Talk:Internal link

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Computing  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Internet  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Proposed Changes to Internal Links Feature :[edit]

Starting to Build a SEMANTIC Wiki with a few simple changes to the INTERNAL LINKS Feature[edit]

With a few simple changes to the Internal Links feature, we can all start to incrementally build a wonderful semantic network version of Wikipedia!

Here's what I'm proposing initially :

When someone creates an internal link while editing a page it would create a Default link type called "Other : <stub>". But it would also open a small window with checkboxes that the person can tick (and/or others can edit later - just like the pages themselves - eg. wiki-able link-types/link descriptors).

Here are some potential basic link-types that a person could TICK off for any given internal link :

             Is-an-example of 
       Co-occurs / Is Associated with
       Excludes (eg. negative association or neg. correlation)
       Is-used by

This will VERY RAPIDLY allow Wikipedia contributors to turn the existing wonderful entries into an active semantic network that one can search and do inference upon! It will also allow for multiple inheritance and other delights of object-oriented programming to be rapidly and incrementally be implemented by Wikipedia contributors.

For example :

a city is-a-subtype-of location New York City is-an-example-of a city.

Non small cell lung cancer is-a-subtype-of lung cancer

Dyspnea is-a symptom

Dyspnea can-be-caused-by lung cancer.

Lung cancer is-a-subtype of cancer

Cancer can-be-caused-by smoking.

Jimi Hendrix is-an-example-of a historical person

Jimi Hendrix is-an-example-of a guitarist

A guitarist Uses a guitar.

And so forth.

This OPTIONAL capability - that is initially completely transparant to MOST users will eventually allow for much more enhanced search capabilities and inference capabilities.

For example : FIND all SYMPTOMS that can-be-caused-by smoking.

The eventual possibilities are very substantial and it comes with virtually no change to most users and contributors.

A contributor who doesn't want to specify the LINK-TYPE will just leave it as OTHER : (Stub). Other folks may then come along later and EDIT the LINK TYPES adding additional ones or deleting or modifying them in typical wiki-fashion. EG. : not only are the PAGES modifiable by users, but also the LINK-TYPES.

People clicking on the internal links will still go to the same pages as before with the same experience as before. (However at a later date it may be possible - for example to do wonderful inferences and searches on specific link types.

    Eg. Find all the pages of people who were guitarists
        and played in New York city.  
    Eg :  find all the pages of diseases that can-cause dyspnea AND 
          can-cause chest pain AND cooccurs-with obesity

OR other such capabilities.

More on this later, but I've got to go now.

What do you folks think ?

It should be fairly straightforward to implement! Just a change to the Internal-links method....

Any thoughts ?

               06:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC) G. Holt

this article is marked a stub... what else should be added?

Hyper hyperlinkipedia[edit]

The use of hypertext in Wikipedia has been taken to an absurd and annoying level. I find the unnecessary links to dates, and other references which have no relevance to the subject of the article, to be a distraction and a possible waste of the readers' time following those links. A more judicious use of internal links would improve the quality of the site. Also, repeated links within articles should be limited dramatically. An article about mideast crises with a link every time Israel is mentioned is preposterous.
Further, it would be very helpful if an option to turn off the hypertext could be installed. At the least, the usual option to chose "copy" rather than "copy shortcut" should be enabled. I like to copy out portions for my own use (I prefer to read offline) and the hypertext copy is a God-awful mess. Abstrator 21:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I emphatically agree with what you say in the first paragraph of your comment. There needs to be a policy about this! I have been using Wikipedia for years and still in almost every article I read I end up hovering my mouse over blue text, to see the URL, thinking for example that surely no one would put an internal link to 2005. Emotion chip disabled (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

MoS Article[edit]

Maybe this should be a MoS article, I was wondering how to use an internal link to link to a subsection of a page, like this, but using internal linking.Thomas B 23:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

You do it like this. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


Shouldn't this be in Wiktionary, rather than Wikipedia? Gruber76 16:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I second this. Does it pass Lihaas (talk) 16:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Purpose of this article?[edit]

Can anyone tell me the purpose of this article? I was browsing and was redirected from External links. That was sort of strange then I noticed it was tagged as needing (possibly) rewritten (2009), and needing additional citations (2013), and from there it went down hill. It started out alright with "An internal link is a type of hyperlink on a webpage to another page or resource, such as an image or document, on the same website or domain.". From that point it seems like the editor might have gotten stoned before proceeding. According to the article "definitions become clouded" and I can see why with writing like: "Internal" links are in fact "external" for many purposes?.
I finally was able to make some added sense when in the last sentence of the fourth paragraph I read "Internal links help users navigate the same website, whereas external links generally take users to a different website.".
I would think if we are going to redirect like this then I could do the same and redirect day to night. Why not? they are related in a sense, about as much as internal and external links.
The reference from Microsoft seems to have merit but the only other reference to the rest of the article, "SEO, Internal Links, Website Navigation & Structure" (UK), does not help nor really does anything from the second paragraph to the end of the article except the aforementioned fourth paragraph.
Aside from all that confusion the article title is Internal link so either it needs to be renamed Article links, Web linking (or something like that), separated (internal link and external link articles), maybe merged to Hyperlink, or just deleted as I have no idea how it could be improved with a rewrite. Otr500 (talk) 22:51, 30 April 2015 (UTC)