Template talk:Wikisaurus-link

=Documentation=
 * This template has been deleted. This talk page is being kept for historical interest.

Usage
Including this template on a page will add the Wikisaurus box (seen here) to the right.


 * 1)    - defaults to the page name in Wikisaurus
 * 2)    - uses parameter passed in as the Wikisaurus target (that is, the article title).

Deletion
The state of the request of deletion: RFDO
 * Requested on 10 October 2007.
 * Pro deletion: By its appearance, this template implies that Wikisaurus is a stand-alone project, independent on Wiktionary, which it isn't. The template's appearance and placement in Wiktionary articles is thus either misleading or plainly wrong.
 * Kept so far, with the last comment: Keep until the current Wikisaurus effort makes some determination about the utility of the template. DCDuring TALK 22:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

New status as of January 2010:
 * Voted to be deleted: Votes/pl-2010-01/Removing Wikisaurus-link template. --Dan Polansky 07:58, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Apperance
The appearance of the template:  Find this word in Wikisaurus Wikisaurus:

=Discussion= This page is being renamed/moved back to Template:Wikisaurus-link, as there is confusion between the two templates named Template:WikiSaurus and Template:wikisaurus--Richardb 13:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why are there two templates? and could you elucidate about the confusion? I seem to be confused too. Amina (sack36) 22:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion debate
I am renominating this template for deletion. The template has already survived one RFDO: RFDO.

Justification: The template looks like a link to a sister project such as Wikisource or Commons, but Wikisaurus is not a sister project; Wikisaurus is a part of Wiktionary. I think it better to link to Wikisaurus from "Synonyms" sections using "See also Wikisaurus:entry", where people naturally come to look for synonyms.

The template is still used in less than 100 entries, so if the nomination for deletion is accepted, these entries have to be updated.

When the template is deleted, its talk page should be left undeleted to document how the template looked in the past. --Dan Polansky 11:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve, why not just get rid of the box and come up with something simpler. Something like:
 * * see Wikisaurus
 * Mglovesfun (talk) 15:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that a template is needed for such a simple think as "* See also Wikisaurus:" . A sidenote: I prefer "see also" to "see", as the synonym sections should not be replaced with a hyperlink to Wikisaurus; they should still host lists of synonyms whenever someone cares to add them.
 * Most hyperlinks to Wikisaurus from the mainspace are done without the template, and it works just fine.
 * If a template would be preferred, it should be called "seeWikisaurus" modeled on "seeCites", and it should contain no bullet. --Dan Polansky 12:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that could be useful though, it could have as a default. If widely used, it would save enough work to merit existing as a templates. I'd prefer just to overhaul it rather than delete it. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've (perhaps unwisely) updated per discussion, and renamed. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * (unindenting) The default is pointless, as in all but a fraction of the pages that invoke the template, the invocation cannot rely on the default: "Wikisaurus:cat" is invoked not only in "cat" but also in all the synonyms of "cat".
 * The template does not save any work:
 * Without the template:
 * With the template:
 * With the template and the original name:
 * When I have entered the "See also ..." into the mainspace for a Wikisaurus entry, I mostly did it by copying and pasting for a complete Wikisaurus synonym set, so the number of characters to be typed played no role.
 * --Dan Polansky 13:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * When I have entered the "See also ..." into the mainspace for a Wikisaurus entry, I mostly did it by copying and pasting for a complete Wikisaurus synonym set, so the number of characters to be typed played no role.
 * --Dan Polansky 13:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * --Dan Polansky 13:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The appearance of the template before Mglovesfun has modified it:

 Find this word in Wikisaurus Wikisaurus:


 * --Dan Polansky 13:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * A third opinion is needed! Mglovesfun (talk) 14:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Input from more people is needed, right, but you should reconsider whether you still think after what I have written that the template (a) can be meaningfully equipped with a default parameter, and (b) actually saves work. I think that I have refuted both points. I am surprised that you defend the template in the name of saving work after you have send, , etc. for deletion; counted by mere keystrokes, the pseudo-context templates that you have sent for deletion had greater work-saving effect. --Dan Polansky 14:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * delete, the link to wikisaurus should be in the synonyms section exclusively, this discourages that; also it would be nice to provide some simple synonyms in entry next to the link to wikisaurus, this makes that impossible; and it's got a silly name. Conrad.Irwin 14:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The change to this template needs to be reverted. Currently, the template is used in very many places where the text does not fit, and it has also messed up WT:ELE. --Yair rand 18:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, I think any major change to the template must be done by result of a vote, as the template is specifically referenced in ELE. --Yair rand 18:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd say that the template can be deleted without a vote, as it has been added by Richardb to ELE without a vote in the first place, in this edit on 6 May 2006, back at the time when votes were unneeded to modify ELE. Nonetheless, I have sent the template to a due RFDO process here, and I have notified of it in Beer parlour.
 * If more people think that a vote is needed, I may need to return the issue to Beer parlour first, as a vote should not be started before a subject has been discussed at Beer parlour. --Dan Polansky 18:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Having thought it over, I think you are right that a vote is needed, so I have started a discussion in Beer parlour. While the paragraph was originally added to ELE without a vote, it is now there, and any further modification of ELE now requires a vote. --Dan Polansky 09:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't have time to peruse all this flapdoodle. The template version that has a picture is useful.--68.218.105.152 23:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The vote seems appropriate. The pseudo-sister-project box is even less desirable than the other sister-project boxes. The Synonyms header seems like the right place for a user to find a link to whatever Wikisaurus coverage we have. DCDuring TALK 10:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This looks like it's going to fail. FWIW I see no advantage to keeping it, my point was more of a general one. It's probably worth leting this have another two or three days to see if we can get more than one person that wants to keep it. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and hope someone finds a way to improve it. 68.218... is right, there needs to be a noticeable version with a picture. --Yair rand 00:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There should be no Wikisaurus logo, neither in Wikisaurus nor when linking to Wikisaurus from the mainspace. Wikisaurus is not a separate project; it is part of Wiktionary in a separate namespace.
 * I have created a vote, one that has not yet started: WT:Votes/pl-2010-01/Removing_Wikisaurus-link_template. --Dan Polansky 12:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That seems like a bad idea, Dan. This page is for discussing the deletion of templates, and if it does get deleted, clearly that passage on WT:ELE can harmlessly be removed because nobody would advocate using a deleted templates on pages. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I am confused by the assertion that Wikisaurus should not have its own logo just because it's not a separate project from Wiktionary. AFAIK, most Wikiprojects throughout Wikimedia have their own logos. --Yair rand 02:05, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree that “Synonyms” section (or “Antonyms”!) is best place, and a sidebox is a bit misleading; like “Citations”, Wikisaurus is another part of the lexicon, and should be treated as such.
 * A simple {seews} template (for a text link) would be useful.
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 06:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)