Template talk:Wplink: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
→Pros and cons?: Reply |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:It can be stuck on the talkpage I think. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 09:20, 24 March 2026 (UTC) | :It can be stuck on the talkpage I think. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 09:20, 24 March 2026 (UTC) | ||
==Pros and cons?== | |||
I want to know what's the diff between using <code><nowiki>[[wikipedia:]]</nowiki></code> and this. I still don't understand why this is necessary 😕 [[User:Rudxain|Rudxain]] ([[User talk:Rudxain|talk]]) 23:53, 11 May 2026 (UTC) | |||
:There is no difference in function. However, I found it to be easier from the standpoint of a casual editor to use a template (with directions included) instead of Wikipedia markup. It also generally gives a cleaner presentation in source editing as oftentimes a second pipe for display is unnecessary (and thus cutting down on the amount of text), whereas using the markup ''always'' requires piping for display. Ex: <code><nowiki>[[wikipedia:Seattle Avionics|Seattle Avionics]]</nowiki></code> vs <code><nowiki>{{Wplink|Seattle Avionics}}</nowiki></code> | |||
:It's not all that different from using <code><nowiki>{{Reflist}}</nowiki></code> instead of <code><nowiki><references /></nowiki></code> — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 04:34, 13 May 2026 (UTC) | |||