Talk:Interwiki map

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 7 days ago by Pppery in topic Requests for updates
The associated page is used by the MediaWiki software to add, remove or update 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 upon request through the completion of a phabricator ticket. 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.

{{interwiki request}} can be used to assist in the making and managing requests.

Instructions to Meta-Wiki administrators

Tools

  • You may use global search to look for URL and interwiki link use. Suggest the use of {{interwiki request}} when making requests for removals and updates.

Current map in the configuration

Wikidata

Wikidata stores the mapped interwiki code as an item for domains in the interwiki map using interwiki prefix at Wikimedia (P6720). Additions, removals and updates should be noted against the corresponding item in Wikidata. Also to note the direction at Complex constraint violations/P6720

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days.

Proposed additions[edit]

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 would:

  1. be useful on a significant number of pages
  2. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site
  3. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
  4. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
  5. be a wiki
  6. have reasonable amounts of content
  7. 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. Before adding a new entry to the interwiki map, use this tool to check whether any existing page names conflict with the proposed prefix.

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

WikiTrek.org[edit]





Interwiki request: new

Status:    In progress

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)Reply

Support Support I support this project because is the natural evolution of HyperTrek. --Hypertrek (talk) 10:36, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
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)Reply
  • For the record: there are 488 links to hypertrek.info on it.wikipedia, although 337 of these are just links to the front page and the rest appear to be concentrated on a few articles. There are also 33 links to wikitrek.org. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
    I still don't understand what is going on here. Are they wanting a wiki for coordinating moving Hypertrek? To where is Hypertrek moving? Is it moving to WikiTrek? Is there something required to Hypertrek? <shrug>  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Comment 20221224 currently 145 links to wikitrek.org (primarily itWP, and some wikidata) and 330 to hypertrek.info, It would seem that there is sufficient reason to create the interwiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Comment 2023-05-29 163 links and 375 links respectively. Still not excessive numbers, so leaving this open for the community to direct what they would like to happen.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:03, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
This looks reasonable to add to me. * Pppery * it has begun 19:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Fandom[edit]



Interwiki request: new

Status:    In progress

An interwiki for Fandom currently exists as wikia: and its alias wikiasite: (along with specific interwikis to certain Fandom-hosted wikis), but there is no alias named "Fandom". Since the site has been renamed, I suggest allowing the new terminology to be used in links as well, to avoid confusion. Thanks, EpicPupper (talk) 00:07, 4 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@EpicPupper: that seems to be half a story.

I have not buried myself into the history of fandom/wikia ins and outs, so please take a step back and look to concisely re-explain what has happened, what it needing to be achieved, and any politics that are at play so the community can make an informed decision.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Billinghurst, sure, here is some more information about the rename. In 2016, Wikia, a wiki hosting platform founded by Jimmy Wales and Angela Beesley Starling, underwent a major rebranding effort and changed its name to Fandom powered by Wikia 1. The name change was announced in a blog post on the Wikia website, which stated that the new name better reflected the platform's focus on communities and fan-created content. In a series of later changes from 2019-2021, all wikis migrated from wikia.org domains to fandom.com domains, and the Wikia branding was stripped completely 2. These changes were mostly uncontroversial and there was little negative feedback from the Fandom community following them. (Most opposers softened their tone a couple of years after the transition). Even if the community largely did not support these changes, that is irrelevant in this situation as "Fandom" is ultimately the official name of the website. Hope that helps! I think this change is relatively minor as it is merely adding an alias to the existing link, not a completely new one. EpicPupper (talk) 06:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Fandom is a generic noun - could that be a problem? "fandomcom", "fandomdotcom" or "fandomwiki" would be more specific. whym (talk) 11:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
Looking back, my comment above doesn't sound very meaningful. Let me try again. What I'm uneasy about is that this proposal is to replace a proper noun ("Wikia") to a generic noun which happens to be trademarked ("Fandom"). The change will increase ambiguity. It looks like when English Wikipedia moved the article, they added a disambiguation, probably because "fandom" is too ambiguous: en:Wikiaen:Fandom (website). whym (talk) 14:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
I don't see the issue that you're trying to solve here and I don't see the ambiguity. If someone is making an interwiki link with the "fandom" prefix it's obvious that they're trying to link to the website containing a massive wiki farm, they're not going to be trying to link to a music album, a documentary or the abstract concept of "a group of fans". 192.76.8.66 16:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Concur with 192. I would oppose FandomSite or any alternatives as I believe that they are unnecessary. Frostly (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • wikia • global-search <= high level of usage, still pertinent link
  • wikiasite • global-search <= high level of usage, still pertinent link
  • fandom • global-search <- noting that existing use may indicate that this is a namespace name, not that such perturb us

 — billinghurst sDrewth 00:15, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@EricPupper: Why do you have namespace codes w:c: in the proposed prefix ? Can you please provide some sample landing targets? Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:26, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
[[w:c:wikiname:Pagename]] is how you link from one Fandom wiki to another.[1] MSMST1543 (talk) 01:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
https://about.fandom.com/about says "over 40 million content pages in over 80 languages on 250,000 wikis". The page "The Joker" in the wiki "batman" is at https://batman.fandom.com/wiki/The_Joker. We cannot generate such a url directly with "batman" and "The Joker" in different places so we rely on redirects at Fandom. These both work currently:
I don't know whether both forms work for all Fandom wikis and will continue to work. Considering they ask their own users to write w:c: at [2], I guess it's safest to use that form. We already say https://community.fandom.com/wiki/w:c:$1 for both wikia:, WikiaSite: and Wikicity:, and I haven't heard complaints about broken links. The proposal is simply to add one more prefix for this. The site has been called Fandom and located at fandom.com for years so it seems reasonable. Four prefixes for the same site is a lot but considering their size and Fandom branding, I don't think we should worry about having a fourth prefix. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'm still not sure if the new name is recognized well as a website name, without adding some sort of disambiguation. "Wikia" had 13 years (2006-2019), while "Fandom" had 8 years (2016-2014), according to en:Fandom (website). Maybe revisit in a few years? whym (talk) 10:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I should have written 2016-2024 instead of 2016-2014. Sorry if that was confusing. whym (talk) 10:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Interwiki.list is behind even the Fandom updates. I'll handle that, but any further changes here should probably be propogated there. * Pppery * it has begun 18:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
This looks fine to add to me. I'll submit it though code review to update interwiki.list first, though. * Pppery * it has begun 19:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
This was added to interwiki.list. Now fine to add to Meta as well. I agree "fandom" by itself is clear enough. * Pppery * it has begun 05:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Several frequently used sites on Wikimedia Commons[edit]

The following websites are very widely used on Commons as part of authority control, based on the Wikidata properties OCLC control number (P243), ISNI (P213) and Library of Congress authority ID (P244); by creating interwiki prefixes for them, we can link to them using interwiki instead of external link syntax, which is better for the database (see Commons discussion and T343131). --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 21:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Interwiki request templates

Interwiki request: new

Status:    In progress

Interwiki request: new

Status:    In progress

Interwiki request: new

Status:    In progress

Miraheze[edit]



Interwiki request: new

Status:    On hold

Previously discussed in 2019, 2022 and 2023. The major reason against it is it is run by John F. Lewis, a WMF-banned user; this is no longer true since control of Miraheze has beed handed to another US entity (and John has resigned in March 2023). So we may reconsider it.--GZWDer (talk) 05:04, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Is it being sufficiently used to be reconsidered? While the ban aspect may be a consideration, the primary consideration is that it is needed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:44, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Based on LinkSearch I see enough uses. I won't add this myself since I'm a contributor to Miraheze, but an addition is warranted. * Pppery * it has begun 00:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
But we definitely should wait until Miraheze decides whether to rename itself to WikiTide first, so we don't have to go through this process again if they decide to. * Pppery * it has begun 19:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Tardis Wiki[edit]

Interwiki request: new

Status:    In progress

Tardis Wiki is the Doctor Who wiki. We recently became independent after just about 20 years on Wikia/Fandom (having been one of the earliest members of Wikicities back in 2004).

Since most of our regular contributors and admins have been moving over to the forked wiki, this is where the most up-to-date articles will be. (We were already one of the largest wikis on the site.)

And since we have very different notability guidelines to Wikipedia, declaring no topic too small for coverage so long as there's a Doctor Who universe source, we're very useful to link to in the Doctor Who Portal.

However, as much as our new freedom has afforded many improvements for our site and community, not least getting away from Fandom's intrusive ads, it's now a lot more difficult to link to us at our own domain.

In case there's any doubt:

  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site
    Tardis has long been the most comprehensive guide to the Doctor Who franchise available online.
    At the moment, there are 396 uses of Template:Tardis Data Core on Wikipedia, linking to our wiki. [Currently resorting to external links for the time being.]
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
    There is no spam on the wiki. Our team of admins makes sure that this continues to be the case, and we also use abuse filters to facilitate this.
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
    All content is released under CC BY-SA 3.0.
  4. be a wiki
    This is a wiki based on MediaWiki with all relevant extensions installed. Anyone can edit.
  5. have reasonable amounts of content
    The site currently has more than 108,000 articles.
  6. not contain malware
    There is most certainly not any malware.

Thanks.
SmallerOnTheOutside (talk) 10:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Search gives 800 uses on enwiki, and presumably more on other wikis, not counting links to tardis.wikia.com which still has several hundred links. And it's unfair to the TARDIS wiki crew that they used to have an interwiki when they were part of Fandom and now they don't. This looks reasonable to add. * Pppery * it has begun 01:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia API Portal[edit]

Interwiki request: new

Status:    On hold

The Wikimedia API Portal is a wiki that documents various APIs around Wikimedia projects. It seems to make sense to not display them as external links. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Denny (talk) 18:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I suggest wmapi. Nardog (talk) 12:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Would recommend waiting for the outcome of T358303 first. * Pppery * it has begun 00:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

MDWiki[edit]

Interwiki request: new

Status:    In progress

[3] is the home of both Wiki Project Med and an improved version of our medical content which we use as a start for translation. As such translations of this content have resulted in more than 2,600 articles across 44 languages of Wikipedia.[4] Additionally software we have been involved with developing is being picked up by Wikipedias such as Template:OWID. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:51, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Agree this should be added. * Pppery * it has begun 00:07, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

shoutwiki[edit]



Included in default interwiki map as shoutwiki:. ShoutWiki is a wiki farm hosting over 13,000 wikis, most licensed under CC BY-SA. Top 40 Wikipedias have over 500 links to them. Any wiki can be reached using link http://www.shoutwiki.com/wiki/w:subdomain:page. 01miki10 (talk) 13:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Comment Comment - If we are making an interwiki for this, then we might use one for mw:Miraheze too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LightningComplexFire (talk) 18:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
Miraheze is unlikely to be added per Talk:Interwiki_map/Archives/2019#Miraheze. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Restored from archive since this was archived without resolution. Either it should be removed from the default interwiki map or it should be added to the local one - it's bizarre for something to be in the default map but not the local one. No opinion on which. * Pppery * it has begun 19:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Proposed removals[edit]

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). Please add {{Interwikicheck|interwiki code}} to top of the new section.

Completed requests are marked with {{done}} or {{not done}} and moved to the archives.

wmve[edit]

Interwiki request: removal

Status:    On hold

Dead, attempting to access this site results in an NXDOMAIN error. According to Interwiki map/detailed table this has/had hundreds of uses. I suggest remapping this to point at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Venezuela, to match what has been done with a number of other dead chapter sites. 192.76.8.66 16:44, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Multiple uses, would need to be remapped with explanation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
This is no longer a nxdomain, it's now a wordpress site saying "this site is under maintenance". Not sure what to do here. * Pppery * it has begun 22:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! The site is under maintenance, due to a failed provider's change. The chapter isn't dead. We're working to solve it. Thanks! --Ybsen lucero (talk) 10:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

mozcom[edit]

Interwiki request: removal

Status:    In progress

No uses outside user namespace on any WMF wiki, adequately covered by Fandom which already has an interwiki. * Pppery * it has begun 02:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

phwiki[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Largely dead site that seems to no longer be a wiki, no significant uses. * Pppery * it has begun 02:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

guildwiki[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

No significant uses, adequately covered by Fandom. * Pppery * it has begun 03:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

onelook[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Not a wiki, no significant uses. * Pppery * it has begun 03:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

liswiki[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Dead wiki (everything redirect to the main page). Has some significant uses so may warrant a /discontinued entry. * Pppery * it has begun 03:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Not sure what I was thinking with significant uses. Looks unused now. * Pppery * it has begun 01:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

wikimac-de[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Awkward prefix, no significant uses, site of questionable value. * Pppery * it has begun 03:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

seattlewiki[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Fandom wiki (hence covered by existing interwikis for fandom), no uses outside userspace. * Pppery * it has begun 03:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

aquariumwiki[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

This is a tricky one. The wiki it points to is overrun by spambots, but it does still have some useful content, and is used in a bunch of places. We could just take no action. * Pppery * it has begun 03:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

wikilivres[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Dead site (every subpage redirects to home page). Probably warrants a discontinued entry. * Pppery * it has begun 04:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

git[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Conflicts with language code. See phab:T360792. Has 700 uses so cleanup would be a pain, and this is a very theoretical issue and probably not going to come up, so feel free to decline this, but putting it here for the record. * Pppery * it has begun 04:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

zum[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress
  • related Wikidata item:

Conflicts with language code. See phab:T360792. Has 100 uses so cleanup would be a pain, and this is a very theoretical issue and probably not going to come up, so feel free to decline this, but putting it here for the record. * Pppery * it has begun 04:44, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

aew[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress
  • related Wikidata item:

Conflicts with language code. See phab:T360792. Relatively low use so not sure this meets the criteria for an interwiki anyway and may warrant total removal. * Pppery * it has begun 04:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

twl[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress
  • related Wikidata item:

Conflicts with language code. See phab:T360792. Surprisingly few uses so suggest renaming to something longer. * Pppery * it has begun 04:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

PokeWiki[edit]

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Interwiki request: remove

Status:    In progress

Per /Archives/2023#PokeWiki, it's worth considering removal of both of these interwikis. * Pppery * it has begun 15:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Requests for updates[edit]

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.

HammondWiki[edit]



HammondWiki • global-search

Current URL pattern

http://www.dairiki.org/HammondWiki/index.php3?$1

Proposed URL pattern

https://www.dairiki.org/HammondWiki/index.php3?$1

This site supports https, so it would probably be a good idea for the interwiki mapping to be updated to use it.

I do question whether this interwiki is actually worth keeping, according to Interwiki map/detailed table this interwiki had 4 uses in 2019, it's on a very niche topic and the project looks fairly dead - There have been no edits at all in the last 90 days. 192.76.8.66 18:29, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

One use. Recommend removal.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:30, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Also needs to be removed from interwiki.list. * Pppery * it has begun 19:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Updated to HTTPS. I'm inclined to keep this for historical value, since it's been around since 2001 and is used on the Nostalagia Wikipedia (!), but could be convinced to remove it. * Pppery * it has begun 20:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Updated further to https://www.dairiki.org/HammondWiki/$1. * Pppery * it has begun 01:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Interwiki.list was updated to HTTPS in gerrit:1026917. This can be resolved now unless we want to consider removal. * Pppery * it has begun 17:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

glottopedia[edit]



Interwiki request: update

Status:    Done
wikidata status:   Done

Current URL pattern: //glottopedia.org/index.php/$1

The Https part of this site seems to be dead - it produces "connection refused" errors. The interwiki should be updated to explicitly use the http site which is still functional. 192.76.8.66 16:16, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

a couple of uses, I would suggest that links be updated to urls, and we remove.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:16, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Updated. Leaving here to discuss removal. * Pppery * it has begun 20:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
This was added in 2020 per Talk:Interwiki map/Archives/2020#Glottopedia. While it's not caught on very much the same principles that applied in 2020 resulting in its addition don't appear to have changed much so I see no reason to remove. * Pppery * it has begun 18:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Baden[edit]

Interwiki request: update

Status:    In progress

Update to https as it is supported. Again, I really do question whether we need an interwiki to a site that covers only one town - it doesn't seem like it would ever see much use. 192.76.8.66 15:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Updated. Has 15 total uses, most of which are files on Commons. Probably warrants removal. * Pppery * it has begun 23:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

ganfyd[edit]

Interwiki request: update

Status:    In progress

Update to https. This is preserved as a read only archive and seems to be sort of falling to bits, so we should prepare for the possibility that this site may not be accessible in the future. 192.76.8.66 15:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Updated. Only a few uses total so should be removed entirely IMO. * Pppery * it has begun 23:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikimedia Quality[edit]

Interwiki request: Redirect..?

Status:    In progress
  • related Wikidata item: [[d:Special:EntityPage/{{{ITEM}}}|{{{ITEM}}}]]

I noticed this as an entry at w:Help:Interwiki linking#Interwiki linking from and within Wikimedia, it's a closed wiki, all it gives you is a page with a manual redirect. Whatever way the {{Interwiki request}} template parses sort-of-kinda-internal URLs, it hates this one.

It has a "longform" IW link - [[quality:]]

Following the most relevant option at the redirect you end up at Wikiquality/Portal (actually located here on meta-wiki), which is itself a vestigial page with the {{historical}} template applied.

So, obviously not important, but maybe the target should be changed to save people the extra click.

One cookie (talk) 20:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why would we need a shorthand to link to a closed wiki that has basically no content? —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
We don't, but that is what we have already. It exists, I'm not requesting that it be created.
There's basically no content at the Special:AllPages link for the wiki because "this wiki has been closed and its content has been moved to meta.wikimedia.org". Some of the content you're looking for is at the correct address for the shortcut's target, meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikiquality/Portal - but, since most of the content created for the project was as articles for a mailing list, the bulk of it is at listarchive:list/wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org/latest.
The project was seen as important, enough so that it was given a shortcut link, and its link was used as one of the 29 examples of prefix codes included at w:Help:Interwiki linking, so what we currently do actually have is a shorthand link which: has been used, can be found on pages of projects which are not closed and which will be seen by users, was functional when it was used, is now broken and points to a dead page.
The shortcut should either be fixed or removed from that list, but removing it from that list won't remove it from anywhere anyone's ever used it, where it will remain an annoying broken link! One cookie (talk) 14:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
"The shortcut should either be fixed or removed from that list". 100% agreed. I'd lean toward remove, as the quality wiki was closed a long time ago and I doubt there are any/many links, but that can be checked. Thorough response: thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:54, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I've fixed the template above. Don't feel comfortable removing this because we currently have a convention that each Wikimedia project has an interwiki link, which I don't want to break. I.e aa: exists too despite pointing nowhere. * Pppery * it has begun 23:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

dict, dictionary[edit]

dict • global-search dictionary • global-search

Currently points to a third-party dictionary. I just cleaned up several uses on enwiki that clearly intended to point to Wiktionary instead, and I would suggest these interwikis be updated in the same way to reduce confusion. * Pppery * it has begun 02:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Dictionary is also in the default interwiki map for new wikis (https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki/blob/master/maintenance/interwiki.list). * Pppery * it has begun 18:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I updated these to HTTPS in the mean time. * Pppery * it has begun 17:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Troubleshooting[edit]

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).

imdb[edit]

Interwiki has diverged between the map here and interwiki.list. Interwiki.list currently has one "imdb" prefix going to http://www.imdb.com/find?q=$1&tt=on . Meta interwiki map currently has several (IMDbName, IMDbTitle, etc.). Presumably one of these should be updated to match the other one, but which? * Pppery * it has begun 19:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Other discussions[edit]

Criteria for listing and delisting[edit]

We have a criteria for suggested listings into the interwiki map, and that is around an expected usage. We don't tend to review the workable functioning of a listing and at what point we declare whether the listing is meeting its aim of easy wikilinking, or whether a full url would be or should be the best.

I think that it is time for a root and branch discussion on what should and should not be on the list, and the criteria for listing and delisting. At the moment, conversations stay open for a while and it is the lack of clarity of the value to the target sites, or to the WMF wikis of that listing.

This is a heads up only, and it may turn into something more fully fledged, or it may not. If someone likes writing RFCs, then go for it, it is not my area of excitement.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:27, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

In my opinion the key things for a good interwiki are: (a) that it should be a site that is linked to frequently (b) across a range of projects and (c) where we can trust that the majority of links that are added are going to be "good".
I think the current criteria for adding an interwiki focus too much on the site having alignment with the values of WMF projects. The 7 criteria listed currently are:
  1. be useful on a significant number of pages
  2. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site
  3. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
  4. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
  5. be a wiki
  6. have reasonable amounts of content
  7. not contain malware
Of these point 5 (be a wiki) and point 6 (be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)) are both widely ignored in practice and in principle don't actually affect whether an interwiki would be used or useful. According to the 2019 stats dump at Interwiki map/detailed table a lot of the really highly used interwikis are links to tools and services that are not wikis (phabricator, irc, mailing lists, ticket systems etc), and standard identifiers (doi, pubmed), which may lead to non-free content. Neither of those are actually allowed under current policy, but both have proven to be very useful to editors.
In my opinion points 1, 2 and 6 are three different ways of expressing the idea that the site should have content that is going to be useful in lots of places on wmf projects, I think they could probably be merged into a single point to the effect of "contain content that is going to be linked to on a significant number of pages on multiple projects".
I also think the addition criteria should include a point to the effect of "we should trust that this site is still going to exist in 10 years time, and that any interwiki links are going to work". There are a lot of sites currently in the interwiki map that seem to have been single person operations that have since vanished leading to a lot of dead links. I think that adding interwikis to "internal" site functionality also needs extra consideration, we should be making sure that such links aren't going to stop working the next time a website gets restructured (see the c2find interwiki for an example).
In terms of removals, I think that at the minimum we should be removing sites that are dead, sites that are unusably broken, sites that have been restructured in a way that the interwikis have been broken and cannot be fixed, and interwikis which have basically no usage and have little chance of being widely used. A lot of the the last case of interwikis are going to be "grandfathered" things left over from when this page was open to ip editing and sites were being added with little oversight. 192.76.8.66 17:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
I concur and add that we could straight up delete criteria 5 and 6, since actual usage has shown they actually run contrary to what editors want for interwiki prefixes. UndueMarmot (talk) 13:55, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply