Citation pages

The same thing (technical debt) could be said of all content which is added, not sure why this is any different. There are some GP discussion about the things which have been broken by quote templates in the recent past if you like. Re placing quotes under the definition lines, that is not a practice I approve of; I think that there should be a single good usage example for each sense and all other quotations should be in the Citations namespace.

If I want to use citation pages in the future, am I to be expected to maintain a database of all the separate formatting practices of every editor that has contributed? Or can I just download mwparserfromhell and parse everything with a single set of rules? And yes this does apply to all content, but especially here where there's so much variation between different editors' formatting preferences, and a simple solution to alleviate it. That's what I'm talking about when I say technical debt.

At this point 99% of the Citations namespace adheres to the formatting I am using, so that will get you most of the way there. The simple solution is also a poor solution, which is why I am not using it. The current format adheres to the suggested format at WT:Quotations, and assuming that most people are using that format. If you would like to propose a new layout which involves templates, I am happy to have that discussion and will abide by its outcome. I will also run the bot to update all of my previous additions should a new format be enforced. Using the current quotations templates, however, adds risk and overhead without adding any value that I can see, as I said above.