Template talk:Please do not link directly to the individual Webster 1913 abbreviations. If you encounter an article that does link to one, please edit it and replace the linked abbreviation with the corresponding text.

I don't get it. TeleComNasSprVen 10:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * For starters, see Template talk:dontlinkhere. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Right. Template:dontlinkhere included served the purpose of displaying, in the entry, the lines "Please do not link directly...", which, as you see in the 2010 discussions archived at [[template talk:dontlinkhere]], was deemed to be a problem: that text didn't belong in the entry for all to see and was only for editors. So I replaced the text with a blank template that shows the text to editors while keeping it invisible to readers. &#x200b;—msh210℠ 15:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Rfd discussion
Template:Please do not link directly to the individual Webster 1913 abbreviations. If you encounter an article that does link to one, please edit it and replace the linked abbreviation with the corresponding text.

Wow... and this template doesn't even do anything. 18:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ancient leftover. delete -- Liliana • 18:45, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Terribly named, no longer needed... kill it with fire! - -sche (discuss) 20:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha, it had a reason actually, to display invisible text. Come to think of it we can already do that using . I don't think I was in favor of it at the time but couldn't quite be bothered nominating it for deletion. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Its actual intent is OBE, though, since we no longer have templates like or . -- Liliana • 21:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Just going to Special:WhatLinksHere/OHG should be good enough, right? Mglovesfun (talk) 10:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No, Liliana, I'm pretty sure it's meant for [//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Please_do_not_link_directly_to_the_individual_Webster_1913_abbreviations._If_you_encounter_an_article_that_does_link_to_one,_please_edit_it_and_replace_the_linked_abbreviation_with_the_corresponding_text.&hidelinks=1 entries like "Shak"], which are linked to from citations, not for templates. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 22:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Jeez, people... how long does it take for someone to act on this obvious monstrosity? If you want to keep a template approach (presumably to enable tracking "What links here" and/or "Related changes"), then use something like:
 *  
 * or:
 *  
 * or just:
 *  
 * depending on how specific the template name needs to be. Any of these approaches allows the same text to appear in the page source for "new users" to see, but doesn't result in a crazily named template. I'm not sure how this notice is helpful, anyway, since I'm not even a new user and I didn't actually understand what the message was trying to tell me until I checked the template's talk page — which most people are probably not going to do. (Note, BTW, that Connel MacKenzie seems to have been the most ardent supporter of a similar template that got deleted, but he hasn't edited here regularly for years. Still, I've notified him of this discussion. Oh, and I've notified the template creator, as well. [Not to drag this out even longer, but…]) - dcljr (talk) 13:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replace [//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Please_do_not_link_directly_to_the_individual_Webster_1913_abbreviations._If_you_encounter_an_article_that_does_link_to_one,_please_edit_it_and_replace_the_linked_abbreviation_with_the_corresponding_text.&hidelinks=1 instances] with HTML comments saying the same thing (or the same thing more clearly), which is a better way of doing it, and (only then) delete the template. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 22:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Been orphaned and someone's gonna speedy it in a sec --ElisaVan (talk) 17:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)