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.

ICANN Wiki[edit]

The following discussion is closed: not done, no evident consensus  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

link:$1 prefix:icannwiki:

ICANNWiki, the independent collaborative resource for the ICANN community.

  • There is Top Level Domain explosion. WikiPedia do not allow creating pages for every top level domain.
  • This wiki contains very detailed information about all the generic top level domains.
  • Has many other topics related with the top level domains, such as DNSSEC.
  • Some of ICANNWiki sponsors are Google, VeriSign, ICANN, Donuts, Sedo, Dyn, DotAfrica, Radix.
Wikipedia has allowed pages about every top-level domain. There are hundreds of country-level domains, for instance. Not sure what "sponsors" have to do with anything, as we are not for sale? K7L (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
K7L, check out w:Template:Generic_top-level_domains, I have created some pages like etc, they have all been proposed for deletion or they were redirected. Plus, I have been blocked for a week for mass creating new pages (they claimed that for example .ninja is not popular thus cannot be created). Okay, if this is the case let's at least link them to ICANN Wiki. --Kirov Airship (talk) 17:08, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Oppose, massive spamming for new TLDs on enwiki, actually a case for the spamblock instead of the interwiki list. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:57, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
You mean this site has been spammed as an external link? This, that and the other (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, some rather poor enwiki new TLD stubs with a link to this site as everything remotely resembling a notable 3rd party reference (not counting ICANN itself as 3rd party.) Not their fault, they are also victims of the new TLD flood. –Be..anyone (talk) 21:36, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
As a general comment, this wiki does seem very detailed, particularly in regards to gTLDs, but I also wonder about how serious it is. It seems to include a cartoon drawing of each individual alongside their photo, which is really bizarre. Does anyone know if it is an official ICANN-sanctioned project? It claims to be, but I wonder... This, that and the other (talk) 11:08, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Having looked more closely, it does seem to be a perfectly serious wiki - the "caricatures" just being a part of its community identity - and I would Support Support this addition. The fact that the site was spammed isn't necessarily the fault of the wiki operators, and the potential for legitimate use is clear. This, that and the other (talk) 14:10, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
18++ months later, where are we? Is this still required? We look to have about 80 links to ICANNwiki. What would the community like done?  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
X mark.svg Closing as lacking consensus, please feel free to reopen and return from the archives.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)



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)

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.

SSL/HTTPS Updates[edit]

  • Could we update all the URLs to get https:// to replace http:// where appropriate? If not others, at least Thanks! --Jeffmcneill (talk)
    When someone tells us which are appropriate to update, then we will do them. I have updated on the list, though it is not active until the next system update is requested.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I have not checked all of the prefixes, but the following prefixes have an HTTP URL that generates a 301 Moved Permanently redirect to an HTTPS URL. For these prefixes, it would seem useful to change the HTTP URL to an HTTPS URL and in doing so provide additional privacy and security for users (in addition to reducing the number of redirects.)
--Elegie (talk) 06:22, 23 April 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)

RFC: Overhaul Interwiki map, unify with Sites and WikiMap[edit]

An ongoing RFC at Phabricator regarding the interwiki map is taking place. Please see phab:T113034. —MarcoAurelio 08:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Instructions to meta administrators[edit]

  • interwiki prefixes are case-insensitive

Following updates to Interwiki map, please either

Update logs[edit]