Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Talk:Interwiki map/Archives/2018

< Talk:Interwiki map | Archives
Latest comment: 4 months ago by Pppery

DOI

doi.org

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)doi.org
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Subdomain dx. has been dropped and should no longer be used in new links.

Greetings --PerfektesChaos (talk) 15:37, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Reviewing, doi.org help supports this updated. — xaosflux Talk 16:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Special:PermaLink/17626158 tested new links OK. — xaosflux Talk 16:37, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
  Done — xaosflux Talk 16:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 16:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Twenty-two prefixes with URLs that redirect HTTP->HTTPS

As of now, it appears that there are a number of interwiki link prefixes for which the target URL uses HTTP and for which accessing the HTTP URL generates an HTTP 301 redirect to an HTTPS URL. I have listed details below regarding twenty-two of these prefixes. It would seem useful, if possible, to have these prefixes use HTTPS target URLs in order to provide increased privacy and security for users, in addition to reducing the number of HTTP redirects. Your attention to this issue is appreciated. Thanks.

--Elegie (talk) 05:33, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

  Done though will not be operational until map updated within system  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:17, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

OrthodoxWiki

Change to https:// —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:09, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

  Done Snowolf How can I help? 05:37, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:40, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Git

The current git interwiki points to https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki/$1;a=log;h=refs/heads/master, but that link has been dead for quite a while now. Instead I propose targeting it to: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/g/$1, as that is the new repository viewer we are using. This changes the destination and the format the links are supposed to be in (they need to include the mediawiki/ prefix), but any links were already broken to begin with. Legoktm (talk) 20:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

  Done per special:diff/17820391 @Legoktm: I am presuming your reference to mediawiki is managed by other means, not through the addition to the map. Not yet rolled to coders to integrate.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:04, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
requested update phab:T189444  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:40, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

TFWiki on https

TFWiki is now available as https. Can the interwiki here please be updated? --Alden Bates (talk) 21:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

  Done —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikimedia Indonesia

Dear all,

Wikimedia Indonesia's MediaWiki website moved from wikimedia.or.id to id.wikimedia.org, this website serves as our financial and narrative report. We will use another platform for the previous domain (wikimedia.or.id). @MarcoAurelio: @Billinghurst: could you help us to update the interwiki link? Thank you! Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 18:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Done —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Six prefixes with HTTP URLs that generate redirects to HTTPS URLs

Six prefixes are listed below. These prefixes each have a target URL uses HTTP. At the same time, the target URL for each prefix generates one or more HTTP 301 redirects such that the user ends up at an HTTPS URL. (For example, it may happen where the HTTP URL generates a 301 redirect to an HTTPS URL which generates another 301 redirect to another HTTPS URL.) It would seem useful, if at all possible, to have these prefixes use HTTPS URLs instead of HTTP URLs, in order to provide increased privacy and security for users and to reduce the number of redirects. Thanks.

--Elegie (talk) 07:03, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Any thoughts on this? (It appears that the target URL for wmfr has since been changed to HTTPS.) --Elegie (talk) 07:24, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
@Elegie: To help make these easier to action can I suggest that keeping it simple works best. So the interwiki, the new url/parameter, an existing example so we can watch its new target
  updated  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:33, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

The following affiliate links are available on https now and I suggest their interwiki links are updated to use the more secure links.

  • wikimedia.ch
  • wikimedia.cl
  • wikimedia.fr
  • wikimedia.hu

—TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:27, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:49, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Please change scores to https://imslp.org/wiki/$1 --Boenki (talk) 08:48, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Squatted/missing domains

The following interwiki links go to a squatted domain or a no longer registered domain. I suggest updating them to redirect to a dedicated meta page.

  • wikimedia.hk
  • wikimedia.or.ke
  • wikimedia.org.ph

—TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:27, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

  updated converted these to link to static pages Wikimedia Hong Kong, Wikimedia Kenya, and Wikimedia Philippines respectively. @TheDJ: I am interpreting that as your suggestion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

ISO639-3

Due to upstream updates, please update that url to https://iso639-3.sil.org/code/$1. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:46, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

  updated, will roll out whenever map next refreshed  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:16, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Please change scores to https://imslp.org/wiki/$1 --Boenki (talk) 08:48, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

  Done: diff; thanks. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:54, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:54, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

AquariumWiki supports HTTPS

The interwiki link AquariumWiki supports HTTPS linking (althout insecure HTTP protocol works and does not redirect to HTTPS). I think we should update nonetheless to use HTTPS. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:43, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

  Done (Special:Diff/18337042). —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:24, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:27, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

IMDbName target URL redirects to HTTPS

IMDbName: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm$1/ Michael Arlen

--Elegie (talk) 08:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

@Elegie:   Done (Special:Diff/18337050) and several other IMDB.* prefixes as well so they all use HTTPS. Will be live in the next update of the interwiki map (no aproximate date for that). —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Update Karlsruhe to https

Please change http://ka.stadtwiki.net/$1 to https://ka.stadtwiki.net/$1 for Karlsruhe. Thank you. --Boenki (talk) 17:11, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@Boenki:   Done. Special:Diff/18337040; best regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

koslarwiki

Please remove koslarwiki from the Interwiki map. It's an inimportant wiki of the small village de:Koslar in Germany with less than 3000 inhabitants. The interwiki-link is neither used in DE-wiki, nor in EN-wiki. (A search for insource:/\[koslarwiki\:/ reveals no results) Moreover the last edit is from 2016 by the sysop (recent changes) and the outdated MediaWiki 1.19.15 from 2013 is used (Version). To sum it up: It's dead and irrelevant with no interwikilinks used. --Boenki (talk) 08:52, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Just found this page to search for usage of interwiki-links. OK, there are exactly four links. Nothing to worry about. --Boenki (talk) 09:02, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Database query:
Database name Page ID Page name Interwiki title
enwiki 11088714 User:Marc_Kupper/sandbox koslarwiki:Main_page
dawiki 730078 Project:Landsbybrønden/Kulturgeografi_og_wiki-links koslarwiki:
dawiki 736893 Project:Landsbybrønden/arkiv48 koslarwiki:
dewiki 320000 Diskussion:Jülich koslarwiki:Hauptseite
I agree we do not need an interwiki link for this usage.   Remove —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:38, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

GlobalVoices

GlobalVoices interwiki which points to http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/dyn/globalvoices/wiki/$1 is down with Error 404. If we cannot find the new location (if any), we should remove the link. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:37, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

According to https://cyber.harvard.edu/research/globalvoicesonline the new site is located at https://globalvoices.org/. I am not sure if we should switch to that site. It is no longer a wiki AFAIK, and I'm not sure either it'd meet at this moment the inclusion criteria? (I admit I have only had a very quick look). —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:39, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
Current usage as per https://tools.wmflabs.org/pirsquared/iw.php?wikis=&iw=globalvoices&hideclosed=on
Database name Page ID Page name Interwiki title
enwiki 11088714 User:Marc_Kupper/sandbox globalvoices:Main_page
Do we need an IW link for just one use? If that count is correct I'd say to remove the link as it is clearly not used.
—MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
I am proposing that this interwiki be removed in a section above. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:47, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Remove GlobalVoices

As stated at Talk:Interwiki_map#GlobalVoices; the interwiki does have just one usage so far. It does not justify the existance of an interwiki link. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:27, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Database name Page ID Page name Interwiki title
enwiki 11088714 User:Marc_Kupper/sandbox globalvoices:Main_page

—MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:39, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

  Done --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:22, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 19:22, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Last-updated date up for updating

Can Steinsplitter or another admin please change the last-updated date to 7 November 2018 (i.e., replace "1=31 October 2018" with "1=7 November 2018" in first line of wikitext)? This was requested at phab:T208344#4726967, and can be "verified" at SAL. Alternatively, to prevent such changes from being necessary in the future, {{Interwiki map intro}} could be modified to abandon "manual" setting of the date, and just direct readers to the SAL link target to check when the last update was performed. (Note that the template already links to both that target and the interwiki.php history in Diffusion, both of which show when the last several updates occurred.) - dcljr (talk) 02:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Dcljr: done. I have also moved the cache date to a separate subpage Interwiki map/updated. It adds a small element of risk, though only to the display. Hopefully that is suitable to the community.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Debian Wiki

wiki.debian.org

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)wiki.debian.org
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Link: https://wiki.debian.org/$1

Prefix: debian: or debianwiki:.

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

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

  added as debian:  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:58, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Discontinue Wikinvest

All external links via this interwiki are useless now.

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

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

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

Yeah, good idea.

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

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

(+) If a discontinued flag is officially introduced, flagged keywords may be listed on Special:Interwiki with their last known URL pattern in a particular section, but usage will link to $wgInterwikiDiscontinuedURL pattern, if defined.
wgInterwikiDiscontinuedURL := https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_map/Discontinued#$0
The extension of interwiki extension started less than ten years ago, now by regular link rot more and more keywords will pass away in near future.
Yours, --PerfektesChaos (talk) 13:31, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
I like this idea. But I'd prefer if the "discontinued interwiki" page also had some way of linking to the Wayback Machine (and maybe archive.is/webcite as well). For instance, one of the links on enwiki is wikinvest:Cincinnati_Financial_(CINF), and the page could link to the archived version here. This couldn't be accomplished using a page on Meta-Wiki. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
@PiRSquared17: that is a task for the wiki hosting the url/link, not us. I would suggest that for theWP that you get them to run a bot job.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:28, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  created local link to Interwiki map/discontinued#Wikinvest. Anyone feel free to update this page to a better standard, and to consider the potential for a standardising on a template.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:45, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

ForthFreak target URLs redirect to GitHub wiki

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

@Elegie:Looking at https://tools.wmflabs.org/pirsquared/iw.php?wikis=&iw=ForthFreak&hideclosed=on has me thinking that we would be better to just remove the interwiki link, it isn't being used.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:50, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
  removed as unused.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:42, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

infosphere

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

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

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

  updated to be https  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:29, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

IRCS vs. IRC

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

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

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

@Ptolusque: there is IRC, have you misspoken, and need to amend? If you are asking why freenode is not available in secure IRC, probably because no one has requested it. Most direct requests that I have seen have been through their https interface.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes, misspelled. Corrected above. I'm asking why all irc servers provided in Special:Interwiki are not available in secure IRCS. Herby I request IRCS to be added or as replacement for irc. --Ptolusque (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikia

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

@PrimeHunter: thanks for the note, can you provide any documentation from wikia about what changes they are making to their naming convention? — xaosflux Talk 23:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I don't edit at Wikia and haven't seen any documentation. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:07, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
I found http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Links#Interwiki_links which says: To link to a page on a different community, enter "w:c:" followed by the domain of that wiki, followed by the page's name. This indicates http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1. Trying this, both http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:tardis:Davros and http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:harrypotter:Hermione_Granger work for me via redirects. Trying http://www.wikia.com/wiki/$1 without w:c:, http://www.wikia.com/wiki/tardis:Davros works for me while http://www.wikia.com/wiki/harrypotter:Hermione_Granger fails. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: thanks for the note, to be clear this will be a change of:
  • FROM: http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:$1
  • TO: http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1
— xaosflux Talk 00:55, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, that is currently my best guess. I haven't tried other Wikia links or different devices. At w:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 169#Links to Harry Potter wiki, Wikia behaved differently with different user agents. There may be four affected interwiki map entries. They currently say:
I haven't examined how WikiaSite:, Wikicities: and Wikicity: are used and whether they would all be better as http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:23, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
I have now tested the use of many Wikia wikis in the English Wikipedia. The already made Wikia change to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1 will fix all tested links made with Wikia:. They are all broken with the old http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:$1. WikiaSite and Wikicity need the same change to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1. All tested links are broken and will be fixed by this change. Wikicities needs a change from http://www.wikia.com/wiki/$1 to http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:$1. All tested links are broken and will be fixed by this. Note that Wikicities does not currently include c: and should not start doing it. It should only add w:. This is because all tested existing uses are adapted to the current value without c: so they add c: in the wikilink like wikicities:c:Smallville:Spirit. The suggested change will produce the working http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:Smallville:Spirit instead of the broken http://www.wikia.com/wiki/c:Smallville:Spirit. In summary, these should be the new values:
  •   Done Wikia http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1 (already done)
  •   Done WikiaSite http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1
  •   Done Wikicities http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:$1
  • Wikicity http://www.wikia.com/wiki/w:c:$1
All tests were with Firefox on Windows 10. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
  Done all updates made. — xaosflux Talk 14:38, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
phab:T207596 opened to sync. — xaosflux Talk 14:41, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Bibliowiki

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

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

Note, this is both the wikilivres and the bibliowiki prefixes. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 14:52, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  Done; Special:Diff/18733804 —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:26, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Doom Wiki

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

  Not done The wikia site redirects to https://doom.fandom.com. This needs a proper discussion and resolution in preference to a one person nominating.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:48, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:24, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

When to accept or reject a request

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

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

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

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

Thanks, I see your point and understand your reasons. But then again, information to the users needs to be updated.
First of all: who is in charge of reviewing documentation? Is this something we users should take care of, or an Administrator is better suited for?
Secondly, how we define consensus? Do we need 10 {{support}}? Or 20? Or 1.000? And how to weight them against any number of {{oppose}}?
I think we need at least a general guideline to know how to approach a proposal and gather supporters.--LucaMauri (talk) 11:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:23, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

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

The rendering of interwiki links is controlled by the CSS class .extiw: in our MediaWiki installation we decided to show a small sunflower icon (WikiMedia logo) next to any interwiki link and we managed to do this simply adding a background-image property to the class in the CSS. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, there is not an easy way to differentiate between different sites. The general idea would be to add a second class – beside .extiw – to the links identifying the prefix of the website where the link points to: then it could be possible to customize every links in a similar way as the <li> elements in the sidebar. This should be suggested as a change to MediWiki codebase, but I haven't found the time to do so, yet. --LucaMauri (talk) 12:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
@Kmhkmh: please note this feature is currently being worked on. See T224064 for further details and https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Attribute_selectors for an alternative approach to the problem. --LucaMauri (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:23, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Botwiki

This website is down, and according to phab:T115790, has been repeatedly over the last several years (depending on how you interpret the last few comments in that bug report, it may have been down continuously for over two years by this point). It is only used a few hundred times, and only around 5 of those are articles, plus a couple dozen or so translation subpages here on MetaWiki (though I counted just by scanning the list, so I may have missed some). 「ディノ奴千？！」☎ Dinoguy1000 17:46, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

I'd be curious as to what happened to the content which used to be on botwiki: as that project's been offline for a couple of years now, breaking the interwiki link. Did the info get moved to mw: or is it simply lost? K7L (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I note there's been no answer from @Snowolf: yet (though by all accounts she's busy IRL, so someone should probably make a more concerted effort to get a hold of her?), and the site's still down. 「ディノ奴千？！」☎ Dinoguy1000 21:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
    I emailed him a couple of months ago regarding this but I've not no reply from him though. If the wiki has been down for some time I'd say we remove the link. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:06, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I apologize for the lengthy delay in replying here. Botwiki has indeed been out of commission for several years. I shut down that hosting account a long time ago now, and never brought Botwiki back up. The entire database for it is overrun with the unwiedly amount of spam we had been experiencing, and I intended on cleaning stuff up before bringing it back. For a project with only a few hundred pages and only a handful of active or semi-active it was unmanageable to have many hundreds of new spam accounts per day. So between that and the fact that it was running on an ancient MediaWiki version, it always ended up pushed towards the bottom of the todo list -- I'm sorry. I am currently in a very busy period IRL, but I can explore bringing it up in May or June if there is need for me to do so. Alternatively, I could look at producing a dump of some kind. I'm open to any avenue that would be preferred (and I'm really bad at answering, I know -- I'm sorry MarcoAurelio). Snowolf How can I help? 18:44, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
    • Keeping in mind I have no personal use for it myself, nor any history with it, I would say at this point that a dump would be fine given the site's been offline for several years and you don't have the free time to bring it back up and maintain it (I've poked around a bit at your user pages here and on Wikipedia, and it sounds like you've been short on personal time for years now, so I'm guessing this is a situation that also isn't likely to change for you any time soon). A dump would also allow someone else to run the site, if there was a desire for that at this point (if nothing else, if the contents of the wiki are of any importance to the WMF, they could toss it up as a read-only wiki similar to Nostalgia). 「ディノ奴千？！」☎ Dinoguy1000 18:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
      Read-only on 1.7.x should be very easy to do. Actually I guess could just disallow new account creations and that would do the trick -- I doubt the spambots would still keep track of their old passwords. I'll look into this maybe sometime in the next week and report back. Snowolf How can I help? 19:04, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
      Sorry that should have been 1.17.x, not 1.7.x Snowolf How can I help? 19:11, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Marked as discontinued. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:04, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

transit.wiki

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


transitunlimited.org

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)transitunlimited.org
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

transit.wiki

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)transit.wiki
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Link: https://www.transit.wiki/$1 prefix:Transit:

  2. stable link : https://www.transit.wiki/$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. Transit.wiki 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
    • Transit.wiki 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 transitunlimited.org; and no links to transit.wiki. 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 transit.wiki because the old links to transitunlimited.org got redirected to transit.wiki automatically. There should be at least 70 links. Acnetj (talk) 02:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
As of today there are 64 links to transitunlimited.org and 18 for transit.wiki 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 transit.wiki's content which I have not reviewed. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

  Not done --MF-W 13:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 13:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia

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

  • Speedy Remove. It was removed per consensus, and I don't see in the archives any thread discussing and approving its readittion. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Uncyclopedia was added to match the addition to the MediaWiki default interwiki map. I don't think the previous removal discussion is that relevant, given the site forking from Wikia, etc. I don't really follow the line of argumentation about being "male-dominated" (not true, but have you looked at Wikimedia projects?) or IRC comments (have you ever been in #wikipedia-en?) and so on. It *is* a humor wiki. (disclaimer: I'm affiliated with Uncyclomedia Foundation). Legoktm (talk) 04:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
    There's no reason for Uncyclopedia to be on the default interwiki map either. It has no relevance to any wiki other than those affiliated with it. Forking from Wikia does not make it not Uncyclopedia. As MarcoAurelio said, there was no thread approving its readdition; at least, I could not find one. I did find this rejected request.
    Of course I'm aware Wikimedia projects are male-dominated, but many members are aware and trying to work against it, and uncyclopedia.co 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. --60.26.9.114 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)

  Closed Consensus seems to be keep though point to Interwiki map/discontinued#uncyclopedia due to active links. Yet to be actioned.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:13, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

  Removed pointing to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_map/discontinued#uncyclopedia , not yet activated  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

  Done interwiki map rolled out @Ekips39:

Re removal: I believe that the bias that Ekips39 has in this proposal, per Isarra, is to be noted. This consensus feels very thin, and is based upon one user actively pushing for its removal. Uncyclopedia has had its fair share of bigotry in the past, but, to my knowledge at least, is currently in the process of redeeming itself; attempting to use IRC conversations as an excuse for delisting an entire website (per Ekips39) amounts to nothing but a massive exaggeration and a direct attempt at attacking Uncyclopedia itself. Considering how it is now fairly established that en.uncyclopedia.co is the primary Uncyclopedia (the Wikia distinction no longer being a problem), and how Uncyclopedia has several multilingual variants, it would only make sense to reinstate the interwiki. Interwikis are meant for easy access to sites, and are not based on its content; For Uncyclopedia, the same applies. Casspedia (talk) 01:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Additionally, to note: many of the former removals were based more on technicalities (e.g. uncyclopedia.org migrating to Wikia, and its subsequent exodus); the lack of technicalities plus the sheer amount of time since consensus was seemingly established is also to note. Casspedia (talk) 01:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
As for the significant use clause... there are a fair share of Uncyclopedia users on Wikimedia Foundation-owned websites. One of Wikipedia's userboxes for Uncyclopedian accounts has about sixty transclusions; there most likely are many more. This removal feels unjustified at best, to be honest; there is a fair overlap between Uncyclopedia users and Wikimedia Foundation users, and allowing this interwiki to properly exist will enable Uncyclopedia users on Wikimedia websites to still refer to themselves and/or their articles on Uncyclopedia easily. Casspedia (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Taking all of the above that I wrote into consideration, I'm strongly against the removal of Uncyclopedia interwikis from Wikimedia Foundation websites. I strongly hope that this decision is reconsidered and the interwiki is reinstated. Casspedia (talk) 01:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
I would like to address two points that Ekips39 made about Uncyclopedia's alleged bigotry. While it is true that we've attracted our fair share of questionable and 'edgy' humor over the years, we've been actively working to amend it in recent years. I myself attempted to start an annual project dedicated to removing racism and other bigoted forms of humor throughout the site last January. Meanwhile, over this spring alone the admins have put in efforts to deal with the androcentric nature of the site, as well as an official set of policies on how to be respectful towards transgender people. Which brings me to my next point. Ekips39 claimed:
"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."
While this was true in 2018, if you go to the active admins page right now, 2 out of 3 of the current active bureaucrats happen to be women. Meanwhile, we've been brainstorming ideas amongst ourselves ways to bring in more female users to our site. On the issue of Uncyclopedia being regressive or indulging in bigoted humor, ekips39's claims are either outdated, or actively being remedied by our most active admins. --Kip the Dip (talk) 01:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

  Comment @Kip the Dip and Casspedia: I put it through based on the general comment and the consensus of the community and especially the information from Isarra, not so much the point of view of the nominator. At this point we/you can add some neutral comment/direction/updated link at Interwiki map/discontinued#uncyclopedia. Noting that mapped links already in place are not dead, so don't have to be removed at site at this time. I would prefer that we archive the previous parts of the conversation, and put your challenge as a new component in this section. I think that it is easier (better?) to have the conversation looking forward with clear eyes, about whether the wiki meets the criteria, and the value of an interwiki, and not surround the discussion with baggage of ghosts past.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Alright. I'll suggest re-addition of the interwiki, citing myself and Kip's reasons. Casspedia (talk) 13:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: proposal for re-addition at #Uncyclopedia (re-addition proposal)  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

L'Enciclopèdia

lenciclopedia.org

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)lenciclopedia.org
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

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)

I see 12 links. Doesn't seem to meet the significant criteria.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:04, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
@Agusbou2015:  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

  Not done, no reply for a long time. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

WikiTrek.org

wikitrek.org

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)wikitrek.org
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

hypertrek.info

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)hypertrek.info
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Interwiki request: new

Status:    Done
wikidata status:   In progress

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

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

Tu summarize:

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

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

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

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

  2023-05-29 163 links and 375 links respectively. Still not excessive numbers, so leaving this open for the community to direct what they would like to happen.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:03, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
This looks reasonable to add to me. * Pppery * it has begun 19:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
  Added * Pppery * it has begun 17:53, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: * Pppery * it has begun 18:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Interwiki_map/Archives/2018&oldid=27055434"
Return to "Interwiki map/Archives/2018" page.