Wikipedia:Red link

WP:RED redirects here. For redirects, see Wikipedia:Redirect. For the Reference desk, see Wikipedia:Reference desk.

A red link, like this one, signifies a link to a page that does not exist in Wikipedia. Sometimes it is useful in editing article text to create a red link to indicate that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because it would be notable and verifiable. Furthermore, academic research conducted in 2008 has shown that red links help Wikipedia grow. However, rather than using red links in lists, disambiguation pages or templates as an article creation guide, editors are encouraged to write the article first, and instead use the wikiproject or user spaces to keep track of unwritten articles.

Articles should not have red links to topics that are unlikely ever to have an article, such as a celebrity's romantic interest (who is not a celebrity in his or her own right). Red links should not be made to every chapter in a book nor should they be made to deleted articles — but one may link to the title of a deleted article if one intends to write an article about an entirely different topic that has the same title.

Good red links help Wikipedia—they encourage new contributors in useful directions, and remind us that Wikipedia is far from finished.

Creating red links

A red link appears whenever double brackets [[ ]] are placed around a word or phrase for which Wikipedia does not have an article.

When to create red links

Only make links that are relevant to the context. Please do create red links to articles you intend to create, technical terms that deserve more treatment than just a dictionary definition, or topics which should obviously have articles.

Keep in mind there are various notability guidelines (WP:NOTABILITY), which exist for a number of subjects, including people (WP:BIO). A red link to a non-notable person can end up being a link to a different person of the same name.

Avoiding creation of certain types of red links

Do not create red links to articles that will never be created, including articles that do not comply with Wikipedia's naming conventions. Note that the illustrative red link created at the beginning of this article is an example of this type of normally unwanted link.

Red links are generally not included in either See also sections or in navigational boxes, or pointed with templates such as {{Main}} or {{Further}}, since these navigation aids are intended to help readers find existing articles.

An article should never be left with a non-existent (redlinked) category on it. Either the category should be created, or else the link should be removed or changed to a category that does exist

Dealing with existing red links

In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there exists no candidate article, or article section, under any name.

A red link that links to an article that will plausably be created in the future, should be left alone rather than create a minimal stub article that has no information. For example, the link Driving in Germany is a valid one to be left undealt with, since there exists an article Driving in the United States, and country-specific driving articles are a likely category for future creation. However, in the meantime, such a link should not be dealt with by creating a "placeholder stub" that says only "There is driving in Germany" with the sole purpose of turning a valid link from red to blue. Create a stub with a usable amount of content, or do not create one at all. Red links serve a purpose to notify readers that need exists for at least a stub article with substantial information content, and creating bare marker stubs only to get rid of red links, destroys this useful mechanism.

An existing red link can indicate one of the following things:

• A new article is needed. When a Wikipedian writes an article, it is common practice to link key topics pertinent to an understanding of the subject, even if those topics don't have an article on Wikipedia yet. This has several applications:

• From within an article, such a link prepares the article to be fully supported. At any time, a Wikipedian may independently write an article on the linked-to subject, and when this happens, there's already a link ready and waiting for it. The red link also gives readers the opportunity to click on it to create the needed article on the spot.
• The red link may identify a need to create a redirect to another article, but only if that article comprehensively deals with the topic.
• Some WikiProjects have bots that determine how many times a certain red link appears in Wikipedia. This is used to determine what articles are the most needed. Editors can also, after clicking on a red link, use the "what links here" function to determine how many times the subject has been red linked.

• The link is broken and no longer leads to an article (perhaps because the underlying article was deleted). In such a case, the link usually needs to be removed or renamed to point to an existing article.
• The link may have been made by someone who wasn't aware of what should and shouldn't be linked to within articles. Always evaluate whether or not a red link is linking to a page that actually needs creation. See Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context#What generally should be linked.
• The red link may be a typo—e.g., someone wanted to link to George W. Bush, but instead typed . In this case, try to figure out the intended article and fix the link. If it looks like a common misspelling, such as Scandanavia, you may want to create a redirect from that misspelling to the correct one, but you should still correct the misspelling even though it would no longer appear red.
• The subject of the red link may be covered on another edition of Wikipedia. If such an article meets the English-language Wikipedia criteria, then list it on Pages needing translation into English; if not, use a link to the article in the foreign-language version of Wikipedia instead of a red link. Such links can be made by:
  • Expicitly including the language tag in front of the article name; for example, the article Highway route markers has a short section on Dutch highway route markers with a reference to the Dutch-language article nl:Hectometerpaal.
  • Creating the language as a superscript; for example Les Blondes ^(FR) in List of Franco-Belgian comic series.
• Links in any of the various {{About}} and {{Otheruses}} hatnotes, in {{Main}}, {{Details}}, {{Further}}, and {{Seealso}} notes, as well as in "See also" sections, are meant to serve a navigational purpose. Red links are useless in these contexts; if possible they should be replaced by a functioning link, or else be removed.
• Lists of "notable people" in an article, such as the "Notable alumni" section in an article on a university, tend to accrue red links, or non-links, listing people of unverifiable notability. Such list entries should be removed; the lists should remain confined to names of people whose notability is attested by an existing article or other reference.

Note

Using user preferences, a user can format red links so that they instead show up as question marks. This option is under my preferences → Appearance → Advanced options.

Example: Derby Field Airport?

See also

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery
• Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context
• Wikipedia:Write the Article First - an essay
• Help:Starting a new page
• Wikipedia:Starting an article
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)
• Wikipedia:Most wanted articles - most redlinked articles.
• Wikipedia:Link color
• Category:Red list for redlinks identified by users
• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-08-11/Growth study