Talk:tåre

Headings on the proper level
If level 2 headings are for languages only, then some other solution is required for general "see also" sections so that they don't appear as subsections of a specific language, let alone even subsections of the "references" section of that language. That's imperative, which should be adequately illustrated by this case. The word "tår" simply doesn't belong to nynorsk only; in particular it's no reference; but as the headings stand here, that's the only reasonable interpretation.83.253.1.17 13:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Look, if the word tår is related to the word tåre in all three languages, you need to add three related terms sections, one for each language. The way you want to do it, with a level 2 related terms section is a bad idea for several reasons:
 * people who want to see the related terms of the Danish word will have to scroll through a bunch of different language sections.
 * there is no guarantee that, for example, another Danish word that is related to tår exists in Norwegian.
 * there is no guarantee that, if another language section is added, tår exists in that language.
 * In a nutshell: language sections are independent units. — Ungoliant (falai) 13:46, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


 * 1. Or you can use the table of contents. (For that matter, it's still a "see also", no reference.)
 * 2. Excuse me, but I am not certain what you mean. The case here is that the words exist. If they hadn't, either the "see also" would have had to be included in each of the pertinent sections, or the reader would have had to read the texts to find out which language(s) the word belongs to. What do you say about the place where I put the word now?
 * 3. That's a point I can sympathise with. But if you want to learn the etymology, your must read those sections anyway. Also, the same is true of homonyms within one language. So if something should be independent units, it's each language section for each etymon. But an article can also be rewritten in a more complicated way if and when the need arises. I suspect many editors will forget that; but they can also forget to put a "see also" in all the places where it belongs. 83.253.1.17 19:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * is for words that differ in minor orthographical elements, such as diacritics or capitalisation. There isn’t a policy but it’s generally not accepted to link to words that differ in having more letters or different letters.
 * I’m not sure I’m understanding you correctly, but, to make it clear: the related terms section is for related terms in the same language. If each of the three languages has a term tår that is related to tåre, then each language section needs to have a related terms section linking to tår. Same thing with the see also sections: they must be subsections of the language sections. — Ungoliant (falai) 19:35, 12 March 2015 (UTC)