Talk:Interwiki map

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Interwiki map Archives (current)→
The associated page is used by the MediaWiki software to add and remove interwiki link prefixes (such as [[w:blah]] to "blah" on Wikipedia). Any Meta-Wiki administrator can edit the interwiki map. It is synced to the Wikimedia cluster every few weeks. Please post comments to the appropriate section (Proposed additions, Proposed removals, Requests for updates, Troubleshooting, or Other discussions); read the boxes at the top of each for an explanation. Completed requests are moved to the archives.
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days.

Proposed additions[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg The Interwiki Map exists to allow a more efficient syntax for linking between wikis, and thus promote the cooperation and proliferation of wikis and free content.

This section is for proposing a new interwiki link prefix. Interwiki prefixes should be reserved for websites that would be useful on a significant number of pages ({{LinkSummary}} can help). Websites useful only to a few pages should be linked to with the usual external link syntax. Please don't propose additions of sites with too few pages or that contain copyright infringing content, such as YouTube. As a guide, sites considered for inclusion should probably

  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
  4. be a wiki
  5. have reasonable amounts of content
  6. not contain malware

Add new entries at the bottom of the section. When requesting a new prefix, please explain why it would be useful keeping the above in mind. Admins, please allow consensus to form (or at least no objections to be raised over a period of a few days) before adding new entries, as once added they are hard to remove from the many copies around the world.

Requests for removal should be submitted on the talk page in the removals section and will be decided on by a Meta admin.



I'm pretty surprised that I didn't see this here already: OmegaWiki is a good and extensive non-WMF wiki with incoming links. I think we should support it thought the map. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

There are about 600+ links, though some by same person in user space, and others in multi-language translations. Either way there looks to be a general acceptance by the community that linking to the site is reasonable, and if that is the case, then our making it easier, and more resilient to change also sounds reasonable. Anyone see downsides to the interwiki?  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:19, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Nope. I like the idea. In fact, there was a "Multilingual Wiktionary" project on Incubator that was trying to move in that direction, but in the end there was no need for it, because OmegaWiki already exists. StevenJ81 (talk) 03:19, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Actually it is intended to move it to our servers and integrate it into Wikidata/Wiktionary someday. --Vogone (talk) 03:27, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
That's stretching a point; right now it seems like an open proposal, nothing more. StevenJ81 (talk) 03:46, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
It only lacks implementation, there is very clear consensus to move forward and OmegaWiki itself already decided to make the way free for the move. It may be true that it still is going to be rejected despite the consensus, but the intent to move cannot be denied. --Vogone (talk) 14:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Final thoughts?  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Seems uncontroversial to me. —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Can someone please add this? —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:04, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Support Support it is basically a superior version of the Wiktionary, and contains a lot more languages. --Donald Trung (Talk 🤳🏻) (My global lock 😒🌏🔒) (My global unlock 😄🌏🔓) 10:35, 29 October 2017 (UTC)



Bonjour! uMap is one of the largest multilangual online map service that use layers / opensource / OpenStreetMap. We use it a lot within Wiki pages, not only in English or French, but also in other languages. It would be awesome to have an Interwiki created for uMap. Especially right now, since we're organising the Canadian Contribution Month!! Thank you in advance. Best regards, Benoit Rochon (talk) 17:24, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

I support this. Amqui (talk) 02:46, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Can you give some examples of the urls in use and how they are stable. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:24, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment Comment At the moment system tells me ... COIBot> 154 records; Top 10 wikis where has been added: w:fr (31), w:de (16), w:en (15), m (8), w:tr (8), w:es (6), www.mediawiki (6), w:ar (5), w:ca (4), de.wikivoyage (4).

The community is using uMap a lot. I'm the president Wikimedia Canada and we use uMap layers very often, since many years. We would like to have an interwiki for$1 ... This is just common sense. Thank you to make this happen. Best regards. Benoit Rochon (talk) 03:19, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@Девочка Енота: The request was to have example urls and demonstration that they are stable. That is still a requirement for us to place an interwiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)


New trial (last 6 years ago, see Talk: Interwiki map/Archives/2011-04). Now:
Mapping: HeraldikWiki: to$1
Meanwhile more than 100 links on and also on other wikis. Since 2013, has its own template for integration (see de:Vorlage:Heraldik-Wiki, 180x integrations). 1001 Greetings. --Arthur Diebold (talk) 00:06, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Comment Comment I am having COIBot run a report, though rough estimate is about 200 additions over time, though looks like only about 100 active today, and most of those to User and Project namespace, with less than a dozen to main namespace. Can I ask why you would want full name like that is there any issue or competition on confusion with something like heraldik? as I think that people will forget or confuse whether to place or not place the hyphen.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:19, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
    I will amend that previous count, I see that we have http: and https: urls, and to top that off we have www leading and no subdomain names, so there is a sufficiency. I also note that there are some urls that have /index.php/ in urls, so can we please confirm that you do want /wiki/. I also note that are some references to /images/ in some urls, so we would need to confirm whether they are meant to be in or out.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:39, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
  • heraldik would be fine.
  • In 2011 we only had http; but we changed over to https a long time ago and today we favor https.
  • I don't know if /index.php/ or /wiki/ is more suitable. I was just testing /wiki/ -- and that worked in most test cases. I like to join the solution that is "better" for interwiki communication. Entry point URLs are:
    article path: /wiki/$1
    script path: //
    index.php: //
    api.php: //
    load.php: //
1001 greetings --Arthur Diebold (talk) 12:16, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Suggested process:

Mapping: Heraldik to$1

We can revisit images with either a separate interwiki shortcut if they remain at the current url, or if you work out a means to slot them into your path, then you can go from there. BTW I was not suggesting bringing them here, more the ability to readily link to them in situ. If the community can give feedback, and if there is nothing within the next week, then I will implement.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:30, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Two weeks are over. Nothing's happening. This is pity. --Arthur Diebold (talk) 00:46, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed removals[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for proposing that a prefix be disabled; please add new entries at the bottom of the section. Remember to explain why it should be disabled, particularly in view of the difficulty involved in correcting any use of the prefix (to generate a list of pages to fix: toollabs:pirsquared/iw.php). Completed requests are marked with {{done}} or {{not done}} and moved to the archives.

Requests for updates[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for requesting update for an existing interwiki. This could be needed if your site's URL has changed. Please add new entries at the bottom of the section.[edit]

Please update to from "$1" to "//$1" (site supports now SSL) --Jkan997 (talk) 09:52, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes check.svg DoneMarcoAurelio (talk) 10:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC)


Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for comments related to problems or corrections with the interwiki map (such as incorrect syntax or entries not functioning). This is not the section to request that a prefix be disabled (see Proposed removals above).

Other discussions[edit]


Announced publicly today, DMOZ will be closed by AOL in two weeks. Pretty crazy. The community is planning on continuing but we don't know where and when just yet. Either way, these links will have to change. The entire site will evidently become a splash page saying that DMOZ has closed. —Justin (koavf)TCM 00:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold, pending further clarification  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:04, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: The best option right now is to redirect to I believe the entire directory has been ported over in a static form with a one-to-one mapping (e.g. is at —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:53, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: I have made the change for DMOZ, though holding off asking for an update for the moment … noting a couple of things 1) the search functionality at dmoztools is not functioning so unchanged until confirmed; 2) there is no www component in the DNS (not that it matters for this component). If you can confirm the search function so we can step onwards.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:27, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Yes, the search is down--it's just a static mirror of the contents but not anything else back-end (including profiles, queues, scripts, etc.): just the links and the ontology. (At the moment.) I realize this is probably not a desirable outgoing link forever but the situation should be cleared up soon and an active community with a more functional site launched. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:32, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: Can the DMOZ community then build a static landing page for search, and we can direct (without parameters) to that rather than a broken search page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:39, 14 March 2017 (UTC) @Koavf: ???
@Billinghurst: I've contacted the user running dmoztools and he's working on search of that site. There's still no consensus on when/where the community will go long-term. —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:33, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: + 1 month ping  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Crazy coincidence that I posted on the DMOZ forums just today about this topic. For now, the community fork is still dmoztools and there's not a clear plan for an editable version. :/ —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: Going to a dead search is less than ideal. Can you ask about a static landing page for search interwiki, even if it explains that there is no search. Better than wilderness~  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:22, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Instructions to Meta-Wiki administrators[edit]

  • interwiki prefixes are case-insensitive

Following updates to Interwiki map, please either

Update logs[edit]