Template talk:See also

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:See also is permanently protected from editing, as it is a heavily used or visible template.

Substantial changes should be proposed here, and made by administrators if the proposal is uncontroversial, or has been discussed and is supported by consensus. Use {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an administrator in such cases.
Any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes, categories or interwiki links.

1 Simplifications
2 See also
3 Copied successful code from {{Main}}
4 Piped links
5 What's the point?
6 Broken indentation with left-floating images
7 Documentation update
8 Punctuation issues with this template
9 Make this Edit
10 Error on template page
11 Can
12 "see also" cat
13 Template for too big see alsos?
14 Punctuation
15 Added image?
16 Edit request

[edit] Simplifications

As simlar to main, I have made a multi-purpouse template for see also, located at User:AzaToth/See also, Do you think this and sibling templates should be replaced? AzaToth ^talk 21:50, 24 November 2005 (UTC) Example:

{{User:AzaToth/See also}}
{{User:AzaToth/See also|1}}
{{User:AzaToth/See also|1|2|3}}
{{User:AzaToth/See also|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20}}

{{User:AzaToth/See also}} {{User:AzaToth/See also|1}} {{User:AzaToth/See also|1|2|3}} {{User:AzaToth/See also|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20}}commented out pending maintenance. —Phil | Talk 09:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Simlar for see

{{User:AzaToth/See}}
{{User:AzaToth/See|1}}
{{User:AzaToth/See|1|2|3}}
{{User:AzaToth/See|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20}}

{{User:AzaToth/See}} {{User:AzaToth/See|1}} {{User:AzaToth/See|1|2|3}} {{User:AzaToth/See|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20}}commented out pending maintenance. —Phil | Talk 09:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

And for main

{{User:AzaToth/Main}}
{{User:AzaToth/Main|1}}
{{User:AzaToth/Main|1|2|3}}
{{User:AzaToth/Main|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20}}

{{User:AzaToth/Main}} {{User:AzaToth/Main|1}} {{User:AzaToth/Main|1|2|3}} {{User:AzaToth/Main|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20}}commented out pending maintenance. —Phil | Talk 09:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

All this templates are using the generic template User:AzaToth/Links, so if subst, the code is not too strange.

By using {{subst:User:AzaToth/Main|1|2|3}} you get

:''Main article{{if|2|s}}: {{User:AzaToth/Links|1|2|3|{{{4|}}}|{{{5|}}}|{{{6|}}}|{{{7|}}}|{{{8|}}}|{{{9|}}}|{{{10|}}}|{{{11|}}}|{{{12|}}}|{{{13|}}}|{{{14|}}}|{{{15|}}}|{{{16|}}}|{{{17|}}}|{{{18|}}}|{{{19|}}}|{{{20|}}}}}''

if the Links code is included, you would get more code if it's substed:

:''Main article{{if|2|s}}: {{if
  |test=1
  |then=[[1]]
}}{{if
  |test=2
  |then={{if|3|, | & }}[[2]]
}}{{if
  |test=3
  |then={{if|{{{4|}}}|, | & }}[[3]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{4|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{5|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{4|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{5|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{6|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{5|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{6|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{7|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{6|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{7|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{8|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{7|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{8|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{9|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{8|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{9|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{10|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{9|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{10|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{11|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{10|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{11|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{12|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{11|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{12|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{13|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{12|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{13|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{14|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{13|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{14|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{15|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{14|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{15|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{16|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{15|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{16|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{17|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{16|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{17|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{18|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{17|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{18|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{19|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{18|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{19|}}}
  |then={{if|{{{20|}}}|, | & }}[[{{{19|}}}]]
}}{{if
  |test={{{20|}}}
  |then= & [[{{{20|}}}]]
}}''

Oops, just had an edit conflict on the template, then immediately on this talk page. We could demonstrate the usage and results of each template in the <noinclude> section as below. —Michael Z. 2005-11-24 21:59 Z

remember that main and main2 are for the moment the same, consensus are waiting for final verdic. AzaToth ^talk 22:01, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] See also

{{Main |article}} (takes up to twenty arguments)

Main article: article

{{See |article}}

Further information: article

{{See also |article}}

See also: article

[edit] Copied successful code from {{Main}}

I have copied the conditional code from {{main}} which will allow for up to 9 parameters; I have also added a test on the end which will alert a keen-eyed user who attempts to use more than that Template:;-):

{{seealso|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10}}

gives you:

See also: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10

HTH HAND Phil | Talk 17:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Piped links

What about piped links? In Template:USCongDistState, I've been using:

''See also:'' [[U.S. Congressional Delegations from Massachusetts|Past and current delegations]] | [[U.S. Congressional Delegation from Massachusetts|Current delegation]] | [[List of United States Congressional districts|List of All United States Congressional districts]]

which was just replaced with:

{{seealso|U.S. Congressional Delegations from Massachusetts|U.S. Congressional Delegation from {{{state}}}|List of United States Congressional districts}}

But that killed my piped links. Any suggestions? —Mark Adler (markles) 03:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't use templates within other templates. -- Netoholic @ 03:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

So what? How would you suggest curing the piped links? —Mark Adler (markles) 04:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, in this template, you can't use piped links. This is because it accepts one or more parameters, and parameters are separated by pipes. Template:Further solves this by accepting only one parameter, which can include multiple piped or normal wikilinks. -- Netoholic @ 04:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Something to consider… —Mark Adler (markles) 05:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The semantics of this template should be changed. It should be

I.e., the user provides the links and the commas. There are three benefits to this change. 1) It avoids the current limit of 15 articles. 2) It doesn't require {{qif}}. 3) You can do piped links however you want. Note that MediaWiki is smart enough to interpret

{{see also|[[article1|pipe1]], [[article2|pipe2]], and [[article3|pipe3]]}}

as you would hope.

There are around 1000 to 1500 articles that use Template:See_also. Presumably these could be updated with a bot. Do others think the change is a good idea? dbenbenn | talk 21:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is utterly brilliant of what is said in characteristic; I seriously endorse for this amelioration of functionality without any stint whatsoever. — ^ignis _scripta 22:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, since it is completely non-intuitive to have wikilinks in a template which don't use the standard wiki markup used in articles - the [[bracketed]] notation should be included. QmunkE 06:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Sounds like a great idea. --Rambutaan 00:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's the point?

So far as I can see, the main purpose of this is to make things difficult for new or infrequent editors. It does nothing that the simple addition of a "See also" section doesn't. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree. Also, this template is often used in sections where Template:Main article or Template:Further would be better. -- Netoholic @ 20:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

For the record, I disagree with both points; this template is intended for cross-reference from sections, where a separate See also section would be too distant. It is not equivalent to either of Netoholic's suggested alternatives, since the wording differs, which will matter to some editors. Septentrionalis 02:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

This template survived a request for deletion. The result of the discussion was Speedy Keep.

[edit] Broken indentation with left-floating images

Byzantine_Empire#Science_and_law - The "see also" template here, which has a left-floating image to the left of it, does not get indented like it does everywhere else. Is this a bug in this template, in MediaWiki, or in my browsers (Windows Firefox 1.5.0.1 and MSIE 6)? Hairy Dude 21:42, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

The template seems fine, as the leading ":" should always work. MediaWiki is generating

    <div class="boilerplate seealso">
    <dl>
    <dd><i>

just as it does everywhere else. So, I'd guess our browsers, as it works just fine with images off. However, that image has nothing to do with the section it's in, and could easily be moved up or elsewhere. And the page is much too long. Summary style should summarize!

--William Allen Simpson 12:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

For future reference, the problem was that only line boxes get compressed to avoid floats, not other types of boxes. This is a rather obnoxious aspect of CSS 2.1 with no workaround that I know of except to give up and go back to tables. The current working draft of the CSS3 box-model module defines a property to correct this omission. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 03:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Documentation update

I updated the template with the optional link-piping feature from {{main}}, but I can't figure out how to properly display an example in the documentation. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 20:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Punctuation issues with this template

See also omphalology.

The final period above is necessary.

See also: omphalology

Is it needed here? I added it in an article. It caused the link to fail! Just a red link, where formerly a blue link appeared.

This template forbidding final punctuation annoys me because many people who edit Wikipedia think no final period is needed in thing like my first example above, and this may encourage that idea. And I prefer the first format, in the interest of keeping things no more complicated than they really are. Michael Hardy 01:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's cosmetic, but I think I'd prefer the template without the colon and with the period – or at least with the possibility of adding a period – especially when multiple parameters are used ("See also Article X, Article Y[,] and Article Z.", etc). Regards, David Kernow (talk) 07:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Make this Edit

unprotect/reprotect immediate edit change requested

What and why: Remove second link (Error message) to template talk--replace with link back to the template page, where the /doc page is displayed -- the current coding defeats the WP:DPP of minimal change impacts rippling through to the database. (Merely saving this page is going to affect the database in all those pages!!!); 1) In the beginning logic, make the first error message read and link:

[[Template:See also|Usage error: Template 'see also' must be given at least one ARTICLE Name(S)!]]

2) Just make this verbatim edit replacement at the 'IF# 16 line' through to the template logics nest if-then-else chain's end:

}}{{#if:{{{16|}}}| -- '''[[Template:See also|<br>See also Usage Error#2: Too many links<br>MAXIMUM of 15 ARTICLES ALLOWED in this list<br>]]'''

3) The template call form {{/doc}} does not work on all Sister sites and I'm trying ready this for export (re: Wikipedia:WikiProject template sharing).

Hence please replace <noinclude>{{/doc}}</noinclude> also with either string: <noinclude> {{{{BASEPAGENAME}}/doc}}</noinclude> or <noinclude> {{{{PAGENAME}}/doc}}</noinclude>

Both are Magic words alternatives that will work on all sister projects while making the same edit.

Thanks... I'm suggesting other changes in the next section below, which need concensus. These two are 'no brainers'. Article space database updates should not link back to changes on talk pages! Best regards and thanks // Fra nkB 16:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Argh (clearing editprotected requests)! You've gone too technical for me. Either wait for an admin with more knowhow to make the change, or please make it explicit on my talk page (put the exact section(s) of text that you want adding, and the exact section(s) of text that it needs to replace) and I'll do it. Proto::► 19:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Ditto, I'm baffeled. Maybe create your suggested replacement with a subpage of this talk and an admin can copy it (noting you in edit summary to comply to GDFL)! --Robdurbar 09:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

So Sorry -- I tried to be clear.

Look at the beginnings of the three numbered lines given as replacements above, and then match those to the template lines currently in place within an edit window.

Note: All changes involve a link, two of which are to the Template talk page, the other to the call to the '/doc' page. The pipe trick and message changed to a somewhat different one, but the curly braces are still the same... [[ A | B]] just becomes [[ C | D]] in the template proper. The Magic word 'PAGENAME' needs to precede '/doc' inside the WP:DPP fenced off call to the documentation.

Replace said lines with the parts I have in BOLD above. If you can't match them, unprotect it for a few minutes and drop me a note and we can do that instead. (Can't blame you for the confusion--this many curly braces and pipes would give anyone pause). Regards // FrankB 16:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Error on template page

As of this edit, the template page reads: See also: Error: Template must be given at least one article name. I thought templates were supposed to read something like See also: {{{1}}}. —Frungi 10:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Template pages usually read like that. Subfields (or whatever they're called), like {{{1}}} here, aren't automatically provided, so the no-subfield error message is triggered. --zenohockey 22:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Can

Can we change this template so it can have infinite arguments?100110100 07:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "see also" cat

Category:See also templates ∞Σɛ_Þ² ^(τ|c) 09:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. Note that you could have made this change yourself by editing {{see also/doc}}. --ais523 09:08, 28 June 2007 (U T C)

[edit] Template for too big see alsos?

Do we have a template to indicate that a given see also section is too long (per MoS)?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 16:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Punctuation

Shouldn't there be a full stop at the end? --RFBailey (talk) 02:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Why was a full stop added? I don't think there should be one, because it is not a complete sentence. {{main}} does not have a full stop at the end, and I think that is the correct way to do it. Gary King (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Undone. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Cheers. Gary King (talk) 21:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Added image?

See also: Bananas on Ice

Does anyone else think that adding an arrow like this might be a good idea? I notice that the See also: blends into the text and I think adding a small arrow like this one would be beneficial. Note that I just found that black redirect arrow on Wikimedia Commons, and I would gladly make a better one... perhaps one with a nice muted blue colour, and a little bit thicker. That black arrow is just there to get my idea across. Good idea? Necessary? -- Tkgd2007 (talk) 21:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Definitely not a good idea. Also, if this was added, you'd also have to bring it up for {{main}}, {{further}}, etc. because in my opinion, they should all be standardized to look the same in the case where you have a combination of them, then they don't stand out too much. Which brings me back to this; we want these links to not stand out that much; the italics works well, and should be enough to bring attention to them when they are needed. These templates already make noise by being placed immediately after section titles, so that should be sufficient. Gary King (talk) 07:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit request

{{editprotected}}
Please apply this patch. 16@r (talk) 10:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Done – Nihiltres^{t.l} 14:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC)