Talk:Quotation marks in English

message: I have "logical" issues with the following bit:
Logical quotation differs from British style in its treatment of colons and semicolons. British and American styles both place them outside the quote marks all the time, while logical-technical style allows them to be placed inside. (An example would be a reference to the C programming language statement, 'printf("Hello, world");'.) 
Anything that is written in code cannot automatically be regarded as English (except in the sense that English itself is a species of code). Code is literally a set of instructions to a processor; for computers, code is formatted in such a way that a compiler can readily translate it into machine language. So the example given is misleading because C uses the semicolon as an operator rather than as a punctuation mark. I'd even argue that the single quotes that buttress the C command line should be double quotes because (again) the double quotes inside the command line are operators, not punctuation.
A better example of the use of a semicolon or colon before an end-quote would be, 'The encyclopedist wrote "Common punctuation errors;" instead of "Common punctuation errors:".'  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.18.19.169 (talk) 13:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is not whether something is code or not but rather whether the period or comma could confuse the reader.  I prefer "To write a long dash on Wikipedia, type in '—'." It serves a double purpose. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Code is not English 

message: There are two questions: 1. Does a previous edition of a source become unsuitable for Wikipedia when a newer edition is published? and 2. Is it acceptable to cite this source through an intermediary, such as a website?
In this particular case, one user has found multiple websites that include the same direct quotation of the fourteenth edition of the Chicago Manual of Style (the fifteenth edition is the most current).  This quotation is used to source the assertion that the Chicago Manual of Style refers to two specific sets of punctuation practices as "American style" and "British style." Darkfrog24 (talk) 05:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue here is twofold: (1) with style guides it's always better to consult the latest edition, and this article does rely on the latest edition as a key source, so we shouldn't be mixing editions; (2) Darkfrog hasn't consulted any of the sources, yet is trying to use them sourced to websites that may or may not be reporting them accurately, and may be using older editions. Darkfrog needs to read the style guides he wants to cite. SlimVirgin TALK contribs 05:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because one source is better than another doesn't mean that the lesser source does not meet Wikipedia's criteria.  In this case, it isn't as if the fifteenth edition contradicts the information that I got from the fourteenth.  Thousands of Wikipedia articles use websites as sources.  The question is not whether copying directly from book would be better; I agree that it would be.  It is about whether copying from a web page meets Wikipedia's standards; I believe it does. Darkfrog24 (talk) 05:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You didn't get any information from the 14th edition, because you haven't seen it. I am challenging your use of random websites, some of them perhaps self-published, as sources. Per V, please produce a good source that you have seen with your own eyes. SlimVirgin TALK contribs 05:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have seen the websites with my own eyes.  They are not random. Darkfrog24 (talk) 06:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But I am disputing them, so please provide the original source. I would like to know what it says, with a page number and a quote, per V. It is policy. SlimVirgin TALK contribs 06:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Considering that Wikipedia has a policy, WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT, on how to cite sources indirectly, it is safe to say that Wikipedia does allow us to cite sources indirectly.  As an example, it uses a website that quotes a book. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for comment, previous edition via the Internet 

message: Unless our sources specifically say "North America"—the ones I've seen don't—we should say "the U.S. and Canada" or "Canada and the U.S." There are millions of North Americans who are neither American nor Canadian.  I realize that in an article about English, many readers will assume that we are discussing the two major English-speaking North American countries, but I feel that equating "North America" with "North America but not Mexico" may offend Mexican readers. Darkfrog24 (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, yeah, there's a big worry.  Just noticed this thread from 2010.  Here it is 6 years later.  Give it a break.  Dicklyon (talk) 07:18, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like you're the one who needs a break.  Go cool down. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:33, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "North America" or "U.S. and Canada"?

message: In 'Typographical Considerations' it is mentioned that one cannot end a sentence with two end marks, but how do you construct:
Did Kennedy really say, "Ich bin ein Berliner!"?
I can see that if we question a question we could do without two question marks although this is flatly contradicted by Correct English, J.E. Metcalfe and C. Astle, Clarion,  (page 97) which absolutely recommends using two question marks if it is logical. 
With the one exclamation and a question about it, surely one must use both?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billben74 (talk • contribs) 12:23, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Valid use of two end marks?

message: I'm surprised that no one yet has caught the misuse of the word "irony" in this article.  Irony does not mean what this article is using it to mean, Alanis Morissette notwithstanding.  It does not mean to use a word in a sarcastic, skeptical, dubious sense at all.  I'll have to get out my Thesaurus and see what is the best word to use for this heading.Wjhonson (talk) 12:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Why, what do you think irony means, if not this? I looked it up again to be sure, and that’s exactly what it means: stating the opposite of the intended meaning. MJ (t • c) 22:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only are you correct, but to change section headings for anything short of a serious problem is unacceptable. I am reverting the change. JonRichfield (talk) 19:48, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

text: Not to beat a dead horse, but Wjhonson's comment not only mistakes the meaning of irony but misuses the word sarcastic and misreads Alanis Morissette's mistake to boot. Sarcasm's primary characteristic is the intent to demean and wound http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sarcasm and only incidentally often employs irony to do so. Ms. Morissette's song uses ironic to mean contrary to expectations or hopes, if I infer correctly, and not at all to mean contrary to meaning. (How else to interpret rain on one's wedding day as ironic?)LINKBook (talk) 17:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Misuse of "Irony"

message: This article should be correct. Some examples improperly put the comma at the end of quoations, inside the quotation marks ("'Good morning, Frank,' greeted HAL.") The last comma does not belong to the quoted text and therefore does not belong inside the quotation marks. It should be: "Good morning, Frank", said HAL. Improper quotation of important people can end up in criminal charges, even if you added only a comma. I request the rewriting of this article. 217.234.55.254 (talk) 18:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, in both British and American English, dialogue for fictional conversations goes inside the quotation marks, as shown. (HAL is a fictional character from the film 2001: A Space Odyssey). This is according to Butcher's Copy Editing, as listed on the article's list of sources. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation marks and commas (proper order) 

message: What about the use of vertical quotation marks when they mean "same as line before - just look above".  I usually see about 1-3 of them per line, spread out depending on the line length.  Is there any specific terminology for this use, and how should it be added to this article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.0.200.59 (talk) 17:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You're thinking of ditto marks; same symbol, usually, as double quotes, but different use completely. Cheers, LindsayHi 08:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in repeated lines 

message: I feel like the source of the quotes should be cited - the first few are from 2001: A Space Odyssey, right? Also, I'm not sure that encyclopedic should use a movie source, instead of a generic sentence (eg. 'Hello,' said John.). --67.87.36.128 (talk) 01:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources of the quotes 

message: Regarding Quotation_mark#Punctuation: What's the difference between:
*“Today”, said former Prime Minister Tony Blair, “I feel free from care and anxiety.” (British non-fiction only)
*“I feel happy,” said Björk, “carefree, and well.” (both major styles)
I can't help but wonder if one (or both) of these is broken. Since the article says: "In non-fiction, British publishers may permit placing punctuation that is not part of the person’s speech inside the quotation marks but prefer that it be placed outside." I'm guessing that the first example should have the final period outside the quotation marks. But really, I'm not sure what needs to happen.
Even (especially) if the examples are correctly punctuated, some sort of clarification, I think, would be in order. — gogobera (talk) 01:10, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Bjork would have said "I feel happy, carefree and well." The comma is present in the original quotation, so there is no issue with allowing it inside quotation marks. Blair would have said "Today I feel free from care and anxiety," so there could be such an issue.  Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error correction or clarification perhaps needed 

message: Some languages put the first mark low, the second high, like ,this'. It deserves a mention (especially because Poles (and maybe others) keep this form when writing in English because they're not aware of the difference. It'd be good to start a section but it'd be better to have more languages if it's true for others too. Malick78 (talk) 11:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it would be an interesting section. Does anyone know how it works with asian languages, such as manderin?MilkStraw532 (talk) 19:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is already a whole article Non-English usage of quotation marks that includes Polish and many other languages.--Azarien (talk) 09:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish (and other languages?)

message: This matter seems to have been dealt with.  If there are no further comments, I will remove the dispute tag tomorrow. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Will remove dispute tag tomorrow

message: your example:
If Hal says: "All systems are functional," then:
    Incorrect: Hal said "everything was going extremely well."
    Correct: Hal said that everything was going extremely well. 
could be much improved by changing it to:
If Hal said: "All systems are functional," then he meant "everything was going extremely well." (incorrect)
 everything was going extremely well. (correct)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.168.75.9 (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: improve this example?

message: Where is any discussion of the application of quotation marks to distinguish multiple-paragraph quotation - and of course vs. the alternative of setting off the entire multi-paragraph section with double indents on both margins to separate from the main body.Danleywolfe (talk) 00:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing discussion for multiple paragraph quotations 

message: The History section does not enlighten us at all - nor does Quotation mark glyphs Wiki q.v. The major alternative glyph, the Guillemet (q.v. Wiki) *does* tell us about a typesetter in 1525-1598 AD and which languages use it. By comparison, where did the 66/99 marks come from; what was their inspiration - does anyone know anything about any of this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.158.30.10 (talk) 00:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: This is an issue that had been confusing me for some time... And just right now I could understand why certain English texts use a norm like that of Brazilian Portuguese (i.e. the "English" one), and some don't (originally I thought a group out of the two was misspelling it, but then I realised it had to be an amazingly widespread 'error' out of such conclusion). How many languages, if any, use comma before the last quotation mark as in the USA? 177.65.15.49 (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do other languages use "American-style" quotes? 

message: When refering brand names do we use quotes or capital letters?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxxyFuyumi (talk • contribs) 14:54, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Treat a brand name as an ordinary proper noun. —Tamfang (talk) 18:12, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Brands

message: I don't understand why Wikipedia's main article about quotation marks is written from an Anglocentric viewpoint, instead of discussing the use of quotation marks in general, in all languages. If this article is only about the use of quotation marks in English, then why isn't it titled Use of quotation marks in English? Jarble (talk) 16:05, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the English Wikipedia. What is your beef? –  – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard|— 20:48, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is the Wikipedia written in English, but it should not be the Wikipedia that ignores the existence of everything non-English. I agree that the article should either be expanded or renamed (e.g. to "Quotation marks in English"). —BarrelProof (talk) 21:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Why does this article only discuss English use of quotation marks?

message: I have removed the reference to the ABA Journal requiring the use of logical quotation (a.k.a. British style) punctuation.  While this was true in 1951, and some point in the past decades, the American Bar Association (ABA) decided that it would use the overwhelming majority quotation punctuation practices prevalent in the United States in the ABA Journal, as well as its many other publications.  As of 2013, the ABA does not maintain a separate internal style guide for its publications, but on its webpage for attorney submissions for publication, it makes a crystal clear statement that it relies on The Chicago Manual of Style "for all style, punctuation, and capitalization matters in written text as well as general rules of book making."  (Please see .)  I also provide two links to current ABA Journal articles that clearly demonstrate that the Journal is using traditional quotation punctuation in its flagship monthly publication, and not logical quotation.  (Please see  and .)  Anyone who wishes to further verify this is welcome to browse other online articles of the ABA Journal from the links provided.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:31, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Bar Association no longer uses logical quotation 

message: see Guillemet --Krauss (talk) 12:09, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  article need some Guillemet citation and explain 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Quotation marks in English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150402231935/http://www.tjhsst.edu/~rgreen/grammar/quotes.htm to http://www.tjhsst.edu/~rgreen/grammar/quotes.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Since we're getting a little traffic on this talk page, what do you two think of this? I'd have implemented it a week or so after proposing it, but by then MOS:SUPPORTS had gotten active.  Now that that's died down, what do you think? Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:03, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Commented there.  Dicklyon (talk) 04:19, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speaking of long-windedness... 

message: I have something to ask about "Typesetters' Punctuation/Quotation.": Exactly how were those particular pieces of type possibly going to break or be damaged so easily, and what were those pieces of type even made of? Also, I am pretty sure that this article may or may not explain the origin of "Typesetters' Punctuation/Quotation.". Does it? Jim856796 (talk) 04:31, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  About "Typesetters' Quotation" 

message: The article says:
If I understand correctly, that is somewhat incorrect. These are not just  the ditto mark; they are the ditto mark (in English). There is no separate character code provided for ditto marks in English. Is that correct? —BarrelProof (talk) 22:58, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ditto mark 

message: You reverted my contribution to this article with the edit summary, .
But the quotations article appears to be about the linguistic phenomena of quoting; the word "typographic" appears only once in that article, but twenty-two times in this article. And this article is hardly strictly confined to the topic of quotation marks themselves but includes all manner of related information, like what key combinations to press to insert them in different operating systems, and the fact that they need to be accompanied by backslashes / escaped when nested in some programming languages.
The whole reason I ended up tracking down this information is because I came to this specific article looking for it, first, and couldn't find it, then ended up elbow-deep in the AP Stylebook before its instruction to never use square brackets (in news articles, apparently because of some twentieth-century technological problem, which I wouldn't be surprised to find is derived from telegraph encoding standard issues or something like that originally) sent me back to Wikipedia to look at the brackets article.
I hardly reproduced any of the seven-paragraph associated subsection of the brackets article; so tl;dr can we at least include a single sentence, so that someone who comes to this article looking for the same information I did—how to denote a parenthesis (rhetoric) inside quotation marks in the most orthodox fashion—can find their way there? --‿Ꞅtruthious 𝔹andersnatch ͡ |℡| 13:21, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, I thought your addition was too much an aside from the main subject, which is the form and usage of quotation marks in the English language. I did wonder about how to include a single sentence which might point to a more pertinent article about how deviations from a quotation might be portrayed, but failed. I would consider such an addition by you as useful and helpful, if you have one and can find the article to point to (such as Bracket#Citations?). Bazza (talk) 13:43, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about the first sentence from my previous contribution?It seems like the same sort of information as the currently-included sentence,  except that it's about punctuation used in coordination with quotation marks in English-language prose, rather than in programming languages derived from English and other human languages. --‿Ꞅtruthious 𝔹andersnatch ͡ |℡| 16:27, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hello, that looks along the right track, but as it's dealt with in more detail at the target article, it could be shortened to be more general:  I've omitted the era when this started as a reference is needed; reinstate if you have one. Same applies if you're attached to your original suggestion. Bazza (talk) 17:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looks good to me.  I've put it in the same place I had originally, under §Order of punctuation, but feel free to move it if there's a better place. --‿Ꞅtruthious 𝔹andersnatch ͡ |℡| 19:36, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of square brackets within quotation marks 

message: We have a list masquerading as reference citation, which is huge and reads:
This material needs to be merged into List of style guides. It is neither a reference citation nor an appropriate non-citation footnote in this article.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:56, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crazy footnote 

message: The usage examples section Quotation_marks_in_English#Titles_of_artistic_works states "Whether these are single or double depends on the context; however, many styles, especially for poetry, prefer the use of single quotation marks." but every example presents the use of double quotes only, leaving an unhanded exception in my understanding single quote usage.
It would be useful to provide some examples from the "many styles" or, as a last resort, dare I suggest, we request some contributions from a poet? 
Also, did I miss a page level/implied reference for all this content? James Bateaux (talk) 01:13, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused by examples for "Titles of artistic works" guidelines