Final Fantasy Wiki
FFWiki forum logo.png
Forums: Index > Rin's Travel Agency > Archive > Transclude Etymology

FFVI Terra Branford Menu iOS.png

Subpages count as articles. So they get bought up in random article and add to article count, which is obviously bad.

The fix is to create an Etymology namespace. Which might not be a bad idea. We can also categorise these pages by name origin and stuff! If I figure out AJAX (and it's about time I did) I could also try to bring up a "pages that embed this etymology" section to these pages.

Back to the original matter sometimes etymology is specific to a version of something, like Midgar Zolom, so just embedding the etym at Midgardsormr won't cut it. It would be unwise to feature the header in the embed. But then we lose out on the edit link. The fix would be to put the embed inside a template which features an added edit link, but then we can't link to the specific section. ?action=edit&section=1 only works on disambigs, for parent pages that won't work. And you can't go to section by name, which would be great (or if you can I've never known about it) but you can't.

Also no boxes.

So an Etym namespace and an Etym template from that namespace is the most efficient method. 00:38, April 30, 2014 (UTC)

I think it is a good idea, as all the articles related to a term should specify what the term means (I also love the Etimology section). I'd support any better/easier way to implement it, but it seems this is the best we have at the moment. JC Holy Knight (talk) 01:59, April 30, 2014 (UTC)

FFVI Terra Branford Menu iOS.png
FFVII Cait Sith Battle.gif

Ah, a grand suggestion. However I do not think there are many Trivia points that would be appropriate for a page and its subpages. I would also say similar for External Links, and References is ultimately just a header and {{reflist}}. With Cid you would expect the point about Star Wars calling a character Cid would only be on the parent, because its a reference to the recurring Cid rather than a specific Cid.

Regarding AJAX, the idea is just to get the Special:WhatLinksHere transclusions list (which I imagine I can get through an API query) and present it on the page in a UL (as simply as needed). The same could apply in any method involving transclusion. JBed (talk) 06:17, July 4, 2014 (UTC)

FFVI Terra Branford Menu iOS.png

The way I imagine it working best:

  • We create a page like "Etymology:Odin". This page contains the Odin Etym paragraph, and we wrap that in onlyinclude.
  • We create a template called Template:Etymology, or Template:Etym. Then we use {{Etym|Odin}} on pages of things called "Odin" we want to put that Etym on, underneath a ===Etymology=== header. The template is so we can do things like add the edit link.
  • On "Etymology:Odin", we also add categories like, "Norse Origin" or "Names of Norse origin", or something.

The kind of Etymology that needs a page are:

  • Borrowed names (things not originating from SE, so plays on words wouldn't).
  • Things that recur (like Malboro).

Anything else can just go on the page. Like small notes about how "Midgar Zolom" is a variation of Midgardsormr. So Midgar Zolom's Etym would be:

The name "Midgar Zolom" is a variation of "Midgardsormr". It is named so as it resides in the swamps near Midgar.


-- 18:25, July 10, 2014 (UTC)


Why not? JBed (talk) 18:41, July 10, 2014 (UTC)

"Putting etymologies on a single template is an example of doing that"

That is not what the template is for. And I hope you don't mean what it sounds like you mean, because that template would need to be a {{#switch}} statement with 1000s of options.

"[..]requires contact Wikia, waiting for a response, then setting it up, and then having users constantly move pages from the mainspace to the new namespace because everyone creates them in the wrong place."

No? Yeah, you need to contact Wikia, so it takes a couple days. And no, why would people be creating the pages in the wrong place? The average user isn't going to write Etymology, or if they do they're just going to hard-type it to the page. Which isn't a problem that's not going to exist. Right now we revert uses from adding Etym to pages saying "it goes on the parent".

I don't understand most of what you said. It doesn't sound like you have a solution to the problem we are talking about. JBed (talk) 19:16, July 10, 2014 (UTC)

"What does it add if we do it that way?"

Organisation. Templates aren't meant to transclude content, they're meant to be templates. The Etymology pages will serve a purpose alone even if they are ultimately for mainspace pages. They are their own type of page.

"Might I ask what is wrong with a "{{#switch}} with 1000s of options"?"

Simply, it won't work. The template would be too big for the page not only to load, but likely also save. Then we're dealing with how {{#switch}} works. It goes down the list and checks every option (IIRC it's not linearly, but I can't remember the genius witchcraft {{#switch}} is often programmed to run like). But in some cases it will be running hundreds of unnecessary processes. Not to mention the code is stupid difficult to maintain.

But there's not much argument to make. It's like arguing to use

<strong> over

<b>; or that there's no point in using an ID if it's not for JavaScript. There is in fact very good reasons to do both those things, but people will say it isn't necessary and we can already do things without. Yeh, you can, but in doing so you miss the entire point in semantics.

In this case you overlook the purpose of a namespace because... what? We don't need one?

Not to mention your arguments don't make much sense. You talk about moving pages to a different namespace, but how do you think template subpages are going to be different? We're still requiring the creation of pages. JBed (talk) 19:49, July 10, 2014 (UTC)

FFVI Terra Branford Menu iOS.png

@Techno: On second thought, my opinion in creating a namespace is more about my own vision. Because they could only serve a utility purpose for embedding and be fine in templatespace. Well, I don't see it as fine, I see it as disorganised, and thus something that needs to be organised and is best organised with a namespace.

And a namespace offers the opportunities in categorising by name-origin which makes for interesting things, making it easier to observe on a larger scale where FF gets its name roots from. And then it also makes targetting easier because we're not searching for parts of a page name, but instead an entire namespace.

So eh, this is more about my subjective opinion than I originally thought. Though I still believe using a namespace is the best choice. JBed (talk) 20:16, July 10, 2014 (UTC)


Subpages count as articles and things to be transclused are not articles. From both your utility perspective and my organisation perspective, this idea satisfies neither. This just sounds like a way to avoid creating a namespace, which I don't get. Template subpages is at least more agreeable.

There was a second point, however it may not matter depending on how people want to handle this. JBed (talk) 20:44, July 10, 2014 (UTC)


"Are you absolutely certain you're not just your perceptions again?" I am certain. We are not talking about how we are perceiving etymology, but instead how namespaces and MediaWiki was designed to aid content. You misunderstand the purpose of namespaces in creating these pages in mainspace.

I shall give you a list of reasons:

  1. The purpose of mainspace is articles about our chosen topic. That is Final Fantasy. These Etymology pages are articles that only state Etymological origin, and should make no reference to FF at all. These are two very easily defined types of "article". Etymology is not
  2. Counting non-article as articles. Yes, this means a lying page count but if you intend to tell me that you don't think the count matters then save your words, it's not just that. Etymology is for transclusion purposes. This etymology page lives to be transcluded. It is not a page for people to visit, we expect people to go to the pages it is transcluded on. It is not even an article. Taking a section out of an existing article and duplicating it somewhere else doesn't make it article. It makes it redundant.
  3. Articles are intended to be linked to and linked from. Etymology does not contain language links and have no reason to be linked to. We would sooner link to the section on the parent, though more likely just the parent as a whole itself even if we were referencing it from an etymological perspective. Orphaned pages or something. I could trail on similar points but it all comes down to etymology alone does not make an article, and things whose purpose is transclusion is at most an article-part, not an article.
  4. And a point for a namespace: Etymologies would be transcluded in a similar manner to how files are transcluded. Files get their own namespace. The parallels are clear. Template subpages is more agreeable, but mainspace is certainly not.

Your point on disambigs does raise an interesting point. Hmm, I wonder what past discussions would have said about this. this is a thing. I wonder why disambigs aren't treated in a similar manner to redirects by the software.

Maybe I had something else to say, don't remember. But I think there is something that needs to be made clear. Creating a namespace is not a hassle. Don't say that. JBed (talk) 21:08, July 10, 2014 (UTC)

BlueHighwind TA.png
Some Color Mage / Talk Contribs / / 23:15, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
It's Blog namespace that we got rid of, Blue.

Anyway, if we want to go with the Wikipedia way, the extension is Labeled Section Transclusion, but really, it'll be easier to just get a new namespace added and there are no technical issues to having a new namespace.

Subpages would also work, but, eh, I'm not a big fan of inflating our article count adding a mainspace page for every single etym.

Bump: are we in agreement to go to Wikia for an Etym namespace? C A T U S E 04:59, July 21, 2014 (UTC)

Works for me. Drake Clawfang (talk) 05:07, July 21, 2014 (UTC)

Right so with etym namespace, here is my proposal:

The Etymology pages:

  • Content: Pages in Etymology namespace focus on a name and its origin. The rules for writing these pages still apply from [[Help:Tags and Disambiguation Pages#Etymology|here]]. Wikipedia links encouraged where appropriate.
  • Name: For example, "Etymology:Minotaur". Pages are unlikely to be tagged, though is is perfectly possible. Tags can be decided simply from origin.
  • Structure: The etymology will be surrounded by onlyinclude tags.
  • Categorisation: Etymology is categorised by its word origin. For example, "Words of Greek Origin" or something to that effect.
  • Creation: Any name SE took from somewhere else should have an Etymology page. For example, even though Baalzephon appears in one title, it would still get an Etymology page. Any name SE made up but still has origins, like plays on words, has an article if it is used more than once. For example, "Etymology:Sabotender" would exist because a number of enemies appear with that name (in Japanese).

The Etymology template:

  • To transclude etymology we will create a template at "Template:Etymology" (or "Template:Etym", unimportant).
  • This page will roughly contain the code {{Etymology:{{{1}}}}}, and in addition to this it will also contain an edit link that takes an editor to the edit page of that etymology. It also means we can make other changes to display as we like.

Etymology on pages:

  • The Etymology header is put on the page.
  • If the enemy name matches etymology, then beneath this is simply the template for the word. So for example, Wyvern (Final Fantasy)'s section:
  • Explanations of how the Etym matches the thing in question is also added to the page, so for Doomtrain:
Doomtrain's name in Japanese is Glasya Labolas.<!--we could put the next paragraph on the same line if we prefer-->

{{Etymology|Glasya Labolas}}

Blah written about in The Lesser Key of Solomon. Doomtrain is obtained from the Solomon's Ring.

[and the rest of Doomtrain's etym]

<!--i don't think adding the "it is named Asp in the original NES release" is necessary-->

At first we may just categorise all the pages as "Etymology" while the namespace is being set up, and they can then be categorised in greater detail later.

If you disagree with anything feel free to discuss. We need to agree on everything before we start using the namespace. JBed (talk) 07:30, July 21, 2014 (UTC)

Works for me; make sure to add {{reflist}}s to pages that have etymologies. C A T U S E 23:59, July 21, 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia links are done like "{{w|Odin}} is a blah from blah". So not as a reference. JBed (talk) 00:08, July 22, 2014 (UTC)

Alright, so Tim Quievryn emailed me this morning:

At this time, Wikia can not offer to create non-content namespaces due to a technical logic bug we are having with our advertisements. I can offer to create this namespace for you, but it will be a content namespace. You could then write in later, when we are able to once again offer non-content namespaces, I could flip the switch to make it non-content without affecting any of the current pages (just the page count). Let me know what you would like to do.

Whether a namespace is "content" or not is not semantic. Content namespaces determine our page count, appear in special:random, special:allpages and other lists of pages, and whatnot. However there's no harm in temporarily having Etymology be content while we transition over to using the new namespace instead of just having them at the bottom of disambiguations. C A T U S E 21:32, July 22, 2014 (UTC)

... fecking Wikia. Making something simple even harder.
I don't understand their reasoning, why would a bug prevent them adding new non-content namespaces? Surely the bug already applies to existing non-content namespaces anyway? JBed (talk) 23:13, July 22, 2014 (UTC)
First, let's ask a very important question: does the Wikia staff know what Wikia does, is, and is supposed to do? Or are they acting blindly? On the more serious side, I like the idea of Etymology namespace.—Kaimi (999,999 CP/5 TP) ∙ 23:25, July 22, 2014 (UTC)
Etymology namespace is now up and running. C A T U S E 17:07, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

Idea: create a page similar to Project:DidYouKnow and transclude into the main page(?). Viewers seem to comment on etymologies a lot compared to other sections of the wiki, right up there with battle strategies. (I've actually wanted to compile stats about the wiki's pages and viewers for a while, but it's just so much work to get a good sample size...) C A T U S E 04:32, July 24, 2014 (UTC)C A T U S E 04:32, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

Looking good. What does the "purge" option do? I like the idea for "DidYouKnow" etymology but is there room on the front page?Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 20:28, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

Purging a page clears the cache, in case it doesn't change when you edit it (often happens with templates/mediawikispace). And there's space in the right column I suppose, since the left one is just so much longer. C A T U S E 20:38, July 24, 2014 (UTC)
There should be one on the tnavbar too in my opnion instead of "discuss", but that's for another discussion.

Questions and splitting things up[]

FFXIV Machinist Artwork.png

Etymology would need one category each, and based on origin. Simply, "Words of Greek Origin" et al.

We can begin whenever. I was thinking of waiting until Etymology isn't a content namespace anymore though. Strictly to allow for MW querying the number of pages in the namespace, which I don't believe is possible any other way.

We could have a navbox, added via the JS (or AJAXd via the JS). Categories should be simple enough to navigate. Including links to specific etymology pages on a nav would be too much of a waste of time and not that useful... because categories. Unlike other namespaces, Etymology doesn't have any hierarchy at all, all Etymology pages are standalone, no parent-child relationships. Although again, I can just AJAX a list from the categories the etym page is in and generate the content's of a navbox on-load.

substetym, whatever makes it easier for you. JBed (talk) 19:22, August 4, 2014 (UTC)


I didn't even bother with AJAX, it's already there. JBed (talk) 19:46, August 4, 2014 (UTC)

Oh, but not on Chrome. I knew I added it wrong, but Firefox let it work :p JBed (talk) 19:46, August 4, 2014 (UTC)
Oh, the problem was not what I expected (although it could be a potential problem, hasn't been yet), but some JS I used was FF only it seems. JBed (talk) 19:59, August 4, 2014 (UTC)

Well as I was saying, I could check what categories an article is in (wgCategories[]), and then AJAX return the list of its members and simply put that in a navbox format via JS. JBed (talk) 20:20, August 4, 2014 (UTC)