Wikipedia:Link rot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.
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.
1Preventing link rot
1.1Automatic archiving
1.2Manual archiving
1.3Alternative methods
2Repairing a dead link
2.2Internet archives
3Mitigating a dead link
4Keeping dead links
5Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites
6See also
6.2Tools and how-to guides
7External links
Preventing link rot
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, (aka 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 during this period making it a major archival source filling in gaps of coverage. 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:
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
"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:
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:
Internet archives
Check for archived versions at one of the many web archive services. The "Big 3" archive services are​, and​. These account for over 90% of all archives on Wikipedia, with 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
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:
Mitigating a dead link
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. moved to​). 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
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​[​dead link] were dead. Place {{dead link​|date=May 2021}} after the dead citation, immediately before the </ref> 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
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
Tools and how-to guides
External links
^ "Save Pages in the Wayback Machine". Internet Archive Help Center. 2018-08-24.
Essays on building, editing, and deleting content
Articles must be writtenAll Five Pillars are the same heightAvoid vague introductionsBe a reliable sourceCivil POV pushing​Cohesion​Competence is requiredConcede lost argumentsDissent is not disloyaltyDon't lieDon't search for objectionsEditing Wikipedia is like visiting a foreign countryEditors will sometimes be wrongEight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia​Explanationism​External criticism of WikipediaHere to build an encyclopediaMost ideas are badNeedNeutrality of sourcesNot editing because of Wikipedia restrictionThe one question​Oversimplification​Paradoxes​Paraphrasing​POV and OR from editors, sources, and fieldsProcess is importantProduct, process, policyPurposeReasonability ruleSystemic biasThere is no seniorityTen Simple Rules for Editing WikipediaTendentious editingThe role of policies in collaborative anarchyThe rules are principlesTrifectaWikipedia in briefWikipedia is an encyclopediaWikipedia is a community
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 testA navbox on every pageAn unfinished house is a real problem​Articles have a half-life​Autosizing imagesAvoid mission statements​Bare URLsBe neutral in formBeef up that first revisionBlind men and an elephant​BOLD, revert, discuss cycleBuild 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 sourcesDon't demolish the house while it's still being builtDon't get hung up on minor detailsDon't hope the house will build itselfDon't panicDon'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 treeGive an article a chance​Identifying and using independent sources History sourcesLaw sources​Primary sources​Science sourcesStyle guides​Tertiary sources​Ignore STRONGNAT for date formats​Inaccuracies in Wikipedia namespace​Inaccuracy​Introduction to structurism​Link rotMine a source​Merge TestMinors and persons judged incompetent​"Murder of" articlesNot every story/event/disaster needs a biography​Not everything needs a navboxNot 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 itRestoring part of a reverted editRobotic editingSham consensus​Specialized-style fallacyStub MakersRun an edit-a-thon​Temporary versions of articles​Tertiary-source fallacyThere is a deadline​There is no deadlineThe deadline is now​Understanding Wikipedia's content standards​Walled gardenWhat 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 fashionThe world will not end tomorrow​Write the article firstWriting better articles
Adjectives in your recommendationsAfD is not a war zoneArguments to avoid in deletion discussionsArguments to avoid in deletion reviewsArguments to avoid in image deletion discussionsArguments to make in deletion discussionsAvoid repeated argumentsBefore commenting in a deletion discussionBut there must be sources!Confusing arguments mean nothingContent removalCounting and sorting are not original researchDelete the junkDoes deletion help?Don't confuse stub status with non-notabilityDon't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argumentFollow the leaderHow to save an article proposed for deletionI just don't like itIdentifying blatant advertisingIdentifying test editsImmunityKeep it conciseLiar liar pants on fireNothingNothing is clearOverzealous deletionRelisting can be abusiveRelist biasThe Heymann StandardUnopposed AFD discussionWikipedia is not Whack-A-MoleWhy was the page I created deleted?What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletionWhen in doubt, hide it in the woodworkNo Encyclopedic Use
Essays on civility
The basics
ALPHABETTISPAGHETTI​Civil POV pushingCyberbullyingDon't accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attackDon't be a fanaticDon't be a jerkDon't be an ostrichDon't be ashamedDon't be a WikiBigotDon't be high-maintenanceDon't be inconsiderateDon't be obnoxiousDon't be prejudicedDon't be rudeDon't call a spade a spadeDon't call the kettle blackDon't call things cruftDon't come down like a ton of bricksDon't cry COIDon't demand that editors solve the problems they identifyDon't drink the consensus Kool-AidDon't eat the troll's foodDon't fight fire with fireDon't give a fuckDon't help too muchDon't make a smarmy valediction part of your signatureDon't remind others of past misdeedsDon't shoutDon't spite your faceDon't take the baitDon't template the regularsDon't throw your toys out of the pramDo not insult the vandalsGriefingNationalist editingNo angry mastodons just madmenNo, you can't have a ponyPassive aggressionPlease don't bite the newcomersPOV railroadThere are no oraclesYou can't squeeze blood from a turnip
Essays on notability
Advanced source searchingAll high schools can be notableAlternative outletsArguments to avoid in deletion discussionsArticles with a single sourceAvoid template creepBare notabilityBig events make key participants notable​Bombardment​Businesses with a single locationBut it's true!Citation overkillCommon sourcing mistakes​Clones​Coatrack​Discriminate vs indiscriminate informationDrafts are not checked for notability or sanityEvery snowflake is uniqueExistence ≠ NotabilityExistence does not prove notabilityExtracting the meaning of significant coverageFartGoogle searches and numbersHigh SchoolsInclusion is not an indicator of notabilityIndependent sourcesInherent notabilityInsignificantMasking the lack of notabilityMake stubsNews coverage does not decrease notabilityNo amount of editing can overcome a lack of notabilityNo big lossNo one cares about your garage bandNo one really cares​Notability/Historical/Arguments​Notability cannot be purchasedNotability comparison testNotability is not a level playing fieldNotability is not a matter of opinionNotability is not relevance or reliabilityNotability means impactNotability pointsNotability sub-pages​Notabilitymandering​Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an articleObscurity ≠ Lack of notabilityOffline sourcesOne hundred wordsOne sentence does not an article makeOther stuff existsOverreliance upon GooglePerennial websitesPokémon testRead the source​Run-of-the-mill​Significant coverage not requiredSolutions are mixtures and nothing elseSubjective importanceThird-party sourcesTrivial mentionsVideo links​Vanispamcruftisement​What BLP1E is notWhat is and is not routine coverageWhat notability is notWhat to includeWikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause
Humorous essays
Anti-WikipedianAsshole John ruleAssume bad faithAssume faithAssume good wraithAssume stupidityAssume that everyone's assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming good faithAvoid using preview buttonAvoid using wikilinksBad Jokes and Other Deleted NonsenseBOLD, revert, revert, revertBoston Tea PartyBarnstaritisDon't stuff beans up your nose​Don't-give-a-fuckism​Edits Per Day​Editsummarisis​Emerson​Seven Ages of Editor, by Will E. Spear-ShakeGo ahead, vandalizeHow many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?How to put up a straight pole by pushing it at an angleIs that even an essay?Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite themLegal vandalismLTTAUTMAOKNo climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-ManOops DefensePlease be a giant dick, so we can ban youPlease bite the newbies​R-e-s-p-e-c-t​Reducing consensus to an algorithmRequests for medicationRequirements for adminshipRouge adminRouge editorSarcasm is really helpfulSausages for tastingThe Night Before WikimasThe first rule of WikipediaThe Five Pillars of UntruthThings that should not be surprisingThe WikiBibleWatchlistitisWhy not create an account?
About essays
About essays
Policies and guidelines
Categories: Wikipedia how-toWikipedia essays about building the encyclopedia
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
Contact Wikipedia
Mobile view
Cookie statement
TalkContributionsCreate accountLog in
Project pageTalk
ReadView sourceView history
Visit the main pageMain pageContentsCurrent eventsRandom articleAbout WikipediaContact usDonateHelpLearn to editCommunity portalRecent changesUpload fileWhat links hereRelated changesUpload fileSpecial pagesPermanent linkPage informationWikidata itemDownload as PDFPrintable versionAfrikaansالعربيةবাংলাBosanskiČeštinaDanskDeutschΕλληνικάEspañolفارسیGalego한국어ՀայերենBahasa IndonesiaItalianoעבריתMagyarമലയാളംMìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄NederlandsNorsk bokmålNorsk nynorskଓଡ଼ିଆPolskiPortuguêsРусскийSimple EnglishSlovenščinaکوردیСрпски / srpskiSuomiSvenskaతెలుగుTiếng Việt中文Edit links