Template talk:Self-reference

message: This template should be placed around any text in the main article namespace which is a self-reference (see Wikipedia:Avoid self-references).
Why, you are asking, is such a trivial thing in a template? It is here to deal properly with self-references. In support of forks and mirrors, articles should never refer into category space, wikipedia space, or talk space. 
However, occasionally there is a good reason to provide a "see also" link into such spaces. Currently the policy is that self-references are only allowed using a template. By using this template, you can include such a link in a way that allows a particular fork or mirror that doesn't copy these spaces to easily suppress that link. Mirrors and forks can choose to blank the template and suppress these references, or they can do a little bit of work and turn them into external references to Wikipedia. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:19, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC) (edited for clarity by Creidieki 18:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this template is useful occasionally. However, potential users should be warned that just because a self-reference is placed in a template is not a license to include all the self-references you desire. They still create problems for paper versions of Wikipedia and are often not encyclopedic or professional. Use discretion. Deco 07:26, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Instructions for use

message: Attention all, replace the selfref tagged (Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Selfref) articles as external links or as external links in the external links section. -- Zondor 20:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: I can understand :Category:Wikipedia maintenance, but what is the purpose of having a  and a See also section hidden within the template?—jiy (talk) 02:04, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: for easier navigation and thus a better wikipedia infrastructure -- Zondor 09:19, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also?? 

message: I made a change that adds a little mark to indicate it is a self reference and appears like this:
This is a self reference ‹sr›
Perhaps, its an eyesore but the point was to indicate this is a self-reference other than using pastel shaded information boxes. And as you know, self-references are not professional.
-- Zondor 09:19, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: this is a self reference
-- Zondor 18:35, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Both have subsquently ceased to exist.  --Wcquidditch | Talk 17:22, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  avoid self references mark 

message: </noinclude>
{{#switch:NONE
is causeing extra space on articles.  Please change to
</noinclude>{{#switch:NONE
or

</noinclude>{{#switch:NONE
or

</noinclude>{{#switch:NONE
.  Thank you.96.53.149.117 (talk) 02:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ruslik (talk) 14:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Protected 

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: Nested templates (similar to those used in ) of the same general location- & format-type can be made to work to some degree with Selfref, according to a few casual tests I ran at As of. However, I think the documentation should warn against it due to the resulting formatting errors:
*Minor and subtile, and therefore more likely to be missed: Nesting another indented template inside the indented Selfref template indents the resulting line of text twice as far as is standard: 
:
:
*Major: Text within Selfref but before (outside) of the nested template will cause a line break, with the resulting text from the nested template indented twice as far:
:
:
Should we put a warning in or leave it out? 
Also, what is the correct WP term for "a template that creates an indented, italicized line used at the top of an article or section"? Is that a hatnote template, or does the term "hatnote" include "message boxes used at the top of an article or section"? Hm. Maybe this distinction doesn't matter here, since something like  would be obviously ugly instead of subtly. Plus, if we caution against nesting any template, that would cover it. Still, I'm curious how robust our distinctions are, for the sake of clarity elsewhere. 
Sorry all I can do is point this out, but my real-life limitations are getting in the way of doing this myself right now and I might not make it back here. Thanks in advance if you can discuss or work on this! — Geekdiva (talk) 22:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we warn against nested templates?  

message: I think users should be free from the unnamed parameter space handling.  It doesn't trim.
I think we should trim space from any given input, so that the spacing output is determined naturally, by the spacing the template is given in the wikitext. — CpiralCpiral 00:33, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trim input 

message: Add the  tags. I have saved the suggestion in the sandbox.
 ADTC Talk Ctrb  10:06, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The version in the sandbox you started from did not match the live template. There's a whole lot more there than just your request. Could you refresh the sandbox and have another go please? I'd do more but am not currently at my PC. Bazj (talk) 10:23, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 10 April 2016 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Self-reference which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 09:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress