Template talk:also

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

There seems to be one problem with the new smart code: 2-item lists have a different CSS class since the serial comma is forced into use as non-optional comma in this case. — Hippietrail 01:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

There's another problem - no space between the second term and the "and" - e.g.:
{ {see|fish|Fish|FISH}}
which should read
See also fish, Fish and FISH.
--BD2412 T 01:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I added the missing space. How does it look to you now? Rod (A. Smith) 02:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
As Curly would say, "Poifect!" BD2412 T 03:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
The issue of A, B, and C or A, B and C is one of style as well. As I understand it, the latter is used in UK grammar strictly and the former is used in many US university grammar codes. Some AU university grammar codes are currently switching to the former in break with UK tradition because of its use in logically simplifying complex lists and clarity to ESOL students. For example, consider how messy lists of multi-word terms inclusive of "and" get. The same basically applies to all several-termed lists including the disjunctive "or" case. Thecurran 09:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Indent?[edit]

What happened to the ":" before "See also"? --Connel MacKenzie T C 04:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

That's a style issue. Some were using it, some weren't - a fact which helped me decide to CSSize the thing. It should be covered in WT:CUSTOM but if it's not I'll look for the place where I did post how to adjust the indent. As for making it default, that would be a Beer parlour topic. It seemed when I did the CSS work that unindented was more popular plus I personally found indented really ugly. Obviously it should reflect whatever most people like as its default. — Hippietrail 20:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes it is in WT:CUSTOM:
.disambig-see-also, .disambig-see-also-2 { text-indent: 2em }
Hippietrail 20:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Guidelines?[edit]

What are the guidelines for which words to refer to? E.g., I just added continu to continue. Or do we not want words that differ in letters only, but use the template only for capitalization and diacritics? henne 12:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Continu might be a language-dependent see-also, placed under the language header, but would probably be better placed in the ===See also=== section, as well as being listed as a homophone if it is one. It doesn't belong at the top of the page. DAVilla 18:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Uncontroversial
  1. capitalization
  2. differing accents
  3. spaces, hyphens, apostrophes, dots
Controversial
  1. in the same language differing only by double letters
I've begun work on a MediaWiki extension to automate this. I have identified thousands of articles which should have it, very many of which don't. — Hippietrail 02:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

(diff)[edit]

Where is this coming from? It is obnoxious ... ;-) Robert Ullmann 18:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It's part of Connel's extra options. Sadly he is breaking some user interface design rules by turning certain options on by default when you turn on the master switch. You will have to opt out or convince him to change how it works: User:Connel MacKenzie/PreferencesHippietrail 22:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

TB[edit]

There are two entries named "TB" in Wiktionary: One is in Latin text and the other is in Cyrillic. I want to link the entry for ТВ in Cyrillic text to the entry for TB in Latin text with the {{also}} template and indicate that it is Cyrillic text. That is to say, I want it to read:

See also ТВ (Cyrillic text)

That time, I didn't use the template. That's the way it is now. If I try {{also|ТВ}} (Cyrillic text), the result is:

See also: ТВ

(Cyrillic text)

And if I use {{also|[[ТВ|ТВ (Cyrillic text)]]}}, the result is:

Is there a way to solve this using the template? Internoob 00:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

{{xalso|[[ТВ|ТВ (Cyrillic text)]]}} works, but I recommend {{also|ТВ}} instead.—msh210 18:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

If it truly were Cyrillic, there would be no conflict: it is written ТВ, not TB. Urhixidur 15:26, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

link to talk page[edit]

why does the "See the talk page for more information" link to Template_talk:see instead of this talk page? --Androl 10:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for pointing it out.​—msh210 18:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Serial and[edit]

I propose that we remove the <span class="serial-and"> from around the "and" in output of this template. When a list is on its own, independent of sentences or phrases, then it makes some sense having the option to display the final "and" or not via CSS (this span is also used in {{f}} and its ilk). Back in the day, this template used display as "See also: ..." but now it displays as "See also ...". In the older style, the colon sets the list off as independent, but the current style seems definitely like a normal phrase (maybe not a whole sentence since we omit a final period). So I think we should simplify this template (and {{xsee}}) and always show the "and". Will that any problems or grumbling? --Bequw¢τ 16:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sister project links[edit]

I have used {{xsee}} to put in a sister project to WP like at Tongan. I was wondering if we could modify this or {{xsee}} to:

  1. more clearly distinguish en.wikt links from links to other sister projects (prefixes, logos, other means)
  2. reduce typing for some common cases.

This would allow us to eliminate the most valid use of {{wikipedia}}: the provision of a link to a WP disambiguation page where a user could find various proper nouns that we may not have either by policy or because we haven't gotten around to it.

"xsee" has the more general capabilities, but "also" seems more compact. Would the specific scope of this request allowed common cases to be handled by a smaller template? If so, that would be nice. DCDuring TALK 14:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

But wikipedia links should always be inside a language section since you are linking to a specific language site (en., fr.). Links shown by {{also}} and {{xsee}} are generally outside language sections since both source and target pages can be multilingual (e.g. a linking to á). Why don't you just use a {{pedialite}} link inside the proper L2? --Bequw¢τ 05:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Because a WP link to a disambiguation page is similar in nature to the see also from a monolingual-English-user PoV. WP especially is likely to have many Proper noun senses that we do not have. Because see also appears even after the translation section, it is not likely to be noticed by users who are not like us, ie, not highly familiar with our layout. I doubt that many normal users will be any more confused by mixing WP with possibly non-English "also" links than they are by the non-English "also" links as they are now. Many {{wikipedia}} are placed above the first language line as well. It is an extravagantly wasteful use of prime landing-screen real estate to have two "also" lines, one above, say, the English line and one below. DCDuring TALK 05:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree is that the wiki links are very useful. We already help mono-English users a bit by putting the English section first. A {{wikipedia}} link just under the ==English== (or appropriate POS) would seem to prominently display a Wikipedia link and be on the RHS so as not to take up another whole line of prime screen real-estate. If those boxes too big we could try and make a slimmer version. BTW, it's also incorrect to place these above the first language section (see Template_talk:wikipedia#Placement). It causes problems with RHS TOCs and I fix them whenever I can. Keeping language-specific links inside the language headers is not just about avoiding some confusion, it's also about scalability. If you allow an English-specific Wikipedia link above the language sections, why not other language (or project) links? On the top of a I don't think we'd want:
See also: Wikipedia-logo.png a on Wikipedia.en.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Aragonese Wikipedia.an.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia.sh.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Catalan Wikipedia.ca.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Croatian Wikipedia.hr.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Czech Wikipedia.cs.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Danish Wikipedia.da.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Dutch Wikipedia.nl.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the French Wikipedia.fr.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Galician Wikipedia.gl.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Hungarian Wikipedia.hu.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Ido Wikipedia.io.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Interlingua Wikipedia.ia.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Irish Wikipedia.ga.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Italian Wikipedia.it.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Japanese Wikipedia.ja.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Latin Wikipedia.la.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Chinese Wikipedia.zh.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Polish Wikipedia.pl.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Portuguese Wikipedia.pt.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Romanian Wikipedia.ro.Wikipedia:a, Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Slovene Wikipedia.sl.Wikipedia:a, and Wikipedia-logo.png a on the Spanish Wikipedia.es.Wikipedia:a
--Bequw¢τ 16:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I would argue that only links to English-language (and possibly translingual, basic Roman alphabet) sister projects merit out-of-en-wikt links from en.wikt, except from each languages own section. I am unabashedly in favor of discrimination in favor of English language everything on en.wikt and expect (and get) analogous favoritism of other languages on projects in those languages. The places where language fairness breaks down the most are at WM itself where English has an "unfair" advantage and on the tech side where people seem to speak (or write) Geeko-English (ISO code gen?). (That doesn't mean I would favor imposing English grammatical categories, etc. Generally all manner of accommodation within technical limits and the spirit of WMF seems desirable.) But I digress. This is yet another area where the fantasy of some kind of logical entry structure conflicts with the logic of trying to serve users. I hope we can work it out. DCDuring TALK 16:46, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I feel we can avoid the whole argument completely, because it appears to me that a {{wikipedia}} link inside the top language section accomplishes everything you want, and is still consistent with our entry structure? There's no need for either side to comprise on this issue. Besides even just restricting to English, there's a lot of sister projects, and I don't want them all to be able to be above the language headers. --Bequw¢τ 21:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
The sole purpose of exploring this possibility is that many consider the sister project boxes too big and ugly. I consider them a waste of space better used for the rhs ToC. DCDuring TALK 00:05, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
OK, how about a RHS version of {{pedialite}} (with some {{wikipedia}} boxes for comparison)?
Wikipedia has an article on:

Wikipedia

Wikipedia-logo.png
 Also on Wikipedia

Wikipedia

Spanish Wikipedia has an article on:

Wikipedia es

Wikipedia-logo.png
 Also on Spanish Wikipedia

Wikipedia es

Does that fit the bill? --Bequw¢τ 02:47, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I dislike the variable box size. Some pages will have several, and they may be visible simultaneously. --EncycloPetey 02:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Put in a fixed width. --Bequw¢τ 13:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Why would we need to have multiple sister project links at the top of any entry? I think most of them ought to be in see also sections or at the top of the applicable language section.
Thanks. That is quite satisfactory for most cases where a WP dab link is needed. If I had my druthers, that would be the mandatory replacement for {{wikipedia}} whenever it was ahead of the first language section. (Would a positional-conditional redirect be posssible? desirable?)
But, what got this started was a complaint by Internoob at WT:GP#issues with multiple right-floating things on a short entry. This does not address what I thought the problem was except insofar as it has less height than the WP box, worth about 1/4". Combining with {{also}} or actually {{xsee}} gives an extra 1/4-3/8".
BTW, there are some other templates like rfp or rfap and top that don't play well with rhs objects. {{top}} and top2, top3, top4 etc can (?) and should (???) all be replaced by rel-top (or der-top) and its relatives (which seem well-behaved, but any request templates should not cause spacing problems. Is it hard to change these? DCDuring TALK 03:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Missing reciprocal links[edit]

It would be nice to have a way of easily detecting instances where this template is used on one page to link to another, but the other doesn't use the template to link back to the first. While there probably are cases where it's best not to have links going both ways, most cases will probably call for it. So, how can such missing reciprocal links be detected? - dcljr 19:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Such natural lists[edit]

You could keep hugging your obscure code there, or you could shout up to get someone to implement this. I even went at lengths to tease you. *rins* --Svippong 23:48, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Fortunately, it is now in the review queue. --Svippong 14:08, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Documentation[edit]

Can someone swap {{seeTalk}} for {{documentation}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:32, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Done.​—msh210 18:42, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Implement self-hiding[edit]

This template should do like the French wiktionary's equivalent (fr:Modèle:voir) and hide an eventual self-reference. This simplifies considerably pasting a single also template block in its multiple pages... Urhixidur 15:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Page contents should be correct regardless of CSS styling. That's the W3C recommendation and it keeps things from looking bad for non-standard displays. We do not want to encourage incorrect links in page contents. What could be done is to program a bot to remove self-references. This bot could maybe also make links symmetrical when appropriate. --Bequw τ 18:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
The French template uses not CSS but {{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}|{{{1}}}|... to hide self-references. Do we necessarily link A to B where we link B to A?​—msh210 (talk) 18:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
The self-hiding feature is ready at User:Internoob/Sandbox if you want to implement it. It made the template a lot more complicated and harder to understand, so if that's a problem, then you may not want it. —Internoob (DiscCont) 18:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I put it in. Feel free to revert if it's not worth it or if I did it weird. —Internoob (DiscCont) 03:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
This is why you people should be pushing for enabling mw:Extension:NaturalLanguageList, as this feature would be implemented as {{#list: ... | ignore={{PAGENAME}} }}. --Svippong 14:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Documentation, or Prevarication?[edit]

The documentation says you can have up to 20 items. I see capability for only 13. Should we change the template, or the documentation? Chuck Entz (talk) 00:13, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I have now created [[Module:Template:also]]. I believe it supports all of this template's logic, without being limited to a specific number of arguments. I propose that we replace the contents of this template with {{#invoke:Template:also|main}}. —RuakhTALK 08:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. —RuakhTALK 06:25, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough, though if there are going to be more than about ten items, it's probably time to start an "Appendix:Variations of ..." page and link to that instead. —Angr 13:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)