Talk:Interwiki map

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to 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)
Hello billinghurst & Девочка Енота, I use the uMap at least twice a year for Wikimedia contests :
I use uMap for the past 5 years and URLs$1 are stable and multilingual. Best regards, Benoit Rochon (talk) 13:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[edit]

Link:$1 prefix:regio:

  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site: it is a special wiki for topics, that dont merit a separate Wikipedia article in but are appropriate for a wiki with more localized content and viewers. So serveral articles are used to be exported to from Sometimes articles are re-imported to, when topics have been gaining in importance.
    Many wiki-newbies start working in and then change to is suported by WMAT (Wikimedia Austria) as a partner project of WMAT
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: It is a private wiki, that requires user registration before any edit is permitted. Registration is done by sysops and requires application via email;
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): Source of files and pics is simply WikiCommons, see e.g. most used files on;
  4. be a wiki: yes;
  5. have reasonable amounts of content: lots of content already with 25,743,616 hits (!); see main side (german), among others;
  6. not contain malware: of course not.

Thanks a lot, --Agruwie (talk) 22:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

There are many links to at user talk pages, because during relevance discussion or deletion discussion often is suggested as an alternative wiki for articles focusing on regional issues, best --Agruwie (talk) 03:37, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[edit]

Link:$1 prefix:dashboard:

  1. tool developped by WMF.
  2. stable link :$1
  3. easy to use prefix : [[:dashboard:]] /or/ [[:wmfdashboard:]]
  4. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects.
  5. relevant for edit-a-thons, organizers, users, stats, etc.
  6. allow to create "Enroll" buttons using an non external link.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Benoit Rochon (talk) 4 January 2018‎[edit] was the old domain name of the wiki before the move in 2016. All the links to are automatically redirected to

Link:$1 prefix:Transit:

  1. stable link :$1
  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site
    • Allows easy linking to detailed transit information. The wiki is designed specifically as a travel guide on public transportation. Some users on Wikipedia tried to include detailed transit information for specific locations but got rejected because such information takes too much space relative to other relevant contents and not meeting the purpose of Wikipedia. See [1] for example. and Wikipedia have separate purposes for the same transit system or transit infrastructure: one focuses on being a user guide and directory, the other focuses on background, history, and controversies.
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
    • has operated for a decade spam free. User accounts are manually approved.
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
    • CC BY-SA 3.0
  4. be a wiki
    • yes
  5. have reasonable amounts of content
    • 37,043 content pages covering transit routes (down to individual route level), transit centers/stations, and community destinations.
  6. not contain malware
    • no malware.

Acnetj (talk) 08:50, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I see about 70 links on wikis to; and no links to How much do you believe it is going to be used?  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:13, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
There's no direct lines to because the old links to got redirected to automatically. There should be at least 70 links. Acnetj (talk) 02:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[edit]

Link:$1 prefix:wikitrek:

WikiTrek is an open project aimed to convert it:HyperTrek from a custom-made dynamic site to a wiki based on MediaWiki.
HyperTrek is the most comprehensive guide to en:Star Trek in Italian, but it is no longer actively maintained. To update the site, improve collaboration and simplify contributions, all the data have been transferred from the old site to new wiki. This wiki already has several contributors and we think the user base will increase in due time.

Italian Wikipedia already tooks data from Hypertrek, but it does not make sense to duplicate that information: this is lenghty manual process. With this conversion, the content of the site was automatically converted to a MediaWiki site and, implementing this interwiki link, all the content con be linked directly from Wikipedia. So users an take advantage from a complete data set and easy linking with no manual work.

Tu summarize:

  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site
    It is the most comprehensive guide to Star Trek in italian
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
    spam does not exist on the site and the community will take care this will be the case in future as well
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
    texts are released under CC BY-SA 4.0 or GFDL
  4. be a wiki
    it is a wiki based on standard MediaWiki installation
  5. have reasonable amounts of content
    site currently has more than 14.000 pages
  6. not contain malware
    it does not contain any malware

Lucamauri (talk) 08:42, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Support Support I support this project because is the natural evolution of HyperTrek. --Hypertrek (talk) 10:36, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
Support Support I support this project. It is an up-to-date blending between a classical hypertext project started decades ago, and an interactive, editable by everyone portal, in the spirit of the wiki initiatives. Afullo (talk) 10:45, 30 June 2018 (UTC)


Link:$1 prefix:lenciclopedia:

L'Enciclopèdia (formerly known as Uiquipèdia) is a wiki encyclopedia project written in Valencian, but using orthography from the Real Acadèmia de Cultura Valenciana (El Puig Rules), which defends an ortographical and grammar standard completely different from standard Catalan (as regulated by the Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua and the Institut d'Estudis Catalans), used in the Catalan/Valencian Wikipedia (Viquipèdia). This website fulfills the six criteria for inclusion and I propose to add it to the interwiki map. --Agusbou2015 (talk) 22:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Debian Wiki[edit]


Prefix: debian: or debianwiki:.

Frequently linked to on more technical wikis like and wikitech, and quite a few on English Wikipedia, which surprised me.

Full disclosure: I'm a Debian developer. Legoktm (talk) 07:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

  • If it were to be added, I'd force the https linking in the interwiki as proposed, despite having links in http. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 00:12, 27 January 2019 (UTC)



Prefix: mariowikide or demariowiki

To summarize: 1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site: is the German counterpart to, which already is included in the interwiki list and the largest independent German site about Mario-related topics.

2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: Of course I won't encourage our contributors to spam links in Wikipedia, also most of the Mario-related articles in the German Wikipedia already have weblinks in the classic format to articles. On our wiki, we don't have any spam problems. free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): our articles are licensed with CC-by-NC-SA.

4. be a wiki: self-hosted MediaWiki-based wiki

5. have reasonable amounts of content: currently almost 6000 articles

6.not contain malware: no ads, no external scripts, up-to-date software. Should not be in risk of becoming a malware-spreading site.

Semako96 (talk) 22:58, 4 February 2019 (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.


I don't understand why Uncyclopedia was added to this list. The text at the top says "Remember to specify why the prefix would be useful on a significant number of pages on Wikimedia Foundation projects", but I see no reason why anyone would need to link to a little-known humor wiki with no relevance to Wikimedia projects other than claiming to be a parody of Wikipedia. I notice this prefix was removed in 2009 after this discussion. It is also worth noting that there are two Uncyclopedias. The community forked in 2013, and a significant portion of it remained at, which today is the more active site and ranks higher in search results. (See wikipedia:Uncyclopedia, which links to both sites, and the number of active users listed on their statistics pages. Also note that the Wikipedia article does not use the interwiki.) I know the Wikia-hosted version can still be linked to by wikia:uncyclopedia:pagename, but having a dedicated prefix for either site and not the other seems like playing favorites.

I might also suggest that is not the kind of site Wikimedia projects would want to be associated with. It is highly male-dominated, as can be seen from their active admins page which lists several self-identified men but no self-identified women. One of those men wrote this misguided opinion piece about the #MeToo movement. They also have an associated IRC channel #uncyclopedia where some really vile things have been said including Holocaust denial. (Ctrl+F for "holocaust". The comment may have been a joke, but if so it's in bad taste. Bigotry is often framed as "jokes" to make it socially acceptable.) There's more I could say, but I don't think it would be appropriate here. I don't know if Wikimedia sites or the WMF care about the nature of the communities they give traffic to with interwiki links, but if they do, I hope they consider that this one conflicts with their principles. Ekips39 (talk) 21:59, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Speedy Remove. It was removed per consensus, and I don't see in the archives any thread discussing and approving its readittion. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Uncyclopedia was added to match the addition to the MediaWiki default interwiki map. I don't think the previous removal discussion is that relevant, given the site forking from Wikia, etc. I don't really follow the line of argumentation about being "male-dominated" (not true, but have you looked at Wikimedia projects?) or IRC comments (have you ever been in #wikipedia-en?) and so on. It *is* a humor wiki. (disclaimer: I'm affiliated with Uncyclomedia Foundation). Legoktm (talk) 04:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
    There's no reason for Uncyclopedia to be on the default interwiki map either. It has no relevance to any wiki other than those affiliated with it. Forking from Wikia does not make it not Uncyclopedia. As MarcoAurelio said, there was no thread approving its readdition; at least, I could not find one. I did find this rejected request.
    Of course I'm aware Wikimedia projects are male-dominated, but many members are aware and trying to work against it, and is far more so as evidenced by the link I gave and by who actively edits there. Yes, I am a #wikipedia-en regular. I find it to be a very civilized place where comments like the ones I linked never occur ("the holocaust is a lie made up by the liberal jewish media cabal", "banging my mum is endless enjoyment", "If you were my fucktoy you wouldn't be semen covered, you'd be semen filled", etc.). Behavior on #wikipedia-en is well regulated, and the channel has a set of guidelines, unlike #uncyclopedia which has no rules at all. Being a humor wiki does not excuse or explain the kind of conduct I have pointed to. But in any case, as I said, this site is not a useful interwiki link for Wikimedia or almost anything else. Ekips39 (talk) 04:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Let me get this straight... you want to remove a link to a group of about fifty wikis (as Uncyclopedia exists in multiple languages, across multiple communities) because someone said something you didn't like... not on the wiki, but on an IRC #channel? This looks to be a political ploy, not a legit attempt to apply established criteria. And yes, there was a discussion both when it was removed (as Wikia projects can already be accessed in a format like wikia:uncyclopedia:PageName) and when it was restored. Nothing has changed since then. K7L (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
@Legoktm: It's not a humor wiki, it's a rumors wiki, Please remove it from special:interwiki. -- 05:38, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Discontinue Wikinvest[edit]

All external links via this interwiki are useless now.

  • The path is ignored, they all are directed to:
  • There is no free information available any longer, at least not without registration.
  • See as brief example e.g. w:en:Price-weighted index both reference and external link.
  • The platform is highly commercial and trying to persuade visitors to invest their money via this company. This is not what we request a platform to provide helpful information to our readers. We should not direct readers to a particular finance management company. The easiest way to manage & improve your investments ÷ Free online personal finance investment software.
  • It is not clear why they ever got an interwiki shortcut; the motivation for running Wikinvest has always been to catch people and make them invest money. See w:en:Wikinvest.

Greetings --PerfektesChaos (talk) 19:00, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

There are a lot of links to remove Would you suggest that there is a link expansion, and then mark as deadlinks, and leave the wikis to manage? Just removing the links is the other option.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:38, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Apparently there is no content available, at least not for free, or put some hundred thousand bucks in as investment to become a silver card member.
Perhaps something is archived via the original expanded URL. No idea.
But yes, projects should get a notice and the old path as starting point for investigations, and they may proceed on their own decisions. Other sites or even wiki pages might be a replacement in some cases.
Greetings --PerfektesChaos (talk) 21:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
@PerfektesChaos: What may be worthwhile is having a target page here at metawiki for all discontinued interwikis where the links have not been removed, and we are concerned about retaining the dead links. Suggest one page, with an anchor per site, and we change the interwiki to point to that static interwiki#anchor. Of course, if someone wishes to build a bot, or manually remove them, then fantastic. We can add some bot requests to wikis if we find value in that.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:25, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, good idea.

  • I suggest a subpage: Interwiki map/Discontinued
    • Brief introduction in English, then sections per keyword.
    • Each section would contain three items:
      1. Recent URL pattern
        • By $1 the former URL can be reconstructed.
      2. Date of discarding (fall 2018, here)
      3. Link to the archived proposal debate (this section here, but in archive; first archive, then change config)
  • URL change would mean:
    • No $1 any longer.
    • Append #wikinvest
    • Subpage URL.
  • It is up to authors and communities how to deal with individual cases: Remove entirely, replace by other source, search web archives, mark as dead.
  • One problem left open: They still appear on Special:Interwiki and might mislead some people. An additional database field hide would be nice; use by parser for link production, but treat as non-existent in all other cases. Flag might even generate the fallback URL directly

Best, --PerfektesChaos (talk) 13:24, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

(+) If a discontinued flag is officially introduced, flagged keywords may be listed on Special:Interwiki with their last known URL pattern in a particular section, but usage will link to $wgInterwikiDiscontinuedURL pattern, if defined.
wgInterwikiDiscontinuedURL :=$0
The extension of interwiki extension started less than ten years ago, now by regular link rot more and more keywords will pass away in near future.
Yours, --PerfektesChaos (talk) 13:31, 5 November 2018 (UTC)


This website is down, and according to phab:T115790, has been repeatedly over the last several years (depending on how you interpret the last few comments in that bug report, it may have been down continuously for over two years by this point). It is only used a few hundred times, and only around 5 of those are articles, plus a couple dozen or so translation subpages here on MetaWiki (though I counted just by scanning the list, so I may have missed some). ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 17:46, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

I'd be curious as to what happened to the content which used to be on botwiki: as that project's been offline for a couple of years now, breaking the interwiki link. Did the info get moved to mw: or is it simply lost? K7L (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

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.

Doom Wiki[edit]

The original Doom Wiki is now at$1. Please replace the Wikia wiki interlink with the new url. Arianator with love (talk) 03:05, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

DMOZ and DMOZS[edit]

The DMOZ community is now live at so please replace instances of "" (a static mirror) with "" (a live fork that continues the project). —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:35, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

For the dmoz prefix, the target URL should be changed from$1 to$1 instead in order to make this change. (This is assuming that Curlie is a legitimate fork of DMOZ and that its replication of Web pages from DMOZ and/or is in compliance with any licensing requirements.) --Elegie (talk) 06:39, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

ForthFreak target URLs redirect to GitHub wiki[edit]

As of this writing, the ForthFreak prefix has the target URL$1. From what it appears, URLs that start with generate a 301 Moved Permanently redirect to For example, there are the URLs and It might be useful to use the GitHub page as the target URL for the ForthFreak prefix, in order to provide increased privacy and security for users by using an HTTPS URL, and for eliminating the redirect. Another possibility might be to use a target URL such as$1, to increase the chance that the URL for an existing wiki entry will be redirected to the corresponding wiki entry (assuming one exists) at the GitHub wiki. For example, there is a wiki entry on the GitHub page at --Elegie (talk) 05:57, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@Elegie:Looking at has me thinking that we would be better to just remove the interwiki link, it isn't being used.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:50, 3 April 2018 (UTC)


Can we please update infosphere to use https: instead of http:?

Thank you, —LLarson (said & done) 12:13, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

When I follow an existing http: link to the site it does not redirect me to an https: link. When I morph the http to https I get a browser warning that it is an insecure link. I would suggest that it is not fully compliant.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:57, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I tried multiple browsers on macOS, Windows, and iOS but wasn’t able to recreate your browser’s warning. My web console did list the website’s Creative Commons badge as being requested over HTTP,1 but if it is called, it is served over HTTPS.2 If that is what is causing your warning, I see user risk outweighed by benefits here. —LLarson (said & done) 15:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

IRCS vs. IRC[edit]

Why is there no ircs in Special:Interwiki? Shouldn't ircs be preferred over irc, 'cause its secure? All Template:Channel transclusions are linking to insecure connections. Two alternative proposals:

  • Could the ircs protocol be added to the map creating 4 new prefixes based on the exiting prefixes irc, freenode, ircrc, rcirc?
  • Alternatively, could the URLs of these prefixes just be changed to the ircs protocol (all listed servers do support IRCS, also all up-to date irc clients). This would eliminate all insecure irc links using interwiki, including thousands of Template:Channel transclusions.

Thanks! --Ptolusque (talk) 09:44, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ptolusque: there is IRC, have you misspoken, and need to amend? If you are asking why freenode is not available in secure IRC, probably because no one has requested it. Most direct requests that I have seen have been through their https interface.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes, misspelled. Corrected above. I'm asking why all irc servers provided in Special:Interwiki are not available in secure IRCS. Herby I request IRCS to be added or as replacement for irc. --Ptolusque (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Comment I asked Ptolusque to come here and raise this issue from Phabricator as I am unsure whether we should amend the existing links or add new ones. I do support using HTTPS of course. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:33, 22 July 2018 (UTC)


Maybe Wikia should change from$1 to$1 but more testing is strongly recommended. I have only tested one page at two Wikia wikis. Both are broken for me now and the change would fix one but not the other. It came up at w:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Template:TardisIndexFile where my tests are shown. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:33, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: thanks for the note, can you provide any documentation from wikia about what changes they are making to their naming convention? — xaosflux Talk 23:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I don't edit at Wikia and haven't seen any documentation. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:07, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
I found which says: To link to a page on a different community, enter "w:c:" followed by the domain of that wiki, followed by the page's name. This indicates$1. Trying this, both and work for me via redirects. Trying$1 without w:c:, works for me while fails. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: thanks for the note, to be clear this will be a change of:
  • FROM:$1
  • TO:$1
xaosflux Talk 00:55, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, that is currently my best guess. I haven't tried other Wikia links or different devices. At w:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 169#Links to Harry Potter wiki, Wikia behaved differently with different user agents. There may be four affected interwiki map entries. They currently say:
I haven't examined how WikiaSite:, Wikicities: and Wikicity: are used and whether they would all be better as$1. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:23, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done Wikia above is done, someone will need to test the others and let us know. — xaosflux Talk 14:11, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
I have now tested the use of many Wikia wikis in the English Wikipedia. The already made Wikia change to$1 will fix all tested links made with Wikia:. They are all broken with the old$1. WikiaSite and Wikicity need the same change to$1. All tested links are broken and will be fixed by this change. Wikicities needs a change from$1 to$1. All tested links are broken and will be fixed by this. Note that Wikicities does not currently include c: and should not start doing it. It should only add w:. This is because all tested existing uses are adapted to the current value without c: so they add c: in the wikilink like wikicities:c:Smallville:Spirit. The suggested change will produce the working instead of the broken In summary, these should be the new values:
  • Yes check.svg Done Wikia$1 (already done)
  • Yes check.svg Done WikiaSite$1
  • Yes check.svg Done Wikicities$1
  • Wikicity$1
All tests were with Firefox on Windows 10. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done all updates made. — xaosflux Talk 14:38, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
phab:T207596 opened to sync. — xaosflux Talk 14:41, 21 October 2018 (UTC)


This site moved to in last month. The site has not maintained complete link functionality from the previous address. The root url will redirect, and occasionally other links will as well but it mostly just timeouts. This is breaking several external link templates that use this interwiki link. I don't see any change to the site content, the name the only change. Frayae (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: The site has quite clearly become wikilivres again as was its name from 2006-2017. Could you update this? Frayae (talk) 20:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Note, this is both the wikilivres and the bibliowiki prefixes. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 14:52, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done; Special:Diff/18733804MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:26, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

ISSN redirects to HTTPS[edit]

ISSN:$1 issn:0021-6925

Note: Some ISSN URLs, such as, generate a 301 redirect to an HTTPS URL that generates a 303 redirect to another HTTPS URL. At the same time, there are other ISSN URLs, such as, that only generate a 301 redirect to an HTTPS URL. The change specified above should cover both situations. --Elegie (talk) 09:56, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

HTTPS for freedomdefined[edit]

Please update freedomdefined: to$1 to use encrypted connection. It has a three-month Let’s Encrypt certificate valid from last Sunday, so it’s a fast catch! :) Hopefully they configured the update script correctly and it will still work in May. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 20:54, 31 January 2019 (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]

When to accept or reject a request[edit]

I would like to suggest to better explain to the users how the accept or reject decisions are made and in what time frame. As you can see from the list above, there are several requests lying here since months (in some cases for more than an year) and it is not clear (at least to me) if and when a request will be accepted or rejected.
At the top of the page it is written Admins, please allow consensus to form (or at least no objections to be raised over a period of a few days), but this is clearly not the case as months are passing, not days.
So I would say that either the approval process is not working as expected, or it is not explained in a clear way to the reader. LucaMauri (talk) 14:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I would say that the text reflected the early days, not the current days where the requirements of the wikis are more specific, and where we have less requirement for change. I don't think that the process is wrong, it is simply that those cases you highlight don't demonstrate a consensus to add, and it is be better instruction to proponents that needs revision. Requests here need the input of the wikis where the links will be used. I would suggest that these proponents need to place their request here, then announce their requests at those wikis where they expect the uses to occur, so that the broader community can reach that consensus here.

Clear cases of demonstrated use, especially internal use, have been approved. Low use, uncertain requests have sat here awaiting a consensus that the value for addition exists.

In my opinion, administrators are here to undertake the addition/change/removal after a consensus has been reached, not to generate the discussion to form a consensus. We could close requests as not done, if they haven't got that clear consensus, or we can leave them open, as has been the practice. [The community decides where we are going, administrators are the conduit to implementation.]  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I see your point and understand your reasons. But then again, information to the users needs to be updated.
First of all: who is in charge of reviewing documentation? Is this something we users should take care of, or an Administrator is better suited for?
Secondly, how we define consensus? Do we need 10 {{support}}? Or 20? Or 1.000? And how to weight them against any number of {{oppose}}?
I think we need at least a general guideline to know how to approach a proposal and gather supporters.--LucaMauri (talk) 11:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

rendering/distinction between internal and external links[edit]

Is there a way to introduce distinct rendering for the entries here? Before the interwiki map was opened to allow prefixes for external sites, readers could visually clearly distinguish between an internal links (WMF projects) and external links, but now that is not possible anymore. This imho rather confusing and also counterintuitive to the rules in some/many wikipedias, which allow external links only in certain section and not the article's main text. Not to mention that some if the entries here somewhat violate the usual criteria for external links of some wikipedias as well.--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:33, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

The rendering of interwiki links is controlled by the CSS class .extiw: in our MediaWiki installation we decided to show a small sunflower icon (WikiMedia logo) next to any interwiki link and we managed to do this simply adding a background-image property to the class in the CSS. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, there is not an easy way to differentiate between different sites. The general idea would be to add a second class – beside .extiw – to the links identifying the prefix of the website where the link points to: then it could be possible to customize every links in a similar way as the <li> elements in the sidebar. This should be suggested as a change to MediWiki codebase, but I haven't found the time to do so, yet. --LucaMauri (talk) 12:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Instructions to Meta-Wiki administrators[edit]

Update logs[edit]

Due to limited search functionality, you will need to check both log searches.

Current map in the configuration[edit]

  • You can check here the current map as existing on the Wikimedia configuration files.