Talk:Interwiki map

Active discussions
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.

Instructions to Meta-Wiki administrators

Update logs

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

Current map in the configuration
  • You can check here the current map as existing on the Wikimedia configuration files.
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days.

Proposed additionsEdit

  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. 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.

transit.wikiEdit was the old domain name of the wiki before the move in 2016. All the links to are automatically redirected to

Link:$1 prefix:Transit:

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

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

I see about 70 links on wikis to; and no links to How much do you believe it is going to be used?  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:13, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
There's no direct lines to because the old links to got redirected to automatically. There should be at least 70 links. Acnetj (talk) 02:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
As of today there are 64 links to and 18 for by looking at the major wikis only. It does not appear to me that this meets the threshold of being significantly linked to warrant an interwiki link of its own. This is not an assessment on's content which I have not reviewed. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


Link:$1 prefix:wikitrek:

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

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

Tu summarize:

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

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

  Support I support this project because is the natural evolution of HyperTrek. --Hypertrek (talk) 10:36, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
  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)
  • For the record: there are 488 links to 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 PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)


Link:$1 prefix:lenciclopedia:

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



Prefix: mariowikide or demariowiki

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

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

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

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

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

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

Technically we can already link there using mariowiki:Special:GoToInterwiki/de:Spezies (although that is definitely not convenient). PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
For the record, there are 84 links to on de.wikipedia. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  Comment - 6000 articles (and 84 existing links) doesn't seem like a lot of content. Kaldari (talk) 19:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

  Not done There seems to be no sufficient need. --MF-W 12:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:22, 27 February 2021 (UTC)



  • Prefix : wmflabsdeploy
  • Well I just found it weird, that our own beta cluster is not on interwiki map.--AldNonymousBicara? 15:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
There's nothing in that wiki interesting to link to IIRC. What do we need an IW prefix for? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
A possible usage could be to use it for easy navigation from here to that wiki cluster, though I do not believe I would use it much myself. --Vogone (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
What permanent links were you envisaging? From which wikis? Can you please provide some real use examples.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
billinghurst, during the content translation testing on that beta cluster (few years back) I have to use url instead of interwiki link, though it's currently no longer needed (as content translation extension is already deployed), I would like to see if deployment got interwiki linked so in the future there will be no longer hassle of doing this, I saw the practicality in this. Also, if it possible to this link site matrix or the meta itself, as an addendum I am fine if this request get rejected, I just thought this gonna make things easier for beta tester to do things that got reported to phab and need interwiki linking to here. PS : also per external search here on meta and en.wp :

Thank you.--AldNonymousBicara? 10:22, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst, Aldnonymous, and MarcoAurelio: I just came here to ask for literally the same thing - on enwiki, I wanted to have the history of [2] be imported to w:en:User:DannyS712/Tag.js, but Xaosflux told me I needed to ask here that a mapping be added first. Am I correct in my understanding that adding such a deployment mapping would also allow access to the entire interwiki map of the beta cluster (specifically the english wikipedia)? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 22:05, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: not per your url, unless there is another way to rewrite/remap your url with which is the request.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: But maps exactly to the page? --DannyS712 (talk) 22:47, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: do you know if most users of that cluster are aware of that syntax? — xaosflux Talk 22:49, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: it uses the same syntax interwiki map that we do here (see --DannyS712 (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: I mean using "$" vs "$" for example. — xaosflux Talk 23:02, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: I have no idea what other users know, or what other users there currently are - I use the beta cluster to build scripts and experiment with things that I can't really do on-wiki, but there isn't a community that I can ask. Sorry, --DannyS712 (talk) 23:04, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • FWIW, support - since we have no issue making IW's for individual TOOL use on wmflabs, making one for the entire wiki should be no big deal. Perhaps 'wmflabsdeploy' would be better title though. — xaosflux Talk 23:07, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
    Changed the prefix based on this suggestion, thank you.--AldNonymousBicara?
    Also changed the title to wmflabsdeploy.--AldnonymousBicara? 16:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    Really? Aren't you just inviting misspellings. Just keep "deployment" and keep it simple, the first part of the name is the focus, not the end. Noting that I still haven't seen a rigorous reason for the addition, and how it would be used by a wide spectrum of people. I just see these small one-off cases linking to a dynamic environment with presumably no rules about redirects and all endpoints.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    Eh, I am fine with any name, rather I just want the interwiki map exist, I don't care about the name as long its usable. billinghurst, you can change the name if you wanted to.--AldnonymousBicara? 01:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  • In general, people shouldn't link to the Beta Cluster wiki from production, and this one in particular is a terrible one to which to link as its config doesn't mirror any "real" Wikimedia wiki very closely. Also, the entire Beta Cluster system is roughly planned to get shut down and replaced in the future. I don't think it's a good idea to add this. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    @Jdforrester (WMF): would the labs' meta wiki be better? --DannyS712 (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    @DannyS712: I suppose you could do that, but I'm not sure how often it'd be used? Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 22:43, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    @Jdforrester (WMF): the interwiki mapping within the beta cluster means that adding a mapping for one site lets you access them all. Personally, I just want to be able to have a script I developed ( be imported properly. --DannyS712 (talk) 22:47, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    Import as a once-off? What is wrong with copy and paste? Interwiki map seems overkill for task.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:47, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    If you don't mean import, and you are meaning utilising mw.loader.load.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
    @Billinghurst: this was related to an XML upload import request, we'll do it one way or another, but if this IW was going to be added we could add it with the 'right' prefix. — xaosflux Talk 00:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
    @Jdforrester (WMF):, wait, this is new to me, beta cluster is going to be shut down?--AldnonymousBicara? 01:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
    @Aldnonymous: Yeah, on-going discussions for years now, but no solid plan. We're overall moving to continuous deployment, where we'd create automatic staging environments as we go, and probably some means to spin one up manually on a patch both pre- and post-merge. There's more in this requirements doc. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 17:42, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  Not done per Jdforrester (WMF)MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site: Yes. It is a wiki on math, physics, and philosophy, with a slant toward category theory. There are already ~400 links to it from Wikimedia projects according to toollabs:globalsearch/globallinks.php.
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: Yes, of course.
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): Technically no. However, it is at least free-ish in spirit: "Using and distributing content obtained from the nLab is free and encouraged if you acknowledge the source, as usual in academia. (There is currently no consensus on a more formal license statement, but if it matters check if relevant individual contributors state such on their nLab homepages.)"
  4. be a wiki: Yes.
  5. have reasonable amounts of content: Yes, it has 13905 pages.
  6. not contain malware: Yes, of course.

PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2019 (UTC)



Prefix: PAWS

Per discussion at phab:T150094, it is requested that an interwiki prefix be created for linking to code hosted on PAWS. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 11:02, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

  Question: are paws-public and paws the same thing? To me there seems a little variation in what you see, though I cannot say that I tried variations with positional parameters. I also find it a little disconcerting that we are providing interwikis to an undocumented service, and one, when you hit it, gives zero information about what it does, nor links to what the service provides. A landing page like is simply rubbish, and I wouldn't think that we should be providing rubbish, meaningless targets.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:58, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: paws-public allows others to view code and related - going to returns an error unless signed in as DannyS712 bot, while going to lets you see the code for one of the bot tasks without needing permission. --DannyS712 (talk) 10:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Quoting billinghurst:
"I also find it a little disconcerting that we are providing interwikis to an undocumented service, and one, when you hit it, gives zero information about what it does, nor links to what the service provides. A landing page like is simply rubbish, and I wouldn't think that we should be providing rubbish, meaningless targets."
@Billinghurst: I have to say I find your words here a tad harsh. I have no idea what documentation you would like and your message does not make clear what doubts would need to be cleared up. Ironically, there is also no documentation on what documentation would be needed for a proposed addition to the interwiki map beyond the instructions up here. Beyond not being exactly a wiki, (but being user editable) PAWS clearly fulfills the other 5 criteria.
Let me also try to bring extra information that might be useful. paws-public and paws are parts of the same project, while paws brings access to user servers that can be used to create, edit and run a variety of scripts paws-public is the way to access the scripts in any user working area. In a nutshell, paws-public is the only interwiki destination that makes sense, besides admins and the users themselves, no one else can access a running user server in paws. paws-public is a very simple component with a toolforge tool with direct http access and an autoindex http server feature (a pretty standard feature). There is also a fancy Lua script that translates user names to global ids, so points to . It is mostly used through a button pointing to the paws-public component from each notebook in paws. It can also be used through a simple change of paws to paws-public in any part of the url in PAWS. IE, can be changed to or to get toçalo.ipynb.
Finnally, please remember we are all volunteers here and destructive criticism for a simple request will get us nowhere. Please indicate what further information is necessary and what documentation you would like to see while refraining from calling a popular volunteer-maintained project "rubish". Phabricator is also the best place to suggest any improvement on the PAWS project, please file a task with any suggestion on the paws-public html interface and perhaps I or another volunteer can work on it.
Chico Venancio (talk) 15:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
@Chicocvenancio: You say that PAWS meets the six dot point criteria, but if I go to or ... how do or where do I see that it meets that criteria? So I think that whilst you may see it as self-evident, I am not certain that the request has yet to achieve the "clearly" criteria as it is neither obvious nor declared. Further I see that we have 49 usage examples, and what is the significant numbers and the reasonable amount of content?

PAWS is sitting there as an isolated, unlinked, unexplained service, and a dead-end target with little context. Now if I dig around WMF wikis, I can find wikitech:PAWS, mw:Manual:Pywikibot/PAWS and mw:PAWS though only as a knowledgeable person of arcane-WMF-wikiness. Contrarily when I end up at PAWS, I end up in an isolated, unlinked, unexplained service. With the existing interwiki links the target urls are pretty much self-evident in their relevance, either from the link itself, or when arrived at as a target, this is not the case with the proposed PAWS usage. This proposal would appear to me to be new usage type, and seemingly proposed as it is an WMF-offered service, not due to it being part of the originally envisaged scope of the interwiki map.

Whilst my commentary may be uncomplimentary, I challenge that it is destructive. I made ZERO comment about the service at all, my comment was clearly about the targets. I am also not certain that it is up to me to go digging and making any phabricator tickets for a service which is pretty unknown to me. I will also reflect that I have enough unactioned phabricator tickets to pretty much reflect MEH! about an equitable cooperativeness, especially in the relationship and decision-making process of the developer-community to the content-community.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It seems like these issues could be addressed by linking to on so that people wondering about PAWS can learn more about it. As far as I can tell, that's the concern raised by billinghurst that is relevant to this proposal and it seems like it is easy to solve for. I've made a task. See phab:T221886 --EpochFail (talk) 19:35, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: PAWS' main page now redirects to mw:PAWS. Does this solve your concerns? --DannyS712 (talk) 03:48, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Please reread #Proposed additions and not just the six dot points, and my commentary and then you tell me.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:54, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: sorry I didn't see this. Rereading through the criteria, I want to highlight that PAWS hosts code that can be run on-wiki, allowing it to be used for controlling bots. It was added as an OAuth application 3 years ago (Special:OAuthListConsumers/view/0a73e346a40b07262b6e36bdba01cba4) and (as for as I am aware) hasn't run into issues since. It is clearly relevant to wikimedia projects, and can be trusted not to encourage link spam etc. --DannyS712 (talk) 05:42, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  Support, though paws: should link to is useless to link as other users will not be able to access the link anyway. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:34, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
1234qwer1234qwer4 Thanks for the support, yes the proposal is to go to PAWS-public. Chico Venancio (talk) 05:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
@Chicocvenancio: Have I said anything different? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Not at all. Chico Venancio (talk) 12:38, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
  Comment TLD is in the process of being disbanded. The links above use now as TLD, and if I followed threads correctly in cloud-l and Phabricator, ultimatelly they'll be If they keep redirecting I guess it's a minor issue though. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, updated the link up there. MarcoAurelio Chico Venancio (talk) 05:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


Link:$1 prefix:xtools:

XTools is a popular suite of analytics tools. Global Search reports some 10,000 links scattered across the wikis, including in interface messages, with an additional 17,700+ links to the old location at (though there's no intention of updating those as they automatically forward to the new location). An interwiki link would simply shave off of some typing. Legacy links to XTools use URL query params (i.e. /ec?project=meta.wikimedia&user=Foo, but as of version 3.0 (released July 2017) it uses path-style parameters, such as /ec/meta.wikimedia/Foo, hence making it easy to link to with an interwiki link. This seems like a missing shortcut given we have similar other shortcuts like quarry: and petscan:. MusikAnimal talk 16:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Support.MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment I wonder if it would make more sense to link to specific features such as contribution counts. The main point of an interwiki is avoiding link rot and if you need to include part of the URL in the link that kind of defeats that. --Tgr (talk) 01:31, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
    @Tgr: I'm fond of the idea, but it's impossible to link to it without including a project and a user. So for the Edit Counter you might have, which is the same number of characters as what's being proposed. Simply making xtools: go to the Edit Counter I don't think is a safe assumption since the suite includes many other tools. I'll also note that historically we've done very well with avoiding link rot. Links going back to the old toolserver with legacy parameters like ?wiki=Wikipedia&lang=fr still work today. At any rate, I have no strong feelings. Maybe this interwiki link doesn't make sense? MusikAnimal talk 00:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
    If something takes two parameters, it's better suited for a template than an interwiki link. But then again, templates are not global... hm. And "link to the contributions of this user on this wiki" would make sense for an iw entry, but there's no easy way to manage that... --Tgr (talk) 07:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support LightningComplexFire (talk · contribs · CA) (enwiki talk · enwiki contribs) 18:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)


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 01miki10 (talk) 13:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

  Comment - If we are making an interwiki for this, then we might use one for mw:Miraheze too.
Miraheze is unlikely to be added per Talk:Interwiki_map/Archives/2019#Miraheze. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


This is a closed wiki for Wikimedia Indonesia, currently used for internal matters. We would be grateful if the wiki have an assigned interwiki for better functionality. Thank you. Rachmat (WMID) (talk) 04:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

  Comment Linking to a fishbowl/private wiki? It isn't going to be widely used, and it is only effectively useful for a small group of people. It is significant number of pages and suitable to do such linking? Just seems weird to me.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:39, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

The private wiki currently has more than 42,000 files which most of them are linked from this wiki. Most of them are invoices and internal papers, saved in the private wiki to avoid abuse. When the files are moved, the bare link from here doesn't automatically redirect, so that is why we consider using assigned interwiki to avoid such problem. Also, having interwiki helps the syntax neat and tidy. Best, Rachmat (WMID) (talk) 06:14, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support This will help to detect whether files/related pages already existed (red link for non-existent ones), thus providing better way of knowing the completeness of important documents in the organization, without compromising the privacy. Raisha (WMID) (talk) 07:24, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Can someone explain "When the files are moved, the bare link from here doesn't automatically redirect" part? If you are linking it from id to id-internal, as long as you don't delete the old redirect (which you should NOT anyway), it should continue to redirect. If you deleted the redirect, that's your problem to solve. Also "having interwiki helps the syntax neat and tidy.": Use template, like the name "internal" (or the one in local language) with <span class="plainlinks">{{{1}}}</span> which produces "[3]" - which when used with {{internal|Hi}}, would be like [4]. — regards, Revi 21:50, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
    • Dear Revi, thanks for your comment. Frankly, I didn't aware that bare links like this will automatically redirect when clicking it from idwikimedia, if the Example.jpg is a redirect. I was thinking it works only when [[:File:Example.jpg]] is used. The "having interwiki helps the syntax neat and tidy" means that we have been using this syntax, [[:File:Example.jpg]], for a while when we hosted our own wiki back then, and we think that it would be good if id-internal have its own interwiki, so that we could link [[:File:Example.jpg]], instead of pasting links from id-internal page in idwikimedia. Kind regards, Rachmat (WMID) (talk) 15:28, 4 January 2021 (UTC)


Wikijunior is a weird one: it's ostensibly a sister project but it's a subproject of Wikibooks. I think there's value in having a way to easily interlink to these various sistersubprojects. Is it feasible to have 1018//////////////// and 102114091518//////////////// as aliases to the different language editions via constructions like 05141018//////////////// or 051910211409/1518///////////////. Thoughts? —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:01, 19 February 2021 (UTC) (another linking)Edit is a data wiki for the WMF. I personally think wd: is a perfect choice, and it would be faster than wikidata: linking

Link:$1 prefix:wd:

  1. stable link :$1
  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site
    • You all know wikidata, no need to explain why we need a linking to it, and yes, I know there's already wikidata:, but I want to type that faster, so wd: would be a better choice
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects
    • Wikidata is part of the WMF. It is not spam
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)
    • Part of the Wikimedia Foundation. No need for a license
  4. be a wiki
    • yes
  5. have reasonable amounts of content
    • 92,721,940 content pages, and part of the Wikimedia Foundation.
  6. not contain malware
    • obviously no malware.

LightningComplexFire (talk · contribs · CA) (enwiki talk · enwiki contribs) 18:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

There is already d:. --MF-W 18:25, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed removalsEdit

  This section is for proposing that a prefix be disabled; please add new entries at the bottom of the section. Remember to explain why it should be disabled, particularly in view of the difficulty involved in correcting any use of the prefix (to generate a list of pages to fix: toollabs:pirsquared/iw.php). Completed requests are marked with {{done}} or {{not done}} and moved to the archives.


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

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

  • Speedy Remove. It was removed per consensus, and I don't see in the archives any thread discussing and approving its readittion. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Re-  Support: Wiki is now closed/deleted. Interwiki link just do not work. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:25, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Uncyclopedia was added to match the addition to the MediaWiki default interwiki map. I don't think the previous removal discussion is that relevant, given the site forking from Wikia, etc. I don't really follow the line of argumentation about being "male-dominated" (not true, but have you looked at Wikimedia projects?) or IRC comments (have you ever been in #wikipedia-en?) and so on. It *is* a humor wiki. (disclaimer: I'm affiliated with Uncyclomedia Foundation). Legoktm (talk) 04:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
    There's no reason for Uncyclopedia to be on the default interwiki map either. It has no relevance to any wiki other than those affiliated with it. Forking from Wikia does not make it not Uncyclopedia. As MarcoAurelio said, there was no thread approving its readdition; at least, I could not find one. I did find this rejected request.
    Of course I'm aware Wikimedia projects are male-dominated, but many members are aware and trying to work against it, and is far more so as evidenced by the link I gave and by who actively edits there. Yes, I am a #wikipedia-en regular. I find it to be a very civilized place where comments like the ones I linked never occur ("the holocaust is a lie made up by the liberal jewish media cabal", "banging my mum is endless enjoyment", "If you were my fucktoy you wouldn't be semen covered, you'd be semen filled", etc.). Behavior on #wikipedia-en is well regulated, and the channel has a set of guidelines, unlike #uncyclopedia which has no rules at all. Being a humor wiki does not excuse or explain the kind of conduct I have pointed to. But in any case, as I said, this site is not a useful interwiki link for Wikimedia or almost anything else. Ekips39 (talk) 04:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Let me get this straight... you want to remove a link to a group of about fifty wikis (as Uncyclopedia exists in multiple languages, across multiple communities) because someone said something you didn't like... not on the wiki, but on an IRC #channel? This looks to be a political ploy, not a legit attempt to apply established criteria. And yes, there was a discussion both when it was removed (as Wikia projects can already be accessed in a format like wikia:uncyclopedia:PageName) and when it was restored. Nothing has changed since then. K7L (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Basically. There's a bit of a history between Ekips and several other uncyclopedians, which in our proud tradition of drama, drama, everywhere, apparently spilled over here. I can't speak to the specific merits of any of it one way or the other, but this was not exactly an unbiased proposal. -— Isarra 21:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@Legoktm: It's not a humor wiki, it's a rumors wiki, Please remove it from special:interwiki. -- 05:38, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
It's a site focused on humor, not conspiracy theories or attacking people. Regardless, listing it in interwiki links isn't an endorsement of it's content. Vermont (talk) 10:26, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment The interwiki is used at enWP, and I believe that the issue should be discussed and resolved there. In the current situation I am not prepared to remove the interwiki and leave redlinks without consulting and having advice from the wiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  • General note that even aside from the bias of the original proposal, much of it is apt to no longer apply regardless: wikia is in the process of deleting all the uncyclopedias they host, so the wikia interwikis will soon no longer work for any of them. Thus while there may still be some different variants of some of the languages, nearly all of the projects will now require a distinct interwiki to access them this way regardless. -— Isarra 21:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Maybe we can mark this one as discontinued to avoid all the sudden creating lots of red links. This discussion has been open for more than 2 years... —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2021 (UTC)


The links are broken - works, but clicking forward to returns a forbidden access error / 403. All links, like, return a Not Found / 404 error.

The primary usage is in w:Template:WP1.0, and the template can be updated.

Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 04:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

  On hold @DannyS712: It has a lot of links at enWP in Talk: and some specialised categories, should it be a case of remapping all links to a single target page and listing on Interwiki map/discontinued.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:52, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Service: fixed ping to DannyS712MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Most of the lines are from the template - if this is going to be moving forward (either removal or remapping) I'll remove the template link - that should clear the majority of links. Should I? --DannyS712 (talk) 21:47, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I see that the link has been removed from the template. Still some links remain in some pages. Is removing those an option or would marking this one as discontinued be prefered? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


The BrickWiki prefix seems to refuse connections. Most links seem to be from talk page --Nintendofan885 (talk) 14:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC) seems to work as of today, on the other hand I am not sure about the usefulness of the interwiki prefix as of today. The wiki seems to be closed down somewhat, and seems to be using a rather old MediaWiki version. Unsure about this one but if it is only used on talk pages, perhaps we should just remove it. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Requests for updatesEdit

  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.


​[[Quarry:$1]]​ maps to ​$1​, should map to ​$1​. For backwards compatibility, the "​query/​" prefix should be removed by the parser. Fuzzy (talk) 09:32, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done special:diff/19815991  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Congratulations. Now every existing link to quarry is broken: (or any number) 404s. w:WP:RAQ for some handy examples. —User:Cryptic (talk) 14:43, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Also, you can no longer link to user pages on quarry, e.g. quarry:Retro used to go to the perfectly-valid (as seen at w:User:Retro). for the links from enwiki, none of which now work, and there's a bunch of immutable edit summaries besides. —User:Cryptic (talk) 15:12, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
  Undone. @Cryptic: this has been undone for now. @Fuzzy: do you have more information on your request and how to avoid problems? — xaosflux Talk 15:56, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm not Fuzzy, but the problem they seem to be trying to solve is that the overwhelming majority of links to quarry do go to query/ subpages, so it's natural to want [[quarry:1]] to work. (Indeed, there's three links on enwiki that tried to do exactly this, all predating the interwiki map change.) It's worth asking the quarry maintainer to redirect e.g. to go to on that side of things, though that's of course a breaking change for users with all-numeric usernames. —User:Cryptic (talk) 16:09, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
How about second interwiki, e.g. [[query:123]]? --Dvorapa (talk) 21:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  • If people do want this, I think the easiest way forward is to get Quarry to support the broken-looking /query/query/1 URLs and redirect them to the proper destination. And then we can safely change the interwiki target. Legoktm (talk) 22:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


It looks like PlanetMath changed the way their URLs are generated and now the interwiki links are broken. For example, in the external links section on the Sigma-Algebra page there is an interwiki link ​[[PlanetMath:950|Sigma Algebra]]​ which goes to the URL ​​. But the URL should actually be ​​. 12:25, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

  On hold at this time. They have complete reworked their navigation and ditched their old schema, so changing the redirect target won't fix anything. It will just give the ability to start again. Please advise what should be done. Alternatively, we can look to remove the links, see  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Shall we close this one or remove it? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
@MarcoAurelio: Probably add a section to Interwiki map/discontinued and redirect the link to the anchor there.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:15, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst Another option would be to simply point to given that the site is still up, that'll not break the links entirely IMHO. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


Now of the form$1 instead of$1 Arlo Barnes (talk) 03:19, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


  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).


The "Wikitech" entry in the current version of the map is not located according to alphabetical sorting order. Please move it to the correct place in the table. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:32, 8 November 2020 (UTC)


The "wikiedudashboard" entry in the current version of the map is not located according to alphabetical sorting order. Please move it to the correct place in the table. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:32, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Other discussionsEdit

Interwiki map/detailed tableEdit

Hi. I created the page Interwiki map/detailed table, and the code I used to generate it is here. If you any glaring errors or omissions, tell me and I'll try to fix them. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata propertyEdit

There is now . It isn't complete yet. Jura1 (talk) 11:21, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Return to "Interwiki map" page.