Template talk:Quote

Change of formatting?
I am struggling a bit with how this template looks on pages. Long quotes come out okay (e.g. Undvik), but short ones aren't quite so nice, especially when there are several short quotes. Two examples are The Witcher (TV series) and Zoltan Chivay. It looks a bit odd on mobiles too, with a grey-ish border around the name the quote is from (e.g. Zoltan or Netflix.com). It uses a table as well, which isn't ideal for this type of data (see for instance this blog post).

I know this template is used on hundreds of pages, but would it be possible to amend it in some way so it looks better, both on desktop and mobile? I don't have any clear suggestions, unfortunately, despite looking around on some other wikis, but wanted to raise it here after all. Maybe it should be italic by default? Blockquote? — Pangaearocks (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I made a couple changes, but it looked fine to me before — Game widow ( talk ) 16:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I actually liked the previous version more (transparent without the gray background), if I remember correctly, but not a big deal. — Gilrond (talk) 01:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Think I agree with that actually, though I did like the additional background. It may be a little harder to read now, due to lower contrast. Plus, the template would need to be similar as well. The Zoltan page uses one of each actually (I only noticed now because they look different, on desktop). If you decide to roll it back, I'm fine with that.
 * Maybe I'm just talking out of my armpit here, but it simply looked/felt a bit wrong or off. They take up a fair bit of space, especially on mobiles (but this change didn't apply to mobiles, it's a different .css file). There is a  after the quote. That probably works fine with two quotes next to each other, but it seems to add unneeded space at times. Though perhaps that is mainly like currently on the TV series page where the quotes happen to be directly before the TOC. Many other wikis use the same or similar template, so perhaps I'm just overthinking it. That said, the table design could probably be changed at some point. I don't know if that in itself has a negative SEO impact, but as that blog post (and countless other sites) point out, tables shouldn't really be used for layout of this type. Hardly a "must fix now" kinda issue, but if this template is indeed used on many wikis across the network, perhaps it's something to think about? — Pangaearocks (talk) 14:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)