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=~~~~}} .

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]

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)

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.

No longer working links (was "Ourpla")[edit]


No longer working TheDJ (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold: see below. Nemo 14:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Empty, Support Support deletion. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
This one's is not on the map? Thehelpfulone 13:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Maybe he meant AbbeNormal [1]? --Nemo 21:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Why do we have a personal blog on the map? PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Only replying after two years for the record - before Wikipedia, the wiki network was just a few small communities and the personal sites of people like you and me. — Scott talk 15:20, 18 October 2015 (UTC)


No longer available TheDJ (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

(Note, checked up to freefeel wiki) TheDJ (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

All these should be first delinked (transformed in external links) on all wikis and only then removed, to avoid loss of information, with the possible exception of spam sites. Thanks for your report, Nemo 17:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I've added a list of links for each of the wikis above at tools:~nemobis/tmp/iwm/, please check it to confirm requests. --Nemo 21:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Lovely work Nemo. I concur with your approach and actions. I would also like to see some ability for your toy tool to be more widely available, even if it just did a count or had a count done a regular basis, and there was a means to request a full report in a timely fashion. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Empty, Support Support deletion. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
My skill with SQL queries is so close to zero that I asked Liangent to produce the script I used. It's linked from the top of the section, so any Toolserver user can run it and of course I can add or update lists immediately when requested on my talk. So far they don't seem to have been used. --Nemo 06:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Oh well, it was worth the try. :-) Maybe we can put a request at Tech to MZM — billinghurst sDrewth 08:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
An API query was mentioned on voy:project:Travellers' Pub but it seems to check only one wiki at a time. A toolserver SQL string is of no use to anyone other than an actual toolserver user (which seems to be just a limited few around here). Certainly the global list of wikitravel: spam is invaluable and something wikivoyageurs will want to know if all those links need to be updated, but it would seem we need the same info for every prefix deletion request here if the sole criterion for deletion is to be use or lack of use on individual wikis. K7L (talk) 16:39, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
The list has already been provided above, but 1) no it's not the sole criterion but surely a requirement; 2) it's not for w:WP:BEANS so if people start pseudo-vandalising wikis I won't produce such lists any longer; 3) wikivoyagers have surely better things to do than removing links to their own wiki (see #Requests for updates). --Nemo 00:58, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
If it's "not the sole criterion but surely a requirement" for any removal request, that's going to affect every request... not just links to one particular wiki (which I won't discuss right now as it's currently in TfD on en: and Pages à Supprimer on fr:). There needs to be some sort of web interface to this toolserver script so anyone can run this query for any prefix before opening a discussion here - much like any WP:AFC n00b simply clicks on "webreflinks" or "citation bot" from an en.wp template to watch those tools do some useful task. K7L (talk) 16:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Broken URLs[edit]

Some were moved to #guildwarswiki and updated. I made lists of usages for the prefixes above available at tools:~nemobis/tmp/iwm/, in case someone wants to help me check them. --Nemo 17:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
If I understand the format of your files correctly, none of the ones I have looked at are in use at all (except for a few on testwiki). Surely you could just sort each file and compare them automatically, to see which ones have any usages? This, that and the other (talk) 10:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I could, but I'm not good at that sort of things and instead I propose that someone improves the script. :) For now I paste here the lines count; in theory all the unused ones should have as many lines as the wikis are, but numbers don't match that well so there may be some mistake.
      733 allwiki
      732 AllWiki
      732 BibleWiki
      732 CorpKnowPedia
      732 DejaNews
      732 FinalEmpire
      732 GotAMac
      732 GreatLakesWiki
      732 JamesHoward
      732 JiniWiki
      732 KerimWiki
      732 Kpopwiki
      732 LugKR
      732 OpenFacts
      732 OSI reference model
      732 PerlNet
      732 SMikipedia
      732 SVGWiki
      732 Swingwiki
      732 Tavi
      732 TESOLTaiwan
      732 TibiaWiki
      732 Turismo
      732 Vinismo
      732 Webisodes
      732 Wikinvest
      732 Wikipaltz
      732 Wikischool
      732 WikiWeet
      734 world66
--Nemo 21:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
It's because some of your files haven't been updated since Sept last year, and many new wikis have been opened since then! Can I suggest you re-generate all the older files? (ps. "echei" seems to have one meaningful link here on meta.) This, that and the other (talk) 09:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Nah, they only needed some cleanup but I was too lazy to do it properly. Now it should be correct. So they're all unused? I'm not sure I'm doing the queries correctly, mind you. --Nemo 09:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
@Nemo bis: wikinvest:concept/U.S._Economic_Cycles - this is a wiki (albeit one filled with ads and comments). See the "edit" link? See also wikinvest:special/Version. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
@Nemo bis, PiRSquared17: The following from this list are now unused, except for trivial usages (i.e. testwiki:Interwiki-table, es:Ayuda:Cómo se edita una página and similar places): allwiki, corpknowpedia, dejanews, finalempire, gotamac, jiniwiki, kerimwiki, lugkr, perlnet, svgwiki, tesoltaiwan, webisodes. Some have only one non-trivial use: wikipaltz is used on n:Talk:Hundreds_of_SUNY_New_Paltz_students_demonstrate,_storm_administration_building only. Among the others, wikinvest in particular is still heavily used. If you want the full data, I will happily provide it, or you can generate it yourself (see User:This, that and the other/interwiki). This, that and the other (talk) 10:39, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@Nemo bis, This, that and the other, Billinghurst, Thehelpfulone, TheDJ:: any updates on this one or its sections? — M 11:47, 06 December 2014 (UTC)

I would support the removal of the interwiki links I listed in my comment of 27 December 2013. Although the data returned by the interwiki table and PiRSquared's wmflabs tool is incomplete (it lacks interwiki links that were added to pages that haven't been touched [edited or null edited] within the last ~6 years IIRC), I think it is quite safe to remove those prefixes from the map. I will look again at the others tomorrow. This, that and the other (talk) 11:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Dead is dead, and I would prefer that they are red links, rather than blue links, as that is more likely to promote action.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:09, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Proposing to close this discussion and remove all the indicated urls from the interwiki. Need to step through an RFC to deal with this more efficiently, that it takes a year to delete dead urls is ridiculous.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:22, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Support Support both: closure and rfc. -- M\A 10:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Not really sure what an RFC here is supposed to achieve. It's a fairly specific niche issue we're talking about here. Only a small number of people are evidently interested in the topic of interwiki linking. I think a standard discussion on this page should be enough to decide how to improve the process. This, that and the other (talk) 11:14, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • @This, that and the other: That also works for me. It's obvious few of us are interested/know what this is for. -- M\A 18:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • @Billinghurst: I guess we should remove this now, right? -- M\A 18:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
    I think that we are right to proceed. I was proposing an RFC that would express how admins can act, rather than this interminable discussion that should have been wrapped up long ago. If we an express the framework of what is reasonable, and a time frame for consideration we can better handle this sort of situation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
    @MarcoAurelio, Billinghurst: I have annotated the table above. Feel free to remove most entries from the map, including those which I have not annotated. But some of the wikis listed above should not be removed, as the sites appear to have come back up, or for other reasons. This, that and the other (talk) 08:33, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
    Thanks. I'm working on the list right now. Will post shorty. -- M\A 09:25, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
    @This, that and the other, Billinghurst: Done a bunch of above [2] and added a note on the above table. Best, -- M\A 09:37, 7 January 2015 (UTC)


No contentJustin (koavf)TCM 08:59, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

It's in use at en:User talk:Hans Adler/Archive 3 and en:MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive 16, but as best as I can tell, that was simply to demonstrate interwiki linking. All the same, I'm a little hesitant to remove this, as the content is all available in the Wayback Machine, and the Crazy Hacks wiki was mainly active before 2006, when the interwiki table wasn't populated. This, that and the other (talk) 09:40, 15 December 2014 (UTC)


It pains my heart, however the former cornerstone of open source movement is now owned by @$^%#$^s who are using it for distributing malware[3][4], etc. In this situation, I believe we should not encourage linking to SF anymore. It has already been removed from MediaWiki's default interwikis. The number of affected links on WMF projects appears minimal. Max Semenik (talk) 23:07, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

At the moment Google says "Some pages on are not safe to visit right now" [5] I'm a user of the site and had no issues so far, and they did something about their weird strategy to keep projects moving away against their will (i.e., I'd hope they stopped that abuse). I'm also a user of NIRsoft, which had a similar "not safe to visit" issue, which was unjustified (some password recovery tools tagged as PUP, potentially unwanted programs), so what is the current state for SF, are they as bad as
JFTR, an enwiki user radically reverted references for the criminal activities of, and no admin there considered that as strange behaviour. I was just too lazy for ArbCom + WMF legal :-( Be..anyone (talk) 20:54, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
@MaxSem: is still the situation? If that is the case, it seems that the removal of the links would be the priority, prior to/adjunct with the removal of the interwiki map. No good having hundreds of ugly links.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 24 May 2016 (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]

link: now hosted at$1 prefix:doomwiki, doom and doom_wiki (currently used by Wikia)

Doom Wiki, is a reliable source that many Doom fans use. The Wikia version of it is no longer updated and is now abandoned and the admins had separated it. Please update it.


The Creatures Wiki has separated from Wikia and is now hosted at //$1 - please update the CreaturesWiki: interwiki. GreenReaper (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

  • The old URL (wikia:creatures) still seems to work and has lots of pages, although wikia:creatures:Special:Recentchanges has a lot fewer entries than the other one. What is usually done with interwiki prefixes in cases like this? --Stefan2 (talk) 21:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Well, has the support of the community, including both of its founders and all its administrators, and all existing links should work at the new URL. has ads, no editors, is stuck on http: and an old version of MediaWiki, and is now called the Creatures Wikia. As you say, wikia:creatures remains available as a link if people want to link to it. GreenReaper (talk) 22:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment Comment Is CreaturesWiki a direct replica linkwise? (well at least at the time of separation). What is the existing state of the wikia version, and its future?  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:09, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes. The XML import from August 15 contains a complete edit history. Current versions of images were uploaded. The recent changes for and speak to the relative editor population. Wikia has control over the wikis it runs and tends to keep them up regardless for the sake of traffic, but the Creatures community is relatively small and close-knit - I don't see many people editing there with the main sites announcing the move and changing their links. (The domain was created in advance after a prior dispute, and now redirects to GreenReaper (talk) 01:59, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
I am okay with making the change, though will leave it for another day or so for other comment.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:17, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
I hate to flip-flop, but in the last 24 hours I've found that the new host has a personal animosity against me, and is using their status to refuse to restore my sysop/bureaucrat rights, without community support. They also kicked me off a chat service used for related discussions (which is moving as a result). They own the domain, and this makes me hesitant to continue to support the change I proposed. Moving away from Wikia is beneficial, but if the new system administrator is willing to abuse their power, we may have to move again very soon. I still hope this issue can be resolved amicably, and if so I will report back here. GreenReaper (talk) 19:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
We don’t expect to move again. While GreenReaper may be understandably disappointed with the actions he described, there has been appropriate community consensus for all described actions taken by the host. We still endorse the original request (//$1). Sgeo (talk) 06:30, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram-voting-question.svg Progress report? Hi. Is this still required? Best regards. -- M\A 09:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, we still desire this change, thank you. Although, could it be made to point to HTTPS? Thank you. Sgeo (talk) 22:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

link: //$1 prefix:CreaturesWiki:

Oppose Oppose, delete the old entry as redundant for wikia:creatures:Special:Recentchanges per nom, and close this request as withdrawn by nominator. There are zero links to in the top 40, and only 28 links (17 en + 3 de + 3 fr + 5 singletons) in the top 40 somehow arrive on

Maybe we are talking about 20 Interwiki links outnumbering the two communities by a broad margin. Disclaimer, I haven't checked that {{LinkSummary}} supports TLD .wiki. –Be..anyone (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

IRC and Freenode[edit]

All modern IRC clients have SSL/TLS support; since Freenode has as well, I hereby suggest changing the "Freenode" and "IRC" entries of the Interwiki map from "irc://$1" to "ircs://$1". --Pred (talk) 14:36, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

While all modern clients have the support, do all clients have the support?  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:57, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
No; without being too sure about it, I would imagine that security was as much as an afterthought for IRC as for any other protocols, and that as a result, no clients that came out in the meantime would have (RFC compliant) support. Wikipedia has an overview of protocol support of current versions of several clients. --Pred (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
I am not inclined to make this change without support from the community.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:39, 9 October 2016 (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]

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)

See also[edit]