Talk:URL shortening

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Other features. And feature comparison of URL shorteners.[edit]

1) It should be in the lede that most of these services create a random URL. eg jO3u6

2) Some do not have the option of a user defined string as shown in the lede: no, TinyURL yes.

3) Some allow the extending of the short URL with subpages. no, TinyURL yes.

4), can only be a Google Map, can only be a YouTube video. It should mention that this is a security feature, as the user knows which website it links to.

QuentinUK (talk) 14:12, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EL: blocked link[edit]

It should look like this but the link is blocked:

==External links==

* Directories:
** {{Dmoz|Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/Hosted_Components_and_Services/Redirects/|URL redirection and shortening}}
** []
* Articles:
** [ Comparison of URL Shortening Services], [[SearchEngineLand]]. April 2009.
** Nesbitt, Scott (7 February 2010). [ "Shorter Is Sweeter: A Look at URL Shorteners"]. [[]].

======================== {{No more links}} ============================
| is not a collection of links nor should it be used for advertising. |
|                                                                     |
|           Excessive or inappropriate links WILL BE DELETED.         |
| See [[Wikipedia:External links]] & [[Wikipedia:Spam]] for details.  |
|                                                                     |
| If there are already plentiful links, please propose additions or   |
| replacements on this article's discussion page, or submit your link |
| to the relevant category at the Open Directory Project (   |
| and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template.         |

{{DEFAULTSORT:URL Shortening}}
[[Category:Uniform Resource Locator]]
[[Category:Internet terminology]]
[[Category:URL-shortening services]]

 —User 000 name 20:00, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

reddit ENCOURAGES shortlinking?[edit]

An excerpt from the URL_shortening#Blocking_and_banning section:

The Reddit community strongly discourages – and in some subreddits, outright bans – URL shortening services for link submissions, because they disguise the origin domain name and whether the link has previously been submitted to Reddit, and there are few or no legitimate reasons to use link shorteners for Reddit link submissions.[1]

Despite the cited source "verifying" Wikipedia's statement, i have empirical evidence to the contrary. All three of the Reddit threads i've visited today (i rarely visit Reddit) offer Shortlinks to themselves:

says, "Shortlink:"
which links to
says, "Shortlink:"
which links to
says, "Shortlink:"
which links to
(side note: It's not free in all markets.))

Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly upon our own point of view. Consider these two facts which seem mutually exclusive but are not:

  • James T. Kirk is the captain of the starship Enterprise.
  • Jean-Luc Picard is the captain of the starship Enterprise.

My point of view is, i don't use Reddit enough to boldly edit this article, but i do believe this article is missing some information, only i'm not sure if this is the correct part of the article to include the missing information. i would appreciate any thoughts or help anyone could add to this subject. Thank you. -- (talk) 01:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


  1. ^ "Rediquette". Retrieved 9 February 2017.

Good grammar changes[edit]

The grammar changes TrumpSupporter777 made are indeed legit. I reviewed and approve of these changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by REE100 (talkcontribs) 03:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Remove from the list?[edit] should be removed, it is no longer used or valid for creating links. Discuss — Preceding unsigned comment added by AIden Bai (talkcontribs) 01:56, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi editors, I add an example of community URL shorten service, If you think it shall not be added here, feel free to remove. xinbenlv Talk, Ping 08:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove racist language[edit]

This article uses the term "blacklist", meaning a list of users or sites that are banned or not allowed. This term should not be used, as it reinforces racist ideas by associating the word "black" with something unwanted, shunned, and vilified. We could convey the same meaning while being more respectful by calling it a "banned list", or a "list of urls that the site rejects", or if that sounds too awkward, we can re-word the whole sentence. There are plenty of ways to get the point across without using derogatory terms. Miranda Brawner (talk) 02:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had not heard that "blacklist" was racist before. I agree that we should try to avoid racist language even when it is "just part of English", but "blacklist" is trickier for me, because it is not obviously racist like "welching" and "Indian-giver".
<digression> I started writing this comment to say that I disagree with Miranda and it was going to be a pithy, two sentence message. But, as I typed I remembered what I learned years ago teaching computers at the Urban League. One of the kids, clearly upset, asked me why the computer always flashed "Slave Master" at him. I explained that the computer wasn't intending to be racist, it was just stating that it had found a "Master hard drive and no Slave hard drive". Before that question, it hadn't occurred to me that people whose ancestors were actual slaves would, of course, be hurt by casual usage of the term. Looking back, I wish I had also told him that, although seeing this every time a computer is turned on might push some Black kids away from studying computer science, it was all the more reason he should pursue it. The people who came up with the Master/Slave device terminology hadn't meant to be hurtful, they were just ignorant. They need people like him so those mistakes won't happen again. </digression>
Anyhow, long story short, I agree with Miranda and am going to change the word "blacklist" to the word I see being used more and more frequently in tech discussions for a list used to block unwanted sites: "blocklist". Ben (talk) 19:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I find this kind of attempted language manipulation to be beyond idiotic. It takes energy and attention away from actual instances of racism, instead of imagining racism around every corner and missing the forest for the trees. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:200:C082:2EA0:85E1:E183:ED1B:6CF5 (talk) 02:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which services are monetized and how?[edit]

There should be a section on how URL shortening companies make money and the table of URL shortening services should include a column for how the service is monetized. I suspect that is somehow making money from selling the data it accrues, but I have no idea. How do they track individuals? Are there privacy concerns? Ben (talk) 19:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with this would be in getting reliable sources for the monetisation. The article at the moment seems to be a target for spam with lots of non-notable services being added and removed. Jmccormac (talk) 20:18, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean???[edit]

The section Techniques contains this sentence:

"Not all URI schemes are capable of being shortened as of 2011, although URI schemes such as http, https, ftp, ftps, mailto, mms, rtmp, rtmpt, ed2k, pop, imap, nntp, news, ldap, gopher, dict and dns are being addressed by such services as URL shorteners."

These are the only two instances of "URI" in the article, and nowhere is it explained what this means.

I hope someone knowledgeable about this subject can fix this.