Template talk:Otherusesabout

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See also Template:Otheruses

[edit] Technical usage note

The template supports a single piped parameter, as shown here:

{{Otherusesabout|something that is not a glop}}

which would produce

[edit] Move from "OtherUses"

It is wholly problematic for there to exist two templates whose titles only differ by a single capitalization event, referring to "Otheruses" and "OtherUses". This is the reason why I've moved the template here, as well as:

• "Otheruses4" was already in use
• "Otheruses5" didn't seem to convey any information about the use of the template
• though imperfect, "Otherusesabout" does indicate in the title, in a manner of speaking, a use case.

Courtland 00:59, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

I have redirected this template to Template:Otheruses1, because the two templates were essentially identical, modulo punctuation. (I could just as easily have made the redirect the other way, but Otheruses1 is much more popular than this template, and its name fits in the sequence Otheruses2, Otheruses3, ….) —Caesura^(t) 10:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Against its wide usage

I would not encourage the usage of this template. If the reader is at a page, they can readily see the "about" themselves. I understand it might be useful in some murky topics, but to promote it indiscriminately (as I see it is being done now) is improper, IMO. It only clutters the top. mikka (t) 16:27, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree, this template should not be used. If the first sentence of the article does not convey at least as much information as is passed to this template, then it needs to be re-written. This encourages a pointless duplication of information. ed g2s • talk 11:39, 9 August 2005 (UTC)