Help talk:Link

two opposite meanings
Simple question: what is In the context of a link from an anchor to a target, it is the starting place. and could you give an example of when this occurs? CapnZapp (talk) 12:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Why did the links change color?
I can't tell if this is intentional or a glitch. In mobile view, links I have already clicked, instead of being purple, are the same color as normal text. This makes it impossible to tell if a word is linked if you have clicked a link to that article before. This issue applies to normal links, section links, and every other kind of link that changes from blue to purple when clicked. The links are still the correct color in desktop view. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, found the task on Phabricator. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2024
Suggest adding a short section about linking to redirect pages. Currently, there are a couple of mentions of the "redirect=no" parameter as an example of something simple wikilinks can't do, and how to do it with general-purpose templates like and  instead. Which is great, but overkill when all one wants to do is link to instead of thru a regular redirect, which is bound to account for the majority of use cases. Draft:

This should go anywhere before, so that by the time the reader gets to the first "redirect=no" example there, they already know they don't need to do it that way in straightforward cases. - 2A02:560:5829:B000:B9F7:CF82:EEE5:7596 (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Just a comment. § Special pages links is not intended to teach people how to link to redirect pages. It's just a example of a link with an ampersand in it.  The proposed text can, and probably should, be below it. Dan Bloch (talk) 17:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Quite, but what a section is intended to do doesn't really signify. Coming to this page and searching for "redirect" or "redirect=no" specifically is a likely course of action for those trying to find out how to link to redirect pages, and those sections are currently where that lands them, and which even allow them to work out a solution of sorts.
 * Replacing the mention of "redirect=no" with a different one of the various query strings that can occur in the kind of URL that the questions are intended to be about would be even better. Note that the "redirect" parameter never actually ends up occuring in the code portions but only the prose portions of those sections.
 * I just figured relative placement would be sufficient.
 * - 2A02:560:5829:B000:B9F7:CF82:EEE5:7596 (talk) 19:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Special pages links says: Because the ampersand character is disallowed, it is not possible to create an ordinary link containing action edit or redirect no in the URL query string. In these cases, use templates or magic words, see Links containing URL query strings.

Isn't this sufficient? CapnZapp (talk) 10:50, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Shadow311 (talk) 18:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

anchor
So, was only partially correct. all lowercase is actually special cased by MediaWiki (see mw:Help:Links). Any other capitalization falls back to the HTML spec. If you're on Vector legacy, it's kinda obvious, goes to the very top of the page but  goes to the page title. So, if we decide to keep my addition, we may want to clarify a little more. Nickps (talk) 19:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As I hopefully made clear in my revert, I don't mind your addition per se. Just make sure you (and your references) talk about mediawiki. If possible please avoid unsourced assumptions of mediawiki support for the wider www spec. Can I ask you to brush up on WP:BRD? Please reserve your chosen approach (BOLD, revert, revert) for genuine mistakes, where you have no reason to believe the discussion will need to continue. Hopefully it is clear to you this is not the case here. I hope that upon reflection you agree that BOLD, revert, discuss would have served us all better in this case, meaning that next time: instead of reverting the revert, post your edit summary as a discussion topic on talk instead. CapnZapp (talk) 09:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, yes, that probably would have been better (or I should have at least also brought it up on the talk page in addition to the revert to get a discussion going). I'm not super active nowadays, so I tend to be a bit lazy on that front. My apologies. Pokechu22 (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. CapnZapp (talk) 20:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)