Template talk:Other uses

Usage

This template is basically the same as Wikipedia's otheruses template and provides a way to automatically give a link to the disambiguation page for articles that follow the "most famous" rule. Thus at the top of the Paris article it will show up as:

For other places with the same name, see Paris (disambiguation).

There are two ways to use this template:

• For the majority of cases, simply include it at the top of the article using {{otheruses}}.
• In cases where the disambiguation page is not named "Name (disambiguation)" an optional parameter can be included. For example, the Orléans article is disambiguated on Orleans (disambiguation) (with no "é"). In that case the template is included as {{otheruses|Orleans}}.

-- (WT-en) Ryan 12:25, 3 June 2006 (EDT)

Purpose

This template is basically the same as Wikipedia's otheruses template and provides a way to automatically give a link to the disambiguation page for articles that follow the "most famous" rule. Thus at the top of the Paris article it will show up as "For other places with the same name, see Paris (disambiguation)." -- (WT-en) Ryan 05:17, 23 March 2006 (EST)

Note that Template:Samename has been used for this in some places, but at the moment that template does nothing other than print any message that was passed to it. It's late and I'm tired and I kind of plunged forward without requesting feedback before creating this template (my bad), but if Template:Otheruses is preferable then I think Template:Samename can safely be deleted, or vice versa. -- (WT-en) Ryan 05:36, 23 March 2006 (EST)

Template:Samename is now unused and has been vfd'd. -- (WT-en) Ryan 20:29, 24 March 2006 (EST)

Template name and page name

I think this template should be called Template:Otherplaces and the disambiguator should be Place (other places). See North Pole for an example. -- (WT-en) Huttite 00:24, 28 July 2006 (EDT)

I'm not sure that the work of changing the existing articles would be worth any benefit. What is the upside of this move, other than that it's more accurate to describe a city/region/etc as a "place"? Also, not to be overly critical, but in the future it would probably be good if there was some discussion prior to creating a template, example page, etc since while this is being discussed we really don't want users to begin using the new format.

Welcome back, by the way - the Kiwis have been sadly under-represented here while you've been studying! -- (WT-en) Ryan 00:38, 28 July 2006 (EDT)

And as an aside, yes, I realize the hypocrisy of criticizing someone for creating a template without prior discussion on the talk page for a template that I created with prior discussion ;) -- (WT-en) Ryan 00:42, 28 July 2006 (EDT)

I created the template Template:Otherplaces and applied it to the North Pole article because I (foolishly) moved the disambiguation page without checking the root article name. I decided to move it to North Pole (other places) to see how it would look, and then found I had to also change the template, and affect all the other pages that use it, or create a new one. I have only used it once and await feedback on whether that is a good idea. -- (WT-en) Huttite 00:53, 28 July 2006 (EDT)