Wikipedia talk:The Wikipedia Library

Trying to access Gale through the Wikipedia Library portal gives me a "403 Forbidden" error on both my primary desktop computer and on mobile, regardless of the database (Power Search, Academic OneFile, In Context...). Logging off and on again did not fix the issue. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:36, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Same here. Timur9008 (talk) 03:42, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Likewise. Nick Number (talk) 16:10, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

There appears to be a change to the username used by TWL to access Gale, from a separate one for Wikipedia, to a joint one with the Florida Center for Library Automation. It is not clear to me if this is intended or not, but I have experienced the same issue when accessing the product directly through the library page I bookmarked () which directs to something like [Gale Wikipedia OCLC domain]/[path]?u=wikipedia (e.g. ) but using the login.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org proxy (e.g. ) works but takes you to a page with ?u=fcla_main. Changing the ?u=wikipedia to ?u=fcla_main in the URL also appears to work for me. Alpha3031 (t • c) 16:32, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

It is a known issue (T410134) that Gale access is currently not working. I hope to have an update at that Phabricator ticket soon. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 14:35, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Any further updates on this? Gave it a try today and it seems to still be down :( AA (talk) 22:11, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

• Samwalton9 (WMF), I see you've closed the Phabricator ticket, but this still isn't resolved for me and hasn't been for several months... - SchroCat (talk) 15:47, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Same for me. Real issue trying to research old cricketers. AA (talk) 23:32, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  @SchroCat @AssociateAffiliate Gale looks to be working for me. What error are you seeing, and can you share some URLs where you're having problems? Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:26, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

  Samwalton9 (WMF), lucky you! Trying to access, for example The Times from this page tries to open this page, which leads to a sign that reads "Technical Difficulties We encountered a problem in processing your request. We apologize for the inconvenience. Please try again in a few seconds." I can retry as often as I like and leave for as may seconds as I like, but it returns still an error message. - SchroCat (talk) 13:58, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

  Same error for me. AA (talk) 14:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

  @Samwalton9 (WMF), I see seven high level options at the Gale Wikipedia Library. Of those, I get the Technical Difficulties message that @SchroCat has reported when trying to access Power Search and The Times Digital Archive. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 14:23, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

  Ah, yep, I hadn't tested all the links here. Thanks, we'll pass this on to Gale. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 16:12, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

  The Gale times archive seems to work on the second attempt for me (the first attempt always fails) and its been doing that since Gale started working again. I'm in the UK and using Edge on a PC.Nigel Ish (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

This is just a quick notice to let you know about an upcoming survey we plan to send to Wikipedia Library users within the next week. The survey will be sent via email to all users who have logged in to The Wikipedia Library and were eligible to access content from it when they did so. Our current tentative launch date is this Friday, 12th December, but it's possible this could shift to next week. Please let me know if you have any questions. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 15:09, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

HI @Samwalton9 (WMF) - I'd like to participate in the survey, but as far as I can see I have not been emailed an invite. Thank you, Goldsztajn (talk) 03:06, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn Unfortunately we hit a technical snag with sending this survey out before the end-of-year holidays (T412427) and need to change our approach to sending it. We hope to get it out in the next week or two. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 14:14, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

This survey is now being sent out! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 22:23, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't seem to have gotten one. What was the exact subject line and/or sender address, so I can do a better search of possible spam filters. RoySmith (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

@RoySmith The subject is "The Wikipedia Library needs your help!" and it was sent from wiki@wikimedia.org (because we used the 'Email this user' function). Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 14:07, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm pleased to let you know that British Newspaper Archive is now available once again in the library! BNA now have a proxy configuration that we were able to use, and so access is available immediately for anyone eligible to use The Wikipedia Library. The only caveat to be aware of is that you need to register an account to access content on the site, even though you're accessing via proxy. You'll be prompted to do this, I just wanted to give folks a heads up. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 15:55, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Splendid news, thank you @Samwalton9 (WMF). Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:10, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Outstanding. Nick Number (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Fantastic. Thank you for making this happen! --Usernameunique (talk) 22:51, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Samwalton9 (WMF) - I'm not sure how to access BNA as I have had a paid account in the past and my email address (I only have one) will probably conflict. Do I sign in, register or subscribe? These are the options when I click on the BNA in the WP Library. Thanks, T. Tony Holkham (Talk) 10:55, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

It's OK, I signed in with my old details and it now tells me I have free access. Brilliant, thanks again. Tony Holkham (Talk) 10:59, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Samwalton9 (WMF) - thank you! Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:58, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Awesome news for end of year 2025, thank you!—Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 03:02, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you very much! Mapple (talk) 11:33, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Great. TrottieTrue (talk) 23:26, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Is this actually working? Every page I go to on https://www-britishnewspaperarchive-co-uk.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/, I just get the "But first, cookies..." dialog. I keep clicking "Accept all", but it doesn't appear to matter. RoySmith (talk) 13:50, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

There are frequent cookie notifications, but the site does seem to work for me. I had difficulties originally because the autofill password kept refusing to let me login. TrottieTrue (talk) 17:42, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I've noticed that JSTOR also keeps nagging me about cookies. I wonder if the oclc proxy URL rewriting confuses the cookie domain matching rules? RoySmith (talk) 17:45, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@TrottieTrue I also have password problems after registering. It seems like you surpassed it though? Geschichte (talk) 13:38, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Basically, the stored password on my device wasn’t for my BNA account, but instead it was probably the one I used when TWL previously had access to the BNA. This password was rejected by the BNA via TWL, when my password for the separate BNA site did work. Bottom line: try resetting your password, and check that autocomplete isn’t putting in the wrong password. TrottieTrue (talk) 15:57, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I haven't received an email that has the access details over the past few months. Is there anything that I can do about it? I sent a renewal confirmation for ToM a few days ago. Bray0829 (talk) 23:08, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Same problem here. I received an email saying that the application was approved and that access details were to be sent within a week or two. This was back in late December of last year, and since then, I haven't received anything related to the Times of Malta from TWL. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:57, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi there. I've not used WP Library before, so please excuse my naivety:

1. Is there some way to do interwiki linking to Wikipedia Library items, similar to using wikt to link to Wiktionary?

2. I am unable to save URLs in my Wikipedia articles for documents I have found in Wikipedia Libary. I get error "An automated filter has identified that your edit includes a link or reference running through a local proxy – typically, the links include '.proxy.', '.gate.', 'ebsco', 'oclc' or similar in the domain." Is there some way to get direct links that do not use a proxy?

Thanks. Masato.harada (talk) 16:38, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Regarding #1, I would say this is not possible or desirable. I'm unsure what you mean by "Wikipedia Library items" but nothing that comes up from searches through the publisher sites will be on a wiki, so wiki linking is not a option. The general goal for searches in Wikipedia library is a citation to attach to content making it verified.

Regarding #2 I guess you mean you are unable to include a URL in a Wikipedia article because the edit step fails with the above error message? In general you should not link any URL you see in the address bar of your browser when using Wikipedia library. The Library works by presenting you as an authorized user to the publisher and always stands between you and the publisher. The links reflect this connection and are not suitable for general use.

I use two different mechanisms to create citations after I find an entry via Wikipedia library.

1. The best method is to copy the Digital Object Identifier (starts with "10.") and use it in a tool like Wikipedia:ProveIt to create and insert a citation. Other tools exist including one in the visual editor.
2. Second best is to use a plain text citation. Many publishers include decently formatted citations but I use the one from Google Scholar. I have a web browser tool bar button and when I am on a page for a source that button will usually give a nicely formatted citation.

These extra tools are very helpful for creating citations. Johnjbarton (talk) 18:15, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Masato.harada. I agree with Johnjbarton that using an identifier like DOI or JSTOR id in a citation tool is the best way of getting a "normal" URL for the reference.

One thing that might be of use for your #1 is the {{twlac}} template, which returns a URL that deeplinks to the Wikipedia Library access version. You can use a variety of identifiers, e.g. jstor:

* {{twlac |jstor=43751265 }}

renders as:

• Full access available to users of The Wikipedia Library.

Or doi:

* {{twlac |doi=10.1163/15685322-10045P11 }}

renders as:

• Full access available to users of The Wikipedia Library.

The neat thing is that {{twlac}} output is hidden in mainspace if you aren't an extended-confirmed editor, so it doesn't clutter up the page for regular readers. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks SunloungerFrog, just the template i was looking for i think. Why would it be clutter in mainspace tho? I'd think it might be a good way to encourage contributions from readers: make just 500 edits and you get access to this treasure trove of information. fiveby(zero) 16:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I received a notification from Wikipedia Library couple of days ago, but I can't find it, I tried to find it somewhere but I can't find it elsewhere, I want somebody to help me. Jlvshistory (talk) 17:40, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Same problem. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 07:54, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

My email was titled The Wikipedia Library needs your help!, from Meta-Wiki <wiki@wikimedia.org> and it arrived just after midnight UTC on 24 January, if that helps. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:02, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes that's exactly the notification looks like Jlvshistory (talk) 12:23, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't know what to do Jlvshistory (talk) 12:23, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@Jlvshistory I've just forwarded you another copy of this email :) Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:04, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much, appreciate it Jlvshistory (talk) 13:36, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Also, I tried clicking it, it won't work Jlvshistory (talk) 13:37, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@Jlvshistory Just to clarify, the link in the email doesn't work for you? Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:57, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

yes, I tried clicking it it won't work Jlvshistory (talk) 14:44, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Apologies if this has been widely discussed before but I am confused about how the library search function works. If I use the search box on the main library home page I get many fewer hits than if I go into one of the archives - I supposedly have 87 to search in. For example, If I search for the word (place) "Ballinafad" in on the main page search it responds with 54 results. If I go into only the Jstor page (one of the 87 archives available) I get 70 results for the same word. Going into Proquest (via the Library) a search yields 1461 results. I have found the same thing for years. Am I missing something? Is there a glitch? You would surely think that the main page box that says "search the library" would give the most results - an aggregation of all the archives. I really appreciate accesss to the archives via WP, but the general search function does not seem to work. I don't know which archives to search in for the results I want. Please advise. Anna (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Nice timing: I just asked exactly this same question at meta:Talk:The Wikipedia Library#Federated search? RoySmith (talk) 16:15, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

The main search box is an EBSCO search. I believe it is more powerful than the search within the EBSCO collection because it searches more EBSCO databases than the library subscribes to (maybe all). It also provides convenience links to full text in selected other collections (JSTOR, for example) if EBSCO has indexed an article but doesn't have the full text. This design is common in libraries. It is convenient if speed is more important than completeness, but if you want to search all collections, you need to open and search each one separately (up to 122 at present). It definitely pays to be familiar enough with the collections to know, for a given topic, which ones to search and which not to bother with. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:27, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

"The main search box is an EBSCO search. I believe it is more powerful than the search within the EBSCO collection because it searches more EBSCO databases". I agree with the theory but it doesn't seem to work. (See my comment above).Anna (talk) 15:42, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

How does your first comment contradict what I wrote? Did you get more results searching the EBSCO collection than searching using the main page box? --Worldbruce (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

I use the Wikipedia library a lot but I gave up on the EBSCO search long ago. At least for the kinds of sources I am interested Google Scholar and a search in a particular collection by title is faster and more certain. Johnjbarton (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

The main seach box hasn't worked properly for many years. Anna (talk) 20:34, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Some user access is granted through scheme to publications on Brill (i.e. brill-com.). But, i've failed to access some things published through "Walter de Gruyter GmbH" (own website degruyterbrill.com), even though since 2024 these publishing houses seemed to have merged as De Gruyter Brill. Whether i can access anything on the "degruyterbrill" through authenticated login there is unclear to me. Sjl197 (talk) 22:34, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

After the Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § Deprecating and blacklisting archive.today discussion and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Archive.is RFC 5, archive.today has been deprecated/blacklisted on Wikipedia.

archive.today was frequently used to Archive.today#Bypassing paywalls.

This has me wondering, is there a way for the Wikipedia Library to partner up with some media/news sites (e.g. New York Times, Vulture, etc.) to allow us editors access to articles behind paywalls? Some1 (talk) 19:52, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Older (I don't know exactly how old) NY Times articles are indexed by ProQuest, which is available through TWL. RoySmith (talk) 21:01, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

@RoySmith, @Some1, We have access to NY Times articles from January 1, 1923, to December 31, 2022 (according to the site's search page). I usually use that search process several times a week for creating articles or adding to existing articles. It's a great resource. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:55, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Newspapers.com (also available via TWL) has The New York Times for older years. RoySmith (talk) 02:56, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Speaking of newspapers.com, it kinda sucks that we now have to register on their website first and "apply" to gain access through the Wikipedia Library. I remember when newspapers.com was easily accessible through the "My Collections" tab of the WL. I wonder what caused that change. Some1 (talk) 17:51, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

@Some1 That setup required a fairly precarious technical setup that was prone to breakages. Although the current system requires a few additional steps to request an account, it should then 'just work' for the full 12 months. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:09, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

@Samwalton9 (WMF), I'm glad that we are back to the individual account setup. Once an account is created, using it is a straightforward process. Newspapers.com is my most-used source for working on Wikipedia. I appreciate having access to back issues of so many newspapers. Thanks go to you and anyone else involved in keeping access available. Eddie Blick (talk) 19:18, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

How much ($$) do you think it'll cost the WMF/The Wikipedia Library to partner up with news outlets like The New York Times to allow us access to all of their articles, including ones written within the past week, that are behind paywalls? Some1 (talk) 17:59, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

@Some1 We'd love to add more news websites to The Wikipedia Library. We recently added The Wall Street Journal, for example. We're looking to get partnerships with other news organisations, but it's a little harder than academic publishers because they don't usually work with library subscribers. Our model (free-access partnerships, rather than purchasing subscriptions) is really a necessity for the program to run at all, the costs would become exorbitant quickly if we were paying for subscriptions for the number of Wikipedia editors who currently use the library. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:12, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. Some1 (talk) 17:17, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

A huge thanks to the 4,900+ of you who took the time to fill out the Wikipedia Library survey we ran recently! I've written up the key results from this survey, and would love to hear what you think. If you have any questions, or suggestions on how we can tackle some of the findings, please let me know! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 10:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I guess that one of the key ways user learn about the Wikipedia Library is via this page, Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library. I think this key entry point could be made more effective for editors. It describes the Library from the point of view of librarians rather than editor-users of the library. Specifically I would add a section immediately after the intro that outlined how to use the Library. In addition to HowTo this section would give potential users a direct sense of the possibilities. I could take a stab at this.

I also think that a Tips page would be helpful. Finding sources is sometimes quite a bit of intricate work. Johnjbarton (talk) 19:57, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• re: finding opportunities to advertise the Library, it would be helpful to offer a script or extension for eligible users to toggle in their Preferences that indicates (highlights, etc.) when a source is available through the Library, or even offers a link to the proxy. This would make it easier for users not using the Zotero extension for automatic proxies already and would raise awareness about the service for active editors who do not use the Library. Could build it into WP:UPSD to start. czar 18:42, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

  On a related note, there was a template created to add TWL links to citations, {{twlac}}. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:20, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

For examples see and , not seeing anything on phabricator about the current issue (there are some archives about older similar issues but not the current one) @VSj (WMF): would you be able to look into this? Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@Hemiauchenia: Tracked at T418834 - we're working on it! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Was here to report the same and found out that it's already been working on - Thank you! 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 10:19, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

I created a quick draft of a new intro page. My aim was to put information for potential users up front. Maybe an annotated screenshot would also help. I would like to add a page of Tips and Techniques.

WDYT? Johnjbarton (talk) 17:19, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

On January 15, Perplexity published a blog post "Happy 25th Birthday, Wikipedia", which said:

To celebrate Wikipedia's birthday, we're offering a gift of 2,500 Perplexity Enterprise seats to share with Wikipedia editors.

But I can't find any information on how to sign up for these seats. I've searched the wikipedia / wikimedia / wmflabs sites and the Perplexity site and haven't found anything. I'd have thought that the Perplexity seats would be made available via the Collections feature of Wikipedia Library, but I don't see anything there.

What is the procedure for signing up for one of those seats?

Thanks, --Macrakis (talk) 12:18, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Just for fun I asked perplexity I am a wikipedia editor. I was excited to read about your gift of 2,500 Perplexity Enterprise seats to share with Wikipedia editors. How do I sign up? Unfortunately, I can't share the chat here because the URL is on the blacklist :-) RoySmith (talk) 16:06, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I got a reply from "Sam, AI Support agent for Perplexity" which promised that they'd get back to me. We'll see.... --Macrakis (talk) 21:58, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

The TWL team isn't familiar with this offer - we're going to learn more and will get back to you! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 10:04, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

"Sam, AI Support agent for Perplexity" wrote me on Friday:

I'm connecting you with our Enterprise team who can help you with the Wikipedia editor seats program mentioned in our blog post. They'll be able to provide you with information on how to sign up for one of the 2,500 Enterprise seats being offered to Wikipedia editors.

Apparently "Sam" is the agentic gatekeeper for Perplexity Enterprise queries. So you might try writing to enterprise@perplexity.ai.

Wikimedia Enterprise already has a relationship with Perplexity going in the other direction (supplying data to them); see this Talk. This seems to be led by @LWyatt (WMF):; I wonder if he can help? --Macrakis (talk) 22:55, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Macrakis, thanks for the ping. This isn't specifically "led" by me - but I can nevertheless confirm that my colleagues are looking into it (options being a more case-by-case basis which is faster in the short term, or a more self-service process which takes a bit more time to set up). We'll be back to you shortly. LWyatt (WMF) (talk) 10:36, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@User:LWyatt (WMF), I'd be happy to be a beta tester of whatever you and Perplexity come up with if that helps. I'm an experienced Wikipedia editor and a longtime software guy (so I know how to write a bug report!). --Macrakis (talk) 18:08, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Apologies if this is not the right place to ask, but I can't find this information anywhere. I have 2 questions: 1. What is the correct format for citing a newspapers.com article (clipping)? Is it still this? "Lightning hits courthouse". San Antonio Evening News. 6 June 1923. p. 1. Retrieved 6 March 2026 – via Newspapers.com.

2. I've been using Newspapers.com a lot lately because I'm participating in the WikiProject unreferenced articles March backlog drive. I've noticed that when I clicked on a clipping link in a citation I'd made (to verify that it was correct) I was told that I had read 1 or more of 5 free articles. Now I have reached the 5 article limit and cannot access any more by clicking on clipping links. So does that mean that WP users who don't have Newspapers.com accounts can't get access to more than 5 clippings ever? Thank you! HazelAB (talk) 14:54, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@HazelAB: Regarding Q1, yes that citation is fine. I would use {{Limited access}} instead of {{open access}} though. As for Q2, I'm not sure if it's permanent, but yes, non TWL users won't have access to more than 5. However, you can get around the paywall by disabling the javascript using an extension like UBlock Origin. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 17:10, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! HazelAB (talk) 17:21, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

The only citation websites it gives me is the original TWL source. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 20:26, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Please provide more information. What citation? What citation websites? Which "original TWL source"?

The concept of citing sources "from TWL" does not make sense to me. TWL does not publish sources, so how can you cite from it? Johnjbarton (talk) 20:53, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

TWL does not publish sources, so how can you cite from it? That's exactly my question. How do I get the citation from the original source on TWL? It's good for getting the content of a source, but if I want to cite it I need a URL. Where would I get that? VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 20:55, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

I use WP:ProveIt in the WP:source editor. I copy the DOI or the DOI URL, widely available for journals and books, and paste into the Generate box in the tool. It creates a {{cite}} reference and then I press "Insert". DOI also works in https://citer.toolforge.org/. Johnjbarton (talk) 00:28, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

You don't always need a URL to cite a source. If you're reading a journal article, the DOI number might be shown--try that; if you're reading a book with an ISBN number, that's a good thing to try. Otherwise, or if those don't work, you can refer to it the old-fashioned way, typing out the author, title, year, publisher, page, or whatever other combination of details work for the format you're citing. A URL is helpful but not required.Penny Richards (talk) 21:00, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

You can remove the Wikipedia proxy part of the URL. For example, https://www-science-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/ can be converted to just https://www.science.org/. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 22:46, 20 March 2026 (UTC)