Talk:Interwiki map/Archives/2013

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Proposed additions


Why is ther b: for wikibooks but no c: for commons? would be helpful, mainly on meta pages. -- 13:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

See Requests for comment/Wikimedia Commons for a past discussion. Technical difficulties have caused the abbreviation not to exist so far. --MF-W 14:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Moving the conclusion here: "Because it currently conflict with en.wp en:Special:PrefixIndex/C:". Bennylin 16:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done for now: so-called "shortcuts" are not to save characters, their feature is that they have a subdomain-dependent behaviour. Commons, in its current setup, doesn't need it (unlike Meta or, in theory, Wikidata). --Nemo 17:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I don’t understand, why it shall not be possible to set an interwiki prefix com: for Commons. It very often leads to wrong interwiki links, because you have to type Commons:Commons:… two times after another to set the right interwiki link, and often one of those is forgotten – I forgot it very often and had to fix it then again (if I saw it, cause it linked to the Commons already, but onto the wrong page there) and I think it would be very much better, if people could be able to type f.ex. com:Commons:Administrators instead of this double prefix Commons:Commons:Administrators, cause then there could be a distinction between the interwiki prefix and the Commons prefix on Commons which would help very much with typing the right interwiki links.

It’s also possible to type m:Meta:Administrators instead of Meta:Meta:Administrators (from another wiki than this one), or w:Wikipedia:Administrators instead of Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Administrators, or wikt: instead of Wiktionary, there aren’t always prefixes with just one or two letters for these kind of sister interwiki links. I don’t understand, why this shall be no need for this, surely there’s a need for it, and I’m missing this very often and I was wondering very often, why there’s no such interwiki prefix. --Geitost diskusjon 22:34, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


rt (or wmfrt or something. but rt is already in use a bit. see e.g. wikitech:httpsless domains) ->$1 --Jeremyb (talk) 15:28, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done as RT, given that (surprisingly?) it's not a taken language code nor it seems possible to become one, for consistency with former wikitech usage. Should also help with bugzilla:30847 at some point. --Nemo 15:33, 15 March 2013 (UTC)



--Jeremyb (talk) 03:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Done. Let me know if I screwed anything up. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


prefix: werelate:


This is a very large wiki (almost 6,500,000 pages total [1]). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ypnypn (talk) 21:39, 3 February 2013‎

Yes check.svg Done. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:06, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


... as in Perhaps there are others I'm unaware of. Maybe or something. 02:16, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

  • +1
I requested this on Bugzilla but it was suggested that this should be requested on this page.
According to w:en:Special:Interwiki there are a few interwiki codes pointing to On the other hand, a few tools have been migrated to, but there is no code for this yet. I think it makes sense to have a code analogous to the existing tools:, which would point to the new site. Maybe toollabs: would be a good choice?
Helder 12:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
  • +2
I know there's a subdomain, but am not sure what others might need to be considered. Quiddity (talk) 19:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Agree with Helder that toollabs: is better for than wmflabs: as WMFLabs is ambiguous and has several domains (,, etc). It would be helpful if we added the ones that were commonly used like tool labs. Thanks. 19:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
+3 --Ricordisamoa 08:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Agree. If there are no objections, I will add this. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:32, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
    Added toollabs: -> //$1. Do you want ganglia ->$1 and dashboard -> (...) as well? Which others are commonly used? PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much!Thank you very much! toollabs was the one I was most interested in. I'm not sure how common ganglia/dashboard/etc are. Perhaps some of the technical wizards from wikitech could chime in here. 04:23, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, I decided to see how many subdomains has and there were more than 350. 99 percent of these I have never heard of. I don't know if any of them are common enough to warrant inclusion in the interwiki map. 04:46, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
toollabs: works now.[2] PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much. You are too good. :) 00:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia España

Casi todos los capítulos Wikimedia tienen su propio prefijo cuando han publicado un sitio web propio. Solicito que exista el prefijo wmes: para que enlace a$1 --Ecce Ralgis (háblame) 17:23, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg añadido --MF-W 22:38, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


link: [3] proposed prefix: sharemap

ShareMap is intented to be wiki for mapping. It is Creative Commons based, social (multiple people can work on same map) mapping solution. There are already a lot of maps created with ShareMap included into Wikipedia article (examples here commons:Category:Created_with_ShareMap). Currently ShareMap promote template to include SVG/PNG image into map and provide link in image description to interactive version. The interactive map is available for both desktop and mobile devices and it uses Open Street Map backgrounds with Leaflet map framework. For some users content of ShareMap is delivered using Flash plugin (which can be argue against because Wikipedia policies), but this only fallback method and everymap can be viewed on HTML5 comply browser without Flash plugin (ie. iPad).

ShareMap has mechanisms to automatically upload assets to Wikimedia, because this was one of main project goals.

Typical page with embeded ShareMap produced maps looks like this (take a look to the assets - KML file attached and SVG image with link to full resolution detailed map) - wikipedia:en:Vermonter

More information about ShareMap project can be found:

--Jkan997 (talk) 20:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

ShareMap currently is applying for WikiMedia grant, on the grant there are voices of endorsment that justify including it in InterWiki linking


  • Community member: add your name and rationale here.
  • Sharemap can be a very useful tool for Wikipedians. It is far from a finished product. Therefore it is my opinion that the grant should be given. For more information: see my comments on the discussion page. Wereldburger758 (talk) 11:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I would like to see this not only on PL Wikipedia, but also DE and EN. Even wrote a small paragraph at wp:de:Wikipedia:Kartenwerkstatt/Hilfe/Programme some time ago, but I think this project deserves more attention by the WP mapping community. Matthias (talk) 15:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Sharemap.Org should be given a grant as they has been very helpful for a municipal governmental project about transportation bus routes. Sharemap.Org is the only online tool we found online as freely available to draw those routes in the open source and share them with the public. With funding they can develop a more free, expanded and precise tool for all to use. We have actually more than 10 routes published and hoping to add near 40. Caguas PR Public Bus Routes Project
  • Sharemap is the only free alternative to proprietary online mapping services, as well as it is much simpler in use when compared to desktop mapping software. It also has a decent set of exporting tools, which allows to use created content in print. There are numerous ways for this project to benefit from funding. We have used Sharemap to show geographical origins of samples in our population genetics study. Center "Bioengineering" of Russian Academy of Sciences


(copied from Grants:IEG/ShareMap#Part_3:_Community_Discussion) --Jkan997 (talk) 10:18, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

@Jkan997: Do you want //$1 or$1? 1) It doesn't work with HTTPS, 2) /public/* seems to redirect to /site/index. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I just noticed that /public/ has the actual maps in it. Maybe that is better then, but we can't link to categories and stuff in /site/ if we add that. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi PiRSquared17, thanks for reply, I think$1 will more will be more flexible - everyone will be able to put address ShareMap:public/Test Map and we will also introduce 301 redirection to allow users to use shortened form for maps in public space ShareMap:Test Map. We are performing some tests with HTTPS (currently with self signed cert) but because ShareMap us using in some cases external map background providers and this providers are not always available in HTTPS and current version of Mozilla is blocking mixed-content OOTB, therefore transition to full HTTPS will be not trivial and will be one of goals of grant. Currently please setup interwiki to always point HTTP and after transition to HTTPS we will be able to update this. Thanks for your assistance --Jkan997 (talk) 08:22, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
@Jkan997: Done. :-) Note that I capitalized it in the source, but it will work the same with lowercase. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:08, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

This recently created WMF wiki still lacks an interwiki link. As the current names are completely inconsistent (e. g. "wikidata:" for wikidatawiki but "testwiki:" for test.wikipedia while the link for cbk-zam.wikipedia is "cbk-zam:"), I would propose either "testwikidatawiki:" or "testwikidata:" for this wiki. Vogone talk 22:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Which one would you prefer? PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
If I could decide that I'd even pick "d:test:" (and just "d:" when linking from a test wiki). But as the current prefixes are inconsistent anyway it is quite indifferent to me. Vogone talk 16:56, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
@Vogone: Done as it is completely uncontroversial. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)


Located here:

WikiPrefix: unihan


Unihan database, wiktionary and Chinese wikipedia many link it--Shizhao (talk) 13:21, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold: someone needs to check the conclusion of the past discussion (if there was one) about adding non-wiki URLs contrary to the current, now-stricter requirements of #Proposed additions. --Nemo 17:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Added Unihan. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hebrew StarTrek Wiki

Hello, A friend of mine and myself have started a StarTrek Wiki in Hebrew. Proposing , (preferably in hebrew) the interwiki prefix as Sector001 or, in hebrew, סקטור001 . We'd like to add this prefix in Hebrew wikipedia in the hebrew articles regarding charachters, etc. The prefix should stand for$1 . Blasphemer (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

This link is dead. Closing until further info is provided. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:46, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
That site was down. Wiki was moved here. The prefix is$1 Blasphemer (talk) 18:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Added Added [6] PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:46, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Internet Archive

Prefix: Archive (or, if that is too generic, perhaps something like IArchive.)


Reason: It would simplify links to the Internet Archive, especially from the Wikisources and Commons. The archive is a major source of scanned works for Wikisource, as well as files useful for the other projects. It isn't a wiki but it contains lots of useful, free content—some of which is contributed by its users; the ethos seems to be compatible. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:50, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold: someone needs to check the conclusion of the past discussion (if there was one) about adding non-wiki URLs contrary to the current, now-stricter requirements of #Proposed additions. --Nemo 17:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
The only reference I could find was from 2009 regarding the Google interwiki. It mentions the "should be a wiki" requirement but stresses "should". As above, I think the general spirit of the Internet Archive, providing free access to licensed and public domain media for everyone, is appropriate for Wikimedia. It would also be similar to other interwiki link targets such as Project Gutenberg. (Sorry for the delay in relying, I forgot I made this proposal.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Added IArchive. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Prefix: hs (the group and common tag for hacker spaces)


Reason: many hackerspaces use wiki, and many WikiMedia, to promote free (as in freedom) technical knowledge. A broad range of technical and technology articles would benefit from linking to local projects and global initiatives from the hackerspaces community, including grassroots experiments in a wide range of research fields, such as computer science, programming, repair, and invention, electronics, bio-technologies, drones, etc. The contents on the HS wiki often bring a hands-on complement to WP articles, allowing readers to explore a topic further and experiment for themselves.

Note: there's a discussion dated June 2012, where someone states "Just to remind ourselves: Wikipedia is not a directory, and I think we'd be hard pressed to describe the current list as anything but an incomplete and haphazard directory of hackerspaces." That reason alone should justify an InterWiki prefix, so that it's easier to link to directory, and avoid wiki spam from people who calls themselves hackerspaces but don't follow the community criteria (e.g. for-profit so-called "commercial hackerspaces".)

Although "hs" is not an ISO code (yet), I think it's better to use something with over 3 letters. Would "hackerspaces:" be okay? PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Added Hackerspaces. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Prefix: lp (many wiki pages already use LibrePlanet as a prefix, which makes it redundant)


Reason: LP is the wiki companion of the GNU Project and the Free Software Foundation. Hence it would enable readers of the articles on free software to meet their peers, and more generally, to help promote free culture.

Although "lp" is not an ISO code (yet), I think it's better to use something with over 3 letters. Would "libreplanet:" be okay? PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Added LibrePlanet. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

link:$1/ proposed prefix: baden

This wiki is a regional wiki for the city Baden-Baden and the region around it. Baden-Baden is an important 19th century city. By then it was called "the summer capital of Europe". There are lots of smaller art objects, nice architecture and so on that can't be added to the Wikipedia because of its relevancy criteria. But it may be worth mentioning it in related articles. The city wiki is based on Mediawiki and the contents are CC-BY-SA. -- Maximus666 (talk) 23:36, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Will review. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
@Maximus666: Added Added PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:42, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Prefix: jerseydatabase


Though the subject of this Wiki is sports jerseys which are worn by sports athletes, each Wiki article on the site, which is for each individual style of each jersey worn by each individual athlete, also includes, at least for the sport of Hockey, embedded year-by-year career statistics from for the player. For Basketball players, the pages at least include links to external non-wiki pages which contain statistics. The great thing about this website link is that, despite its pages behaving like non-Wiki pages by having statistics or links to statistics, the pages are Wiki pages, so they can fill in the gaps left by mainline Wikis which do not have pages for these players already, which could be especially helpful for Minor-League players. As a result of these things, all WikiMedia pages can be enriched by including links to a new set of Wiki pages which in the past would have been dead links on those pages. ([7]). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wcreed88 (talk) 14:18, 26 October 2013‎

  1. MoreInfo (unknown) provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects
  2. Yes (AFAIK) be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
  3. MoreInfo (unknown) - be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
  4. Yes be a wiki
  5. Yes have reasonable amounts of content
  6. Yes (AFAIK) not contain malware
I guess it can be added to sports player infoboxes or to files on Commons, but I'm not sure it's needed there. A lot of the content seems like it does not meet the threshold of originality, but the website itself just says "Copyright", with no other details, so we must assume it is "All Rights Reserved". PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:30, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
@Wcreed88: Please reply. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:44, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll probably add this if nobody else comments in a few days. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:00, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17: That would be awesome. Thank you so much for your consideration. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wcreed88 (talk) 12:21, 1 December 2013‎
Added Added PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


Located here:

WikiPrefix: glyphwiki


kanji (hanzi, hanja) glyph database system--Shizhao (talk) 13:21, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I support this addition, excellent one especially for Wiktionaries.
  1. What they provide would complement entries about characters at Wiktionaries. They have many glyphs that are not standard (thus cannot be written as text on Wiktionaries) but used. They link between related characters, alternative glyphs, relation among radicals, etc.
  2. The wiki already has 290,000 entries as it claims.
  3. There is a vibrant community to improve the information and expand the coverage of glyphs of kanji/hanzi/hanja and other characters, as you can see in its RC.
  4. Their contents are free (but not copyleft); their license allows modification, redistribution and commercial use.
They have two (synchronized) versions,* in Japanese and* in English. I suggest prefixes jaglyphwiki for the former and englyphwiki for the latter in order to minimize confusion. --whym (talk) 13:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. Do you want glyphwiki as an alias for jaglyphwiki, Whym, Shizhao? PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:15, 17 October 2013 (UTC) 19:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

No reason given. Declined until further information is provided. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Actually, this might have been a bit harsh. I'd be willing to add this if you convince me that it is useful to the Wikimedia projects. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:39, 4 December 2013 (UTC)



It's a Wikimedia wiki. Used by "SUL2" for central logins. It might not be overly useful, but I see no reason to make people write the URL instead. It is also a useful link for stewards to CU. Either login: or loginwiki: is fine. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

There only seems to be one page on the wiki. Do you often need to link to the project? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:30, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done No need for this to be used, there will never be edits, and stewards have no specific need to link to users at this wiki — billinghurst sDrewth 01:25, 30 November 2013 (UTC)


link: proposed prefix: beacha

Although the site itself seems fine, it does not seem to be linked to much: w:Special:LinkSearch/* Is there a need for a special interwiki prefix for this wiki? PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Why is this an issue? Interwikis are about facilitating links between wikis, and there are many kinds of wikis out there. English Wikipedia has no real need to link to this site, as it would contravene their external linking policies. However, other wikis may like to link to Beachapedia using an interwiki prefix. This, that and the other (talk) 11:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
You're right. Done. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:20, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Danish MediaWiki installations

The following discussion is closed: not done, no demonstrated need, nor consensus for the group additions

Here is a list of Danish mediawikis that I proudly propose. The content in all of them is historical information and making interwiki-links will make it easier collaborate with wikimedias, which might be usefull. See Danish village pump for a short review by the chairman of Wikimedia Denmark.

These sites may qualify, by having significant number of pages, being wikis with free content and being not known to contain malware. The easiest way of linking would be by using the town name as prefix. --Ribewiki (talk) 01:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. If nobody else comments in a week, I will add these. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Please wait, there's no concensus on da and there's multiple issues with the wikis that needs to be adressed first. Regards Knud Winckelmann (talk) 21:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Please don't hesitate to add, according to copyrigt issues. Danish legislation states that historical content freely accessible in national archives may freely be distributed even under public domain rights. The discussion in danish wikipedia has not been very specific about graphics copyrigt on these wikis and seems to be no problem. --Ribewiki (talk) 10:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Comment Comment I am concerned with a hint of CoI in the original request, and that adds to my feelings of the need for a consensus at the wikis, so I agree with the indication that we should let the daWXs reach a decision on whether there is a consensus on the use of the wikis as legitimate references before we consider them for a global interwiki. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Looks like no Danish non-WMF wikis has even been added to the list, so something needs to be done, the sooner the better. Is there any consensus about removing broken URLs from the list? Nothing seems to happen in that concern! --Ribewiki (talk) 13:04, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
@Knud Winckelmann: update? PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:02, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
It seems there is no consensus within the Danish community to add these. Shall we close this, or add the least objectionable few? PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:21, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Support Support When baden: has been added with only 230 content pages, I see no reason why not also adding all these Danish wikis. Its very much the same type of wiki and lots of local editors can take advantage. --Ribewiki (talk) 18:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that several of the projects have problems. For example, on the Danish page, User:Palnatoke noted that all activity to one of the wikis after 10 May has been spam. I note that this no longer is the case: there were four edits on 8 December which are better described as test edits instead of spam. A user created four pages containing the word "test" and nothing else. Also, the edits on 10 May mostly appear to have been useless creations of empty categories. Unless the projects have useful content which we may want to link to, I don't think that there is any point in having interwiki prefixes for the wikis. These should not be added in a group, but instead be individually evaluated based on their merits. Many of them do not seem to be useful for Wikimedia projects. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Comment Comment Looks like you have surveyed the mentioned on the Danish page. I agree with User:Palnatoke, that it's not worthy for interwiki, and thats why I actually never proposed it here. Let's only take the good ones. --Ribewiki (talk) 01:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Which wikis are the "good ones"? Does anyone else think these should be added? PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Nobody except Ribewiki seems to want these additions. --Palnatoke (talk) 13:40, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree, Palnatoke, and I probably won't vote for you on next years general assembly. Remember this interwiki-proposal started because of discontent by holding every Mediawiki Denmark general assembly in the swedish border town Copenhagen. I'm trying to represent the widespread attitude of the western parts of our language area including north atlantic parts. You just won't face criticism. --Ribewiki (talk) 19:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Ribe Wiki

prefix="ribe" url="$1" contains 2.014 content pages (19.259 total)

I have modified the Ribewiki:About-page for clarification about licensing. --Ribewiki (talk) 19:12, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

This means that out of six pages, only two aren't mirrors of other pages. Also, the mirroring pages seem to be completely unrelated to the city of Ribe, although that city appears to be the purpose of the wiki. The two local pages are about things within 50 km from Ribe. Looking at Speciel:Seneste ændringer, I see lots of further mirroring of websites in the same way. Also, is this wiki really a collective work? Apart from this IP edit, all edits at Special:RecentChanges during the latest week seem to have been made by you. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:46, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Comment Comment Truly Ribewiki has only few contributers yet. Can't tell how many, because it's open editable (and uses the very effective Key Captcha-filter against spam). Interwiki linking is believed to encourage collaborate work for all kind of wikis, and not only being advantageous for Wikimedia-sites. --Ribewiki (talk) 01:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done no clear need demonstrated from the community. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:04, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Support Support Don't misinterpretate what a club of 19 members in Copenhagen may think Wikimedia is like. --Ribewiki (talk) 19:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Who are the members of this "club of 19 members in Copenhagen"? Only 8 people have edited da:Wikipedia:Landsbybrønden/Kulturgeografi og wiki-links (plus three anonymous edits from three different IP addresses), and several of the participants in that discussion do not live in Copenhagen according to their user pages. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:09, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Aarhus Wiki

prefix="aarhus" url="$1" 1.464 content pages

Helsingør Leksikon

prefix="helsingor" url="$1" 1.039 content pages

Horsens Leksikon

prefix="horsens" url="$1" 1.800 content pages

Kolding Wiki

prefix="kolding" url="$1" 769 content pages

Odsherred Wiki

prefix="odsherred" url="$1" 4.859 content pages

Ringsted Wiki

prefix="ringsted" url="$1" 210 content pages (nice)

Skanderborg Leksikon

prefix="skanderborg" url="$1" 438 content pages

Vejle Wiki

prefix="vejle" url="$1" 661 content pages

Wiki Silkeborg

prefix="silkeborg" url="$1" 1.250 content pages

Closed Closed There is not a consensus for these addition, just continued argument by one person who has an apparent vested interest. If the daWX have a need, they should present a case by case proposal. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Prefix: wikiapiary Link: WikiApiary About Statistics WikiIndex

WikiApiary collects, graphs and analyzes information about MediaWiki websites. It has articles on over 9,000 MediaWiki wikis and 3,000 MediaWiki extensions. A lot of the WikiApiary users are active in the MediaWiki development community. WikiApiary is linked from thousands of extension pages at due to transclusions from mw:Template:Extension, and it should be linked from the Wikipedia articles about the various notable MediaWiki installations (see List of wikis) because it has a lot of useful data about those sites. Many of the same arguments for having WikiIndex in the map apply to WikiApiary, although the sites have some important differences. Leucosticte (talk) 02:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Seems quite reasonable and meets all the criteria. I'll add this in a few days if nobody objects. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
@Leucosticte: Added Added [8]. PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:47, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Prefix: gentoo Link: //$1

Currently in the interwiki list, there is 'gentoo-wiki', the old Gentoo community Wiki which has been down for the last year. The Gentoo project has since launched its own (official if you will) Wiki. It doesn't have the same contents, so probably warrants a new prefix. I'll file a separate removal request for the abandoned community site. —A3li (talk) 11:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Added Added. @Billinghurst: to show they are separate wikis, compare archive to this. There is a fatal licensing flaw that prevents importing old Gentoo pages onto the new Gentoo wiki: the old one's content is non-free (CC BY-NC-SA). PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:28, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed removals


Couldn't find any subpages via Google for -- 18:09, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold: see below. Nemo 14:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Not on the provided list, can we please rerun. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Removed:[9] unused, according to the lists. --Nemo 21:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)


The target wiki seems broken and returns nothing. Liangent 11:29, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold: see below. Nemo 14:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Not on the provided list, can we please rerun. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Removed:[10] unused, according to the lists. --Nemo 21:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)


  • Points to //$1

Wrong. It gives the impression that Meta-Wiki is Wikipedia. If at all, it should be Wikimedia. Also: m: exists and meta: exists too. If it's not widely used I suggest removal or be replaced. I understand it might be there for historical reasons though, but since m and meta do exist I don't see the need for a third interwiki. Regards. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done Speedy closing (because I'm sure you don't mind) for backward compatibility. We have some hundreds of uses, but most of all on many (many!!!) outdated wikis, it's still the only way to link Meta... I very often have to use it for this reason, so you can't really blame people for using it, and it's not actually causing any harm to the others. New releases are ok[11], mw:Extension:InterwikiPrefixes maybe will fix this forever. --Nemo 22:50, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
I use it all the time on my wikis, although I think it would have been better if some different prefix had been used for meta-wiki from the beginning, for the reasons stated by MarcoAurelio. Too late now. Leucosticte (talk) 05:56, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Sure, no problem. If that is the situation then keep it of course. No harm intended ;-) Regards. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)


No longer of use as the same data is already on Wikimedia's servers as wikivoyage:. The corresponding template has now been voted for deletion on the English, Dutch and French Wikipedia.

At the current time, Wikitravel is just an outdated copy (fork) of Wikivoyage and the prefix is no longer in use in the encyclopaedic content. There are an isolated few instances where it exists on user or talk pages: de en fa fr ja ko pl pt ro ru tr en-source ru-source zh-books

There are also a few mentions of WT in the discussion here on meta regarding the creation of Wikivoyage under the Wikimedia umbrella: commons meta en-mw

Any new links added to articles need to point to the Wikimedia project (Wikivoyage) and not a for-profit rival with largely duplicate content whose owners were suing our contributors in 2012. Please remove the wikitravel: prefix - it has no further legitimate use to Wikimedia and is causing confusion as it had been added in the past to "sibling project" boxes on some wikis when it is clearly not a WMF sibling. 08:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Removed Wikitravel. Communities have discussed and removed templated use, and no longer consider a primary external link. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


A pile of spam advertising acne medication... did someone let their domain registration expire? It might be worth clicking through the entire list of non-WMF wikis and removing any which don't resolve or return spam. 18:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks unused, +1. --Nemo 21:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
The options as I see it:
  1. Remove link completely
  2. Change to$1
  3. Contact Gojko and ask him about moving the content to another domain
Since it is unused, I will implement option 1 unless someone comments in 2-3 days. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:37, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, but I will remove this now. Consider this Removed Removed and Closed closed unless you have any objections. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:23, 11 December 2013 (UTC)


The site has been down for the last year, the owner has abandoned it. I filed a request to add the since launched official Gentoo project wiki to replace this entry (with another prefix as explained there). —A3li (talk) 11:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, but let's check existing links first. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
There is a request above about Are they one and the same? If so, is that just a url change? — billinghurst sDrewth 07:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: They are different. I just checked existing links to gentoo-wiki. Here is a complete list of links: arwiki: gentoo-wiki:HOWTO_Mencoder_Introduction_Guide, enwiki: gentoo-wiki:Main_page, enwikivoyage: gentoo-wiki:fr:Utilisateur:Xillimiandus, eswiki: gentoo-wiki:, frwikivoyage: gentoo-wiki:fr:Utilisateur:Xillimiandus, testwiki: gentoo-wiki:. I do not think that keeping the old Gentoo wiki is needed, as it is broken. The most important link is the arwiki one, as it is the only one that actually points to an article (from an article). I'm going to remove this now, revert if you disagree. And to prove they are different wikis, compare "HOWTO_Mencoder_Introduction_Guide" on the old gentoo-wiki and the new one. It does not exist on the new one. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:17, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Requests for updates


BrickWiki currently maps to$1. The real BrickWiki site,, is back up after a three-year absence. Recommend updating the URL. Might also consider adding the prefix "brickipedia" to map to --ALittleSlow (talk) 15:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

We should not be linking to lego.wikia (or any other individual Wikia fansite) at all. A precedent for removing these links exists with Uncyclopedia (which was in this table, and was removed when Wikia moved them from to over the objections of that wiki's community). A link to whatever.wikia. is duplicative of the main wikia: interwiki and there are thousands of these, mostly worthless. K7L (talk) 03:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Brickwiki is down... again. I don't think it is reliable enough to have an interwiki link to. Ajraddatz (Talk) 20:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
BrickWiki is up...again, as Domain name problems. When it's up long enough to be considered reliable, please correct the interwiki link. -- 01:46, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Looks to be stable now. 18:15, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
And still is, so Yes check.svg Done.[12] The other URL was only used as temporary fallback for the originally intended destination, so I left aside the considerations on what wikis are worth linking. --Nemo 18:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)


Please update entry "CKWiss ||$1" to: CKWiss ||$1 Thanks! --Friedrich K. (talk) 18:32, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Is there a need for this? It looks like the first link still appears to be working. Thehelpfulone 13:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done because it's the domain used on the wiki's main page, but indeed, get them fix their webserver so that it uses only the canonical domain... [13] --Nemo 18:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)


The proper domain name is, not (the latter was a temporary domain while we had legal problems with --Tgr (talk) 11:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. [14] --Nemo 18:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)


The URLs as they currently appear in the interwiki table are incorrect and don't work. I've split these out of the main list of broken URLs as the wikis do still exist. 16:33, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done [15], thanks. So are the wikis in the table above confirmed dead and not available at other URLs? --Nemo 17:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)


It should be$1, current one doesn't work (see, per es., wmph:Main Page). I know I can fix it, but I'd like a more senior admin to check. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:09, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Resolved. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


works as is but we can remove a redirect hop to simplify things. should only be used for legacy links. diff --Jeremyb (talk) 21:36, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, diff. –Krinkletalk 11:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


The Wikimedia Uk's wiki have been migrated from WMF hosting to WMUK own hosting. The new URL is //$1 -- KTC (talk) 21:04, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done [16] --Rschen7754 21:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


The Wiki had to be re-setup. The correct link is now:$1 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]])

previously Yes check.svg Done, Closed Closedbillinghurst sDrewth 01:28, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

planetmath interwiki is broken

Could someone please fix the planetmath interwiki? Currently PlanetMath:41190 gives garbage, while is the desired result. User:Linas 05:10, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done [17] PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

semantic-mw offers https access. Thus it will be nice if the link for the existing interwiki prefix "semantic-mw" could be changed to "$1" to point users directly to the right spot. Many thanks in advance! --[[kgh]] (talk) 08:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done [18] PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Cheers --[[kgh]] (talk) 16:35, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


Please change flickrphoto: and flickruser: so they point to // instead of in order to link to the HTTPS protocol when enabled. --ralgis·/t/ 20:49, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't the HTTPS version of Flickr use instead of It seems that the change is bigger than just a simple removal of the protocol. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:40, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
I already changed it to protocol-relative, but I can change it to something else if you want. Is there actually a difference between and If so, why not redirect the latter to the former? Since there's no way to separately specify https and http links, this would not be easy to do. It may be possible if there is already a redirect service like this that is protocol-relative. But, to reiterate, are these subdomains different at all? PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:00, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
@Stefan2: Per this, I think what I did was fine. :-) PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:14, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK

Not urgent, but wmuk: no longer needs to be pointed at , but rather simply (the wiki. has been made superfluous). Thanks, Jarry1250 (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. I removed the "wiki.". Hope I didn't mess up. Savhñ 19:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)



Yes check.svg Resolved.

Interwiki prefix to MediaWiki's git repository, which was added at 17:57, 9 April 2012 doesn't work well.

What happens? Isn't it enabled now?--aokomoriuta (talk) 11:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The interwiki table needs to get synced per hand by a sysadmin for new prefixes to work ("A script copies the list below into the database fairly regularly (usually once in several months)") - Hoo man (talk) 17:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Generic Wikimedia prefix

With so many sites at, I'm surprised that there is no generic "wikimedia" prefix, like the "wikia" one. Instead we have (not very useful imho) Wm2005, Wm2006, etc. (Just wanted to make an internal link to -AlexSm 15:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

This sounds like a good idea to me, but I think we'll have to create a bug for it. (I don't think the script that updates from this map will understand things like wm => http://$$2.) Cbrown1023 talk 21:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
bugzilla:24748 Huib talk Abigor 19:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

"chapter:" interwiki

I've filed a bug: 24442 - "chapter:" interwiki link doesn't work for non chapters wikis. --Nemo 15:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I propose to add wmde: etc. interwiki as a workaround for all wikis listed in bugzilla:24442#c0. --Nemo 14:41, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Done for all wikis; wmau is the only website which had already been added. --Nemo 11:19, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Since wmno, wmfi, wmpl etc. are also added. Please add "wmnl" to the map as well. Address:$1Krinkletalk 15:57, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done -Barras 16:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
There seems to be no interwikis for Wikimedia Pennsylvania (wmpa-us) and Wikimedia Brazil (wmbr). Ruslik 17:34, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


It's impossible to create a link with this interwiki to ? Liangent 10:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not really sure if links to google are that useful. Every language uses an other language code for google to get the information they want. I don't think we should add this. -Barras 11:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
google:foo already works. Liangent is asking if there is a way to search "1 2". πr2 (talk · contributions) 21:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
[[google:{{urlencode:1+2}}]] -> google:1+2. X! 23:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
As πr2 said, I'm trying to search "1 2", and after being encoded it becomes "1+2". Liangent 08:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
{{urlencode:1+2}} → 1%2B2 πr2 (tc) 15:07, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
So the question is, how to transform "1 2" into "1%202". Or rather, how to use rawurlencode() instead of urlencode(). –Krinkletalk 14:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Although I didn't knew untill now, this has been recently added to MediaWiki in 1.17 (not yet deployed on Wikimedia sites yet). {{urlencode:string here|PATH}} uses rawurlencode. Example: {{urlencode:1 2|PATH}} => 1%202 (in the future this would expand to "1%202" instead of "1+2"). –Krinkletalk 14:16, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that there's been a short discussion before, Talk:Interwiki_map/Archives/2009-09#URL_encoding, and there's an open bug (bugzilla:15274) with some recent comments. --Nemo 21:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

see: {{URLENCODE:string|foobar}} at mw:Help:Magic words#URL_data and mw:Thread:Project:Support desk/URLENCODE and related functions as encodeURIComponent ‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 07:31, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Use mw:Extension:InterwikiRegex! Leucosticte (talk) 06:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Is there something we can actually do to the page in its current form to fix this? PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:44, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Liangent: I think this was part of the reason someone had me write tools:~mzmcbride/redirector/google/1+2. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

@MZMcBride: Could you make one of those to redirect to ("Generic Wikimedia prefix") or for using IW links? PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Maybe, but the whole system is hackish and requires writing esoteric redirect logic that I hate. Do you have an account on Toolserver or Labs? It shouldn't be too difficult to set up your own redirects. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 17:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, but I'm no expert at PHP or security. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:39, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't believe there's any PHP involved in this. It's just using some strange syntax that the Web server supports, as I recall. And security issues aren't really relevant if you're just passing input through. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
As a more comprehensive fix, what do you think of the idea of adding an iw_regex field to the interwiki table? That regex would then be applied to interwiki URLs ($attribs['href'] or whatever). Shall I file a bug report? Leucosticte (talk) 06:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm reminded of this quote. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 21:20, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Ticket: and OTRS:

Is there any way to control what happens if just ticket: and otrs: are used? wikipedia: redirects you to wikipedia:Main Page, can that be done with these links? Currently, using either link without anything after the colon takes you to an error page - for the former and for the latter. Ideally, both links should take you to – Philosopher Let us reason together. 09:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

X mark.svg No, there's no way. --Nemo 21:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
The pages look the same anyway (at least to someone who isn't logged in to OTRS) PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Other discussions

Something to look for: Pretty RFC

A cool new RFC reader site which does not have much content yet: pretty-rfc. If the author adds all RFCs as he says he will, this will be a good candidate for the RFC interwiki links, as it is superior to IETF's own viewer in all regards. --Tgr (talk) 22:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Table style

I propose table class to change from class="plainlinks" to class="wikitable sortable plainlinks" which shouldn't break anything. -- とある白い猫 chi? 16:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


I think it would be practical to have a log such as Spam blacklist/Log to register additions, removals and changes of interwiki prefixes. Since it's a low traffic page, one per year would be enough. We could start on 2013 if folks agree with. Thanks. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 22:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree and I assumed there already is a log, but apparantly there isn't. Trijnsteltalk 22:53, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Support Support Practice exists in multiple places, and for good reason. IMNSHO may as well start now rather than wait, and annual log file seems appropriate. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:32, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't understand the request, why isn't page history enough? Are there administrators not using edit summary? (If yes, let's desysop them!) --Nemo 21:50, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
It would be helpful for someone contemplating adding a new request to know what the discussion was for previous requests. There doesn't seem to be anything stopping someone from creating such archives. Leucosticte (talk) 05:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
@Leucosticte: There's a search box on Talk:Interwiki_map/Archives. Is that what you meant? A log would be like Spam blacklist/Log. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I figured it probably existed and I was overlooking the obvious. Leucosticte (talk) 17:54, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Clean up?

Is it time for a clean up of the list? When was the last one? It'd be nice to make sure all the links (a) still work; and (b) are still appropriate for inclusion.

Somewhat related to the section above about logging, an annotated version of this list would be nice so that you can see who added which entry when and why. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

The last one was about a year ago, when we made everything protocol-relative. There are already some proposed removals above but nobody has checked and fixed the usage of those interwikis yet. --Nemo 13:50, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Many are 404, "parked" as spam or simply do not resolve. How can there be "usage" worth preserving if the target does not exist? 16:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
The URL itself is information, while a prefix you don't know the URL translation of is just junk (a mysterious red link). You can help check them at #Broken URLs. --Nemo 17:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Allow non-wikis

Proposal: Let's allow sites other than wikis to be added if they are very useful. For example, the Internet Archive, Project Gutenberg, or "unihan" above. @Nemo bis and MZMcBride: opinions? PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:24, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

The current proposed addition guidelines say "should" rather than "must" (cf. RFC 2119). This is probably sufficient. We already include a number of non-wikis (e.g., "google:"). --MZMcBride (talk) 18:36, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Then nobody would care if I complete the requests above for non-wikis? Okay, I'll do that then. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:38, 26 November 2013 (UTC)