(Articles About Popular Shops?)
(Articles About Popular Shops?)
Line 477: Line 477:
 
Personally, I would like to see what jvvg and the other admins have to say about this, as well as the ST. We haven't had much imput from them yet.{{User:Amateurradiogeek15/Sig}} 22:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 
Personally, I would like to see what jvvg and the other admins have to say about this, as well as the ST. We haven't had much imput from them yet.{{User:Amateurradiogeek15/Sig}} 22:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 
:Re - makethe's post above - Guys, PLEASE read the thread before you make any conclusions about his post.  Either he completely misread the thread or he's twisting what we've said.  Thanks. <scratchsig>Firedrake969</scratchsig> 00:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 
:Re - makethe's post above - Guys, PLEASE read the thread before you make any conclusions about his post.  Either he completely misread the thread or he's twisting what we've said.  Thanks. <scratchsig>Firedrake969</scratchsig> 00:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 +
::Sorry about double posting, but look at [https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/189432/?page=5#post-1866377 this] - don't draw conclusions about two highly unrelated things ;)
  
 
== Spanish Scratch Wiki + The Wiki Times ==
 
== Spanish Scratch Wiki + The Wiki Times ==

Revision as of 01:31, 22 March 2016

Welcome to the main talk page for the Scratch Wiki!
Shortcuts:
SWT:CP
S:CPORTAL
S:CPTALK
S:PORTAL
S:PORTTALK
S:TALK

We recommend that before you ask a question, you search the archives first to make sure it has not been answered before:





Archives (oldest first)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100
101 102 103
If you do not think a discussion is done, you can move it to Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done.
Size of Community Portal: 100,408 bytes.

Click the button below to leave a message!
Make sure it has a descriptive title so people can see what you're talking about in a glance.


If your topic is a request for admin action, please post it at Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Admin Requests.

How to edit on the Scratch Wiki

We recommend that before you create your question, you read these tips to editing on the Scratch Wiki.

  • Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) after your post.
  • To do various text formatting, follow the following rules, rather than using any other text-editing methods:
    • Make text bold with '''text'''.
    • Make text italics with ''text''.
    • Make text bold and italics with '''''text'''''.
    • Make a link to a page outside of this wiki with [http://www.example.com link text] or {{plain link|1=http://www.example.com|2=link text}} if you don't want the Link icon.png symbol to appear (remember http:// prefix).
    • Make a link to an article on this wiki with [[Page name]] or [[Page name|Link text]].
    • Make a link to a Wikipedia article with [[Wikipedia:Page name]] or [[Wikipedia:Page name|Link text]].
    • Indent a paragraph by putting a colon (:) before it.
    • For more, see the help page on formatting.
  • Put new text under old text.
  • Always remember to be polite and respectful, assume good faith, and be welcoming, while following the Scratch Community Guidelines.
  • When creating a new post, mark it as No Not done by putting {{not done}} at the top. Once the conversation has been resolved, replace it with {{done}} (producing Yes Done).

Not done

No Not done (this will never been done completely, so don't archive!)

Threads that need "long time and hard work" will not be archived, but moved to Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/not done. Actually you can read and continue following threads there:

To make sure that your thread will not be archive put the template No Not done at the top.
Don't forget to replace it with the Yes Done template when the thread is finally finished.
MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 17:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Suggestions to connect with the main website?

No Not done

You all may have noticed that we're relatively detached from the main Scratch website. We're trying to fix that by connecting the Wiki with the main site as much as we can, and we would like your input! Any ideas would be appreciated.

Please post your suggestions here
jvvg (talk | contribs) 02:22, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Awesome! I'll check it out. Thanks, jvvg!
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 19:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Yep, and please also comment other suggestions if you like :) - LiFaytheGoblin Avatar.png LiFaytheGoblin (Talk) 20:05, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
That's really a great chance for the Scratch-Wiki...I hope all authors contribute with their thoughts and ideas
MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 12:40, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Scratch News

No Not done Do we really have to announce new FPC's and SDS's? Can't people just look at the front page? I think It should be about new and retiring ST members, and stuff that would go in the announcements.
Coke11 (talk | contribs) 13:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree. That stuff is kind of obvious, and not very important. Also, it happens a lot, so it doesn't always get updated on time. For example, bjskistad was only curator for 1 or 2 more days when he or she was announced as the curator. Also, I think updates to Scratch should be announced.
Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 15:27, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes
Coke11 (talk | contribs) 18:44, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I agree, the News panel does need some revamps in what we put there. However, FPC's and (at least) SDS's are notable and fun to know about. Even though they might be on the Scratch front page doesn't mean we can't have it. I can understand though that FPC do get updated very frequently, every week, and might not be too notable.
Tomorrow I might add a bit of info to the news updating guidelines.
Update: I instead updated the News to include a somewhat recent update. That should act as a precedent.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 04:21, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
I agree with ErnieParke. I think that it is fun to know new SDS's and new FPC's, but we should also add new news like as you said new Scratch Team Members.
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 15:03, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Maybe we could keep SDS news as it doesn't change too often, but maybe remove the FPC news, as users such as "thenextcurator" are becoming quite popular.
Bbciplayer (talk | contribs) 17:29, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Should We Move Content on the Computer Science to a New Article?

No Not done I realize now that when I wrote the Computer Science article a while back, I put in a lot about computer hardware, which is realistically a separate field. Do you think I should make a page on Computer Hardware? After all, it relates to Scratch, because you can't run Scratch if you have no hardware!
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:33, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

While I guess you're right in it relating to Scratch, it doesn't really relate in the sense of a geared-towards-children's block programming language xD I think that the materials listed in the article are very advanced for the younger, more popular age range in Scratch, and as such, should be more contained. While I completely agree it's great to have it, I think those topics should be less focused on and more together in one place. :) However, your topic covers a very wide range of information, so I do think a seperate article would be appropriate.
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 

New Template

No Not done Should we add

DocumentInQuestion.png Is is in question whether the subject of this page meets the Scratch Wiki's notability guidelines. You can discuss whether you want it deleted or not on its talk page.
Reason: {{{1}}}

as a template?
Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 03:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
No support, just use {{NotUseful|Not notable}} instead.

Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 03:08, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
You can, but notability is why most people use that template. Why not have it as its own template?
Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 03:19, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
You could just use {{not notable}} to get that. It would just be easier.
Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 03:21, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
{{NotUseful}} is better IMO since it is a general template that indicates we might not want the page, but it lets you be more specific too. Having multiple templates suggesting we might want to delete the page seems redundant.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 12:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
I'll temporarily put it on BeetleBlocks as an example.
Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 21:00, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
I made a better example here.
Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 03:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Or here.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 21:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

I think {{notUseful}} replaces it well.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
The main purpose is that it would be faster and it already has a link to Scratch Wiki:New Page Policies, which really decides if we keep a page. Also, BeetleBlocks seems like it is nothing but a violation of those guidelines. Maybe one of us should ask non-Wikians on the main site if they know about BeetleBlocks. Most would probably ask, "What's BeetleBlocks?"
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 20:48, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Hm, no offence please but I don't quite see how most people not knowing something is a reason against having an article on the wiki where people can in fact learn about things that exist in the world of Scratch that they didn't know about before? I don't know, does that make sense? - LiFaytheGoblin Avatar.png LiFaytheGoblin (Talk) 21:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Those policies clearly state that something must be notable to be on here.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 21:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
They say, "Only create pages for Scratch modifications that would widely be considered extremely notable." BeetleBlocks would widely be considered extremely un-notable.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 21:17, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
It is indeed a requirement to create a page, but please keep the discussion about BeetleBlocks on its talk page. As that applies to this template, it's also a requirement that articles be appropriate (we actually used to have a template for that, but we removed it), not duplicates, and clearly related to Scratch, but we don't have templates for all those. We just use {{NotUseful}} instead, since it's a multi-purpose template.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 02:11, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────OK. Do you think this would benefit, hurt, or not affect the Wiki?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 02:14, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

It probably wouldn't hurt per se, but I don't think it would help much. One of the goals of the Wiki is avoiding redundancy, and at least in my opinion, the {{NotUseful}} template accomplishes basically the same thing, but also puts pages in a category so we can see them all at once.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 12:45, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
OK. It would be so you could be more specific about why it isn't notable without a super-long reason.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 17:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
You could still do {{NotUseful|<Not notable because most Scratchers haven't heard of it>}}. That isn't that long (it really only adds the first three words) but still brings across the same message.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 02:14, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
This would, eventually, save bytes on the server. That "Not notable because " part adds 19 bytes. "Not Notable" is 2 bytes bigger than "NotUseful." The template is 443 bytes. It saves 17 bytes per page. After 26 pages, it would save a byte. See?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 22:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
The focus on bytes is a little misguided. There is plenty of space on the server, and an image takes thousands to millions of bytes. Saving a single digit number of bytes doesn't really make a difference, especially when the server still keeps the original revision.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 12:50, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
This would work if we put it on the pages in the first place.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 14:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Cleanup

No Not done We haven't started it yet! I was thinking, some pages need to be simplified. Others are too simple. And there are more that need updating. The stubs. Also, a bunch of files need reverting/updating. I bet there is at least some vandalism on at least 1 page. I thought, let's clean up the Wiki! VoxBot might help, because we can ask it questions and they'll get answered. I was thinking call it "Wiki Cleanup." It would look like this:

when gf clicked
forever
if <the current page is a stub?> then
expand this page
end
if <the current page is too complicated?> then
simplify this page
end
if <the current page is too simple?> then
make this page slightly more complex//Notice that I said "complex," not "complicated." We would keep it easy to understand, but make it describe what it is about in more of detail.
end
if <the current page is unhelpful?> then
ask an admin to delete this page
end
if <the current page has been vandalized?> then
un-vandalize this page
end
if <the current page is a file?> then
if <the current file is outdated?> then
update this file
end
if <the current file needs to be reverted?> then
revert this file
end
end
end
Maybe we could do it every 2 months or something?


Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 16:14, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

We're sort of trying to do this all of the time, it just can be forgotten at times though. Thank you for the idea! Maybe it could be something we do regularly, sort of as a collective push. Maybe we could add some incentives?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:01, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't know what incentives are. I mainly got the idea from reading about Operation: Cleanups on the TBG article. Should we start it?
Mitopolis (talk | contribs) 16:35, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
This is a response to here and my talk page. Incentives are basically rewards to make people what to edit more. For example, you have to mow my lawn. The incentive is, if you mow my lawn today, I will give you five pieces of hand-made chocolate.
On second thought, I don't think we need a special event to be editing the Wiki. If people have time and want to edit, they will.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
The point is to help us find the problems. This would work because, during Wiki Cleanup, finding things to change could be our main focus.
-unsigned comment by Mitopolis (talk | contribs)
Should we start this? I really want some more opinions.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 20:38, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
A better script would be
when gf clicked
repeat until <all of the pages are good enough to end cleanup for now?>
if <the current page is a stub?> then
expand this page
end
if <the current page is too complicated?> then
simplify this page
end
if <the current page is too simple?> then
make this page slightly more complex//Notice that I said "complex," not "complicated." We would keep it easy to understand, but make it describe what it is about in more of detail.
end
if <the current page is unhelpful?> then
if <I am an admin?> then
delete this page
else
ask an admin to delete this page
end
end
if <the current page has been vandalized?> then
un-vandalize this page
end
if <the current page is a file?> then
if <the current file is outdated?> then
update this file
end
if <the current file needs to be reverted?> then
revert this file
end
end
next page
end

Scratch Wiki Monthly News Report

Hello fellow Scratch Wiki Editors! Once a month I will come up with a Scratch Wiki News Report and post it on the Community Portal. It will consist of

  • News
  • Events
  • Articles
  • Scratch Trends
  • Scratch Wiki Trends

and more!

The Official Page can be found here , but is Under Construction!


This monthly news report will continue throughout many years to come. It is a good idea so people know what's going on around the Scratch Wiki and can see what is yet to come.

I am also looking for one or two other Scratch Wiki Editors to help me with this Monthly News Report. So, if you'd like to join the team please reply to this message.

Thank you,
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 01:43, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

That sounds cool! And very helpful, especially for the people who don't have much time! -
LiFaytheGoblin Avatar.png LiFaytheGoblin (Talk) 13:10, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
I might be interested. What is entailed? EDIT: You can tell me on my talk page. ;)
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 14:42, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
^^^^^
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 15:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Really great idea! I'm looking forward to the first issue. It would be very convincing to start that thing with a complete impressing issue (or at least a part of it) you made yourself. Starting with "I will do it for years...but I have nothing until now...but I am searching for people that could do something" is at least "a little bit" less impressing ;-)
MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 11:06, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Woof!

Woof! Prealpha is finally released! It is here!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 02:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

That's cool! :) But what does it have to do with the wiki? Mods can't be in alpha if they have a page.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 05:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
I just don't use the forums, so I do stuff here. Did you try Woof!?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 14:50, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
I skimmed woof, and the things I like the most are clone and broadcast [ v], and list [].
What was the goal of the mod? Just to experiment, or to something else?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:22, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
The main goal was to add the [] in list blocks, not [ v]. That is what I call "Semi-first-class data".
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:28, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I did try it :). It's pretty cool!
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 04:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
A few broken-block removals, and it is ready! (Unfortunately, cloning will go until a later version.)
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 18:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Woof! (Scratch Modification)
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 19:31, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

AF Vote

Please vote on Sonic content for the AF Wiki. +1 if you support removal, -1 if you support leaving it, +0 if you don't care, +.5 it you don't want it gone, but want some removed. Rules:

  • Only one vote per Wikian.
  • Admin/EW votes count twice.
  • No changing votes.
  • No changing the support rating.


Supprot rating: 1. At the and of the voting, if this is positive, we will desonic, otherwise, we will allow it.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 04:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

+1
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 04:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Hmm I did a quick search and the only AF pages I could find with "Sonic" on them, were the following.
That makes 11. Are there any other AF articles which have sonic in them which aren't on this list? Because IMO 11 articles isn't really a substantial amount.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 05:06, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Try searching "Blaze," "Shadow," and "Hedgehog." Also, what is your vote?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
As the person actually in charge of the AF Wiki, I have already stated the official position on Sonic: it is allowed there is no reason to go around removing it. Unless you have something funnier to replace it with, do not remove it.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 03:26, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
We do need a consensus on Kaj, which is funnier, fish or Sonic.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

+9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999. I HATE SONIC. Fish is funnier than Sonic.


TheHockeyist (talk | contribs) 19:01, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

"I HATE SONIC" isn't exactly a good reason to remove it. Please be more respectful in discussions, especially when the discussion is about something very trivial.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
... Well, it's been annoying us all. Hogging up the AF Wiki... isn't that a good enough reason?
TheHockeyist (talk | contribs) 19:16, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I have said this before and will say it again: if you have something that you can show is funnier, you're welcome to put it in. However, until you can produce that, you can't just remove Sonic because you don't like it. In the meantime, being rude or disrespectful because you disagree with somebody is not acceptable. You are welcome to disagree with people, but you have to voice your disagreement in a calm, reasonable, and respectful manner. Going around shouting that you hate something does not fit any of those criteria. Also, I will bring this up again: these are a set of pages that are only shown for one day a year. Everybody is getting way too worked up about a set of joke pages. Think for a second about how important the AF pages are compared to the rest of the Wiki.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:28, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Jvvg is correct. Also, even if you do have something better to put, it's still not okay to be disrespectful to the topic you're replacing. Whoever implemented sonic on AF pages obviously did so because they enjoy the topic of Sonic. If you were to add something about Hockey (just going based off your username :P) and someone removed it saying how much they hate hockey because it's super annoying, your feelings would be hurt. In the future, while you were only expressing your opinion, please be sure to do so appropriately and respectfully. Thanks :)
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 
Correct.
Also, I go with the "Shadow" idea because while I was viewing the "fish" revamp, it was kinda sad because the fish was eaten up. It would be surprising if people discovered Kaj was a video character.
PPL Icon.gif ♥PrincessPandaLover Talk | Contributions | Scratch Account 01:23, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Rules

I think we should rethink the "no non-notable mods" rule. I didn't know about any mods until I read their articles. I think the Wiki should also be a place to learn about mods you didn't even know existed. Think about Woof, is it a notable mod? No. Is it a special mod? I don't really know. What do you think?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 23:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm surprised to hear this from the same user who was asking for BeetleBlocks and TurtleStitch to be deleted only a couple of months ago, because not enough users knew about them. Anyway, I don't support. I only think the really notable mods should be on the Wiki, and Woof! is definitely not one of those.
By the way, the CP needs archiving.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 00:21, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Well, this brings us back to the Wiki Guidelines, which say the Wiki isn't an advertising hub. The question is this: do you use the Wiki to get people to learn about your mod or do you use it to document it once people already know about it? In general we are pretty aggressive in enforcing the S:NOSP policy, and I think that only allowing notable mods is an extension of that.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 03:16, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I agree with what's said above. If we start allowing just any mods to be added, then users will call for project tutorials, user examples, contests documentation, etc. There has to be a line and I believe that where it's currently at is working just fine. :)
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 
Do you think Woof! is a special mod?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:04, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I like to see less "notable" articles on the wiki (like BeetleBlocks or TurtleStitch), as long as they are no advertizing. If it is not clear if an article is advertizing, there could always be a discussion on that on the Community Portal. -
LiFaytheGoblin (talk | contribs) 17:08, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
So you think the Woof! article should come back?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 18:52, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I think that mods should be given articles if they're available to everyone and the article won't become a stub. Plus the article shouldn't be written as an advertisement for the modification. Oh and @LiFaytheGoblin it's advertising.
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 20:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
The Woof! article wasn't advertising at all.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 20:20, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I mean how to SPELL advertising ;)
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 22:18, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Please answer my question: Is Woof! a special mod?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 22:48, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Special is a vague term. You'll need to be more specific.

Either way, it seems that no, Woof! is not a highly used mod. So far, it looks like a mod as highly used as a mod someone made for fun.

If you want to better convince us, maybe you can show us people using said mod for their projects and websites in several notable places?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:20, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I just released it yesterday.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 23:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I mean, do you think the features are special?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 23:25, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Wether or not Woof! has special features, it does not change the standard by which the Wiki decides if we should have a modification page. As jvvg said, that standard is notability.
The way I choose to measure notability is by asking, "Are there extended, multiple, usages of Woof! ?"
So far I have seen none. Also, since Woof! was released just yesterday, that suggests that it is not well known.
As such, Woof! does not seem notable.
Maybe later it can deserve an article.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
What do you mean by "extended, multiple, usages?" If you mean new types of projects,You could practically host a website or entire filesystem with it!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 00:21, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
By extended, multiple usages of Woof!, I mean multiple real-life examples of a Scratcher using Woof! for more then a few days.
One key term is real-life: The example has happened, and not "might happen".
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:17, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
</offtopic>What do you think abot the rules change?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 01:20, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The Wiki is not an advertising hub, so I don't see any reason why to move away from "no non-notable mods"
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:35, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Question

Just wondering, have there been any problems with my edits?
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 21:19, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I mean, everyone has made mistakes on the wiki before, but I can't think of anyone one edit that was very problematic.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 21:23, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
OK. Thanks.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 21:24, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I agree with KrIsMa. I think that your edits have been generally pretty good :)
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 21:57, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Signature Importance

Hey, I've been noticing people intentionally removing and omitting their signatures from their posts in order to test WM. This might seem harmless, but it actually causes some issues.

Please keep the wiki neat and consistent. If you omit your signature, not only does it prevent others from knowing who you are but it can give other people the go-ahead to not sign their posts as well.

Thank you for observing this.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits`

Ok. I have to admit I did this before. I was curious on what would happen!
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 22:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, sorry, I've accidentally left off my signature before, but that was when I was first starting to work on the wiki
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 21:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
If you do it by accident once or twice it's okay. It's just when people deliberately leave off their signatures to test WikiMonitor.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 21:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Personally, I try not to be bot-ed. :P
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 13:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I was the one who tested it.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 20:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Homepage

When there's a new curator, change his/her to their. Personally, I think it's boring seeing his/her all the time.
Banana439monkey (talk | contribs) 16:58, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Newspaper

I made a newspaper called The CP Weekly. (Why doesn't AutoCorrect like "CP?" It is used all the time on wikis.) Why not join!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 14:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

What's involved?
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 15:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
User talk:Mitopolis/CPWeekly/Sign-Up
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 15:07, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Where did the monthly go? It seemed nice.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
I'd need to know what's involved before I could come up with a reason I want to join. :P
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 16:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
You need to:
  • Be active in discussions
  • Help get the CP ready to archive :)
  • Help end discussions, not continue them when we've already had a consensus, and
  • Help continue discussions until we have a consensus.
    Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Well, I think most people do that last two... Anyway, what I'm asking is...what's involved in being a reporter? I mean, we can all do those four things ^ but, that's not exactly reporting. XD Sorry if I seem to be being picky, but I just want to understand how this works. ;)
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 17:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Whenever we have a notable discussion, add a section with some quotes, a description of what it was about, and a list of users involved.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 17:11, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Definition of notable?
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 17:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Three or more users involved and about at least one page.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 17:14, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Ok, got that. But what do you mean by a "Page"? Isn't the CP in itself a page? Do you mean long enough to fill the screen? That's subjective due to resolution and screen size...but...I guess?
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 17:50, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
I mean that the discussion is about a page.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 17:52, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Isn't there already a Wiki Newspaper run by AghaCool?
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 

There is, but this is specifically about discussions.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 18:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, there is. I asked for more information on it, but never got a response, so I don't know if that one is actually functional or not. @Mitopolis, ok. Gotcha. ;)
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 18:24, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Now do you want to be a reporter? I'll just add you.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 19:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Eh, why not. ;) I'll give it a shot.
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 02:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm willing to join and help out :D!
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 00:25, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
OK!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 00:28, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
What happened to the Monthly Newspaper? Mitopolis, this is pretty much copying my idea and I'm not very happy right now.
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 14:29, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I'm not copying your idea, this will be only about discussions, where yours is more general. Reasons why it isn't copying yours:

  • Yours is about the Wiki and Scratch itself, this is only about the Wiki,
  • Yours doesn't cover discussions, that is all this one covers, and
  • What is the problem with 2 newspapers?
    Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:03, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Gotcha! I understand now! Thanks for clarifying :)
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 14:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 15:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion

Could we make an extension that gives us admin-rights in our own userspace? (protect, delete, editprotected, ...)
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 04:24, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

By this do you mean just the "User" namespace, or the User Talk namespace as well?
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 04:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Both, and only under Special:MyPage and Special:MyTalk.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 04:31, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
But then you could go and delete revisions in your talk page, if someone said something you didn't like. Or you could go and protect it, so no one could leave you messages.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 04:39, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Regardless, this would take a long time to code for minimal benefit. The current system of just trusting users (and then reverting their edits if they don't follow the rules) works fine.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 13:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
OK, no protecting and no hiding edits. Other than that, the main benefit would be deleting out of your userspace.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:04, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Again, it would be a lot of work for not a lot of benefit. All you need to do is put on a delete template and an admin or EW will get to it in probably less than a few hours. It's never really so urgent that you need a page in your userspace deleted immediately, is it?
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 22:36, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

HELP!!!! 2 Seconds ago It said that the scratch website had SERVER ISSUES!!!!!!!! WHAT CAN I DO??????????? (remind me not to reload the page with the scratch project I was watching)
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 23:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Same :P. It's working for me now though.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 23:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
It went down for me, then when it came up, messages weren't working worth anything. It was dead. I could get messages in my inbox, but nothing when I actually went there. Now it's down again.
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 00:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
It went down while I was working on a project. I made the mistake of trying to go to another page, then when I went back, everything was gone. At least it was only a backdrop and two sprites :P
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 00:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Yeah. It's annoying when that happens. *Imagines the life of a server.*
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 00:13, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
And NOW I have a DIFFERENT error! (looks on the wiki to see which one it is,) MAINTENANCE MODE!!!! Maybe the ST is giving us time to work on the wiki? If that's the case GOODBYE STUBS!!!!!
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 00:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Oh by the way, Programmer, here's your reminder not to reload that page. :P
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 00:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

thanks! I heard from This'n'gain The ST had a Power Outage!
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 00:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
You're not joking right?
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 00:39, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Why would I joke? this is The SCRATCH wiki! Of course I COULD joke but I'm being honest
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 00:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
But how would that affect the servers? I mean, I don't know where the Scratch servers are...but...Maybe at MIT? Maybe not...
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 01:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
The servers are indeed at MIT. A few years ago, I remember my brother at Harvard informed me of a power outage in Cambridge, and sure enough the website was down (and for a while it said "We're coming back from a power outage"). See this announcement for details.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm... Look at what this random person called jvvg wrote "Also, I learned how addicted I am to this website yesterday :P" Cool! i wonder who jvvg (sarcastically) I NEVER have SEEN him on the WIKI
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 02:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Ahahahah so he did :P.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 02:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Cool! I did not know that! :D Thanks for the input!
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 02:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Wait, the ST had a power outage? That makes sense, as there was no other message on the Scratch Twitter page like there usually is. At least it's back up now :P
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 13:10, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
It's back up.
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 14:54, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

The Wiki Times!

Hello, if you don't know The Wiki Times is a new newspaper on the Scratch Wiki! I am no longer going to post issues on the Community Portal, but instead I will be posting it on the official page. If you haven't looked at the March 5th Newspaper yet, please check it out! Currently we have one manager, Hamish752. We really need some reporters so if you are interested please leave a comment on the official page. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns please reply to this message!
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 14:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Pac-Trivia

Do you want to play some Pac-Man themed trivia? If you do, go here!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:10, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

articles that aren't directly related to Scratch but kind of

There's an interesting discussion on a talk page somewhere... I've been noticing some articles on the wiki starting to get less and less related to Scratch. Take Computer Science for example. The content is mostly about things not related to Scratch. In Computer, there is a small section relating to Scratch, but other than that, it isn't really directly related to Scratch. I think that if we don't have a discussion on whether this "digression" is a good idea or not, these types of articles will continue to be built, and it may or may not help the wiki.

tl;dr - should articles like Computer Science and Computer - that don't directly relate to Scratch, be on the Scratch Wiki?
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 21:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

They should; but we should focus more on how the topoic relates to Scratch.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 00:54, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Articles such as "Wikipedia" and "Super Pi Day" are definitely not related enough to get an article though.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 01:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Maybe instead of a "Pi Day" article, it would be better to have a more condensed article explaining how Scratch has celebrated various days (if we don't have one already).
Back on topic, what you said KrIsMa is true. I just guess that at times, people are eager to make articles on the Wiki because it is a small sign of prestige. We just need to remember that quality is better than quantity.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 12:59, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that is true. I think we should edit or delete pages based on that.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:02, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Finally!!

wikipedia:Scratch Wiki
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 00:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Looks like it's on a list for speedy deletion.
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 00:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
I know. I hadn't explained it well enough but I fixed that.
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 01:26, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Ah. Good 'nuff! :D
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 01:47, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
It is done! Are you a Wikipedia editor? If you are, let's work on it together!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 02:50, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Sorry Mitopolis but I had to re-add the speedy deletion tag :P. You can't remove a deletion tag from an article you created yourself, you can however contest the deletion. Lol sorry haha.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 05:45, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Funny thing is I was actually thinking of starting the same article myself lol.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 05:49, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
It got deleted. But, I can recreate it and have the new one be better!
Popular GIF.gif Mitopolis (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 14:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Ah, it's looking better now :)
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 21:19, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Hmmm... I don't really edit wikipedia but remember to cite it using reliable sources. My teacher doesn't like us using wikipedia, BUT do to Model UN and the teacher doing Model UN I've been using it more often. Its actually quite good if you cite it properly! My teacher just doesn't like it and I can agree with him but as long as its citations are good and reliable... Oh and add a bit more information on the wiki sections. I don't know why but I ALWAYS get frustrated when the little sub articles aren't the same length! Oh and Its written like an advertisement.
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 23:30, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Hmm. I do have to agree that it does smack a little of an advertisement.
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 00:08, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Oh and I don't think there needs to be a mention of April Fools Day. maybe Make it a tiny bit like the Scratch wiki article here? Its a lot more iformitive. Right now Its all inside jokey.
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 00:38, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Articles About Popular Shops?

Would it be appropriate to make articles about some of the most popular shops, such as those owned by makethebrainhappy and Sigton (first and second most popular, respectively)?

Sorry if this is the wrong spot to put this, I'm brand-new here :)


BlockWare (talk | contribs) 21:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, welcome to the Wiki! :D I don't think that would be a good idea...do we have an article on Shops though? (I imagine we do.) If so, it could possibly be added to that article?
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 21:59, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Looks like there is a section for shops under the Requests (forum) article. Whether or not it's worthy to add those shops...well, we'll see what the masses have to say about that. ;)
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 22:02, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm... This all depends on how you look on different rules of the wiki. I mean this could possibly become a target for advertising, couldn't it?
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 23:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Personally I would support it ;), maybe I'm biased. But I can't really say much else!
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 23:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
That was my thought @Programmer. Brains, how did I know that would be generally what you'd say? :P
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 23:31, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh and think of it. Lets use Waves of Sound (a none popular shop I joined) as an example. One could argue that it IS popular but not well known or something like that also it could become a target for advertising! I mean it could be like how someone might feel sometime when so-and-so happens. It all depends if its written properly but I think it could become a REAL target for vandalism and possibly bullying like 'Wave Of Sound Is TERRIBLE!!!' and for advertising? 'Waves of Sound is AMAZING!!!!!! CLICK THIS LINK TO CHECK IT OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' See what I mean (If not this is the reason I haven't made any major edits)
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 23:58, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, yes...that could theoretically happen, but I think the question here really is more of a question of how useful such an article would be. I think passively mentioning it on another page where shops are mentioned, such as the Requests (forum) page might be ok, but I don't really see the need for a whole article on shops at this time.
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 00:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm afraid not :/. Shops, are in essence collaborations. And pages, or mentions of collaborations aren't allowed because they're user-generated content. Only a few collabs at Collaboration (group) are allowed as examples.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 04:58, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
All good points. I agree, we probably don't need an article on shops. Although, I'm sure Brain wouldn't mind ;)
BlockWare (talk | contribs) 14:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
@Amateurradiogeek I don't know :P. @Programmer We are Scratch Wiki Editors, not vandals, and we hope no one would vandalize someone else's work. @Hamish I've heard the rule before, but the real question would be why. There are articles about people and companies in the real world. Why not here?
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 20:33, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
And your right, I wouldn't mind :P
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 20:33, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
@BlockWare, well you're right, of course. But honestly I don't think any shop owner would mind. @Brains looking at S:NOSP, basically it's because pages or sections on user generated content could be used for advertising, either intentionally or unintentionally. They're also not very notable, and could become the target of vandalism (e.g "I hate this shop! They didn't get my order done on time!").
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 21:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to make an article like What are Shops? but not about specific shops. Maybe we could mention popular shops such as Sigton's and Makethebrainhappy's, but I don't think they deserve their own article (no offense to the creators of the shops :P)
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 23:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Griffpatch should be notable enough to get his own scratch wiki article. Does it really matter that it would technically be advertising? Ever wiki page is advertising its own subject. That's why there's a wiki page for it :P. The wiki is so linked together that even if your looking for a specific subject, you'll always find more and different things. Vandalism? Every page is may be influenced by vandalism, I'm not sure that it would occur more frequently. We are Scratch Wiki members selected by experienced Wikians and Admins. We have protection measures in place. The purpose of the Scratch Wiki is to give information about as much on scratch as possible. So why should we only give some information, even when we know that there's much more we have never spoken.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 01:41, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The fact that it's not notable isn't the only reason that shops don't deserve an article. Sure, Griffpatch is notable, but he isn't covered by the scope of the Wiki. The wiki exists solely to document features in all parts of Scratch (e.g the website, the editor, the forums etc.), to give tutorials on using said features, and to document other things which are somehow related to the Scratch Team or Scratch itself. User-generated content is not something that should be documented here unless it in some way "changed Scratch". For example, Kaj or Removed Pac-Man Project. Even those exceptions to the no user-generated content rule are the subject of much debate as to whether or not they're notable enough to have an article, even though they arguably did "change Scratch". Meanwhile, popular shops haven't really "changed Scratch", aside from having more customers than the average shop in the Requests forum. Although yes, I do agree that my point about vandalism wasn't a very good one. Vandalism is incredibly rare here.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 05:36, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Hamish. It's not just concerns of it violating S:NOSP (which I believe it would), but rather, a couple other reasons too. Who decides what Shop is good enough to be used for an example? And what determines 'good enough'? Because of the fact that the Wiki allows users from Scratch to create an account, anyone with a shop who sees that example could create an account solely for the purpose of adding their shop. Also, as Hamish said, it is prone to vandalism. The collabs on the collaboration page are mostly inactive, for a couple years too, so there isn't as much chance for their to be vandalism. Perhaps, if we really wanted to add a shop example, we could create one of our own examples on the page. Something like how we have example posts on the Suggestions page.
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 
Agreed. I think this is becoming an issue of following the Wiki Guidelines.
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 12:50, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
As Hamish mentioned, I think it would be good to have one article about shops. We could base which shops are displayed based on views or replies. And we could monitor the page to make sure there is no positive or negative advertising, and describe all shops in a passive, neutral tone.
BlockWare (talk | contribs) 17:13, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
@Pianogirl That sort of already exists as the requests forum page, but its a little outdated. @Hamish "The wiki exists solely to document features in all parts of Scratch (e.g the website, the editor, the forums etc.), to give tutorials on using said features, and to document other things which are somehow related to the Scratch Team or Scratch itself." The members are definitely part of scratch, and isn't it a little bit unfair to say that everything they do is unimportant. We should expand the scope of the wiki, because we will portray more information and because there's no reason not to. @st19 galla "It's not just concerns of it violating S:NOSP" I believe that we could change it to allow pages about users and member-created collaborations/shops. I'll answer your other questions as well. "Who decides what Shop is good enough to be used for an example? And what determines 'good enough'?" We would go off of Math. Math doesn't lie. You have 5000 or more followers, you get an article. Your shop has more than 5,000 replies, you get an article. (You wouldn't go off views because they are easily manipulated). "Because of the fact that the Wiki allows users from Scratch to create an account, anyone with a shop who sees that example could create an account solely for the purpose of adding their shop." That's actually true of any account, and if we are going off the Math it would be deleted anyway. One of my reasons for joining was the make an article about the Scratch Helper Mentoring Committee. Might have to bring up that discussion again :P. "Also, as Hamish said, it is prone to vandalism." He also said that that was a bad point. I believe admins also have the ability to ban people. @Amateurradiogeek15 "Agreed. I think this is becoming an issue of following the Wiki Guidelines." They should be changed slightly to incorporate guidelines to allow pages for users and collaborations. @BlockWare "I think it would be good to have one article about shops. We could base which shops are displayed based on views or replies. And we could monitor the page to make sure there is no positive or negative advertising, and describe all shops in a passive, neutral tone. " That might be a long article :P. I think specific shops deserve there own pages
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 11:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Wow, that was a massive post. Anyway, so as for 5000 or more followers/5000 or more replies. I see multiple problems with that. The 5000 or more followers idea makes Fame seem really important. The 5000 replies rule isn't a good representation of how notable the shop is, especially since some shops chat a lot (*cough cough*) and don't actually have a lot of business. Also, admins can't ban. Only the ST.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 21:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Indeed. Fame means that you are notable. Even though the ST wants to make it seem like fame isn't important it does indicate that there's a field you excel at. Otherwise you wouldn't be famous. It means that you've brought something new to the field. That leads us to the next question. Is fame really important? It depends on the type of person you are. But if you are famous, it usually means that your special. The ST wants to make it seem like fame isn't important. But then why haven't they removed all the features that code for fame? Tell me a better way, because we can't keep ignoring people's accomplishments.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 22:09, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── "The ST wants to make it seem like fame isn't important". Well if that's true then we should do the same. We're a sub-domain of Scratch. Fame is not important. As I said above, Scratchers, projects and collaborations are not within the scope of the Wiki. Even if they have a lot of followers, or have a lot of replies. It would be very difficult to manage which collabs go on the Wiki and which don't. Many would probably be written in a way that unintentionally advertises the collab. Basing it on followers or replies seems like a bad idea, because you can so easily cheat to get the number you need. It would also create a lot of competition.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 22:48, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

How misleading. You forgot to quote what I put directly after it. "But then why haven't they removed all the features that code for fame?" Answer that please. The wiki is supposed to portray all the information about scratch. Therefore it is in the scope of the wiki. It is called the scratch wiki after all. Replies are the best indication, because you won't make it to 5,000 without some work. Also then your technically notable for chatting. Not the best position but still notable.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 23:11, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
The features you are talking about is Top-Loved and Top-Remixed, right? Well, they're not "features that code for fame". They're features that are coded to show the Community what is being viewed at the moment in time. That's the only purpose. There is no reason to carry that onto the Wiki as well as it's sole purpose is to document features/other notable Scratch events, and provide tutorials/other information. I do not believe creating an articles about certain shops fall into any of those categories as they aren't features, they aren't extremely notable, they aren't tutorials, and they don't provide relevant Scratch information. Regardless of what I just said, whether one agrees with it or not, this conversation is just making me believe more and more that articles about shops should not be allowed. The conversation is turning into talking about fame and whether or not something has enough fame to have an article about. The Wiki is NOT a place for articles to be made simply due to the topic (shop) being famous. This is clearly stated in the Scratch Wiki Guidelines. These guidelines have been used for years; they will not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary, and I do not believe a shop(s) having 5000+ replies is absolutely necessary. Please forgive me if any of this is taken harshly or meanly, I mean it all in good faith and am merely trying to point out of few major points :)
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 
Brains, in answer to your question, adding on to what Galla said, rows on the Front Page are not intended to encourage fame, and make the owners of the projects more famous (although it does achieve that). They're intended to 1) Show what's being made in Scratch at the time and 2) Show those who aren't Scratchers and just happen to be checking out the website, the kinds of things that Scratch is being used for. And how exactly would having 5000 replies make you "technically notable for chatting"? I could make a forum topic in MaC or RaP and get that many replies from chatting, but would that make it a notable topic? Take a collab I'm sure you'll remember, Ultropia for example. I just counted up all the replies in each of the various threads. We got a total of around 2500, half of the minimum replies you're suggesting. But we got literally nothing done. So I think that proves that the number of replies is not an appropriate measure of notability.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 00:13, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Actually that's not what I'm talking about, but it's a good point to bring up. They do code for fame, if you make it on their it increases your viewers and your followers, therefore increasing your fame. That's indisputable. If they weren't meant to encourage fame, then they shouldn't be there, and the ST wouldn't have put them there. What I am specifically referring to is the follow button. I would say if the ST wanted to discourage fame, change that button into a "receive updates from this scratcher" button. I would also remove the ability to see who you follow and who follows you. If we want to discourage fame, then take away the ability to see your fame. The purpose of the follow button, to bookmark people you like and want to remember is preserved yet a lot of the fame is taken away (almost all of it). So why not do that? Why is there a loves button if it weren't to promote fame. Seriously though, what other purpose does it serve? I can also argue that shops and users notable actions should be documented as history, so that people in the future can learn from their mistakes. The wiki is supposed to contain all the information from scratch, not just the generic stuff. We've made 1,000 articles about it now, it's time for something new.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 01:44, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Well, the follow button isn't really anything like a "receive updates from this Scratcher button". Because, you don't receive updates or messages from them. I would argue that the follow button isn't just to encourage fame. It's also to bring a more social side to Scratch. Because lets be honest, if there weren't follows, loves, favorites, comments or the front page, the Scratch Community would be a pretty sad place. Anyway, back on topic. Adding articles about Scratchers, Projects and Collabs just seems like rewarding and encouraging fame. It would lead to a lot of competition. Everyone's going to want an article on themselves, their project or their collab. So then as you suggested, we'll have a criteria on what shops can go on the Wiki. That's going to lead to people cheating and abusing the system to get enough replies or follows to have an article. That's why replies and follows are not a good measure of notability, along with the problem that it encourages fame. Even if we did come up with a really good criteria, which actually reflected the subject's notability, it would still be easily abused. Say we made it a measure of how many members the shop has? That can easily be cheated by making more accounts. Same goes for if we made it how many orders had been taken. Whatever we make the criteria, it will easily be abused.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 02:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
"Well, the follow button isn't really anything like a "receive updates from this Scratcher button". Because, you don't receive updates or messages from them. I would argue that the follow button isn't just to encourage fame. It's also to bring a more social side to Scratch. Because lets be honest, if there weren't follows, loves, Well, the follow button isn't really anything like a "receive updates from this Scratcher button". Because, you don't receive updates or messages from them. I would argue that the follow button isn't just to encourage fame. It's also to bring a more social side to Scratch. Because lets be honest, if there weren't follows, loves, favorites, comments or the front page, the Scratch Community would be a pretty sad place. or the front page, the Scratch Community would be a pretty sad place." Actually you do, on the front page there are features for that. I never said anything about favorites and comments. Those could stay, although maybe there shouldn't be a favorites count on projects. Of course the follow button is to encourage fame, if you can see who follows you and have a count. Loves are only there for fame, because otherwise they serve no purpose. "Anyway, back on topic." This is on topic :P. After analysis, I feel like the ST doesn't actually believe that fame is a bad thing. They just feel that its a bad thing for people who are immature about it and have such a pretense in order to deal with people like that. It doesn't mean that popularity doesn't exist on scratch. It shouldn't mean that we can't use a popularity benchmark here. The scratch team tries to avoid popularity 'contests' because some people would get upset, but this would be no competition. We'd have guidelines and an application page. It would be a benchmark, not a competition. We would have an application page where Scratchers can apply for an article, and another where Shops/Collaborations can apply for an article. "Projects" I never said anything about specific Projects, those would go onto the Scratchers wiki page. As a consequence it may "just seems like rewarding and encouraging fame." I do not believe that it would negative. We aren't holding a popularity contests. We are recording and noting prominent scratchers and shops in order to provide information and inspiration to other scratchers. There isn't much on this wiki to provide inspiration. 5000 Followers and 5000 replies was just something that I came up with on the spot. The numbers need to be made with agreement from other wiki members. The Scratchers requirements may be: 4,000 followers. 3-front paged projects. Member of at least 2 collaborations. A project with at least 400+ favorites and/or loves. For Collaborations: At least 4000 replies, at least 3 finished polished pieces, at least 10 members, at least some sort of hierarchy. For Shops: At least 4,000 replies, at least 100 completed orders, at least 10 members, at least some sort of hierarchy. For Role Playing collaborations: At least 2,000 replies. At least a role playing studio with 5,000 comments from varied users. At least 7 members, at least some sort of hierarchy, at least some sort of story. The leaders of each collaboration would give this information into an application form, and scratch wiki people would look at it and make sure that its legit. Then a page would be made about it, highlight achievements, and other things that the scratch wikiers noted/ saw in the application. The Application form would be pretty difficult to complete. You may say that someone could go to very great lengths to try and cheat the system. That may be true, but by that time they may have made a good example for the future. People won't bother to cheat the system, if they don't care about it. If they do care about it, then they will continue on with it. They need to provide links to all the requirements in the application. The standards can be editied right now or in the future by community vote. I'd like suggestions, because the numbers I mentioned are not the final numbers
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 12:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Whoa, very long message. :P Anyway, about the follow button. I highly disagree with you and think that you are looking at it the wrong way. Take laws for example. One could argue that they only exist to stop them from having fun. I know, it sounds ridiculous. But that's not why laws were created. They were created to keep people safe and orderly; they're something vital to countries running smoothly. It's similar to the follow button, obviously not in the way of keeping Scratch safe:P, but in the way that one could argue that it's to encourage fame, but that's not why it was created. Anyone can interpret things the way they want, but it all comes down to why it was created. Anyway, regardless of that, this is the Scratch Wiki not the Scratch site. I'm not sure why we are discussing the follow button on here when there isn't even a follow button on the wiki :P Please let's make this the last time someone has to say "now, let's get back on track" xD Anyway, whoa, now you're trying to expand this into popular Scratchers getting articles too?? That doesn't even make sense to me. It's like we are giving a ticket to someone who's already popular to become even more popular. You claim that it will help inspire Scratchers who are less popular, but I'm not sure that's what it will do. In fact, I think it will do the opposite. I see Scratchers leave everyday because they see others getting 1000+ loves in the Featured Projects section while they hardly get 1. I see Scratchers leave because they see Scratchers getting hundreds of comments on their profile while they don't get any. Imagine what will happen when they see those same Scratchers getting articles on the wiki when they don't. It will just escalate Scratchers leaving even more. Now, don't twist my words and claim that this is why we shouldn't have follow buttons and loves etc. While it's very unfortunate that they see comments and loves being expressed as them being less popular, they are missing the main point of Scratch; learning creatively, not getting loves on a project. About shops having their own articles, why not just create an example shop of our own if we really wanted to. We could have examples of how it could fail, how it could succeed, things to avoid, tips, etc. I'm sure that you would be a great contributor to that article as you could provide lots of great tips. The only reason for using a real shop is to help it get more fame, and that's not what the wiki is about.
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 

@Hamish: Are views/comments a good standard by which we can measure notability? Do views and comments really show how you've changed Scratch? Does count accurately represent impact? One example I want to look at is griffpacth's Minecraft. Millions of Scratchers have played it, but were they changed? Did Scratch change by having the project? Is there evidence beyond the "1,000,000+ views" that people were changed? If there is evidence, it needs to be provided. That evidence might count as showing that the project is notable.
My doubts here, Hamish752, is that views/replies/loves don't seem like an accurate representation of notability. Maybe some other evidence would be more accurate?
@Wikians in general / self: I would like to touch on one minor thing. In this discussion I am using the following definition for notability "Something has a large significant impact on Scratch". In a previous modification discussion, I had said I would measure notability by asking, "Does it have multiple, extended usages?" However, that is not necessarily a good indicator of notability. Maybe I had measured notability with the wrong question?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 13:44, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Indeed :P. Also why can't I use what you say to strengthen my argument. That makes no sense xD. The follow button has everything to do with this, as I explained earlier. "It's similar to the follow button, obviously not in the way of keeping Scratch safe:P, but in the way that one could argue that it's to encourage fame, but that's not why it was created. Anyone can interpret things the way they want, but it all comes down to why it was created." I explained to you why it was created and how to discourage fame while at the same time keeping its function. I believe that the function of the follow button is to bookmark scratchers you like and recieve updates from them on the front page. That's why it was created. Yet it still encourages fame, and this proves that the ST doesn't mind fame because there is a simple way to avoid it. If people couldn't see who followed them or their follower count, then fame would be discouraged yet the function of the follow button would be preserved. Why doesn't the ST do this? I'm not sure, but we could say that maybe they aren't totally committed to stopping fame. "In fact, I think it will do the opposite. I see Scratchers leave everyday because they see others getting 1000+ loves in the Featured Projects section while they hardly get 1. I see Scratchers leave because they see Scratchers getting hundreds of comments on their profile while they don't get any. Imagine what will happen when they see those same Scratchers getting articles on the wiki when they don't." That's history, that's life. It won't help or hurt any of those people if we ignore history. It just makes them more ignorant in how to succeed. Your seeing it that they are seeing the article and thinking "Why don't I get an article. Why am I not famous... Why, etc." But the success story would also be there. If they were committed to it, they would read it, and learn success strategies which would help them pull ahead. Your speaking about the first reaction to someone who's already unhappy with his situation. If those people are ready to improve, then they will look at it in a different way. "now, let's get back on track" We were always on track, its just that you can't rebut the follow button argument :P, or the love button argument :P. "It's like we are giving a ticket to someone who's already popular to become even more popular" Maybe, but does it really help them significantly. The answer is no. By the time they are that prestigious, they don't need our help to make them more 'popular'. I believe that by sharing many peoples success stories we would be helping other scratcher's achieve greatness because they would learn the strategies of people of the past. "Now, don't twist my words and claim that this is why we shouldn't have follow buttons and loves etc. " :P :P :P. No comment :P :P :P. "About shops having their own articles, why not just create an example shop of our own if we really wanted to. We could have examples of how it could fail, how it could succeed, things to avoid, tips, etc. I'm sure that you would be a great contributor to that article as you could provide lots of great tips. The only reason for using a real shop is to help it get more fame, and that's not what the wiki is about." I would be a great contributor :P, but still there's a problem. Every successful shop has a unique strategy or product that makes it successful. Every Shop is usually a little bit different. Creating a generic strategy doesn't help scratchers find and create a unique successful strategy for themselves. Also, it won't help them to know that the strategy would've never been tested, that this solution only came through thought. Real Shops are real success and failure stories.

"@Hamish: Are views/comments a good standard by which we can measure notability? Do views and comments really show how you've changed Scratch? Does count accurately represent impact? One example I want to look at is griffpacth's Minecraft. Millions of Scratchers have played it, but were they changed? Did Scratch change by having the project? Is there evidence beyond the "1,000,000+ views" that people were changed? If there is evidence, it needs to be provided. That evidence might count as showing that the project is notable." Was this question directed at me? :P. Hamish is arguing against having articles for projects and articles for scratchers and collaborations/shops. I'll answer it, and I hope he answers it to. At the time when griffpatch released his game, I believe that they were using a different viewer count system where every page click counted. Now the viewer count is each individual user. (Correct me if I'm wrong). The Viewer count today might actually represent popularity better than user counts did in the past. Comments I would ignore, because they can easily be manipulated. My doubts here, Hamish752, is that views/replies/loves don't seem like an accurate representation of notability. Maybe some other evidence would be more accurate? Loves might be. While I say that we shouldn't make articles about specific projects, griffpatch as a scratcher should have its own article. Griffpatch is very notable and has probably inspired many scratchers. We should share his success story so that it reaches others. While he doesn't need help in the popularity department, he still has a very good story that could help to inspire many different scratchers. On the General thought, I believe that history is history, and success should be documented, even if we can't say that it 'impacted all of scratch for all time'. The success of others paves the way for future scratchers. We shouldn't just ignore it.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 14:04, 20 March 2016 (UTC) ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Wow. Huge posts. Anyway, Brains, you know, you could come up with a page in your userspace...It could then be reviewed and evaluated. Just a thought.
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 16:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Ummm... Wait Whats all this about? I can't tell. They discussions are WAY to long! I thought it was about shhops but I see some things about followres
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 17:05, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Who would evaluate it :P? I think its fine here. Maybe we should snapshot this, and put it into the suggestions forum. Get some user input. @Programmer Its about making pages about specific shops, collaborations, and scratchers
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 17:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
EDIT: I never learned to make a sandbox :P
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 17:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Who would evaluate it? Wiki editors. Sandbox? Go here and edit the page. Or I can do it if you'd feel more comfortable.User:Makethebrainhappy/Sandbox
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 18:22, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
That's what the community portal is for :P. Anyway, am I allowed to post screenshots in the suggestion thread and get scratcher input?
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 19:03, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
You mean screenshots of this discussion? Why not copy and paste? XD
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 19:21, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
To make it seem more legit xD
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 19:25, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Can we shorten the discussions a bit - maybe take out circumlocutions and shorten points that could be shortened? Be concise - I'm not saying that the information you guys put forth isn't useful, it's just that readers like me can't follow the discussion because there is too much to read - so in turn there are voices that aren't getting heard.
Also, I don't want the trend to continue :P
If or if not possible, thanks!
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Brains, you're saying that Griffpatch should have an article? Sure, his story is sort of inspiring, but then people would get really mad "(Why does THAT GUY get an article when I don't?"). I'm pretty sure this has already been mentioned above, but that would be the opposite of what Scratch is for. Scratch is about coding and sharing your projects with others, not about having over20,000 followers like he does. If I saw an article about a "famous" Scratcher right after I joined Scratch, I would have been sad that that person gets an article all about their great story and how they're so popular today, while my Virtual Pet project that doesn't even work has 1 love. :P That's just my two cents.
EDIT: Sorry if that was too long @KrIsMa. I just read your post.
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 20:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Sorry KrisMa- Most of it is rebuts to things other people said. :).
@Pianogirl Griffpatch is my example for someone famous, yes. I don't that would be the reaction at all for a New Scratcher or not-famous-yet scratcher. You know that there are people who are more famous than you. There are many people who are more famous than all of us. There are people who are richer than us. There are people who are better in almost every way. Are we mad at them? Do we sit around fuming about people's success? No, actually the exact opposite. We tend to idolize people who are famous. I mean it obviously varies per case, you may not like a specific famous person, but overall you don't sit around hating all famous people (I hope ;)). We as humans want to be more like them. Don't worry, it's my posts that are to long XD.
If no one objects, then I'll take screenshots and post this in the suggestions forum next time I get on a computer :)
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 20:29, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
I don't have time to read/reply to the super long message you responded with at the moment, but before you go, please do not post this conversation on the Suggestions forum. This has to do with the Scratch Wiki only and thus should be discussed on the CP only. However, if you're referring to the follow/love/fav button etc. go right ahead :)
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 
@Brains I'm not saying that's how I would react now, I meant 1 year ago. Honestly, I was really immature a year ago. :P Anyways... I understand why you think Griffpacth deserves an article, but I still don't think he's (can't think of a better word) important enough to Scratch to have an article. Did he really have a major impact on Scratch, other than getting a ton of followers, loves, and favorites and being followed by tens of thousands of Scratchers? Griffpatch isn't what this discussion's about, anyway. We're supposed to be talking about shops having an article, not famous people ;)
(Also, if Griffpatch saw this conversation, he'd probably be like "why u creepy people talking about me" XD)
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 20:55, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
^^^The length of the replies are now better! Thanks!
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:25, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
"how I would react now, I meant 1 year ago. Honestly, I was really immature a year ago." Most Scratchers are around 12. Also, I doubt its how you would react. You are basing your decision off this discussion, but I'm not sure. "Did he really have a major impact on Scratch" Does Bill Gates have an impact on the world? Think about that. "Also, if Griffpatch saw this conversation, he'd probably be like "why u creepy people talking about me" XD". Hehe, I'm pretty sure he's used to it ;).
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 22:31, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Lets see the community work on this xD: https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/189432/?page=1#post-1863949
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 22:40, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Okay so I was exaggerating a little bit (well, a lot). :P But I still don't understand how griffpatch is important to Scratch history. I noticed a second ago that you said in a previous post that we should make the article so his "sucess story" can reach others. As of right now, griffpatch has 32,252 followers, and there's probably a ton of other people that have either heard of him or viewed his profile, since he's so "successful". The Scratchers that aren't following him or have even heard of him probably don't care, or even know the Wiki exists. The only reason that there's articles about Kaj or the removed pac-man proejct is because "users have a right to know about things that made an impact on Scratch, and it's notable." (he probably is used to people talking about him, lol)
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 22:59, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The Wiki is for articles about things which "changed Scratch". If you name one user, shop, collaboration, or project which has "changed Scratch" (and which we don't already have an article on) then I think it deserves a page.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 06:43, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Is there really any shop or collaboration which has changed Scratch? Sure, MTBH's shop was the largest shop on Scratch - actually still is I believe. Well, Ultra Player Collaboration is the largest Collaboration on Scratch... While both have become "household names" in their own circles, not everyone on Scratch frequents the Requests and Collaboration forums...I don't know. Even though I'm the leader of UPC, I guess I'm trying to take an objective view. Do I think that they are notable enough to get a spot in an existing article? Possibly. Their own? Not really. Brains, like I said before, make an article on the shop in your own userspace and it can then be evaluated. If it's decided we don't need it on the wiki, you can keep it in your userspace. That's what I have done with the page on UPC.
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 12:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Sorry to interrupt the conversation, but I have a question to think about. If articles are for things that changed Scratch, then why do RPs have an article, with specific examples? I think that there should be a Wiki Page on Shops, just like there is with RPs. It should provide specific examples, but talk about it from a statistical point of view. Just my opinion, I'm new here, so maybe this is wrong?
Tiger75 (talk | contribs) 15:36, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
@Tiger75 Welcome to the wiki! We sometimes put examples in articles to show what something is (like platformers or roleplaying). I agree that there should be an article about shops in general, though. We've started to get off topic talking about griffpatch ;)
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 19:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
In the forum I made, everyone (except 1 person) has voted to keep love-its and follower stuff. They all say that fame is great and is an essential part of the community. They also feel that the ST doesn't really believe that fame is bad. That means we are allowed to judge based off fame and popularity. Let's start making guidelines for articles about scratchers, collaborations, and shops.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 21:01, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Personally, I would like to see what jvvg and the other admins have to say about this, as well as the ST. We haven't had much imput from them yet.
Amateurradiogeek15's logo.png Amateurradiogeek15 (Talk | Contributions | Edits | Scratch account) 22:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Re - makethe's post above - Guys, PLEASE read the thread before you make any conclusions about his post. Either he completely misread the thread or he's twisting what we've said. Thanks.
Firedrake969 (talk | contribs) 00:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about double posting, but look at this - don't draw conclusions about two highly unrelated things ;)

Spanish Scratch Wiki + The Wiki Times

Hello fellow Wiki Editors, administrators, and Experienced Wikians! You may or may not know about the Spanish Scratch Wiki (which is currently on the Test Wiki) You can find a link to it here. We desperately need other users to help us out with the Spanish Scratch Wiki. If you speak Spanish or even better you are a native spanish speaker, please create an account on the Test Wiki either through here or through here. We would greatly appreciate any help we can get. If you know someone on Scratch that can either speak Spanish or is a native Spanish speaker please refer them to the Spanish Scratch Wiki and ask them if they would like to join and also tell them HOW to join. Any help and support would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, let me know! I should be pretty active these next two weeks because I am on spring break!

If you'd like to be a reporter for the Wiki Times, we will be releasing our next newspaper on Friday. If you'd like to join please go here. Scratch On!
AghaCool (talk | contribs) 15:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Wednesday - April

Hello everyone! This month was the opening month for Wiki Wednesday (WW) , and it was a success! Since it began, the featured article "Remix" got hundreds of views. Specially, it has gotten ~1600 views. That's many hundreds greater than normal, ~1000 views more. Once WW finishes, I expect Remix will have gotten ~1500 extra views. It's a good success! :)

The next Wiki Wednesday is fast approaching us. We need to find a good article for it. Any suggestions?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 20:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I suggest the article Paint Editor, since it is very detailed and refers to one of the most used features of Scratch.
Frodewin (talk | contribs) 20:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
What about Cloud Data? It's something minorly complicated that could help new users. The paint editor idea sounds good too! :)
St19 Galla Logo.png St19_Galla   Talk • Contribs 
I'd suggest the Sound article. Or maybe the Removed_Pac-Man_Project
Programmer1121 (talk | contribs) 21:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I think Paint Editor would be a good choice.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 21:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Ooh, cloud data is a good idea!
Pianogirl84 (talk | contribs) 22:11, 21 March 2016 (UTC)