This template says that the article contradicts another article, but doesn't say what article that is. It seems like it would make more sense to allow specifing the other conflicting article as a parameter to the template to make it clear where the contradiction is. Ken 02:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Just a thought. Having played with the Interwiki-Link-Checker, I've encountered way too often articles that seem to contradict the same article in a Wikipedia of another language. Maybe a new cross-Wiki template (or this) could be translated and copied into other Wikipedias.-- Jyril 19:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, unless there is a better tag. For example: (as of 2023-09-15)
/info/en/?search=Carbonic_acid and
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlens%C3%A4ure disagree with each other, English claiming that Carbonic Acid is organic, and German claiming it's inorganic. Though the use of 'auto revert' bots seems like it would make such tagging useless anyhow - AA — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
216.59.204.166 (
talk) 21:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
It doesn't contradict another if it is self-contradictionary (like it categorized articles as) -- Ysangkok 14:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
As noted in the current revision of Barbacoa ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Barbacoa&oldid=86966114 ) something is wrong with this template when it can't take 100% of the page width. I don't know HTML well enough to fix it. 66.95.123.6 17:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I've had problems where I've an article or even a section contradicted TWO (2) articles, i.e. Moria (StarCraft). It would be nice if you guys could make the template more userfriendly. It might also be wise to reconsider
instead of the current
. 199.126.28.20 12:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I have just boldly modified the template two add two optional parameters, and changed the documentation accordingly. The new optional third un-named parameter is the talk page section name where the discussion is to take place. The other optional parameter added is a parameter named date. -- Boracay Bill ( talk) 00:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to have the option to state that a section of this article contradicts another article (or a section of it, in which case one could link to that section). I.e., I'd like to add the |section parameter, just like it is possible in the contradict-template. It would also be useful to make the reference to a talk page optional; sometimes the contradition is so obvious it doesn't need to be explained. Preslav ( talk) 14:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
On the template page, I see the example, but I don't see the generic form of the template. And with all the various parameters, I'm confused as to what it should look like. Help! (For comparison, I'm looking for something that resembles what is on Template:Contradict.) Aristophanes68 ( talk) 18:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I suggest that we add a link in the template to WP:Content forking. What do you think? Sole Soul ( talk) 03:42, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I made a similar template: {{ contradict-other-multiple}}. It deals with the case where one article contradicts multiple other articles.
Usage is almost the same as this template, except the talk page parameter (2nd parameter) is mandatory, and I allow you to specify any talk page. Also the section parameter is done using "section = ".
I am quite the newbie at template syntax, so testing, and of course comments, are both appreciated.
If I made any bad decisions regarding parameter choices, now is the time to bring it up (while the template isn't being used). - Frazzydee| ✍ 03:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
If you're tagging an article as contradicting itself, you can use
{{contradict|about=who framed Roger Rabbit}}
so that readers know immediately which "fact" to be suspicious of.
If those few words are self-explanatory, there doesn't even really need
to be a talk page section about the contradiction, unless people need
to discuss how to resolve it.
But if the article contradicts another article, there's no about=
parameter available; readers have to be told to go to the linked talk
page, where a new section has to be placed and the contradiction restated.
Since the {{contradict-other}}
tag should be
placed on both articles, that's three edits to report one problem.
Giving {{contradict-other}}
an
about=
parameter seems like a no-brainer to me.
(In fact I just fixed a contradiction where the tagger had just
assumed that a parameter with that purpose existed, and hadn't
put anything in the talk page.)
How about it?
-- 208.76.104.133 ( talk) 01:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Right now, amboxes are hidden by default in the mobile version, but the fact that an article contradicts another is important for readers to assess the credibility of what they are reading. Is there a way to make this template visible even when placed other than at the very top of an article? 96.255.148.25 ( talk) 16:28, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Contradict which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 14:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
@ TheDragonFire: Your edit broke the talk page links that this template generates. Please undo it or fix it. --- Wikitiki89 ( talk) - 20:21, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
This template says that the article contradicts another article, but doesn't say what article that is. It seems like it would make more sense to allow specifing the other conflicting article as a parameter to the template to make it clear where the contradiction is. Ken 02:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Just a thought. Having played with the Interwiki-Link-Checker, I've encountered way too often articles that seem to contradict the same article in a Wikipedia of another language. Maybe a new cross-Wiki template (or this) could be translated and copied into other Wikipedias.-- Jyril 19:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, unless there is a better tag. For example: (as of 2023-09-15)
/info/en/?search=Carbonic_acid and
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlens%C3%A4ure disagree with each other, English claiming that Carbonic Acid is organic, and German claiming it's inorganic. Though the use of 'auto revert' bots seems like it would make such tagging useless anyhow - AA — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
216.59.204.166 (
talk) 21:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
It doesn't contradict another if it is self-contradictionary (like it categorized articles as) -- Ysangkok 14:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
As noted in the current revision of Barbacoa ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Barbacoa&oldid=86966114 ) something is wrong with this template when it can't take 100% of the page width. I don't know HTML well enough to fix it. 66.95.123.6 17:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I've had problems where I've an article or even a section contradicted TWO (2) articles, i.e. Moria (StarCraft). It would be nice if you guys could make the template more userfriendly. It might also be wise to reconsider
instead of the current
. 199.126.28.20 12:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I have just boldly modified the template two add two optional parameters, and changed the documentation accordingly. The new optional third un-named parameter is the talk page section name where the discussion is to take place. The other optional parameter added is a parameter named date. -- Boracay Bill ( talk) 00:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to have the option to state that a section of this article contradicts another article (or a section of it, in which case one could link to that section). I.e., I'd like to add the |section parameter, just like it is possible in the contradict-template. It would also be useful to make the reference to a talk page optional; sometimes the contradition is so obvious it doesn't need to be explained. Preslav ( talk) 14:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
On the template page, I see the example, but I don't see the generic form of the template. And with all the various parameters, I'm confused as to what it should look like. Help! (For comparison, I'm looking for something that resembles what is on Template:Contradict.) Aristophanes68 ( talk) 18:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I suggest that we add a link in the template to WP:Content forking. What do you think? Sole Soul ( talk) 03:42, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I made a similar template: {{ contradict-other-multiple}}. It deals with the case where one article contradicts multiple other articles.
Usage is almost the same as this template, except the talk page parameter (2nd parameter) is mandatory, and I allow you to specify any talk page. Also the section parameter is done using "section = ".
I am quite the newbie at template syntax, so testing, and of course comments, are both appreciated.
If I made any bad decisions regarding parameter choices, now is the time to bring it up (while the template isn't being used). - Frazzydee| ✍ 03:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
If you're tagging an article as contradicting itself, you can use
{{contradict|about=who framed Roger Rabbit}}
so that readers know immediately which "fact" to be suspicious of.
If those few words are self-explanatory, there doesn't even really need
to be a talk page section about the contradiction, unless people need
to discuss how to resolve it.
But if the article contradicts another article, there's no about=
parameter available; readers have to be told to go to the linked talk
page, where a new section has to be placed and the contradiction restated.
Since the {{contradict-other}}
tag should be
placed on both articles, that's three edits to report one problem.
Giving {{contradict-other}}
an
about=
parameter seems like a no-brainer to me.
(In fact I just fixed a contradiction where the tagger had just
assumed that a parameter with that purpose existed, and hadn't
put anything in the talk page.)
How about it?
-- 208.76.104.133 ( talk) 01:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Right now, amboxes are hidden by default in the mobile version, but the fact that an article contradicts another is important for readers to assess the credibility of what they are reading. Is there a way to make this template visible even when placed other than at the very top of an article? 96.255.148.25 ( talk) 16:28, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Contradict which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 14:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
@ TheDragonFire: Your edit broke the talk page links that this template generates. Please undo it or fix it. --- Wikitiki89 ( talk) - 20:21, 6 October 2017 (UTC)