From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

“I always have a quotation for everything -- it saves original thinking.”

~ Dorothy Sayers

This page lists the templates used for quotations. The only quote templates you should use are {{Q}}, {{Cquote}}, and {{Wilde}}.

Why use quotations?[edit]

Quotations in Uncyclopedia should be used sparingly, if at all. The overriding goal of the Introduction is to tempt the reader to dig into the remainder of the article. Any quotations should support this goal. A poorly written Introduction can make the reader stop reading the article only a few sentences in.

Authors who use initial quotations for "realism" are mistaken. Neither Wikipedia nor any other encyclopedia has articles that start with quotations (though some religious writers quote scripture at the top of an article). Most often, an encyclopedia article on XYZ introduces itself with a brief definition ("XYZ is an ABC station...") instead.

A quotation should look serious, but the substance should be funny.

Unless you have a clear comedy idea in mind, the quotation should be by a well-known person, and it should be something the person actually said, or almost something he said, or especially something he would have said until you shamelessly took him out of context.

The tone of the quote should always be consistent with the "source's" style. Some sources have specific styles. Shakespeare's archaic English or Yoda's unusual grammar are extreme examples. Most sources don't have a well-known style, but you should still make the quote something the source could have said. For example, a 19th century writer would not have used terms like "noob," "wtf," or "lulz."

What not to do[edit]

Generic quotations[edit]

Quotes should not be by "You" or "Me" or "Your mom" or "Some guy" or "Everyone". These quotes, and "apocryphal" quotes uttered by "A customer at Burger King," quickly break the encyclopedia gimmick and suggest you think you are lettering in the balloons of a comic strip rather than writing a fake encyclopedia article.

Bickering quotations[edit]

The same applies when the supposed utteror of Initial Quotation #2 "hears" what the guy said in Initial Quotation #1 and talks back to him. A series of "bickering quotations" that go back and forth is a form of comedy, but Uncyclopedia articles should begin by giving the impression that they are a Wikipedia article, not an episode of Beavis and Butthead.


How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid explains why you should avoid overusing Uncyclopedia memes such as Oscar Wilde. Any Wilde-ism quote ought to have something to do with Wilde (such as debauchery, time spent in prison, perversion, or some double entendre) and also have something to do with the article at hand.


How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid also mentions gimmicks that have been used way too many times to be funny. New authors often start articles with:

Starting your article with these unfunny devices, perhaps with the lame excuse that you have seen it done in hundreds of other Uncyclopedia articles, does not engage your reader and does not improve our encyclopedia.

Overdoing it[edit]

Quotations, like lists, can be overdone. In addition, a long list of quotations, like any list, is an open invitation to anonymous editors to add just one more. If an article begins with more than two quotations, there ought to be a good comedy reason.

Quotations as a goal in themselves are pursued in our Unquotable namespace.

Header clutter[edit]

Avoid excess templates, quotes, or other "header clutter" at the start of an article. Placing a thumbnailed image above the text is acceptable, as the text will still show at the top of the article. Placing a legitimate {{Whoops}}, or other disambiguation at the top on an article is also acceptable, but that should only be used as a navigation tool, not as a joke. The introduction sets the tone of the article, and many readers associate header clutter with poorly written articles.

Even if an article were about a famous quotation? Wikipedia:We shall fight on the beaches leads with a definition ("We shall fight on the beaches is a common title given to a speech delivered by Winston Churchill to the House of Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom on 4 June 1940...") with the actual famous quote displayed later, in context, in the section Wikipedia:We shall fight on the beaches#Peroration:

“We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender”

~ Winston Churchill

This sort of format is typical of an encyclopaedia. Having to step over a huge template box declaring "This article is British! Tally ho and pip pip!", a fake quote in which Churchill says he'd rather fancy a cigar, followed by another fake quote saying Oscar Wilde would also fancy going out for "a fag or two", followed by more random templates. followed by Google asking "Did you mean Winnie the Pooh?" before the explanation of what the article is actually about? No. An encyclopaedia, as a reference work, is a source of fast facts and a summary of a topic; quotations are of secondary importance if they appear at all.

How to do it[edit]

Inside a paragraph, use quotation marks and other standard formatting, rather than breaking paragraphs with {{Q}}. For example, one should type that William Shakespeare said, "Brevity is the soul of wit." One should not use Q and say that:

“Brevity is the soul of wit”

~ William Shakespeare

This method abruptly ends the previous paragraph, and may start the following one just as abruptly. Interrupting a paragraph with {{Q}} breaks the flow of ideas and looks less encyclopedic. There is a reason books are written in paragraph form. If you must pepper your text with quotes with {{Q}}, be sure there is a clear comedy reason to do so.


Click on the name of the template to see the documentation on how to code it.

Template Effect Comments
(Used on)


~ You on quotations

This is the quotation template to use. If there is an Uncyclopedia article on the speaker, his name is turned into a link to that article. If there is a third argument, it is the subject of the quote (but see below).
(Used on)


~ Piped link

In this template, there are two links for the speaker: one for the Uncyclopedia page, and another for how you want the link to read on the page: [[{{{2}}}|{{{3}}}]]. {{{4}}} is the subject. This template works like {{Q}}, but with less complete coding. It is only mentioned for archival purposes, and should not be used.
(Used on)
~ You
This template works like {{Q}}, but with less complete coding. It is only mentioned for archival purposes, and should not be used.
(Used on)
~ You
This template is still kicking around as well. Please use {{Q}} to make Uncyclopedia seem like one encyclopedia rather than several.
(Used on)

“This is a metasyntactic sentence, mainly because it sounds cool.”

~ Oscar Wilde on a template, not necessarily this one

This template is still in use, but everything it does can be done with {{Q}}.
(Used on)
This template is often used for lengthier quotations in the body of an article.
(Used on)

This is like {{Cquote}}, but the author can set it to take less than the entire width of the page.


Most of the templates take a final argument that let you state what the speaker is speaking about. In the first example, "You" are speaking "on quotations." You need not provide this text, and you should not unless it completes the joke or tells a second one. Especially, a page such as "Carrot" does not need each of its quotations to note that the speakers were speaking "on carrots." And you should not capitalize this argument (unless it's a proper name), as it will be put after the word "on."

Random quotes[edit]

Inserting random words into an article may amuse you, but will not amuse the reader, except maybe at random. So do not use any of the following templates:

Template Effect Comments
(Used on)

“Randomly randomize random randomness.”

~ Oscar Wilde

This template should not be used.
Insulting words
(Used on)
asexual This one neither (from the largely trimmed back madlibs page).

Discontinued templates[edit]

The "OWQ" and "OWQL" templates for generating Oscar Wilde quotations out of a central repository, and the "Bushism", "Canned", "Killquote", and "Random" templates for generating "canned humor" [sic], will not be down for breakfast.

Some templates were specific to one page or topic, much like {{expletive}} is specific to the one page complaining that Uncyclopedia equates Tourette's Syndrome with coprolalia. A random quote like "Bushism" made a bit of sense once on the one page about George W. Bush, but only there. Their overuse, or their use where they're not needed, only detracts from the encyclopaedic style.

See also[edit]