(New template?)
(Ban my wiki account: new section)
Line 241: Line 241:
[[Scratch Wiki:News Updating]] has several links to the old news page, except I can't edit the page to remove them, so could an admin do that? <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 23:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
[[Scratch Wiki:News Updating]] has several links to the old news page, except I can't edit the page to remove them, so could an admin do that? <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 23:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
:{{Done}}.<scratchsig>Mathfreak231</scratchsig> 13:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
:{{Done}}.<scratchsig>Mathfreak231</scratchsig> 13:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
== Ban my wiki account ==
Ban my wiki account. My Scratch account was permanently banned since I shared an email. >_><scratchsig>Tierage</scratchsig> 03:15, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:15, 26 October 2013

Welcome to the main talk page for the Scratch Wiki!

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
101 102 103 104
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: 63,538 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).

List of New Blocks Page

No Not done
Should there be a page with a short list of commonly made/used new (dark purple) blocks? There's a list of collabs/companies.
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 21:20, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

It'd Be Neat For Some Things As A List.
Mrsrec (talk | contribs)
It'd be hard to keep track of all the blocks people use though...
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 23:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
I said most common. Or, if you want, most rare.
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 23:30, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
I think it would be cool to do something like this in the future, but I don't think that's something we should really focus on now, especially without a 2.0 block plugin yet. They would, however, be nice as parts of new tutorials.
Also, I honestly don't think there should be collab pages or a list of them and that's something I've been meaning to bring up but I'll probably wait on that for a while.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 00:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
And how about that 2.0 hasn't been out very long, so we don't have any data...?
A better comparison would be Most Common Scripts.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 09:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
That too. :P
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 14:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm with veggie on the list of companies/collabs as it gets outdated and it's not very useful other than for fame of companies/collabs. It would make more sense to have those pages on winners of Collab Camp and stuff like that.
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 22:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, the collab page totally makes me cry every time i hit Special:Random and it comes up :(
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 11:52, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

It's been a while. Should we begin to collect data?
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 01:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I thought of this. I already tried a bit in my sandbox. I say, DO IT.
Hexagon400 (talk | contribs) 18:38, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Well if somebody could tell me how we are going to collect data on unique custom blocks, we can do this. Otherwise, "useful" or "commonly used" custom blocks are totally opinion.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Just look at different projects and see what comes up common. I know jump is very popular, but comes in many forms.
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 01:14, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Well how will we find consistent blocks? And which projects would we look at?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 23:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it would be a better idea to make tutorials for specific blocks rather than having a page for a list of common ones.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 20:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

template ranking

I noticed on many pages such as Scratch Days, there are multiple templates. These templates can be put in any order on the page, though. I think this may cause the wiki to not be entirely uniform, and it may seem a little awkward. I was thinking rank the importance of each template so we can figure out where each template would be placed on a specific page. What do you think?
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 00:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, that ""Scratch Days" page looks fine to me. The templates are in the right order. I think we could just decide if a template would be needed, and use it on the page. For example, if you made an article on something related to Scratch 2.0, then you would have to use {{unreleased}}, but it always goes up top of the page. Then {{expand}} (which goes next), THEN that "redirect" template that doesn't have that little box inside it. That's the normal order of the templates. That's what I think about the idea. The page you link to looks fine.
Legobob23o (talk | contribs) 11:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
while scratch days looks fine, there are definitely other articles that don't.
i do think there should be some standardisation about it but i'm not sure how it should be.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 13:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
After all, it is just three templates at the top in that "Scratch Days" article, along with a template with a list of sensing blocks at the bottom. I'm not saying that we shouldn't try this "template ranking" thing. I'm just saying that I like the order of the templates how they are. But it would be okay with me if you changed them at all.
Legobob23o (talk | contribs) 17:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
as i said scratch days looks fine. other articles vary the order, though, so it should be standardised.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 19:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hm. I think I'll put something like this together in my sandbox. Also, IMO, things for the readers (e.g. about and unreleased) should go before notes for editors (e.g. stub and notUseful).
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) Updated 19:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I made a quick mockup of what I think. User:Mathfreak231/Template Order Standards. Comment on what you think at its talk page.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 22:00, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
i kind of feel like they should go in the opposite order, since that's how i read them (they're closer to the content based on how related they are to it) but i might just be really weird. plus, i kinda think unreleased should always be on top.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 22:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Unreleased at the top? Until 2.0 comes out, good idea.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:51, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

No Not done We need to re-visit this. Please view my ideas. I updated them slightly.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 16:04, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I've decided to reply! I like the page about template order and I think it's great. My only thought would be that the ones which are just text as opposed to graphics should go at the bottom because it somehow seems weird having them mixed in. My main worry though is that if this became the rules who would remember and how would we be able to deal with all the pages that are currently wrong?
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 15:54, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
I've seen you and others mass-fix pages. If we divide and conquer, we could get things done really quickly.
And I see this as not about "good looking" but in order of importance. I'd rather want to know why typing in something took me to the wrong page than that the page I'm on is a stub.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
I suppose so, I support. If we do this maybe we should make a certain order for See Also, References and External Links?
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 16:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

When clicking a link in search dropdown, it should take me directly to the page rather than the search page

Whenever I click a link in the search auto-complete dropdown, it takes me to the search page (searching for the thing I clicked). Once there, I click the top link ("There is a page named User:Jvvg on this wiki") and it takes me to the page. However, on the old skin, if I clicked the dropdown item, it took me straight to the page without the search page in between, thus eliminating a step and saving everyone time. I don't have much experience with MediaWiki, so I couldn't find how to do this looking through the skin (I really was just fixing HTML errors), but if somebody with more experience editing MediaWiki skins can figure that out, that would be great.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that, too.
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 17:40, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

2 Articles on Grids

When I created the page Implementing Grids, I never realized there was the page Snap to Grid. I searched "Grid" and didn't find it and it wasn't in the scripting tutorials page. So, what should we do with these two articles? Merge them? Both have their own advantages I think to each other.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 17:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

One of them is a tutorial and the other one is an info page, so I think they should be kept. But don't trust me: it's only my second day here
Scratchisthebest (talk | contribs) 21:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
They should both be kept.
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 23:39, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
In my opinion, they both sound like tutorials, and they should be merged.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:26, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Index Magic Word on Scratch Wiki Home

Yes Done

Should an admin add __INDEX__ to the front page?
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 00:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

What does __INDEX__ do?
Chocolatepenguin (talk | contribs) 10:24, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
It's supposed to ask search engines to index the page. I don't see the need, as it already gets indexed.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 13:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
No it isn't. I did a Google search and the only pages that came up were Scratch Wiki and Scratch, which I manually indexed.
Curiouscrab (talk | contribs) 22:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 18:12, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Scratch Wiki Home/News vs. Scratch Wiki:Current Events

The only key difference I've noticed is that C.E. has it divided into sections, which doesn't change much. Do you guys think it'd make a difference deleting one of them? My opinion is that we should get rid of Current Events and change MediaWiki:Currentevents-url to say "Scratch Wiki Home/News".
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 01:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

They have different information, although I don't know if that's intended or not.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 02:23, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
I never really knew myself what the point of the C.E. is. Maybe for going further back than on the main news? I wouldn't delete it though, Lucario might get mad at you. :)
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
When was the last time Lucario ever did anything on the wiki, anyways? I haven't seen him around in a while.
Again, the only difference I really see is that CE is divided into sections, which again isn't much of a difference.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 20:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Luc's been busy, I believe. I can ask him why there are too different pages next time I talk to him, though.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 22:26, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Image and Category Name Consistency

For categories and images, I think we should have a set of "guidelines" for naming them. As I scam through them, the namings' capitalization is all different and not in sync with one another. For example, there is the category "Scratch Program Images" and "Unsatisfactory images", except the "i" is not capitalized as in the first category. I also see some images with only the first word capitalized, and other images with all words capitalized. So, what is the system? I'd assume it's capitalization on all words (with exclusions of articles like "the" and what not). Maybe we should have some sort of guideline page, maybe in "Category:Help/Naming Guidelines". What do you think?
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd agree with you, but we're not like Bulbapedia's image archives as they require 150-550 Pokémon sprites per game or pair of games and they have strict naming conventions to keep everything organized. There are currently no naming conventions for categories OR files (besides uploading it under a name that makes sense), and I'd like to keep it that way for now.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 20:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I was planning on writing something like this up but I don't currently have the time. My personal recommendation and preference would be to make everything sentence case (except for titles of software, etc.), like Wikipedia, including page titles, section titles, categories, etc. This however has been disagreed with by some (including Lucario621, JSO) because most of the wiki is already in title case (capitalised except for some conjunctions, articles, short prepositions, etc.) and it would take a lot of work to move everything. I also would recommend removing the (block) and (Scratch Modification) parts of page titles that do not require them (and it would be only be required in the case of a conflict where the block/value/Scratch mod/whatever doesn't take precedence). I was also going to work on renaming images, but it would probably be more efficient with a bot with admin/EW privileges because images are linked on a lot of pages and all those links need to be changed; it took me like two hours manually to do the four or five on the front page that I did.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 23:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
If I knew PHP or whatever, I would maybe turn my ThisIsAnAccount test account into a bot.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 12:40, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
If you could sort me out with a bot account, those kind of changes should be pretty trivial using the mini library I wrote.
Blob8108 (talk | contribs) 15:40, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Just make an alt on Scratch (or use an already-existing test account), leave a comment saying the account you're going to use, and I'll let it in. Then you can convince scmb1 to upgrade that account to "bot" and let it do its stuff.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 17:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Blob8108 (talk | contribs) 14:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Warning / Info templates look funny

The text looks like it runs onto the Info or Warning! label.

Can anyone with more CSS experience than I do fix this?
Scratchisthebest (talk | contribs) 19:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

I could fix it, but I don't see the issue on my end. What are you using OS and browser wise?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 20:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Google Chrome. Happens on android version and windows version.
Scratchisthebest (talk | contribs) 05:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Binary Code Article?

Does anyone think having an article all on binary code would be good? It could merit an article and go under Category:Computer Science. However, I don't know too much of it, just how to count and stuff, so who knows a lot about it, such as binary addition, etc.?
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 02:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

this being the scratch wiki, I don't think it is really necessary.
Hardmath123 (talk | contribs) 04:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Unless you can find a way to make it relevant to Scratch, we really won't need it.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 11:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Maybe a number to binary converter? Would a tutorial on that fit your requirements? I know that would be a fun article to have for sure.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I disagree. "Find a way to make it relevant to Scratch" implies you're going to try to invent a reason to have that page. That doesn't make sense, and I really discourage using that as an excuse to make a page just because writing it is fun. I know writing a new article is fun, but it should be within reason.
That said: A page on binary could be useful to a Scratcher in many ways: reading the .sb format needs you to know about it (actually, reading most file formats needs binary knowledge). You need to know about binary to know why we use hex for BBCode colors. The old RSC needed some knowledge of bits and bytes.
But that's not the point. The point is whether it's worth writing yet another introduction to binary or whether we should let the reader Google it and find something someone else wrote with more knowledge and care. We can't have an article about every computer science concept there is. I'm actually not completely sure about the articles about lambda and oop either (even though I admittedly made them). But if we can have a simple binary-for-dummies article then I don't object; it will be a great way for a curious Scratcher to learn something new and important (which is the whole point of Scratch).
Hardmath123 (talk | contribs) 00:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I was just curious if we should; I didn't just want to write the article just for fun. Actually, I'm not knowledgable enough in that field to even write it. We have the article pixels which contains much information related not to Scratch, yet some related to Scratch. I guess it's the same case.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
How about an article showing how to binary to decimal converter in Scratch? It could explain the CS stuff (eg. hex codes) in passing.
Blob8108 (talk | contribs) 09:22, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I definitely agree with your idea; having it otherwise seems a bit unnecessary because although a simple binary-for-dummies article would be very educational to the intrigued Scratcher, this isn't really the place for that.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Bot template?

Now that we've got our first bot, I think we should have a template to show they're a bot, how about:

Stop.png This user is an automated bot controlled by BotCreator. It is used for making repetitive or difficult edits that would be hard for a human to do.

Check its contributions to see if it has been behaving itself and comment on its talk page if you have any problems with it.

I'm not sure I like how large it is and the image is not good (maybe a robot would be better) but I think the message is just about right so what do you think?
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 19:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

That does seem very large, and I was the message is too long, though at least quality. What do you think about this template?
Robot.jpg This user is an automated bot controlled by {{{by}}}. It is used for making repetitive or difficult edits that would be hard for a human to do. Please check its contributions to see if it has been behaving itself, and comment here if you have any problems with it.

ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 20:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

That looks (and reads) a lot better, especially the robot picture!
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 20:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Sheesh, we only have one bot, and already we need a template?! :P
Blob8108 (talk | contribs) 21:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget that we'll probably get others in the future, so it's safe to have, and it leads to better organization of the Wiki. Still, maybe it's not really needed. What does everyone else think?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:08, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I was somewhat inspired by Wikipedia to change the wording:
Robot.jpg This user is an automated editor controlled by [[User:{{{by}}}|{{{by}}}]]. It is a legitimate alternate account used for speedily making large amounts of edits in place of a human. If it has been malfunctioning, please comment on the developer's [[|talk page]].
Reads even more easily. We need a way better image, though...  :P
@Blob You could be right, unless again I turn ThisIsAnAccount into a bot...
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 22:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I preferred Ernie Parke's version mainly because it linked to the Bot's contribs. I also don't think a link to the developer's contribs is necessary either and the developer's talk page is linked to at the end so we don't need it repeated.
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 08:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
K, I took your advice. I still think mine is worded better.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 12:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Nice, looks good!
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 12:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

502 errors

I have been receiving 502 Bad gateway errors when I try to access the main site for the last 15 minutes. Firefox 17.0.9, Windows 7 Professional, Service Pack 1.
Wes64 (talk | contribs) 12:47, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Trouble finding things to edit

Hey, I'm having a bit of trouble finding pages to contribute to and help fix on this wiki. I've tried pressing the random page button a view times, but to no luck. Do you guys know of any pages I could help fix up?
Tierage (talk | contribs) 03:06, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Scratch Wiki:To-do. You could also try participating in some of the above discussions.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I'll take a look around.
Tierage (talk | contribs) 23:30, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
I'd also like to point out that lots of the pages on scratch blocks are missing code in their examples, so if you ever want to add some, go ahead!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Pages that need to be deleted

Special:BrokenRedirects The majority of these pages need to be deleted (as a result of the inactive mod cleanup).
Technoboy10 (talk | contribs) 21:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that up, but I don't think deleting them is 100% necessary. Couldn't we redirect them to the List of Scratch Modifications page?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I really don't think that that would be a relevant redirect because if a mod is inactive, who would bother looking for it? If they need info about it they could search the forums or something.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 01:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
But then there wouldn't be anything in the forums, so they'd need the Wiki, but then again, it's page is gone. I see your point; they should be deleted.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Plus the names will still be on the list and all names on the list will have references or a page.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 02:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Looking for a Help Page on Divisions

I worked a lot with the blocks part of the TOC, and a lot of what I did was adjusting the borders and divisions in:


I've figured out a lot by playing with the code, but I couldn't find a help page on it in Category:Help, and it is a pretty large part of editing. Is there a help page? If so, could someone direct me to it. If not, I, and probably others, would appreciate it greatly if someone made Help:Divisions. Thanks! :D
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I would make a page (even though I'm not an expert), but <div> is part of CSS, and a larger section on CSS would be 3x better. Also, apparently there's already a page on it Help:CSS, but it's constructed poorly, so it'll have to be re-made. Anyway, I'll try my hand at remaking the page tomorrow. If you're reading this Scimonster, could you maybe look over my handiwork once I finish?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

The Help:CSS, as you said, doesn't really say much. I think a help page on divisions could be separate from the CSS help page, because there are much to divisions.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 02:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

You forgot to indent.
Anyway, yes, <div> is nice and diverse, but so is <span>, and the rare <ol> and <il> (I think I got those last two right). Where are those supposed to go now? <ol> and <il> both don't have enough content to merit there own article, and <span> is basically <div> except with one difference. Compacting them into one overall page with <div> makes a lot more sense to me.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
It's li not il, remember? I have Scimonster's talk as a source.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, I'm surprised I even knew what I wrote :P what do you mean by indent? Where does the indentation go?
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:14, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
If it helps you remember, ol = ordered list, ul = unordered list, li = list item. For real.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 08:49, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
@Turkey3: At the beginning of your comments. The third comment here, or your second, isn't indented.
@Mathfreak231: I haven't used them in awhile, and I don't need that source. I remember it well enough.
@Scimonster: I was guessing that for li, back when I remembered its two letters. Well thanks for the refresher!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 20:08, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I have another question: what's the difference in the stylings:
  • border-radius
  • moz-border-radius
  • webkit-border-radius
    Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 20:35, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
The first is supposed to be a general styling for every browser, but some don't use it. As for the rest, Scimonster does a good job summarizing:
"In any case, the different prefixes are called vendor prefixes. They are used because not all browsers support it unprefixed, back from when it was still liable to change. So, Firefox (and other Mozilla applications) use -moz-, Chrome and Safari use -webkit- (the name of the rendering engine), Opera uses -o-, IE uses -ms-."
Do you remember the front page that I recreated in the Table of Contents, and how there was a "useless image" there? That image was useless because IE didn't support the key part of that it made it the background of the website, so I had to added in vendor prefixes.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

The Scratch Forum Guidelines

During my moderator checkin, when i agreed to retire, i talked to Lightnin a bit about a problem i've noticed on the forums: Newbies don't follow the rules. Why is this? The simple answer is that there isn't a single collection of the rules. I therefore proposed the Forum Guidelines, written in the style of the Community Guidelines, but specific to the forums. He suggested we work on it on the wiki.

I can think of a few rules to start out with:

Post in the right section. 
Read the forum descriptions to make sure that your topic is in the right place. This helps keep the forums organized and helpful.
Search before posting. 
If you take one minute to do a quick search before making a new topic, this can save many duplicate topics from being created.
Read the stickies. 
The "sticky" topics contain useful information for a specific forum. It is wise to read them, especially the ones called "Read this before posting".
Don't necropost. 
Necroposting is when someone posts an unhelpful message on an old topic (general consensus is over one month inactive).

I know some of them need to be improved. Anyone have any more to add? Remember to keep each item (as well as the whole list) short and concise.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 19:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

How about expanding Scratch Rules?
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 20:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't spam. 
Spamming is posting something irrelevant to the topic or using an excessive amount of smileys and unneeded symbols.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't spam — good one. I forgot about Scratch Rules, thanks. Except i think we should have a separate page for this.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 13:46, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't report problems with other users on the forums. 
If another Scratcher is bothering you, please report them to the Scratch Team. Posting about it on the forums, especially using names, dramatizes the conflict, and is not helpful. These topics are always closed.
^ I know, that's a little long. :/
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 08:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't like the wording of that last one (the title of it) because someone may interpret it as if someone is doing something bad, don't report the problem and leave it alone. It sounds like "if another user is causing a problem, don't report it". I'd change it to "If someone breaks the above rules, report the post".
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 20:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
I think "When reporting users " is a better title, mainly due to how it's shorter. I also agree with Turkey3; the rule does sound a bit like trouble users shouldn't be reported. (though @Turkey, this is if someone breaks a rule on the website, not in the forums)
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

New Curator!

krish15 is our 115th curator.
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 09:39, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

New template?

I think we should make a new template to say why exceptions have been made for certain pages, such as Toki. It could look like:

Yes check.png This article would normally break the Scratch Wiki's guidelines. However, an exception has been made for it because of the decision made.

which is made by:

{{User:EH7meow/SandboxTwo|because=of the decision made}}

What do you think?
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 17:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea. I'd wait for one other person before creating it though.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:00, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
I think it's a good idea.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:37, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Is this something that regular users (as opposed to wiki authors) are going to be concerned with?
Blob8108 (talk | contribs) 20:03, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Good point there, because non-editors don't know what should be allowed, nor care: they just want info.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 21:45, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Also, this might be useful in the future with a plan of the Scratch Mentors; it's still being decided and worked on, so the template might not be needed, but we'll see.
Anyway, I support this template. I'd also like to see a parameter field that would allow custom reasons.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:19, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
If it doesn't meet the wiki guidelines, one should look on the talk page to see what has been done about it. I don't think the template is really needed.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 11:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Good idea! I also think we should create a page for Andresmh, and add that template.
Joletole (talk | contribs) 14:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
@ErnieParke There are custom reasons! Change what is after the
in {{User:EH7meow/SandboxTwo|because=of the decision made}}.
Also, this template might possibly stop any confusion on why somebody wasn't allowed to make a page about something when there were other articles about user-created stuff.
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 17:16, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
It could also be better for new editors.
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 17:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
@Joletole There was an idea a while ago to make a page about more prominent Scratch Team members (with perhaps small subheaders with more info). Is there a reason Andresmh merits a page over other Scratch Team members?
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 17:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
@EH7meow Aren't new editors the ones usually breaking the guidelines or, not being very bold, often bringing something up on the talk page too early? I still think it isn't needed, as the info will be on the talk page anyways.
...Then again, it could be one of those templates that is actually put ON the talk page like they have on Wikipedia...
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 20:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Main site is super slow

Most webpages I visit take about 5 seconds to load. Most Scratch pages are taking about 5 minutes to load. However, the wiki is fine.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 22:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind, the site seems to be back to normal.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 22:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
And now it's even slower.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 22:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
This isn't really the place to discuss that; we have no control over it and this is more for wiki discussions. Sorry. :\
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 01:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I posted it here because the wiki was at normal speed yet the main site was taking forever.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 20:49, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Anytime the main site is slow, the wiki should be normal speed because it's hosted on another server. If both are slow, it may be a problem with your connection.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 23:43, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Admin Needed to Updated a Page

Scratch Wiki:News Updating has several links to the old news page, except I can't edit the page to remove them, so could an admin do that?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes Done.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Ban my wiki account

Ban my wiki account. My Scratch account was permanently banned since I shared an email. >_>
Tierage (talk | contribs) 03:15, 26 October 2013 (UTC)