This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. The result of the debate was: It remains acceptable to use italics or bold for emphasis in an article.—Xwing328(Talk) 22:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I have seen several times that italics and bold were used for emphasis. I wonder if it is necessary. Emphasis can be made clear simply by using the right word or phrasing. I remember removing some italicizations because of this, and I am almost 100% sure that there is no official consensus on this question. Here is an initiative.
There are some times when no matter how you phrase it, a sentence could be ambiguous to somebody. (Look at that- you know my emphasis in that sentence is on "somebody" rather than "ambiguous". Not absolutely necessary to convey my exact meaning to everyone, but it's the way I would have spoken the sentence, so I typed it to get my exact emphasis across). If it's really not needed or you can find a better way to phrase it, then by all means be bold and change it in an article, but I see no reason for an extra and useless rule. Use italics or bold for emphasis if they are so needed. Wildyoda 00:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Good god in heaven, no. Coop 01:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with WildYoda on this one.RushinSundaws 01:27, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Can be necessary. But italics are far better than bold. Havac 01:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Should be used sparingly in articles, but I see no point in a ban. It's just common sense. And they're really useful in discussions... Evir Daal 08:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Italics are often used in even the most formal writing for purposes of emphasis; bold less so, but it's still not uncommon. I see no reason to forbid a perfectly legitimate and useful stylistic tool from our articles. jSarek 08:42, 30 May 2007 (UTC)