Wikipedia:Link rot - Wikipedia Wikipedia:Link rot From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search How to prevent or repair broken links This page is about (primarily) link rot in external links. For broken section links within Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Database reports/Broken section anchors. For internal links which point to deleted or non-existent articles, see WP:REDLINKS. For other uses, see Wikipedia:Citing sources § Preventing and repairing dead links. "WP:LR" redirects here. For Lua requests, see Wikipedia:Lua requests. To request URL changes, see WP:Link rot/URL change requests. This help page is a how-to guide. It details processes or procedures of some aspect(s) of Wikipedia's norms and practices. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, and may reflect varying levels of consensus and vetting. Shortcuts WP:LR WP:404 WP:ROT WP:BADLINK WP:LINKROT This page in a nutshell: Steps may be taken to reduce or repair dead external links. Like most large websites, Wikipedia suffers from the phenomenon known as link rot, where external links become dead, as the linked web pages or complete websites disappear, change their content, or move without HTML redirection. This presents a significant threat to Wikipedia's reliability policy and its source citation guideline. In general, do not delete cited information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer. Tools, procedures, and processes are available as outlined in this document. Contents 1 Preventing link rot 1.1 Automatic archiving 1.2 Manual archiving 1.3 Alternative methods 2 Repairing a dead link 2.1 Searching 2.2 Internet archives 3 Mitigating a dead link 4 Keeping dead links 5 Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites 6 See also 6.1 Essays 6.2 Tools and how-to guides 6.3 Bots 7 External links 7.1 Notes Preventing link rot Shortcut WP:PLRT Automatic archiving Links added by editors to the English Wikipedia mainspace are automatically saved to Wayback Machine within about 24 hours (nb. in practice not every link is getting saved for various reasons). This is done with a program called "NoMore404" which Internet Archive runs and maintains; other language wiki sites are included. It monitors EventStreams API, extracts new external URLs and adds a snapshot to the Wayback. This system became active sometime after 2015, though previous efforts were also made. Also, sometime after 2012, archive.today (aka archive.is) attempted to archive all external links then existing on Wikipedia at that time. This was incomplete but a significant number of links were added to archive.today during this period making it a major archival source filling in gaps of coverage. Archive.today is still making some automated archives as of 2020, though the extent of coverage and frequency is unknown. As of 2015, there is a Wikipedia bot and tool called WP:IABOT that automates fixing link rot. It runs continuously checking all articles on Wikipedia if a link is dead, adding archives to Wayback Machine (if not yet there), and replacing dead links in the wikitext with an archived version. This bot runs automatically but it can also be directed by end users through its web interface. It is available when viewing any page's history, located near the top of the page on the line of "External Tools", with the "Fix dead links" option. As of 2015, the periodic bot WP:WAYBACKMEDIC checks for link rot in the archive links themselves. Archive databases are dynamic and changing, archives go missing, move, new ones added etc.. this bot maintains existing archive links on English Wikipedia. It also does archiving on request at WP:URLREQ, it is a flexible tool that can do many custom jobs. Manual archiving Suggestions for ways to manually improve archiving: Avoid bare URLs. Use citation templates such as {{cite web}} for citations, and {{webarchive}} for external links sections. Use a web archiving service such as Internet Archive or Archive.today. A complete list is available at WP:List of web archives on Wikipedia. Within citation templates, put the archive URL in |archive-url= and add an |archive-date=. If the link is still valid, include |url-status=live, otherwise set |url-status=dead. If the link is still live but not yet archived, visit the web site of the archive service of your choice and request that the page be archived. Run WP:IABOT on pages via its user interface. Alternative methods Most citation templates have a |quote= parameter that can be used to store text quotes of the source material. This can be used to store a limited amount of text from the source within the citation template. This is especially useful for sources that cannot be archived with web archiving services. It can also provide insurance against failure of the chosen web archiving service. Storing the entire text of the source is not appropriate under fair use policies, so choose only the most important portions of the text that most support the assertions in the Wikipedia article. Where applicable, public domain materials can be copied to Wikisource. Repairing a dead link Shortcut WP:DEADLINK "WP:DEADLINK" redirects here. For the guideline on what to do when a link is dead (including potential removal of the cited material), see WP:DEADREF. There are several ways to try to repair a dead link, detailed below: Searching If the dead link includes enough information (article title, names, etc.) it is often possible to use it to find the Web page at a different location, either on the same site or elsewhere. Often web pages simply moved within the same site. A site index or site-specific search feature is a useful place to locate the moved page. If these tools are not available, many Internet search engines allow a search on a specified site. Failing this, searching the Internet for the page can find alternatives. If you find a suitable new URL, then you can edit the parameters within the citation. If the citation uses one of the common templates (e.g. {{cite web}}, {{cite news}}, {{Citation}}), then you can edit as follows: Change the |url= to point to the new URL; Change or add |access-date= to refer to the current date. Internet archives Check for archived versions at one of the many web archive services. The "Big 3" archive services are web.archive.org, webcitation.org and archive.is. These account for over 90% of all archives on Wikipedia, with web.archive.org being over 80% of all archive links. Other archive services are listed at WP:WEBARCHIVES. The Mementos interface allows one to search multiple archiving services with a single search. The Memento database is cached, meaning results are returned quickly, but the cache also becomes out of date. Therefore, it should not be relied on as the final word – very often it may report no archives are available, when they actually are. You may still need to do the work of checking individual archive sites, but Mementos can be a quick first check. Bookmarklets to check common archive sites for archives of the current page (all open in a new tab or window) Archive site Bookmarklet Archive.org javascript:void(window.open('https://web.archive.org/web/*/'+location.href)) UKGWA javascript:void(window.open('http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/*/'+location.href)) If multiple archive dates are available, use the one that is most likely to be the contents of the page seen by the editor who entered the reference on the |access-date=. If that parameter is not specified, a search of the article's revision history can be performed to determine when the link was added to the article. View the archive to verify that it contains valid page information. Usually dates closer to the time the link was placed in the Wikipedia page, or earlier, are more likely to show valid information. If you find a suitable archive URL, then you can add it to the citation. If the citation uses one of the common templates (e.g. {{cite web}}, {{cite news}}, {{Citation}}), then you can edit as follows: Leave the |url= unchanged, pointing to the source URL. Add |archive-url=, pointing to the archive URL. Add |archive-date=, specifying the date when the archived copy was saved. YYYY-MM-DD format is usually easiest but any format can be used. Add or change |url-status=. Use |url-status=dead if the old URL does not work. Use |url-status=unfit or |url-status=usurped if the old URL has been usurped for the purposes of spam, advertising, or is otherwise unsuitable. Use |url-status=live if |url= still works and still gives the correct information, but you want to preemptively add an |archive-url=. Leave the |access-date= unchanged, referring to the date when a previous editor last accessed the |url=. Some editors believe |access-date= should be removed once a working |archive-url= is established since the |url= is no longer available, maintaining an |access-date= is redundant clutter. Mitigating a dead link Shortcut WP:MDLI At times, all attempts to repair the link will be unsuccessful. In that event, consider finding an alternate source so that the loss of the original does not harm the verifiability of the article. Alternate sources about broad topics are usually easily located. A simple search engine query might locate an appropriate alternative, but be extremely careful to avoid citing mirrors and forks of Wikipedia itself, which would violate Wikipedia:Verifiability. Sometimes, finding an appropriate source is not possible, or would require more extensive research techniques, such as a visit to a library or the use of a subscription-based database. If that is the case, consider consulting with Wikipedia editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange, the Wikipedia:Village pump, or Wikipedia:Help desk. Also, consider contacting experts or other interested editors at a relevant WikiProject. Sometimes a link is dead because the website moved the URL (e.g. http://example.com moved to http://example.co.uk). If you discover an URL change like this, please submit a request at WP:BOTREQ for a url move. A bot will make the change. Keeping dead links Shortcut WP:KDL A dead, unarchived source URL may still be useful. Such a link indicates that information was (probably) verifiable in the past, and the link might provide another user with greater resources or expertise with enough information to find the reference. It could also return from the dead. With a dead link, it is possible to determine if it has been cited elsewhere, or to contact the person originally responsible for the source. For example, one could contact the Yale Computer Science department if http://www.cs.yale.edu/~EliYale/Defense-in-Depth-PhD-thesis.pdf[dead link] were dead. Place {{dead link|date=June 2021}} after the dead citation, immediately before the tag if applicable, leaving the original link intact. Placing {{dead link}} auto-categorizes the article into Articles with dead external links project category, and into specific monthly date range category based on |date= parameter. Do not delete a citation just because it has been tagged with {{dead link}} for a long time. Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites Shortcut WP:EXTERNALROT Non-Wikimedia sites are also susceptible to link rot. Following a page move or page deletion, links to Wikipedia pages from other websites may break. In most page moves, a redirect will remain at the old page—this won't cause a problem. But if a page is completely deleted or usurped (i.e. replaced with other content) then link rot will have been caused on any external websites that link to it. Replacement of page content with a disambiguation page may still cause link rot, but is less harmful because a disambiguation page is essentially a type of soft redirect that will lead the reader to the required content. If a page is usurped with content for another subject that shares its name, a hatnote may be placed at the top that directs readers to the original content on its new page—this again is a type of soft redirect, but less obvious. In these cases, readers arriving from an external rotten link should be able to find what they're looking for, but the situation is best avoided as they would have to get there via an additional page, potentially giving a poor impression of both Wikipedia and the linking website. Because the Wikipedia software does not store Referer information, it will be impossible to tell how many external web pages will be affected by a move or deletion, but the risk of link rot will probably be greatest on older and higher profile pages. In truth, there is not a lot that can be done; maintenance of non-Wikimedia websites is not within the scope of being a Wikimedian, nor in most cases within our capability (although if they can be fixed, it would be helpful to do so). However, it may be good practice to think about the potential impact on other sites when deleting or moving Wikipedia pages, especially if no redirect or hatnote will remain. If a move or deletion is expected to cause significant damage, then this might be a factor to consider in WP:RM, WP:AFD and WP:RFD discussions, although other factors may carry more weight. See also Essays Wikipedia:Build content to endure Wikipedia:Offline sources Tools and how-to guides Wikipedia:Link rot/URL change requests – request help to change many URLs, or mark them dead Help:Using the Wayback Machine – how-to guide Wikipedia:Using WebCite – how-to guide (note: as of June 2019 WebCite no longer accepts new archive requests) Wikipedia:Using Archive.is – how-to guide Special:LinkSearch – to find all the pages that contain a particular URL Wikipedia:Citing sources/Further considerations#Pre-emptive archiving – brief guide on how to use various archiving services Wikipedia:Citing sources#Preventing and repairing dead links Wikipedia:External links#Longevity of links – prescribes removal of dead URLs from the "External links" section Category:Articles with bare URLs for citations – the backlog of articles containing bare URLs at risk of link rot, sub-categorised by month Category:Articles with dead external links – the backlog of articles containing dead links, sub-categorised by month Bots InternetArchiveBot (IABot) – automatically fixes dead links whenever possible, and tags them when it isn't WaybackMedic-automatically fixes dead links that are difficult to determine, other general fixes User:Legobot – can mass tag links with {{dead link}}. Requests can be made at User talk:Legoktm. External links official Wayback add-on for Firefox and Chrome[note 1] Resurrect Pages, a third-party add-on tool provides links to seven cache/archive websites upon coming across a dead link. (Firefox) Webcache, add-on for Opera. (discontinued; newer similar add-ons available) weblinkchecker.py—script from the Python Wikipedia Bot collection which finds broken external links. Notes ^ "Save Pages in the Wayback Machine". Internet Archive Help Center. 2018-08-24. v t e Wikipedia essays Essays on building, editing, and deleting content Philosophy Articles must be written All Five Pillars are the same height Avoid vague introductions Be a reliable source Civil POV pushing Cohesion Competence is required Concede lost arguments Dissent is not disloyalty Don't lie Don't search for objections Editing Wikipedia is like visiting a foreign country Editors will sometimes be wrong Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia Explanationism External criticism of Wikipedia Here to build an encyclopedia Most ideas are bad Need Neutrality of sources Not editing because of Wikipedia restriction The one question Oversimplification Paradoxes Paraphrasing POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields Process is important Product, process, policy Purpose Reasonability rule Systemic bias There is no seniority Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia Tendentious editing The role of policies in collaborative anarchy The rules are principles Trifecta Wikipedia in brief Wikipedia is an encyclopedia Wikipedia is a community Construction 100K featured articles Acronym overkill Advanced source searching Adding images improves the encyclopedia Advanced article editing Advanced table formatting Advanced template coding Advanced text formatting Alternatives to the "Expand" template Amnesia test A navbox on every page An unfinished house is a real problem Articles have a half-life Autosizing images Avoid mission statements Bare URLs Be neutral in form Beef up that first revision Blind men and an elephant BOLD, revert, discuss cycle Build content to endure Cherrypicking Chesterton's fence Children's lit, adult new readers, & large-print books Citation overkill Citation underkill Common-style fallacy Concept cloud Creating controversial content Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability Deprecated sources Dictionaries as sources Don't demolish the house while it's still being built Don't get hung up on minor details Don't hope the house will build itself Don't panic Don't revert due solely to "no consensus" Don't teach the controversy Editing on mobile devices Editors are not mindreaders Encourage the newcomers Endorsements (commercial) Featured articles may have problems Fruit of the poisonous tree Give an article a chance Identifying and using independent sources History sources Law sources Primary sources Science sources Style guides Tertiary sources Ignore STRONGNAT for date formats Inaccuracies in Wikipedia namespace Inaccuracy Introduction to structurism Link rot Mine a source Merge Test Minors and persons judged incompetent "Murder of" articles Not every story/event/disaster needs a biography Not everything needs a navbox Not everything needs a WikiProject Nothing is in stone Organizing disambiguation pages by subject area Permastub Potential, not just current state Principle of some astonishment Printability Pruning article revisions Publicists Put a little effort into it Restoring part of a reverted edit Robotic editing Sham consensus Specialized-style fallacy Stub Makers Run an edit-a-thon Temporary versions of articles Tertiary-source fallacy There is a deadline There is no deadline The deadline is now Understanding Wikipedia's content standards Walled garden What an article should not include Wikipedia is a work in progress Wikipedia is not a reliable source Wikipedia is not being written in an organized fashion The world will not end tomorrow Write the article first Writing better articles Writing Avoid thread mode Gender-neutral language Proseline Use feminine pronouns Write the article first Writing about women Writing better articles Deletion Adjectives in your recommendations AfD is not a war zone Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions Arguments to make in deletion discussions Avoid repeated arguments Before commenting in a deletion discussion But there must be sources! Confusing arguments mean nothing Content removal Counting and sorting are not original research Delete the junk Does deletion help? Don't confuse stub status with non-notability Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument Follow the leader How to save an article proposed for deletion I just don't like it Identifying blatant advertising Identifying test edits Immunity Keep it concise Liar liar pants on fire Nothing Nothing is clear Overzealous deletion Relisting can be abusive Relist bias The Heymann Standard Unopposed AFD discussion Wikipedia is not Whack-A-Mole Why was the page I created deleted? What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion When in doubt, hide it in the woodwork No Encyclopedic Use Essays on civility The basics Accepting other users Apology Contributing to complicated discussions Divisiveness Edit at your own pace Encouraging the newcomers Enjoy yourself Expect no thanks High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors How to be civil Maintaining a friendly space Negotiation Obsessive–compulsive disorder editors Relationships with academic editors Thank you Too long; didn't read Truce Unblock perspectives Philosophy A weak personal attack is still wrong Advice for hotheads An uncivil environment is a poor environment Be the glue Beware of the tigers! Civility warnings Deletion as revenge Failure Forgive and forget It's not the end of the world Nobody cares Most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals Old-fashioned Wikipedian values Profanity, civility, and discussions Revert notification opt-out Shadowless Fists of Death! Staying cool when the editing gets hot The grey zone The last word There is no Divine Right Of Editors Most ideas are bad Nothing is clear The rules of polite discourse There is no common sense Two wrongs don't make a right Wikipedia is not about winning Writing for the opponent Reader Dos Argue better Assume good faith Assume the assumption of good faith Assume no clue Avoid personal remarks Avoid the word "vandal" Be excellent to one another Beyond civility Call a spade a spade Candor Deny recognition Desist Discussing cruft Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass Encourage full discussions Get over it How to lose Imagine others complexly Just drop it Keep it down to earth Mind your own business Say "MOBY" No Nazis Read before commenting Settle the process first Don'ts ALPHABETTISPAGHETTI Civil POV pushing Cyberbullying Don't accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attack Don't be a fanatic Don't be a jerk Don't be an ostrich Don't be ashamed Don't be a WikiBigot Don't be high-maintenance Don't be inconsiderate Don't be obnoxious Don't be prejudiced Don't be rude Don't bludgeon the process Don't call a spade a spade Don't call the kettle black Don't call things cruft Don't come down like a ton of bricks Don't cry COI Don't demand that editors solve the problems they identify Don't drink the consensus Kool-Aid Don't eat the troll's food Don't fight fire with fire Don't give a fuck Don't help too much Don't make a smarmy valediction part of your signature Don't remind others of past misdeeds Don't shout Don't spite your face Don't take the bait Don't template the regulars Don't throw your toys out of the pram Do not insult the vandals Griefing Nationalist editing No angry mastodons just madmen No, you can't have a pony Passive aggression Please don't bite the newcomers POV railroad There are no oracles You can't squeeze blood from a turnip WikiRelations WikiBullying WikiCrime WikiHarassment WikiHate WikiLawyering WikiLove WikiPeace Essays on notability Advanced source searching All high schools can be notable Alternative outlets Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Articles with a single source Avoid template creep Bare notability Big events make key participants notable Bombardment Businesses with a single location But it's true! Citation overkill Common sourcing mistakes Clones Coatrack Discriminate vs indiscriminate information Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity Every snowflake is unique Existence ≠ Notability Existence does not prove notability Extracting the meaning of significant coverage Fart Google searches and numbers High Schools Inclusion is not an indicator of notability Independent sources Inherent notability Insignificant Masking the lack of notability Make stubs News coverage does not decrease notability No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability No big loss No one cares about your garage band No one really cares Notability/Historical/Arguments Notability cannot be purchased Notability comparison test Notability is not a level playing field Notability is not a matter of opinion Notability is not relevance or reliability Notability means impact Notability points Notability sub-pages Notabilitymandering Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article Obscurity ≠ Lack of notability Offline sources One hundred words One sentence does not an article make Other stuff exists Overreliance upon Google Perennial websites Pokémon test Read the source Run-of-the-mill Significant coverage not required Solutions are mixtures and nothing else Subjective importance Third-party sources Trivial mentions Video links Vanispamcruftisement What BLP1E is not What is and is not routine coverage What notability is not What to include Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause Humorous essays Anti-Wikipedian Asshole John rule Assume bad faith Assume faith Assume good wraith Assume stupidity Assume that everyone's assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming good faith Avoid using preview button Avoid using wikilinks Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense BOLD, revert, revert, revert Boston Tea Party Barnstaritis Don't stuff beans up your nose Don't-give-a-fuckism Edits Per Day Editsummarisis Emerson Seven Ages of Editor, by Will E. Spear-Shake Go ahead, vandalize How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb? How to put up a straight pole by pushing it at an angle Is that even an essay? Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them Legal vandalism LTTAUTMAOK No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man Oops Defense Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you Please bite the newbies R-e-s-p-e-c-t Reducing consensus to an algorithm Requests for medication Requirements for adminship Rouge admin Rouge editor Sarcasm is really helpful Sausages for tasting The Night Before Wikimas The first rule of Wikipedia The Five Pillars of Untruth Things that should not be surprising The WikiBible Watchlistitis Why not create an account? You don't have to be mad to work here, but About essays About essays Essay guide Value of essays Difference between policies, guidelines and essays Don't cite essays as if they were policy Avoid writing redundant essays Finding an essay Quote your own essay Policies and guidelines About policies and guidelines Policies Guidelines How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance Policy writing is hard Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Link_rot&oldid=1018009043" Categories: Wikipedia how-to Wikipedia essays about building the encyclopedia Hidden categories: Project pages with short description Wikipedia semi-protected project pages Wikipedia maintenance Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Namespaces Project page Talk Variants Views Read View source View history More Search Navigation Main page Contents Current events Random article About Wikipedia Contact us Donate Contribute Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file Tools What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Page information Wikidata item Print/export Download as PDF Printable version Languages Afrikaans العربية বাংলা Bosanski Čeština Dansk Deutsch Ελληνικά Español فارسی Galego 한국어 Հայերեն Bahasa Indonesia Italiano עברית Magyar മലയാളം Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄ Nederlands Norsk bokmål Norsk nynorsk ଓଡ଼ିଆ Polski Português Русский Simple English Slovenščina کوردی Српски / srpski Suomi Svenska తెలుగు Tiếng Việt 中文 Edit links This page was last edited on 15 April 2021, at 20:15 (UTC). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Mobile view Developers Statistics Cookie statement