Template talk:Shortcut

Consideration of proposing a rename to Linkbox

Hi,

I am considering proposing a rename of template:Shortcut to template:Linkbox.

Reasons to rename include:

1. The template does not enable the function of shortcut, but instead produces the display of a WP:LINKBOX

2. Some editors think that listing new shortcuts in the linkbox is required for the shortcut to work

3. Due to #2 above, LINKBOXES are often excessively populated, contrary to the advice at WP:LINKBOX

In the result produced on the page, I suggest changing the heading text in the box from “Shortcuts” to “Recommended shortcut” (singular, even though multiple shortcuts may be listed).

- SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Question about anchors

• Template:Shortcut#Anchors

It says that it automatically adds the shortcut as an anchor (For example: "WP:UNCIVIL").

But does it add an anchor without the """"WP:""""?

For example, it would be nice if it added "UNCIVIL" instead of "WP:UNCIVIL" - or add both as anchors, if that is preferred.

I ask, because of pages like WP:OC, where each section has an anchor template and a shortcut template. - jc37 08:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, for example all of these should land at the same spot:

• WP:OCYEAR
• Wikipedia:OC#OCYEAR
• Wikipedia:Overcategorization#OCYEAR

"WP:" is a namespace alias and can be used in place of "Wikipedia:" for any page. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

So if I remove the anchor template from WP:OC, and leave only the shortcut template; and then add WP:OC#OCYEAR to some other page, I will still land at the correct section? - jc37 10:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh shoot, sorry I only anecdotally test this quickly, didn't realize both were there. So no, {{shortcut}} is not producing a named section for the anchor without the "WP". That could potentially be built in to the module. For that specific page, as there are many anchors in each section removing just one of the anchor keywords doesn't seem very useful though (and even if a shortcut is removed later, keeping the anchor could still be useful). — xaosflux ^Talk 11:05, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh ok.

And true about OC, but I'm seeing this over a lot of policy pages. So I think it would be nice to add that in.

I don't know how the module is coded, but I think it's the difference between {{PAGENAME}} and {{FULLPAGENAME}} - jc37 11:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 13 February 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 13:52, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

---

Template:Shortcut → Template:Linkbox – Reasons to rename include:

1. The template does not enable the function of a WP:shortcut, but instead produces the display of a WP:LINKBOX

2. Some editors think that listing new shortcuts in the linkbox is required for the shortcut to work

3. Due to #2 above, LINKBOXES are often excessively populated, contrary to the advice at WP:LINKBOX

In the result produced on the page, I suggest changing the heading text in the box from “Shortcuts” to “Recommended shortcut” (singular, even though multiple shortcuts may be listed). SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose No real need to rename this. The template highlights the existence of shortcuts - the current name is fine. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:49, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  The real need is the constant mistaken addition of excessive shortcuts to LINKBOXES that require manual fixing. I have been doing this for years. It is a real and ongoing actual problem. The highlighting of the existence of shortcuts for a LINKBOX template is ignorant confusion, due to the bad name, the existence of shortcuts has nothing to do with the contents of a LINKBOX.

  Is there any reason not to rename? SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

  The reason is that people are used to "shortcut" meaning what it does now. Changing the name to educate people is not going to work. Johnuniq (talk) 04:45, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

  I’ve had conversations with editors that shows otherwise.

  They see {{shortcut}} so think WP:SHORTCUT. If they saw {{Linkbox}}, they might think it is governed by WP:LINKBOX as oppose to being the mechanism for how a shortcut works (some really think this). This is not really “education”, but using correct words, and not misleading with the wrong word.

  I’m not sure what you mean by “"shortcut" meaning what it does now”. What does "shortcut" do? SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:00, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Same as Pppery. JustSomeoneNo (talk) 06:31, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit request 5 June 2025

Description of suggested change:

Diff:

line 52:	line 52:
if options.target and yesno(options.target) then	if options.target and yesno(options.target) then
listItems[i] = templateMode	listItems[i] = templateMode
and string.format("{{%s[[%s|%s]]}}", prefix, templatePath, shortcut)	and string.format("TM:{{%s[[%s|%s]]}}", prefix, templatePath, shortcut)
or string.format("[[%s]]", shortcut)	or string.format("[[%s]]", shortcut)
else	else
line 60:	line 60:
}	}
if templateMode then	if templateMode then
listItems[i] = string.format("{{%s%s}}", prefix, listItems[i])	listItems[i] = string.format("TM:{{%s%s}}", prefix, listItems[i])
end	end
end	end

Whatback11 (talk) 17:23, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Please provide a "complete and specific description of the request". GoldRomean (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)