Help talk:Interlanguage links

nonredlink ILL

Is there a way to get an ILL, but not have it show a redlink? I could use xx:link, but that would show the foreing language not the English. So what I want is the text, and then the bracketed ILL. Metallurgist (talk) 19:59, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

The red link is the point of using ILL. It enables a reader to access associated information on another Wikipedia if they happen to be able to read its language or want to use a translator, while also serving the purpose that WP:REDLINKs serve: to suggest that a topic that doesn't have an article here might merit one and possibly spark an interest in a passing reader in creating one.

In article text, you shouldn't link directly to another Wikipedia because that surprises a reader who isn't expecting to be taken off-site and because the information there won't be useful to most readers.

In other cases, if for some reason you want to link to a page on Wikipedia while displaying the English term, you use a pipe, just as you do for links to other pages within English Wikipedia. (Note how, for example, I used a pipe to create the link the word "pipe"to the guidance about pipes.) Largoplazo (talk) 23:18, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Yea I dont want to link directly. I am trying to provide links inline without being intrusive to the relevant article on another language, but a redlink would be pointless because no such article is likely to be created or considered notable here (it is in the target language). So I would want it to say Blahblah and then the little ill link in a bracket after. Metallurgist (talk) 17:57, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

It's difficult to give fitting advice without having context for its application. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:15, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

misleading attitude about deleting wikilinks

I think some of the guidance about non-existent links could lead some newbie editors to inappropriately remove links just becuase they're redlinks:

If you find interlanguage links to non-existent pages on the English Wikipedia, they may be deleted as having no content. Alternatively, you can create at least a stub page on the target wiki before adding an interlanguage link to it.

The way this is written can be seen as a "call to action" any time somebody encounters a redlink. While the presence of a redlink can be viewed as an invitation to create a new article, it's probably more appropriate to look for a pertinent article, either on the "local" wiki or on a foreign language wiki. OTOH, there's no mandate to take any action, leaving it for other editors to create an appropriate target article.

I completely realize that this is like "Wikipedia editing 101", but I think we should be more clear that the presence of a redlink does not create a call to action,i.e. there is no mandate to "do something" about every redlink an editor encounters, and our guidance should be clear on this. Fabrickator (talk) 13:26, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

You have a point, Fabrickator, but first - let's discuss: what does this passage even mean? I have a hard time understanding what the editor had in mind when they wrote it.

I think, but am not sure, the editor writing this had regular interlanguage links in mind (not {{ill}} links), and is talking about a link here on English Wikipedia that leads nowhere, to a non-existing article in a foreign Wikipedia. And how the issue with this is that such links do not turn red. This led the editor to suggest creating the destination as a stub, so the reader at least doesn't encounter the "this article does not exist" error, and not only that, but gets the error in a foreign language to boot. For example pl:this article does not exist (a link that is blue even though there is no such article on Polish Wikipedia) doesn't say "this article does not exist", it says "W Wikipedii nie ma jeszcze artykułu o takiej nazwie" (meaning "There is no article in Wikipedia yet with this name" in Polish).

But I want to make clear this will NOT be a red link. Also I think this passage loses sight of what's important.

Now as to your point. Seeing a red link, any red link, should not be interpreted as a call to action. Neither to correct a wrong, nor that there exists a "hole" in Wikipedia that must be filled. Per WP:REDLINK, red links are literally meant to be used for topics that should have articles but do not. They are completely acceptable meaning there is nothing wrong with them, and they should not be removed as being an error of sort. Furthermore, since the intent is 1) to signal there exists a subject that English Wikipedia should cover and 2) encourage creation of more articles, just creating a minimal stub for the express purpose to "fill the hole" (turn the red link blue) is also not advisable, since this removes the signal for both 1) and 2) Finally, and also per REDLINK, you should only remove a red link if you want and can say "this subject should not be covered by English Wikipedia".

If we apply this to {{ill}} links, which chiefly are a form of red link, we can say that we should not link to foreign-language wikipedias for subjects unless we believe the subject merits an English-language article eventually.

I think that passage should be rewritten, but will hold off in the case more perspectives are forthcoming. CapnZapp (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry I am confused

How do you link these same articles in different languages?

Comandos de la Frontera

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comandos_de_la_Frontera

Coding is not my specialty. 😅

Historyguy1138 (talk) 07:00, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Done. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:18, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much. :D Historyguy1138 (talk) 12:58, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Redirects

Hi. I do not work usually in English Wikipedia, so I do not know what to do in this case. I just saw a template usage that looks like [[<self link via redirect>]] [<language code>]. Knowing the red links are not allowed in this specific Wikipedia, and self links are not recommended or not allowed nearly anywhere, I tried to remove the wikilink, so it will become <some term> [<language code>], but couldn't do it. What is the right decision in this case? Leave the self link? Something else? Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 08:08, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

@IKhitron: You admit that you're not particularly familiar with English wikipedia, you post on the "talk page" a question about the {{interlanguage link}} template, except that you're not actually asking about the {{interlanguage link}} template, and you don't even bother to tell us which article this is in regard to. I do see that you have reported some cases where a character is dropped out, e.g. "Collapse" becomes "ollapse", so perhaps what's causing that to happen is causing other things not to work as expected. In any cse, please keep in mind that this talk page is regarding the {{interlanguage link}} (a.k.a. {{ill}}), and so I wouldn't consider this to be the right place to discuss the use of language codes in, that would probably be {{interwiki linking}} But really, that's for issues with the documentation. You could try either the "help desk" or you could solicit a request for help using the {{help me}} template on your own talk page. Fabrickator (talk) 10:24, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

I'll note that it appears that the page in question is Culture of London, which has a link to London Metropolitan Orchestra, which redirects to Culture of London#Classical and opera. The behavior of a "hidden redirect" like this is somewhat irksome ... the user is expecting to go to a new page, and there is no alert that it is just going to a different section of the page they're already on. (In fact, I have done the same thing in a dozen or more articles, appending the string "(suppress redirect)" to the article title.) As for the mention of enwiki having a policy of "no red links", that's either simply not true or is some sort of misunderstanding. Fabrickator (talk) 19:12, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

This case, with >60 incoming links, screams for an article for the subject. Unfortunately, instead of improving, it was deleted in August 2016. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:25, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not certain which is the exact right talk page to discuss the redirect, but I'm pretty sure it's not here. Fabrickator (talk) 14:46, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

I met another example, but this is definitely what I was talking about. IKhitron (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2026 (UTC)