-In [[markdown]] syntax, none of the other special characters get processed inside a code block. However, in ikiwiki, [[wiki links|wikilinks]] and [[preprocessor directives|preprocessordirectives]] still get processed inside a code block, requiring additional escaping. For example, `[links don't work](#here)`, but `a [[wikilink]] becomes HTML`.
\ No newline at end of file
+In [[ikiwiki/markdown]] syntax, none of the other special characters get processed
+inside a code block. However, in ikiwiki, [[wiki_links|ikiwiki/wikilink]] and
+[[preprocessor_directives|ikiwiki/preprocessordirective]] still get processed
+inside a code block, requiring additional escaping. For example, `[links
+don't work](#here)`, but `a [[ikiwiki/wikilink]] becomes HTML`. --[[JoshTriplett]]
+
+Indented lines provide a good way to escape a block of text containing
+markdown syntax, but ikiwiki links like \[[this]] are still
+interpreted within such a block. I think that intepretation should not
+be happening. That is I should be able to write:
+
+ [[this]]
+
+and have it render like:
+
+ \[[this]]
+
+--[[cworth]]
+
+----
+
+> Has there been any progress or ideas on this bug recently? I use an
+> expanded CamelCase regexp, and without much escaping in freelink text, or
+> url links, or in codeblocks I get IkiWiki's attempt at creating a "link
+> within a link".
+>
+> I have no ideas other than perhaps once IkiWiki encounters \[\[ or the
+> position is reset with a backreference from a CamelCased word, further
+> processing of wikilinks is disabled until the position is reset and a "no
+> not makelinks" flag or variable is cleared.
+>
+> I've come up with some _really_ ugly workarounds to handle case specific
+> stuff like codeblocks but the problem creeps up again and again in
+> unexpected places. I'd be happy to come up with a patch if anyone has a
+> bright idea on a nice clean way (_in theroy_) to fix this. I'm out of ideas.
+>
+> --CharlesMauch
+
+> I've moved the above comment here because it seems to be talking about
+> this bug, not the similar Smileys bug.
+>
+> In the case of either bug, no, I don't have an idea of a solution yet.
+> --[[Joey]]