual of style, and which quotes are bold may change depending on the article or quote, or it may change for the same article over time. As far as article format and presentation, Wikiquote can be much more fluid than Wikipedia, and there may often be no one presentation which is objectively the best.
- I normally only bold quotes that I find particularly striking, or which are particularly widely quoted. What meets this standard may change over time or across editors. I normally don't bold quotes until there is enough quotes on an article to want to make certain ones stand out to readers, but again, that my vary depending on who you ask. The important thing is that we have a presentation that is compelling for readers, and if we do that, then however we do it is the correct way. GMGtalk 02:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
Recent new pages
Hi, I've noticed you've been creating a number of pages from officials in China or medical people that pertain to the Wuhan virus. Perhaps it would be better to gather these quotes onto a single page regarding the virus, rather than a multitude of smaller pages from not very notable people? Just a suggestion. ~ UDScott (talk) 14:15, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
- By default I will try to find those notable people first (those who already have Wikipedia page) to write their Wikiquote page. If there is no Wikipedia page from that person, then I make sure there is their Wikidata page at least (usually those professor with many publications, thus they have their author ID in some publication sites listed in Wikidata), then I write their Wikiquote. If they don't have Wikipedia and Wikiquote page, the very least I write their Wikiquote are those with affiliation with highly notable institution (e.g. university, government institution, hospital or medical institutions - all must be notable (the very minimum), meaning they must have their Wikipedia page). Those without Wikipedia, Wikidata or notable affiliation, I don't write their Wikiquote (that's my minimum judgement on what's considered notable for Wikimedia projects). And also, I write only those virus/microbiology-related people (scientist or health officials), not from other occupation's perspective (e.g. celebrity, business people etc) - I'm trying to make it as much scientifically correct as possible. So that's my approach so far. As the information is still growing fast with so many new information, there will be a future 'data re-arrangement' to unify or consolidate all of these information nicely and smoothly - I agree on that - for this Wuhan virus (or 2019-nCoV (or many other suggested name variants) - even the Wikipedia community haven't come into conclusion what name to be used for this particular virus - again, whether to focus on the virus itself, or the outbreak) quotes into one Wikiquote page about it. Chongkian (talk) 14:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)