Template talk:See also

message: I have copied the conditional code from  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 ;-):
 
gives you:
 
HTH HAND Phil | Talk 17:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied successful code from &#x7B;&#x7B;Main}} 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  What's the point? 

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

message: :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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Punctuation issues with this template

message: ;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:
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:| -- See also Usage Error#2: Too many linksMAXIMUM of 15 ARTICLES ALLOWED in this list 
:3) The template call form  does not work on all Sister sites and I'm trying ready this for export (re: Wikipedia:WikiProject template sharing).Hence please replace   also with either string:   or   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 // FrankB 16:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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...  B just becomes  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)
thread_title: Make this Edit

message: 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: . —Frungi 10:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Template pages usually read like that.  Subfields (or whatever they're called), like  here, aren't automatically provided, so the no-subfield error message is triggered.  --zenohockey 22:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error on template page 

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

message: :Category:See also templates ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 09:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Note that you could have made this change yourself by editing . --ais523 09:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "see also" cat 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Template for too big see alsos? 

message: Shouldn't there be a full stop at the end?  --RFBailey (talk) 02:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why was a full stop added? I don't think there should be one, because it is not a complete sentence.  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)
replies: text: Undone. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 21:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, thanks! Cheers. Gary King (talk) 21:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punctuation 

message: :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)
replies: text: Definitely not a good idea. Also, if this was added, you'd also have to bring it up for , , 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)
thread_title:  Added image? 

message: 
Please apply . 16@r (talk) 10:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Y Done – Nihiltres{t.l} 14:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

text: PeterSymonds (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: ;purpose  and need:
* Expand so user can specify alternative wording (such as the  and  template's language:
Simply Make:
    See also: {{#if: →
into:
→    See also: {{#if: 
Drop me a note when completed, and I'll handle the usage fix up. 
Thanks, FrankB 15:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: PeterSymonds (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: another 080619

message: What's the preferred way to refer to a section?
Or something else entirely? I don't really like the first since it leaks HTML syntax to the reader. The second one is compact, whereas the third one is more explicit. What do you think? Shinobu (talk) 10:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a similar request a few sections below (note, it's been almost a year...)  //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 18:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to refer to sections 

message: On templates that use this, such as Template:Olympics bids, the see also is preceded by an unnecessary colon. This can be corrected if the following is placed into the template

The effect: as it is now the diff the changed version
This should replace the colon between <includeonly> and  (at the beginning of the template). Thanks, ~ AmeIiorate U T C @ 06:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: This will not work: it will correctly remove the colon on the template page itself, but wherever the template is transcluded, the  template will detect the local namespace and output the colon.  Although this issue does need to be solved, it can't be solved this way. Happy‑melon 13:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit protected 

message: :cy:Nodyn:Gweler hefyd. -- Xxglennxx ★talkcontributions★ 23:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add cy 

message: This message is to inform people monitoring this talk page that there is an "editprotected" request involving this and several other templates at Template talk:! cymru.lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 20:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editprotected request involving this template 

message: This template shouldproduce a period at the and of the sentence (any sentence). So:
}}]]
should be like
}}]].
By the way, parameter 15 does not work out well. Which is quite relevant, since it is protected this tough. 
(now really, a <500 times used template is admin-only protected?)
-DePiep (talk) 01:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The template does not produce a compete sentence, so a period would not be appropriate. —Farix (t | c) 19:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Being a hatnote, it should produce a sentence, so end with a period -DePiep (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Added, then removed in 2008. I'd like to see more support.--SPhilbrickT 00:31, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's quite heavily used — like you, I clicked WhatLinksHere for the template talk page and found fewer than 500 links.  However, this tool shows the template as having 73,436 transclusions.  Its code doesn't really produce a sentence, so a period wouldn't be appropriate here.  Nyttend (talk) 03:08, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  editprotect 

message: ;Request:
Replace all  code with all  code this version)
;What has changed
See Template:See also/testcases, pre-change
# I added the point to make it a complete sentence (in accordance with WP:Hatnote#format, and congruent with almost all other hatnote templates).
# Paramter #15, when used, gave wrong output; pipes added
# Removed second pipe in #14.
-DePiep (talk) 12:11, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done -- DQ (t)   (e) 13:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Where does it say that a period must end the hat note?  This hat note is a sentence fragment, not like some others which will make a sentence.  Other templates also are sentence fragments and do not use period for this reason.  This is just punctuation, which WP:MOS probably agrees.  I suggest removing the period, but I will let other editors opine.Curb Chain (talk) 08:56, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:Hatnote#format. As noted in the edit request. And it is a complete sentence. -DePiep (talk) 16:29, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editprotect 

message: , ,  and other similar templates do not have dots. There is no reason for this one (and ) to have one either. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 23:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I Object. Wikipedia:HATNOTE#Format says: A hatnote, being a sentence, ends with a period. I nullify the editrequest. -DePiep (talk) 23:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:HATNOTE can say the Queen of England is named Willi Wonka, but it doesn't make it so. This hatnote is not a complete sentence, so should not take a dot. And it should especially not be inconstant with the other hatnotes like , , , etc... Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Controversial, so no change. -DePiep (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: By that logic, the change should never have been made in the first place, so should be reverted. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

text: <SPAN STYLE="display:none">Y</SPAN> Done  older ≠ wiser 03:08, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:40, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, how is it not a sentence? -DePiep (talk) 10:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

text: It is not a complete sentence. If you don't believe me, ask the mavens at WT:MOS. older ≠ wiser 12:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove dot 

message: I've created a Lua version of this template at Module:See also. It is mostly the same as this template, but has the benefits that an unlimited number of links are allowed, category and file links are automatically escaped with the colon trick, and links to sections are formatted as page § section, rather than the MediaWiki default of page#section. You can see some test cases at Template:See also/testcases. Would anyone object to me making the change? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 16:58, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: See also related discussions at Template:Hatnote, Template:Details, Template:Further and Template:Main. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 17:09, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: WOW this is really causing some readability  problems on virtually  every page. Do we need the merger/deletion notice transcribed  multiple times on 4,499,655 articles? -- Moxy (talk) 18:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope - I've noincluded it. (And that was Steel1943, not I.) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 18:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversion to Lua 

message: (Pinging Andy W. and SMcCandlish given Oxford comma discussion above)
I drafted a version of Module:See also at Module:See also/sandbox that applies the now-standard Module:Hatnote list to this template's implementation. Then, for some reason I don't remember, I stopped and left it alone for a month. I don't see any obvious problems with the version there, but would people mind taking a quick look just in case something's slipped my mind? Thanks,  15:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Nihiltres, thanks, no issues with the code. Something on the side though: I think Module:Hatnote list (or Module:Hatnote?) should be aware of Module:Section link to be consistent with the standard way of making these links. Currently it's hard-coded at line 164. Recently, it was determined that "§" should be non-breaking on the right (i.e.  for now), but that might change in the near future, since there's discussion of using narrower exotic spaces. If I personally have time to investigate, I can help out here and let you know if I do. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 17:07, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  That behaviour's in Module:Hatnote, and Module:Hatnote list just pulls the function from it as needed. I'll take a look into that myself after updating Module:See also; tweaking the code to match or require() the section-link module seems trivial. Thanks for checking over the sandbox.  20:14, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using Module:Hatnote_list 

message: In an effort to standardize the features of various hatnote templates, I designed Module:Labelled list hatnote a while back, which implements any hatnote template that produces a list of pages prefixed with a colon-terminated label. Its primary advantage over Module:See also and family is that it implements a consistent feature set with regards to side features like labelling (e.g. using |l1=Label to change the display of the first page listed), letting us centralize code that's effectively duplicated right now across hatnote templates that generally behave the same. I've had a working version of this template sitting around in Template:See also/sandbox for a while now, and you can see at Template:See also/testcases that it produces the same output as the current template/module. I plan to also update similar hatnote templates in the same way.
Are there any objections to my implementing this change?  16:30, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Migrating to Module:Labelled list hatnote 

message: Why do we bother if the article in the  is linked n the text of the section? I see this usage time and again. - Sitush (talk) 11:15, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thank you. That is my opinion also. I'll hang on to see what others think. - Sitush (talk) 01:55, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification, please 

message: This is really only an issue when only 2 pages are specified.  To illustrate the issue, compare:
:
:
which render as:
:*
:*
to:
:
:
which render as:
:*
:*
There shouldn't be a comma after "See also § Section 1" when a section is specified in the first parameter and only two pages are linked.
Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 20:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, so this goes down to Module:Hatnote list, which says that   wrote the module..unsure why that's there Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:27, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The intention is to provide clarity on where the section title ends, especially as section titles can themselves contain conjunctions. While in practice you can usually tell precisely which part belongs to which by the styling of the link, the design is that you should be able to tell reasonably well where it ends using only the plain text. A comma helps do that; if a comma is present in the link then the code will use a semicolon as a fallback separator. Still, if people really want the behaviour removed, it should be established for all hatnote lists, since it's present in the shared functionality via Module:Hatnote list. Aside from that, if a consensus finds that the behaviour ought to be changed, I'd be happy to implement the change myself.  03:51, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A stray comma is generated by this template when a section link is used in the first parameter and only 2 parameters are used 

message: The results of this template should end with a period, as I see it:
::See also Treatment of slaves in the United States.
and not the fragment
::See also Treatment of slaves in the United States
Note that the template 
::Not to be confused with Prohibition in the United States.
does produce a sentence with a period.
deisenbe (talk) 16:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , the see also template does not produce a complete grammatical sentence and as a sentence fragment, it should not have terminal punctuation. Whether the  template does or does not produce a complete sentence is a matter for that template's talk page. older ≠ wiser 16:19, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add a period 

message: When two articles are provided, the template produces a comma in front of the "and" as though there were more than two articles. See Proto-Semitic language#Phonology, for example. The comma should be omitted in that case. Largoplazo (talk) 00:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: From Paine Ellsworth's edit to the above template, I was led to the discussion where I learned that this is at a higher level and the current state of affairs, when the first item is a section link, is intentional. I can't say I agree with it but it is evidently not a bug, so never mind. Marking this answered. Largoplazo (talk) 11:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 4 February 2024