# Topic link suppression for quoted blocks

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/topic-link-suppression-for-quoted-blocks/56979>\
**Category:** Feature\
**Created:** [6. Februar 2017 um 14:51 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/topic-link-suppression-for-quoted-blocks/56979 "2017-02-06T14:51:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/sam/32/102149_2.png) [@sam](https://meta.discourse.org/u/sam)\
**Post date:** [6. Februar 2017 um 14:51 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/topic-link-suppression-for-quoted-blocks/56979/1 "2017-02-06T14:51:39Z")

</div>

I think we need to open a bit of discussion about some long term link suppression we had in place.

> <https://github.com/discourse/discourse/blob/main/lib/pretty_text.rb#L280>

In English this means: “Please ignore any links that are in `aside.quote` or `.elided` classes.”

In even more English this means that if you quote something, we ignore all the links you quoted for topic linking, meaning we don’t track bi-directional links for that case.

So for example:

- Say I am writing a reply in topic T1
- I am quoting a post on topic T2
- Inside the quote there is a link to T3

There is no link between T1 ↔ T3 cause this is ignored.

I am not 100% certain this is correct. I think the more internal links exist, the better. There is a connection between T1 and T3.

Note: recently this our post pipeline changed somewhat and this rule started stripping out internal links between oneboxed topics and posts. This is clearly not desirable.

I think we should just junk this suppression altogether, I don’t see and value… not sure about the `.elided` one as well, seems odd.

@codinghorror @eviltrout @zogstrip thoughts?

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/topic-link-suppression-for-quoted-blocks/56979)._