bug#47416: Strange sentence in documentation of 'insert-file-contents'

[Gregory Heytings <gregory@heytings.org>]

>> What about replacing "which see" with "quod vide"?  It's not longer 
>> (eight letters and one space), and is easier to look up than both 
>> "which see" and "q.v.".
>
> ISTR that past discussions concluded that q.v. would be even more 
> cryptic.  With "which see", at least native English speakers and those 
> who are used to scientific literature would immediately understand what 
> it means.
>

The only thing I see in that discussion (bug#28790) is: ""Quod vide" (qv) 
is arguably more conventional, but for those who haven't encountered the 
abbreviation or learned its meaning, it's a much tougher nut to crack." 
So it's about the abbreviation, not about the expression in full.  I just 
tried, finding the meaning of "q.v." is difficult, but finding the meaning 
of "quod vide" is immediate.

I tried to find recent occurrences of "which see" in Google Books and 
Google Scholar, there are none.  There are some occurrences of "on which 
see <reference>" or "for {examples, a discussion, an overview, an 
assessment, ...} of which see <reference>".  It seems that all occurrences 
of "which see" are from the 19th century.