Revision as of 21:22, 1 June 2015 by Blob8108 (talk | contribs) (Phosphorus Article)

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
101 102 103 104 105
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: 51,243 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 [ link text] or {{plain link|1=|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).

Debating...New article, change an old one, or nothing at all?

Part 2

I decided to move the page to CoolBoy5677's domain until things are a bit clearer.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:59, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

It's pretty clear to me, so far 5/6 people have voted, and 3 to keep 2 to add it to collaborations and 1 no
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 23:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, KrIsMa said we should vote, we are. So far, keep it is winning so why did you delete it? We are doing a vote of what we want. Like the elections.
Coolboy5677.gif CoolBoy5677 user | talk | contribs | edits 10:19, 9 May 2015 {Scratch Day} (GMT)

New curator

It's karebear17!
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 23:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

karebear17 is now on the news page. :)
CoolBoy5677 (talk | contribs) 07:23, 30 April 2015 (GMT)

Instead of 5 items, there is 6 items on the wiki news.

^ Please fix.
Rumanti (talk | contribs) 10:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

A EW or Adminstrator or Bereaucat fixed it. :)
CoolBoy5677 (talk | contribs) 07:26, 30 April 2015 (GMT)
Yup, KrIsMa did ;)
Rumanti (talk | contribs) 09:58, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I need some help!

When I just use a timestamp to sign my username, it says my timezone is UTC and it says that my local time and stuff is 1 hour before the real time for me. It also says it in my settings/preferences. For example now, if I did a timestamp, it would say CoolBoy5677 06:29, 30 April 2015 (UTC), when it should be CoolBoy5677 07:29, 30 April 2015 (GMT). Please fix it! Also, when I was signing this with
(talk | contribs), it was making me write over it, not inside it.
CoolBoy5677 (talk | contribs) 07:34, 30 April 2015 (GMT)

1. Signatures are always in UTC so that we can tell the relative dates of messages without having to convert times. 2. You should just sign your posts with 4 tildes (~~~~), and it does everything for you.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 11:44, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
No. When I do that, it say the time but the time is 1 hour before it is suppose to be
CoolBoy5677 (talk | contribs) 16:22, 30 April 2015 (GMT)
According to my computer clock, at the time I post it, it is 6:20 PM UTC. The post timestamp agrees with it. Are you sure you are in UTC and not UTC+1?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:20, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I don`t know. I live in England UK. About an hour away from London.
CoolBoy5677 (talk | contribs) 07:32, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Demonstrating the project link template

I created this template a long time ago and created as a shortcut to Scratch projects, {{Project link}}.


PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 21:03, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey, this looks cool! :D
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 23:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Looking good!! I could try to make all links to scratch to use this template?
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I failed..... :(

Ok, I tried to make a sandbox...but I have one problem! I went on Main Scratch Website Mode...and put / instead of : between User and Amateurradiogeek15... :( How do I fix that boo boo? Thanks! Here's the link. I hope this works User/Amateurradiogeek15/sandbox
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 21:51, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

You can just move it (pencil menu -> move). For the namespace, select "User" and for title, just remove the "User/" part. I moved it for you, but if this happens again that's what you need to do.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:39, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Can you perhaps be a bit more clear? Got the pencil then the button move, but I take it that it'll then ask for me to type something in?
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 22:45, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
After hitting move, I inputted this into the box: Clicky! I selected "User" as the namespace to signify that it was a userpage (select "(main)" if it's a "mainspace" regular article, "talk" if it's a talk page, and so on), then typed in what goes after the namespace, which in this case is everything that goes after User:. The system at play here is the namespace system. There are a few different namespaces, such as mainspace, userspace, talk space, Scratch Wiki namespace ("project namespace"), and so on. A page in one of those namespaces has a prefix as appropriate followed by a colon (e.g. "User:", "Talk", "Scratch Wiki:", etc.). The part after it is the title. In this case, the title is "Amateurradiogeek15/sandbox", and the namespace is userspace, so it is written out as "User:Amateurradiogeek15/sandbox" when combining the prefix and the title. See Help:Namespaces for more information about namespaces.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:57, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Ah, thank you! I was always wondering what was meant by all the "space" thingys XD That unmuddies the waters wonderfully! :D
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 23:59, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
When is it/ is it not advisable/acceptable to leave a redirect?
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 19:47, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Help:Redirects#When_to_make_redirects! :)
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:29, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Thank you! :)
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 02:06, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

happy to help!
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 13:07, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Page which is guide for wiki in another languages

It could be Help:Interwiki.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 22:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 23:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
If we don't already have one made, I think that would be a good idea, although maybe it would be better named "Help:Interwiki".
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 00:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
I support this. If this guide had existed months ago, it would save a lot of my precious hours.
Rumanti (talk | contribs) 08:40, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes Done
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 22:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I apologize for inactivity.

It's just that real life has gotten in the way of things, sorry... Also, I don't know how else I could help out here.
TheHockeyist (talk | contribs) 17:00, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

We would appreciate if you could help here:
There has been no activity since over one month:
I know that you speak Russian. Dimon4ezzz seems to be inactive. I understand that's not possible to care for a wiki on your own, but there mus be more Russian speaking Scratcher out there. See also Scratch_Wiki#Russian.
Wouldn't you like to help the Russian Scratch-Community to establish their own Scratch-Wiki? We can make you an account or even give you admin-rights if you want to. Just mail to info(at)scratch-dach(dot)info.

MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 19:02, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Days since 2000 workaround controversy.

The recent workaround given by a certain user (007Brother-1) doesn't work for every day - the 100 and 400 rules are ignored. Of course, my workaround fails in this respect too, but I at least correct this inaccuracy in this workaround to make it totally correct from 1800-2199. But then once we get before 1582 (1753 for England, 1918 for Russia, etc.), we must deal with the Julian vs. Gregorian calendars, and what date is on what system, etc.

The workaround I use comes from this source:

So I claim my workaround being more correct for the range of 1800-2199 simply because it corrects for the 100-year and 400-year leap year rules. If anyone can come up with something better, please let me know.

We need something that works for any date, past or future (ignoring complex calendar changes and reforms in different countries and year 0 and future reforms that might happen...)

TheHockeyist (talk | contribs) 19:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow, so mathematical.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 21:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
What was wrong with the method that was previously in the article? This:
set [days since 2000 v] to (((((365.242) * ((current [year v]) - (2000))) + (((current [month v]) - (1)) * ((365.242) / (12)))) + (current [date v])) - (1))

ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
The main issue is the 365.242. It is slightly off. The correct value should be 365.2425, and also, it's only an approximation. It also assumes months of equal length, which is wrong. This is only a very crude approximation. I find my method works much better and is more accurate in both of these regards.
TheHockeyist (talk | contribs) 15:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I would like to point out that there is a typo in the Scratch Day banner on the homepage. Please fix.

^ Very long heading, but I don't want to sound rude, so yeah :P The "Scratch" on the banner is spelled "Sratch", without the first "c".
Rumanti (talk | contribs) 08:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the catch! :) ErnieParke fixed it! Yay, thanks!
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:20, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Scratch wiki tumblr post.png
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 16:38, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Some requests

I'll write an article on ScratchX.
Djdolphin (talk | contribs) 00:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 23:48, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Seems to be Yes Done.
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 23:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

New Curator!

The new FPC is @ProfesserMaddog. Someone should probably update that! :)
Eat-sleep-softball (talk | contribs) 20:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes Done
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Does anyone know what's up with this?

Whenever I visit a page with a div under class "gradient-vertical", this is what I see:

Bad gradient.png

I think I've found a possible cause of the problem in Common.css:

.gradient, .gradient-horizontal { 
    background-image: url(; 

.gradient-vertical {
    background-image: url(;

Does anybody else know anything about this?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 22:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I posted about this bug a long time ago.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 23:46, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
for some reason, it shows up for maybe 0.5 seconds then turns into that, weird!
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I can't see the photo in the link used by the CSS. Weird.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 13:11, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
We should host them locally in order to prevent that from happening.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 13:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Not sure if this is supposed to be this way...

On the Scratch Wiki Home the word curator goes to a disambiguation page...I'm wondering if someone might want to make those particular instances of the word curator go directly to the front page curator page? Just a thought. :)
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 23:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Pen ghost feature!

Hi! I've recently discovered by this project the support of alpha by the pen as v435.2. I would like to ask you if you think we should add this feature in the pen article or if we should make a new article about this? Thanks for reading and giving your opinion!
Pixelisator (talk | contribs) 14:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

My humble opinion would be to add it as a new section to the pen page.
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 15:18, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I think we should add an article and make a section in the pen article, too. What should we call the article? nvm, I added a section in the pen article =)
Blue-Monkey (talk | contribs) 01:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Why is everyone inactive?

EVERYONE IS ASLEEP.jpg It all says....
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 21:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Um... Perhaps there's nothing to do?
TheHockeyist (talk | contribs) 00:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I quite agree with that, but I believe now should be the time to expand the Wiki adding less important elements from Scratch that people would like to know about. I guess the information never is bad in excess, and if you want things to do, that's definitely something.
Logotcodina.png Tcodina™ user | talk | contribs | edits 16:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
very true
Powercon5 (talk | contribs) 16:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 21:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

A few possible new articles for the Wiki

I have been looking for different topics the Wiki doesn't cover to expand it as much as possible, because I have not seen any articles which need to be fixed, expanded, or anything like that.

Anyway, so here are some ideas for new articles:

-User Location article. As in, the option to change your user location, and  the workarounds that people use to set it as "Location Not Given" or a two letter combination such as "ST".
-Most viewed/loved/remixed. This was a feature from 1.4 which I would like to keep somewhere to remember it once existed - and to never forget about it! In addition to explaining on what each of these consisted, it could be explained that for instance, the most viewed project from 1.4 (University Escape) has now just 10 thousand views because of a glitch in the view counting, and the incorporation of the ST of a new algorithm to determine a more realistic number of views for the projects.
-Glitches on the Scratch website. This article could list all of the glitches the site has had, such as the frontpage having no projects at all, the apostrophe being replaced by a strange character combination everywhere from the site, and the negative love it's & favourites in projects. It's not necessary, but I feel it could be nice to know some curiosities.

These are all I can think of, but I'll let you know once I have any new ideas!
Logotcodina.png Tcodina™ user | talk | contribs | edits

I agree about the first two, except for the part about the most viewed project, but the third violates the new page policies.
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 15:58, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't know.. Maybe instead of creating new pages, just add/expand sections about it on related articles? User Location could be in the article about user profiles, Most eye/heart/spiral could be in today's article on the historical section or something, etc.. Just my opinion. Also, I have an article here: Scratch APIs, that could do with some more APIs.. Been lazy to try to find Scratchy secrets :P
Rumanti (talk | contribs) 10:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Setting the Time - merge.

I requested a merge on the top of the page because it's really a duplicate of a section of that article. Any thoughts for or against?
TheHockeyist (talk | contribs) 19:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I think this is better on the talk page.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 22:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

More fun with request notes

Another day, another set of request notes from people who think we're bluffing when we say that "if [the requester] did not read those pages, [his/her] account request will be rejected."

Since we have a Tumblr blog for our favorite ones now, I'm not going to post them here. You can look there instead.

However, I still do have some commentary I would like to offer. Just today, I received replies to the standard rejection message ("Your Scratch Wiki account request was rejected because you did not read prior to submitting your request.") from three people who claimed they did. That brings us to today's theme: users who say/think they did read that page but clearly didn't.

I will provide selected request notes here for reference:

completely blank

– User #1

Fix Scratch blocks, fix old pages, give more info, etc.

– User #2

I would like to become a contributer to help Scratchers with Scratch. I think it would be a good experience for me.

– User #3

I would like to become a contributor because I like help people on Scratch. I am also pretty good at writing, because I've written articles before. When I have nothing to do, click "Discuss," "Help With Scripts," and start helping Scratch users with projects. I am a Scratcher and have had that status since [date removed]. This paragraph got typed in [date removed]. I have had my account, regardless of Scratch experience status, since [date removed]. When push comes to shove, if you accept me, it'll make a great difference on the Scratch Wiki.

– User #4

User #3 told me that he/she had to leave for somewhere and the request was submitted incompletely. Despite the situation, user #3 still checked the box saying that he/she read S:CONTRIB, and it was made very clear that everyone has to read that page. This indicates that some people don't realize how important it is to us that people can go through the trouble to do the reading. Still, that situation is not the kind I'm really trying to talk about

User #1 obviously made no effort to write an acceptable request, but yet somehow anyway insisted that he/she read S:CONTRIB. The reply comment was "I DID FOR GOD SAKE!", indicating that I was overlooking something obvious. Either this user is clueless and thinks that the page I link to only serves as a link to the actual account request page, or thinks I don't actually check that users read the page and could convince me just with that.

User #2 may also have skimmed the page and seen the thing about specific examples, but apparently missed the more important elements such as naming specific articles and writing in complete sentences.

User #4 may have skimmed the page, but did not "read" it per se. That page specifically says to avoid just talking about history on the main site. Yet somehow, user #2 still protests my accusation, despite the fact that I can tell he/she did not read the page.

From these, it looks like we have two categories of requests that very clearly don't meet our standards. The first category is simple: people who just write bad requests and think we don't check that they met our requirements. Those people will just write a request that explains nothing, and then say that they read S:CONTRIB anyway after being rejected (although many do not and simply accept the response). The second category is more complicated: people who only skim the page and then think they read the whole thing or at least got the essence of it. These people think they read S:CONTRIB because, well, they did. Telling them otherwise seems to confuse them. However, the test we are performing is that people read the whole page and don't just skim, as much of the Wiki is about reading and not writing (yeah, I'm being a little bit hypocritical given the length of this post, I'll wrap it up soon). If you have read this far, include the phrase "reading S:CONTRIB completely" in your reply and don't give this away. Back to the original topic, these people want to join the Wiki, but don't realize that the first test to get in (it's not exactly written verbatim) is that they can read stuff completely. The question is, how should we emphasize that they need to read the whole page, and not just the requirements or the most important parts? That being said, some people have floated being more lenient on account requests and not actually requiring them to read the whole page. However, that misses the fundamental point of the Wiki, which is that people can both read and write, and are good at both. I've seen plenty of incidents here (including some involving myself) where someone made a writing mistake as a result of not reading (usually making a duplicate of something or not finding something within a long article).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I can't believe somebody posted a blank request note and replied harshly. :P So you say it's no use.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 01:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
reading S:CONTRIB completely
I think with a community as young as Scratch's, we're always going to get those people who haven't had much experience in the world. Meaning, they don't have much to base their new experiences (for our importance, Wiki experiences) off of. Ex. they have a sense of confidence in being a Wiki editor but have poor (grammar, writing, something) skills, don't understand that reading a page really means reading a page, decide to leave account request notes blank, ect...
So I think there's two better categories to split bad account requests into: "rejection based on clarity" and "rejection based on lack of personal experience/ect" One can be fixed, one needs time.
Also, nice (but confusing) sonic PrincessPandaLover. :p
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
That's Silver the Hedgehog. Google "It's no use"to figure out why I used him.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 23:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Good points @ErnieParke!
I guess there is a good side to all of this though. This means that the wiki is the best quality it can be, as we only have contributors who know how to edit pages well.
The_Grits (talk | contribs) 11:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

New Scratch Wiki article?

Just as I said in a comment above, I think the top viewed, top remixed, top loved and top downloaded pages from Scratch 1.X should be stated somewhere in the Wiki. Furthermore, I was wondering if anybody knows any article which contains all the 1.X site features where I could add this information into, otherwise a brand new article could be created.
Logotcodina.png Tcodina™ user | talk | contribs | edits

If it helps, we already have an article on the Scratch 1.4 front page (which includes front page rows): Front Page (1.4)
Yeah, but these are not what I mean. The top viewed/remixed/loved/downloaded were in a separate page, not in the front page, so I don't think they would fit in these articles. Maybe a more general one, as in Scratch 1.4/Scratch 1.4 website? Are there articles named after that?
Logotcodina.png Tcodina™ user | talk | contribs | edits


Why is transclusion of this page blocked?
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 15:23, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Why would you want to transclude the page in the first place? Besides, I feel transclusion of the CP would only clutter a page up.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


Should we have talk page guidelines?
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 15:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

What do you exactly mean? Personalized guidelines for your very own User Talk page? Or some general rules for all talk pages, no matter what? I think the last one I stated exists.
Logotcodina.png Tcodina™ user | talk | contribs | edits
Where is that second one?
3sal2 (talk | contribs)
Over here, that's the one you're looking for I believe.
Logotcodina.png Tcodina™ user | talk | contribs | edits
I think it needs info about what not to talk about.
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 23:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
It sounds as if you're wanting to propose a rule about what not to talk about. If you do, what do you have in mind?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

External links

Should {{External Programs}} have an associated category called Category:Pages with external links?
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 04:45, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it should
Blue-Monkey (talk | contribs) 22:25, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Hacked Blocks Article?

Hi, I was wondering if we should add a "hacked blocks" article, or make a section for that in another article.
Blue-Monkey (talk | contribs) 22:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

It's Malik44!

So, there is a new FPC, Malik44. Can some admin/EW update the news page?
Really_A (talk | contribs) 23:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Okie dokie lokie.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

On reverting edits without discussion

Regarding [1]:

  • Respect edits by ST members; don't revert them.
  • If you really think they've made a mistake, leave a message on their talk page.
  • In general, never revert any edit without also leaving a message, otherwise you're leaving out the "Discuss" part of BRD. Leaving an edit summary doesn't count: you shouldn't expect people to obsessively follow Recent Changes! :-)

On Talk:LEGO® WeDo™ Construction Set, Natalie writes "We need this to be clear as we reference it in help materials", so this should probably be treated as an ST-maintained page.
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 14:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

You make a good point, but in this case leaving a talk page message probably won't accomplish too much. I only see Natalie make edits fairly infrequently, and I'm assuming that she doesn't check her talk page that frequently either. Due to this, if she makes an edit that has good intentions but goes against the general Wiki organization philosophy or something similar, we can't notify her about it and expect it to be either fixed or explained in any reasonable timeframe. One of the issues with the Wiki is that the ST doesn't visit very often, and therefore they aren't always familiar with the organizational rules that we have.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 14:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


We have too many redirects. Searching all namespaces for "Redirect" returns 2541 results, almost all of which are redirects. EDIT: There are 2288 redirects according to Special:ListRedirects. 21:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 21:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Redirects are an important part of this Wiki. Since many topics are known by multiple names, it would make sense that we have significantly more redirects than articles.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:07, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
However, looking at the list, you do bring up a good point. There are a fair amount of redirects that are meaningless when there is already something almost exactly the same (e.g. Why Doesn't My Project Show Up In a Search and Why Don't Projects Show Up In a Search) are both redirects, even though they are essentially the same thing except a question mark. If anyone finds any other redirects like this, please put {{NotUseful}} on it and we will consider deleting it.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


I think Like this one and Red link should be protected.

Rationale: They are both used as examples of red links. Like this one is protected on Wikipedia for similar reasons, and probably so is Red link.
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 22:40, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Nobody should create a page there anyway. Any page created under those titles will be deleted since there's no way it will ever have anything to do with Scratch. We should not be protecting pages that nobody would create anyway, as that can draw attention to them.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:56, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Scripts Team Closed Down

Hey everyone! The Scripts Team Helper Group is being closed down. Therefore, the article Scripts Team needs to be archived or so and the article Scratch Helper Groups needs to be updated. Since I'm not an expert of the EN Wiki, I thought maybe one of you could take care of that... - LiFaytheGoblin Avatar.png LiFaytheGoblin (Talk) 15:13, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 01:58, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Sadly, only the scratch team can edit it :( I told scmb1!
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:25, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay, thank you! - LiFaytheGoblin Avatar.png LiFaytheGoblin (Talk) 13:59, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Changes to the Scratch Welcoming Committee

Hey! It appears I do not have permission to edit the How to Join the Welcoming Committee article. Could an Experienced Wikian, Admin or Bureaucrat please replace the part about what your project to welcome New Scratchers should be like with:

  • Be friendly, welcoming, and enthusiastic.
  • Describe something that you like about Scratch.
  • Invite New Scratchers to comment on the project to introduce themselves and ask questions.
  • Include a brief introduction to Scratch.
  • Link to the Scratch Wiki and another helpful place.
  • Look appealing and include a backdrop or a couple of sprites.

Thanks, EH7meow!
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 19:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey! I can't edit that page either, but I in a way bumped up your question for you. (On the Recent Changes page) :P
The_Grits (talk | contribs) 14:15, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Phosphorus Article

Should we make a phosphorus article?
Blue-Monkey (talk | contribs) 22:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, doesn't seem to merit an article for itself (it's not directly scratch things) :)
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:25, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Sure! Check @nXIII's okay with it first though :-)
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 21:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Possible using the wiki for making video captions

Hey everyone! I just wanted to ask your advice about something.

We have a lot of Scratch tutorial videos that some Scratchers use to get started with Scratch or learn new Scratch skills. A lot of them do not have captioning. Captions are useful because they allows people who are deaf or hard of hearing to use our videos, they allow people to view the videos even if they cannot listen to the sound at the time, and they would make translating the videos to make subtitles in another language easier.

I was talking with some Scratch Team members and we were thinking it would be cool to get Scratchers' help making the captioning for these videos, and maybe for the Scratch Video Updates too. We thought that some Scratchers might be interested in helping us transcribing the videos, and then we'll put their transcriptions in the videos. Is helping with that something any of you would be interested in?

Also, we are thinking that the wiki might be a good place to work on these transcriptions, since it's useful for working collaborative. I was thinking we could make an article for each video-- or one article with a section for each video-- and who ever wants to help type out the transcriptions can. Although this is not necessary a typical use for the wiki, I do think it could be useful to have the transcriptions of these videos here-- in case people would rather read, etc. But what do you think? Would it be okay to use the wiki for this?

Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 17:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I think this sounds like a really good use for the wiki. Perhaps it could be in its own separate part of the wiki, for example, Captions: [Video Name] or something similar.
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 19:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I think this sounds really cool. (No pun intended) I also think EH7meow had a great idea with the separate section for the captions, although maybe it should be named something like Video: [Video Name] since it has videos, not just the captions.
The_Grits (talk | contribs) 21:01, 1 June 2015 (UTC)