Template talk:LinkToCategory

The trouble with using "onlyinclude" rather than "includeonly" is that it includes its contents in the template itself. This means that if e.g. a category is itself included in the stuff to be included, that category will be invoked.

It makes not that much difference, but the missing category will then appear in the "categories wanted" list which is invoked from Special Pages.

Hence the original decision to use "includeonly" rather than "onlyinclude". --prime mover (talk) 10:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * It is to me semantically better to encompass the stuff one wants to include in "onlyinclude" than to use "noinclude" around the explanation. This also allows a more natural control of how much spacing is transcluded, which is quite important. Hence the change - but I won't be working through all of them systematically, it's just an ad hoc change. --Lord_Farin (talk) 11:07, 29 January 2013 (UTC)