Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Template talk:initialism of. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Template talk:initialism of, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Template talk:initialism of in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Template talk:initialism of you have here. The definition of the word Template talk:initialism of will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTemplate talk:initialism of, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Redlinks
Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
This template generates redlinks in its most common use with proper nouns, such as organizations, which we rarely include. Of course, normal humans have no prospect to correct the template. DCDuringTALK11:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Why doesn't it work the other way around, with one having the ability to add brackets to achieve a link? There are more organizations with initialisms than those that have a WP article. The word-by-word blue links are stupid. This is the result of making massive changes without understanding or caring about consequences. The structure of templates doesn't allow correct editing short of replacement. DCDuringTALK12:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
There are many problems with this one. First of all, it is very redundant, since the part of speech header already says "Initialism" for all of these. Secondly it links entries automatically, which is in most cases not appropriate since the written out terms do not meet CFI. In short, this is not needed, and what it does it does badly. -- Liliana•15:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
I think it's not needed either. Usually initialisms are defined just by writing the expansion as the definition, there is no need for 'Initialism of' before it. And linking isn't necessary in many cases either. On the other hand, it would be nice if a link existed if the entry it links to exists as well. And we need to account for that in cases where the expanded form is created after the initialism. —CodeCat15:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
The part of speech isn't "initialism" for each of these. See e.g. ], which is as it should be. Also, I believe this template is used in some etymology sections. Strong keep.—msh210℠ (talk) 17:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
When the "Initialism" section is ever needed, anyway? I have the impression that we can always replace it by "Noun", "Verb", etc. headers in English. --Daniel12:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)Reply