Template talk:OV

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight

Aviation: Aircraft

	Aviation portal This template is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation
	This template is supported by the aircraft project.

United States

This template is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Better link

Wouldn't it be better if there wasn't a separate link to "Space Sputtle"? This goes to what you'd expect from a link, and possibly also to overlinking.

Example: {{OV|099}} currently results in code [[Space Shuttle]] [[Space Shuttle Challenger|''Challenger'']] (two links), but I think [[Space Shuttle Challenger|Space Shuttle ''Challenger'']] would be better.

Compare with the USS template. You don't get an extra link to "USS" there – the whole link goes to the ship in question.

HandsomeFella (talk) 20:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can use "full=nolink" to link just the Shuttle's name: {{OV|104|full=nolink}}: "Space Shuttle Atlantis" --G W… 12:48, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know that, but that would still be like if the USS template worked like this: USS Enterprise (if there were a full=nolink option for the "USS" part).

What I mean is that "Space Shuttle Challenger", just as "USS Enterprise", is an expression, and in my view it should be regarded as one unit.

With or without full=nolink, it looks a bit strange (I think). See WP:LINKING, section General points on linking style, more specifically the Irish Chess Championship example.

Don't you agree?

HandsomeFella (talk) 14:17, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editrequest

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please replace

[[Pathfinder (simulator)|''Pathfinder'']]

with

[[Space Shuttle Pathfinder|''Pathfinder'']]

to directly link to the article. 70.49.127.65 (talk) 03:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done TOW talk 08:44, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic overlinking

The wikilinking of the Space Shuttle prefix by default is problematic. This templates constantly violates MOS:OVERLINK, especially when transcluded more than once. One might want to argue that one can simply use full=nolink, but that would be a flawed argument. A transcluded template's default state should not violate Wikipedia guidelines. Use of additional parameters should not have to be a requirement in order to comply by MOS guidelines. Also, up until just now full=nolink was not even shown as an example on the documentation page, necessitating an unnecessary peak at the source code.

Furthermore, as was previously mentioned, wikilinking the prefix creates MOS:SEAOFBLUE issues. In order to combat—or at least not contribute to—this disease called overlinking, I suggest and highly recommend disabling wikilinking the prefix by default. Jay D. Easy (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"full=no" version has extra space in front of it

As you can see below, {{OV|Columbia|full=no}} gives problematic output: Columbia ...or inside parentheses...
( Columbia)
Can this be fixed? Nosferattus (talk) 05:21, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]