View source for Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done

<noinclude>{{April Fools}}
{{Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archives}}
{{shortcut|S:CPND|S:NOTDONE}}
If a topic on the [[Scratch_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal|community portal]] hasn't received a lot of replies or it's not been solved in a while, topics may be moved to this page, to keep track of incomplete discussions. Remove the original topic and move it to this page to prevent confusion.
</noinclude>__TOC__<noinclude>

== We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach" ==
{{unresolved}}
=== TOC ===
[[File:Scratch-wiki-watch-logo.png|thumb|200px|right|link=http://scratch-dach.info/wiki/Scratch-Wiki:Watch|Click this picture to jump to "ScratchWiki:Watch"]]
<small>To hold this long thread readable I build sub-Threads. I also moved individual conversions and answered it there (hope you don't mind). Please write new appliances to get " "International Scratch Wiki Coach"" there. Please answer each Sub-Thread at it's end:
* MainThread [[#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"]] 
* SubThread1 [[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help]] 
** [[#answer of TheHockeyist]]
** [[#answer of KrIsMa]]
** [[#answer of ErnieParke]]
** [[#answer of Mathfreak231]]
** [[#answer of jvvg]]
** [[#answer of Rumanti]]
* SubThread2 [[#Forum Thread: Scratch Wiki in Your Native Language]]
* SubThread3 [[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]]
* SubThread4 [[#Not Done!]]
</small>

=== Introduction ===
After presenting at [[:de:Scratch2015AMS]] (see [https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/70851224/]) (and before at [[:de:Scratch2013BCN]] see[http://scratch-dach.info/wiki/Scratch2013BCN#Podiumsdiskussion_.22Internationalisierung_des_Scratch-Wikis.22]) we have some just starting International Scratch Wikis. We found out, that there is much more work, than me [[:de:user:Mtwoll]], [[:de:user:LiFaytheGoblin]] and [[de:user:akhof]] can handle. 

We just started international Scratch-Wikis where we were sure, that there are Scratchers of that language that would really work hard for their Scratch-Wiki,  but it seems that those people all need help, coaching and motivation, to cope with the problems of a just started Wiki: It seems that only [[:id:]] is completely on the right track until now (Thanks to [[:id:user:Rumanti]], who made a great start and motivated some other Indonesian Scartchers to help). [[:ru:]] is also evolving slowly but there seem to be too less active authors with just [[:ru:user:Dimon4ezzz]] and [[ru:user:Timkoiko]]. With [[ja:]] we have great hopes in [[:ja:user:Jp86143]] and [[:ja:user:Abee]] who just started. But [[:hu:]] and [[:nl:]] are still in a kind of "starting position". 

In opposite to the English and German Scratch-wiki the starting Scratch-Wiki-Authors have no templates and existing articles where they can look up what is needed and mostly less experiance in Wikimedia-Syntax. Also some of them have problems with the English language: Naturally they know it, but everything lasts longer with misunderstandings and so on. (My English isn't perfect either, but where is a will there is a way ;-) Ironically the language-communities that have the biggest problems with English language need a Scratch-Wiki the most. Imagine the English Scratch-Wiki had nearly zero articles and templates and you could only see other wikis in languages that you know only a little bit. Also imagine that your Scratch community was not so big than the english-language one (see [[Wikipedia: World_language#Living world languages]]).  

How would you start? Therefore I'm asking you for your help: Who of you wants to get „International Scratch Wiki Coach "? You would get an account and perhaps also admin-rights at all existing international wikis (depending on your activity). You should be an experienced Scratch-Wiki author in the English Wiki (>1 year membership and >300 edits?). We already have some [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Team_Mitglieder#Interwiki Autoren]] but that's only Interwiki, not coaching. It would really be great, if some of the English Scratch-Wiki-Admins would also apply for this job: They would immediately get Admin rights at all other international Wikis and perhaps also FTP-rights, if they are experienced with that "under the hood"-stuff. To see what goes on, we have made [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Watch]]. There are also many other ideas from the International Scratch-Wiki-Community (e.g. automized-account-application everywere, multinational-accounts like in Wikipedia, international templates, Scratch-Projects inside the Scratch-Wiki like we have it in DACH, international Blocks Plugin support, [[#Mobile Device Skin & Responsive Design for Scratch-Wikis ?]], conecting scratch-wikis as a part of the scratch-editor-help…)...

...but let's begin with the beginning :-) Who wants to help and applies for getting '''"International Scratch Wiki Coach"'''? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 12:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

{{outdent|6}}

=== Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help ===
<small>[[#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"|back to top]]</small>
====answer of TheHockeyist====
{{collapse top}}
[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]
I'll try to help the Russian wiki. I've not had time at all in the past many months, so I'll try to help it grow if I have time. <scratchsig>TheHockeyist</scratchsig> 19:49, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
:@[[User:TheHockeyist]]: Thank you very much for helping with [[:ru:]]. You already have an account there: [[:ru:Special:ListUsers]]. I hope you don't mind that I  interwiki-linked it to your account here? (I just saw that jvvg reverted it, so please feel free to “Re-Revert” it if you like. Excuse me for doing that minor link-change to you userpage, I just wanted to help, but jvvg is right: It’s better to obey strictly to all rules to avoid any conflicts).  Do you still have the login to your [[:ru:]] account or should I tell the wiki to resend you a password? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 11:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
::@[[user:MartinWollenweber]]: I don't mind if you linked the Russian interwiki to my userpage, however you do that. I still have the login information written down on my computer, and so that isn't a problem. I'm happy to help out in any way that I can. <scratchsig>TheHockeyist</scratchsig> 13:20, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Great! Thank you very much for helping. I'm looking forward to you - as an experienced scratch-wiki-author - helping the other Russian authors so the Russian Scratch-Wiki could evolve much faster. I can't believe that it hasn't got a Homepage similar to [[Scratch_Wiki_Home]], like [[:de:]] or [[:id:]]. BTW: The source code of [[Scratch_Wiki_Home]] is really hard to read, we use [[:de:template:Scratchwikiframe]] at [[:de:]] to make more readable. Perhaps that's better than a "copy-transfer-translate" of [[Scratch_Wiki_Home]], so we choose an english name for that template and copied it already to all international wikis. (  [[:ru:template:Scratchwikiframe]] ,  [[:nl:template:Scratchwikiframe]] ,  [[:hu:template:Scratchwikiframe]] ,  [[:id:template:Scratchwikiframe]] ) <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 17:25, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
::::Well, I'm not too good with templates, sorry. About the best I can do is images and links. I'm looking forward to mostly expanding the wiki, and I'm a fast learner. (Wow, this sounds like a resume...) <scratchsig>TheHockeyist</scratchsig> 22:27, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::I'm really looking forward to your work at the [[:ru:]]-Scratch-Wiki! <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 16:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::Okay, thanks. I'm planning to start tomorrow unless I get distracted. <scratchsig>TheHockeyist</scratchsig> 19:34, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::::Great! I already saw [[:ru:user:TheHockeyist]] and [[:ru:Special:RecentChanges]] there by using [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Watch]] {{smile}} <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 14:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{Outdent|7}}(I don't know how to outdent) Well, I was updating my ru userpage (grammar), but I will contribute when I have the time. And thanks. <scratchsig>TheHockeyist</scratchsig> 18:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:I'm looking forward to your [[:ru:Special:Contributions/TheHockeyist]] <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig>
::No prob. <scratchsig>TheHockeyist</scratchsig> 18:37, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

==== answer of KrIsMa ====
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]</small>
Nice idea! I was wondering - some people join specialized wikis because that is the only language they know - such as someone only knowing Japanese on the Japanese wiki. How will we coach and communicate with those people?
Or maybe, we could talk to everyone on their community portal?
{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 13:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
:With the first generation of international scratch wiki authors communicating in english is not alway "no problem" but alway possible. Most Scratch-Wikis don't have a communityportal until now, but we could use a Scratch-Forum-Thread to make sure that everybody can answer, independent of his membership in certain scratch-wikis.<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 14:32, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
::great! just wondering, so one of your ideas is a forum on the wiki that allows all members of the wiki from all wikis on scratch to talk? good idea! we can also put a link somewhere on the individual wikis to allow them to find the forum. then, if people need help, we can create pages or help them on the wiki with admin powers. interesting!
::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 17:25, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
:::@[[user:KrIsMa]]: Thank you for your interest and ideas. There is no exact plan how to connect a forum to the wikis until now. Perhaps like this here:[[:de:user:Mtwoll/Sandbox2]] ? Will you take part or are you as "International Scratch Wiki Coach" or just as an interested observer?<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 11:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
::::I brought up the Wiki suggestion because I thought it would be a great addition; it will allow other users from other wikis to communicate with one another :) I can suggest a separate forum for Scratch Wiki members to scmb1.. Sure, I'll participate! I just need to set up the French Wiki as well
::::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 14:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::I'm happy that you want to take part as "International Scratch Wiki Coach": Could you send you eMail to mtwoll[at]gmail[dot]com so I can create accounts at all international scratch-wikis for you? If not sure about that ask [[User:ErnieParke]]. I had a look at your profile and saw that you are specialized in [[User:KrIsMa/Templates]]: That's something really missing at the international scratch-wikis. Problem is, that templates can't be just copied from the English-wiki, because they are connected with the language. At the other side there is mostly no "template-specialist" at the starting wikis, what makes it very hard for them to start. Perhaps we can find a way, e.G. a mixture between English and native-language templates? I'm also thinking about a way to connect forums with wiki better. I didn't understand your sentence: "I just need to set up the French Wiki as well": Until now we (the DACH-Scratch-Wiki people) set up and hosted all intentional wikis, when a language community had enough people to start and asked us for help...<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 17:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::oh hi, I just mean that I need to start the forum to start the french wiki 
::::::i think the most important thing in this is actually a good chat medium, or a good place to talk to each other. we can use the cp for the individual wikis, and the forums or something like that for communicating to all other wikis.
::::::also, sure ill send you an email.
::::::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 21:43, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::Ok, before I do that, a question. I am a bit worried about the language barrier. I know I can help the English people in the other wikis make their templates. But, it might be faster to do it ourselves (because some of the wikis are slow to start). Do you think it might be a bit inefficient? 
::::::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 21:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::::'''see above:''' (most important to make a start): Could you send you eMail to mtwoll[at]gmail[dot]com so I can create accounts at all international scratch-wikis for you? If not sure about that ask [[User:ErnieParke]]. 
:::::::'''language barrier''': I thought weeks to find a solution for the "hen egg problem" - "They can't start without templates - they will never build templates without starting". I think I found a solution now: We should copy all English templates, including the pictures used, to the new wikis and inter-wiki-link them. This could best be done by a bot. So you can also copy any article from the English wiki without loosing the layout and start to translate it to the language of the Wiki. As time goes by the text-parts of the templates could also be translated, than the documentation and at last the template-name can be transferred to the language (including renaming all occurrences) . I think if we do it the other way round only people who try it really very hard and with lots of passion (like us in the DACH-Scratch Wiki ;-) will be successful and it will last very long in any case: In DACH we invented most templates new in our German language and our own system, but the advantage to have native "hand made" templates is not as big as the disadvantage to start with nothing: We still haven't  many good templates used in the English wiki. What do you think? Should we start with a few test-templates? Who could build the bot that we would need?<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 16:31, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::::Ok I have sent the email :) Also, I am not sure that [[User:VoxBot]] will have anything to help on the other wikis.?
::::::::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 16:19, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::::::Your accounts to the international scratch-wikis are created. Does everything work? I agree, [[User:VoxBot]] will not directly help with the international wikis, but it shows that his developer is really good in bots and wiki-work and that will help a lot :-). Meantime I had an idea that could help a lot: see [#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]. What do you think?  <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 19:05, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::::::Thank you for your mails. I think its better to communicate here, because the others should also stay involved. I saw that you edited your userpages at {{SameLinkAtAllWikis|user:KrIsMa}}, but some seem still missing. We already added you to [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Team_Mitglieder#Interwiki_Autoren|german interwiki authors]]. Thanks for test-transferring [http://nl.scratch-wiki.info/w/index.php?title=Speciaal:RecenteWijzigingen&days=5&from=20150925150600 some of the most important templates]  to the NL-Wiki. Did you use a bot ore did you do it by hand? Could you also create a TOC there like [[User:KrIsMa/Templates]]? I think that would help the NL-use and translate the templates. I will tell [[:nl:user:Xota]] that you did it, hope he then finally starts editing and involving others. BTW [[:nl:user:Xota]] is the driving force behind the two European Scratch Conferences (see [[:de:WhoIsWhoInTheScratchCommunity#Joek_van_Montfort]]) so I'm sure he will also mange it to create the NL-Scratch-Wiki, specially if we help him {{smile}}. To see whats on at the international scratch-wikis best use [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Watch]]. I also made the template [[template:SameLinkAtAllWikis]] that could be useful: writng  <nowiki>{{SameLinkAtAllWikis|Special:RecentChanges}}</nowiki> shows up as: {{SameLinkAtAllWikis|Special:RecentChanges}}. Did you read [[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]]. Your comments and ideas? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 15:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::::::}}
Thanks! I will read that later. Did you want me to import important templates and the toc to the other wikis too? <br/>
{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 00:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
:Replied below. Also, using a bot would be very hard for templates (importing images, categories, etc!) I manually did it.
:{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 00:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
==== answer of ErnieParke ====
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]</small>
This sounds interesting. I seem quite a bit of time in my schedule, and I've helped the DACH Wiki find Scratchers to make International Wikis before, so I do have some experience. (Even if it's not enough experience to set up a mobile skin or to do FTP.) I volunteer. <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 00:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
:@[[User:ErnieParke]]: Great! As I already got your e-mail-address I will create accounts at all scratch-wikis for you. You will get your passwords in separate mails (we don't have multi-accounts like in Wikipedia until now, so they are all separate). Please go to all your international userpages and link them by Interwiki. Did it Work? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 11:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
::Everything alright Ernie? Did you receive the mails? Could you lock in? We sometimes had a problem with that "wiki-create-new-user-and-send-him-random-password"-function and had to do a reset-password-and-send before it work. Or did it work directly? You can set the wiki-language to english after you loged in by using [[ru:Special:Preferences]], [[id:Special:Preferences]]...and so on (see [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Watch]]. <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 16:41, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
:::@MartinWollenweber: I remember awhile ago I made Java code for a bot that (with some tweaking) could work in other languages. The only problem is the bot can't log in, and it can't commit any changes. I imagine that I can build those functions in, although it would be really nice if I could host a local copy of a Wiki for testing purposes. Maybe you have an idea on how to do that? I'll try looking around.
:::Yes, copying over templates sounds like a good solution, assuming it can be done.
:::Let me look at the emails.... I just logged into the Hungarian Scratch Wiki, so it looks like everything is working. <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 00:28, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
::::It would be great if you manage it to get this bot to go. Perhaps we should ask people that are experienced with bots like [[user:jvvg]]? His [[User:WikiMonitor|WikiMonitor-bot]] seems really to be sophisticated. I will ask [[:de:user:akhof]] to set up a test-scratch-wiki, so no wiki get's crashed while testing the bot.  <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 08:39, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::@MartinWollenweber: There's no need to set up another wiki. I'm trying that right now with Bitnami, which should hopefully fulfill my needs. <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 00:42, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::OK. I made you a user at all wikis, see {{SameLinkAtAllWikis|user:ErnieParke}} and {{SameLinkAtAllWikis|Special:ListUsers}}. You just need to edit your new userpages and specially set interwiki-links to each other. What do you think of [[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]]? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 15:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}
I missed the part about creating a user page. My bad! On the bright side of things, my user pages are created now, and I'll try inter-wiking them right now. <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 00:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
==== answer of jvvg====
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]</small>
If there is ever a Wiki in Spanish, I could help out.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 16:53, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
:<big>@'''[[user:jvvg]]'''</big>: We would urgently need an experienced admin like you, to help us with all international scratch-wikis. We even would set up a Spanish wiki just to convince you to help with international wikis in general. We have nobody programming wiki-bots or other skripts like you do and that could be very helpful with international wikis (e.g. Interwiki-bot that sets all missing that could be constructed by the existing ones, like it is uses in Wikipedia, or the code for the user-registration-procedure). You've proved your knowledge, experience and reliability for so many years here that I would suggest to give you FTP-rights to the international wikis, if you are interested. What do you think? Would you help us in general even before we set up a Spanish Scratch-Wiki? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 11:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, I am definitely interested in this. In terms of getting my code to work on other Wikis, my account requesting extension should be relatively portable and if I could have someone do the necessary translation for me for each Wiki, that would be great (a lot of the stuff was translated into various languages in the original extension I based it on, but I did add a bunch of stuff). For bots, I could make WikiMonitor work on pretty much any Wiki. The messages are actually stored on the Wiki and the page just needs to be edited as necessary.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 19:44, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
:::I'm happy to read that you are interested {{smile}}. Your "account requesting extension" could be a great step forward for the self-maintaining abilities of the international scratch-wikis. Could you help me and [[:id:userRumanti]] to set it up in the german and the indonesian scratch-wiki as a first test how it works there? With a small modification it could also be the technical base of the strategy described in [[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]] . What do you think of that plan? Do you think it will work?Have you additional ideas? We definitely should also test your WikiMonitor-bot at the other wikis, because this is also about easier self maintaining-abilities. If you send me a mail to mtwoll [ät] gmail [dot] com I will give you an account to all international scratch-wikis to make a start. If in doubt about that ask [[user:ErnieParke]]. <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 15:48, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
::::Ok, that sounds great! I'll shoot you an email and we can discuss this further.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 21:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
::::: see: [[User talk:Jvvg#FTP-rights to international scratch wikis: your answer to my mail]] <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 16:35, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
==== answer of Mathfreak231====
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]</small>
:language linking is pretty fun and i'd love to help out any way i can
:i know admin stuff and i know how to connect to an FTP server but i've never actually seen what a wiki looks like on an FTP server<scratchsig>Mathfreak231</scratchsig> 22:21, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
::I'm happy that you also want to help us! Learning how to sysop a wiki is no "rocket-science" but you need to have a little bit of experience with different stuff. Do you a little bit about Apache / MySQL / PHP? I think we could setup a test-wiki where you could try it when our sysop-admin [[:de:userAkhof]] is back from vacation. Meanwhile we could make you accounts at the international wikis. As you are already [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Team_Mitglieder#Interwiki_Autoren|Interwiki-Author at the DACH-Scratch-Wiki]] I still got your mailadress to set it up. Shall I? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 12:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Go ahead and do whatever. Unfortunately, school is frying up all my free time (which also happens to be the reason I didn't reply right away). I've used MySQL and PHP a little bit before, but I don't really know Apache. I could use accounts on other Interwikis (although embarrassingly, Google Translate is usually my only source of communication).<scratchsig>Mathfreak231</scratchsig> 21:02, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
::::Please come back when you got enough time to get involved, than I would be happy to invest my time to get you inside. <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 02:02, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
==== answer of Rumanti====
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]</small>
Woah, I never knew you could read our minds! Though everyone learned the basic markups quickly, none of us specialize in important things like MediaWiki templates, including me. Some support and help from coaches would really speed us towards our goal - I am very optimistic about this program :) (Extra woah for not knowing about this until now {{-}} in fact the reason I came here today was to find out, specifically, why ErnieParke and KrIsMa signed up on Scratch-Indo-Wiki!) <scratchsig>Rumanti</scratchsig> 12:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:Thank you very much for your motivating answer {{Smile}} We are really happy about you work at [[:id:|The Indonesian Scratch Wiki]]! We worked so long (>2 years until now!) to get more good running International-Scratch-Wikis like this, but its really difficult. So we decided to change strategy, find more help, less restrictive and more self-mantling systems for making a start. Your answer shows me that we're on the right way {{Smile}}. You see be the reaction that help for you is on the way, but other language groups nee even more help, that also you could give them, because you already made a breakthrough with your Indonesian Scratch Wiki. I hope the people here also like the [[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]], comment positive and help to build it up: Perhaps this could be the start of a "chain reaction" that builds up more successful scratch-wikis with less work and more motivation for everybody. I hope you and others add more ideas that help Scratchers all over the world, to build up their own Scratch-Wikis. <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 13:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
==== answer of Eribetra====
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]</small>
I would like to help with the Portuguese (Brazil) wiki! I speak Portuguese natively and want to help fellow Brazillians learn more about Scratch, and I have lots of time for that. I've translated English to Portuguese in some projects, so it'd be nice to do the same here too.
<span title="{{Special:EditCount/Eribetra}} edits since 26/1/2017" style="color:#0000ff;font-family:Segoe UI, sans-serif;display:inline">{{#ifeq:|nobr||<br/>}}[[File:Eribetra%27s_Profile_Picture.gif|20px|link=User:Eribetra]]{{nbsp}}{{link style|User:Eribetra|color:black;font-weight:normal|text=Eribetra}}{{nbsp}}<span style="border:1px solid black"><span style="border:1px solid black">{{nbsp}}{{link style|User talk:Eribetra|color:black;font-weight:normal|text=Talk}}{{nbsp}}</span><span style="border:1px solid black">{{nbsp}}{{link style|Special:Contributions/Eribetra|color:black;font-weight:normal|text=Contribs}}{{nbsp}}</span></span></span> 21:23, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
==== answer of OurPrincess====
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help|back]]</small>
:::I have great hope for the future that is to come with Scratch becoming multilingual. Scratch is out here trying to grow and I appreciate everyone who's trying to help improve it. Scratch respects people of all skin colours, religions, age and experience. The diversity on Scratch is appreciated by many Scratchers.
<scratchsig>OurPrincess</scratchsig> 23:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

=== Forum Thread:  Scratch Wiki in Your Native Language  ===
[[#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"|back to top]]

@All: Am I right that all of you know this Forum Thread? [https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/19841/ Diskussionsforen » Translating Scratch » Scratch Wiki in Your Native Language (New)]] . [[user:ErnieParke]] created it and sort of curates it (Thank you very much Ernie!). There are some other language communities that could be ready to start with their  own native wiki in the future.   <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig>

=== Link-Table: Authors wih multiple Scratch-Wiki-Accounts ===
I put a Table here that shows [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Watch#Authors wih multiple Scratch-Wiki-Accounts]]. Please feel free to correct it if there are any mistakes. <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 15:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

=== New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more ===
<span id="AAA"></span>
{{collapse top}}
<small>[[#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"|back to top]]</small>

Perhaps there is a solution for the big Challenges we have to cope with International Scratch Wikis. Perhaps this system could even be a solution for Scratch Wikis Authorship in general.

==== Challenges: ====
* It's a lot of work for us to set up a new scratch-wiki in a certain language (like e.G. http://jp.scratch-wiki.info for Japanese)
* It's frustrating for us to do this work and  see that nearly no one uses that wiki after a few weeks
* But we are (with reason) afraid, that people tell us, they want to make a start, but loose interest after a few edits
* To solve this problem , we made lots of restrictions for starting (prove that you are a group >4 people, know Scratch, prove that you will take it serious....)
* Those restrictions surely sometimes kept of people that could have been successful if  we only had given them a chance to prove it
* Its also frustrating for potential authors to wait so long for a start, or to here "no, we don't believe you could be successful because..."
* On the other hand, some people  could overcome those restrictions without been successful afterwards
* So this restriction produce to lots of work with negative effect

==== Solution: ====
* We set up a test-scratch-wiki ( test.scratch-wiki.info like http://jp.scratch-wiki.info ) were everybody is allowed to start with nearly no restrictions
* Here everybody can start to build articles of his native language  and can find out and prove, if he or she is able to build a wiki (including a wiki community of their language that is strong enough to create a future for their own scratch-wiki)
* To separate the languages in the test-wiki, we use "test.scratch-wiki.info/wiki<big>''':[language-code]/[article-name]'''</big> e.G. "test.scratch-wiki.info/wiki<big>''':it/'''</big>Scratch1.4" for the "Scratch1.4"-Article in Italian language.
* Only after we see, that the language group is successful and has about let's say 50 acceptably articles in their language, including a proper homepage, we will set up their own wiki of that language and will give all active authors an account for it, so they can transfer their articles there: And voilà - We have a new pretty running international scratch wiki with nearly no work and no frustration for us and for the authors  
* We could combine this qualification-system with the idea of transferring all the English templates there too, to make it  more easy to start...it could even be more easy: We could transfer a complete copy of the English Wiki there, because the other languages have their own wiki-spaces   
* To show that this is only a test-wiki it can have a warning and a special color in it's skin (like "This is only a test wiki, the original wiki is ''here''"). And it surly should have no Interwiki to the other wikis..
* The idea could be enlarged with different automation for creating accounts and transferring material and even deleting articles of authors that didn't edit for a certain amount of time ("self-cleaning-ability")
* This system could also be used for the qualification of new wiki-authors in general: Let them prove that they are able and willing, before they come, do two or three edits and than leave again. That's makes the qualification-process more easy and harder at the same time. 
* There could be a system that tests, if you got a scratch-account, some projects, some time been Scratcher and so on...but no questions like "are you serious?"...better prove it than telling it ;-)

What do you think? Are their additional ideas or suggestions? 

<small>To hold this long thread readable I build sub-Threads. I also moved individual conversions and answered it there (hope you don't mind). Please write new appliances to get " "International Scratch Wiki Coach"" there. Please answer each Sub-Thread at it's end:
* MainThread [[#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"]] 
* SubThread1 [[#Individual Threads with scratch-wiki-authors that want to help]] 
* SubThread2 [[#Forum Thread: Scratch Wiki in Your Native Language]]
* SubThread3 [[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]]</small>
<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 12:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

==== Discussion: ====
:The challenges are so great, I am amazed that anyone could come up with such a good-looking solution. The best think I think about it, is that it allows dedicated serious Scratchers to help out, but filters teams consisting of New Scratchers that are actually large, but not very dedicated nor serious.<scratchsig>Rumanti</scratchsig> 12:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
::Thanks for your comment. I hope we get enough help to create this system {{smile}}. Have you got additional ideas? <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 13:23, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Right now, nope :) <scratchsig>Rumanti</scratchsig> 14:19, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
::::Good idea. This will prevent wikis that are inactive!
::::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 00:27, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::This sounds like a good idea. It would even be nice if there would be a test Wiki page listing the requirements for a test Wiki to become its own Wiki, as well as a page listing the activity of users in a language (to track which Wikis have enough active users to turn into its own Wiki).
:::::Is there a way to set up a guide to learning MediaWiki in multiple languages? How about a suggested guideline on what to start with in a new language Wiki? It'd be really nice if we could get knowledge of the International Wikis more widely known too.
:::::Edit: I realized that a simple guide to learning MediaWiki in English would suffice. If it isn't too long, this would work: [[Help:Welcome/0|link]]<scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 01:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::@KrIsMa: Yes to all of your suggestions and yes, there is a multi-lingual guide to mediawiki here [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Help mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Help]  but it is not really "Scratcher-friendly". 
::::::Also yes: International Wikis should been more widely known. There could be more links to them at the different forums ([[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Werbung_für_DACH-Scratch-Wiki|see signature suggestions at DACH]]) , but also at the scratch-site depending of your language setup. One suggestion, our German translation team just sent to [https://scratch.mit.edu/users/natalie/ Natalie Rusk], is: "It would be great to be able to place a link at the end of each tutorial that leads to a scratch-wiki-page in that language with further information and materials.".
::::::Also the FAQ of the Scratch-Website could-language-dependent be linked to the Scratch-Wiki-FAQ (that could be write-protected for security of the Scratch-homepage, whereas a copy of it evolves further and updates the write-protected from time to time). 
::::::Scratch-Wiki and Scratch-Website could be much more connected than by just one link like today, without harming the security and influence of the Scratch-Team by that above described way: I think that would not even help the Scratch-Community, but could strengthen ability of young people even further than just Scratch: Leaning to use Wikis and to share your knowledge there is also a really important ability and could hold people much longer in the community, even when they passed the typical "Scratcher age"   <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 12:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}
I really like the test idea. This is like the "Other Languages" forum on the Scratch Website. This will require users to show that they are dedicated to having their own language Wiki, but not deter them from trying to create articles in their language because there's not enough starting momentum.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 17:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
=== First Successes ===
*<small>[[#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"|back to top]]</small>
It's great that so many experienced scratch-wiki-members will help us with international wiki and we had the first success within a few days: 
* many new [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Watch#Authors with multiple Scratch-Wiki-Accounts|Authors with multiple Scratch-Wiki-Accounts]] that want to help with coaching
* [[user:KrIsMa]] tranfered usefull Templates to the [http://nl.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/ Dutch Scratch Wiki]
* [[user:jvvg]] helping [http://hu.scratch-wiki.info/ the Hungarian Scratch Wiki] with their wiki-skin-coding-problem
* [[user:jvvg]] installed the [[User:jvvg/Authentication|ConfirmAccounts-Plugin]] on [[:de:|the DACH-Scratch-Wiki]]
* we have a [[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]] that has some supporters and good chance too run within a few weeks or even days 

If you want to have a impression of the international scratch community, have a look at [https://vimeo.com/141046816 this videos of the Scratch2015AMS-Conference]. You will also find a (horrible ;-) video of [[user:LiFaytheGoblin]] and [[user:MartinWollenweber|me]] there, where we try to introduce our international scratch wiki idea. You will also find many other People at the multiple short videos, that you perhaps could know, like Joren Lauwers [[user:JSO]], Tim, Connor & Michael, Jens Mönig & John Malloney that gave a first look at their logical successor of BYOB & Snap! called [[:de:GP (Programmiersprache)|GP]], Ricarose & Eric from the Scratch-Video-Update, Eric Rosenbaum, Mitch Resnick and so on... best is the whole international scratch community singing the Scratch song :-) [[:de:Scratch2015AMS]] was real great!

<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 22:17, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

: Seriously this is even better than everything is expected! I noticed we have the authentication system now (THANKS A TON, jvvg) but wow so much happening in the other wikis as well! This is great!!! Thanks everyone, I can't wait to see what the next weeks will bring :D - [[File:LiFaytheGoblin Avatar.png|15px]] [[User:LiFaytheGoblin|LiFaytheGoblin]] ([[User Talk:LiFaytheGoblin|Talk]]) 10:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

=== Test-Scratch-Wiki is online! ===
*<small>[[#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"|back to top]]</small>
Like explained  in "[[#New Idea for the future of international Scratch-Wiki or even more]]" we started http://TEST.scratch-wiki.info/ that will have much lower restriction for new wiki-authors and that will be a kind of "really big sandbox", where everybody who wants can start a scratch-wiki of his own language to prove if he is able. We will help and coach to make a start, but only if we see success there (>50 articles + homepage), we will start a real wiki for this language. There is still much work to do, because until now this wiki is completely empty. We should write/copy help-text and templates there. [[user:jvvg]], [[de:LiFaytheGoblin]] and [[de:mtwoll]] are admins there and I hope that  [[user:jvvg]] will manage to create an automatic account creation system that fits to the targets of this test-scratch-wiki. 

@[[user:jvvg]]: Please write here when it works and how to use it, so that everybody who wants to help can join.

We need your ideas an help to make this happen! Find most important international links at [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Watch]]. Please comment here, what you will do to help. Thank you in advance! <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 15:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:Good to know! What do you recommend we do with [https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/19841/?page=1 this forum topic] ? <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 00:56, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
::The test-wiki is not ready for start now, but after it is ready, we should inform all participants of this  [https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/19841/?page=1 this forum topic] how they immediately can get authors in the test-wiki and how they can make a start for the first 50 pages and the community of a scratch-wiki in their own language there. I suggest you prepare the invitation and explanation text in a sandbox (you could take the text above and shorten it as a start), so that we all can take part in creating this text. We should not inform the participants of that thread to early, because we still need some time for preparation. I think it will decrease success if we start inviting new authors without having everything ready.  <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 01:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
=== Not Done! ===
*This Thread is {{not done}}!
*We still need your help: And you still can Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach" 
* But now there is an easy way to do it: http://test.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Special:RequestAccount
<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 11:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
:I already joined. :P <scratchsig>AghaCool</scratchsig> 15:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
::Yeah, that's great! Hope many other will join us. I already wrote at your user-DISC, see: http://test.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/User_talk:AghaCool :-) <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 15:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
:::Yep! I told fmtfmtfmt2 to join and his account was accepted.:)<scratchsig>AghaCool</scratchsig> 15:39, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
::::I would like to apply! I have great interested in helping other language communitites :){{User:Asqwde/sig}} 12:34, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
:::::To join see: https://test.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Test-Scratch-Wiki:Become_a_contributor {{User:MartinWollenweber/signature}} 05:38, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
::::::I am already a contributor, I was just wondering how I could get admin rights?{{User:Asqwde/sig}} 07:09, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::}}
To become admin, you have to have considerable technical knowledge and ideally know at least one non-real wiki language. As a contributor, you can already help plenty.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 07:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:I am waiting from a reply from Martin {{User:Asqwde/sig}} 09:42, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
::I'm entitled to speak for him, as he has his own company to run and following the upcoming transfer he will be even less active on the non-German wikis. I don't see why you need admin rights when you don't speak any of the languages currently available on the Test wiki nor do you speak any language not available on any wiki. Additionally, you are not multicultural enough to understand how to interact with people whose native languages are far different from your own. Though you definitely have leadership skill, it only applies to leading people who speak a language you speak.
::In fact, I'm not sure why you should be on the Test wiki in the first place, seeing as you made exactly one edit over 2 months ago (which is your complete editcount) and haven't been seen since. Once you have encountered multiple cultures, and been far more active on at least one wiki and/or gained far more considerable technical skill, then we can start talking about potential administrative rights.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 11:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
::I asked you to teach me some technical skills, but you have not come back to me with an answer {{User:Asqwde/sig}} 12:04, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::Ken is busy, and you need to learn some by yourself. You have Russian wiki - where you should start. {{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 12:40, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
::::Yes, that too. You are already an administrator on the Russian wiki. You should spend most of your time there. Even though I have admin privileges on all wikis, I only use them with any frequency on the English and Test wikis, the wikis I am most comfortable in. I use them on other wikis only on request. Since you don't have such privileges on other wikis, and therefore can't deal with requests there, I recommend you instead focus completely on the Russian wiki, maybe with some English wiki work on the side.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 12:50, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::The Russian Wiki is inactive {{User:Asqwde/sig}} 14:19, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::: @Asqwde If the Russian wiki is inactive, then do something about it! Don't let it stay inactive, you are an admin there, you can recut people, you can edit there! If you are active in the Russian language community, then you can easily meet people who can help edit the wiki. I see you already made a post in the Russian forums and thats great! You should also make a post in the request forum, to artact more attention to the wiki because that forum is more active than the  Russian forums. Another tip is to also practice the language so your lingo seems natural to a native Russian speaker. I know these tricks work because I use these when I was looking for translators for the SDS,  I currently am also teaching my self Spanish to help connect with the Spanish speaking community and improving my German to better connect to the German community. <scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 19:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::::I just sent an application for the Spanish Test Wiki. {{User:Scratch-Coding/Signature}} 23:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Why is Interwiki not possible in the english community-portal? ==
{{unresolved}}
Why is Interwiki not possible in the english community-portal? In [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Gemeinschafts-Portal]] it is no problem (but in and [[:id:Pembicaraan_Scratch-Indo-Wiki:Portal_Komunitas]] it seems to be, just tried it...).<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 14:00, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:Hmm.. Does the CP needs interwiki(s)? Because I didn't see any interwiki in this CP. <scratchsig>Really_A</scratchsig> 23:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
::Interwiki at cp only means that the cp's of all Scratch-Wikis would have a language-link box, so you could switch between them fast and find them without knowing the language (like Interwiki in any article). Surely it only helps you if you have a lttle knowledge of the other language, or if they use english for some threads (what we often do in DACH because we have some non-german-speaking authors that help us). If you put <nowiki>[[:de|Scratch-Wiki:Gemeinschafts-Portal]]</nowiki> in the cp here (that should create the Interwiki-Link to [[:de:|Scratch-Wiki:Gemeinschafts-Portal]]) it has not that effect like in an article, because cp is somehow special configurated. <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 11:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
::: Oh I see. Anyway, I have a question; should I add an interwikis to the Indo wiki? <scratchsig>Really_A</scratchsig> 14:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::[[:id:]]  already has Interwiki, as you can see in multiple articles that have a language-link in the language-Box to other Scratch-Wikis (like the Homepage). See [[Scratch_Wiki:Interwiki]] for explanation of Interwiki. But you can look for possibly missing Interwiki-Links. <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 16:46, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::: Well, I see. But the indo's CP still doesn't has any interwiki. <scratchsig>Really_A</scratchsig> 09:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::::Interwiki seems only to be possible at certain group of pages. Surely I could setup it somewhere in the config of the international scratch-wikis (because I'm admin+bureaucrat+sysop ), but I don't know where to do it. At [[:de:]] there seems to be a configuration difference (possibly an error :-) that allows you to interwiki-connect [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Gemeinschafts-Portal]].  Does somebody know how to set up wiki-config, so interwiki-connection works for every cp? As I'm no admin+bureaucrat+sysop  of this English wiki, I couldn't do it here, even if I knew how ;-) <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 11:44, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{outdent|7}}
The problem I assume is true is that the community portal is actually a talk page. <br/>
{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 23:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
=== Not Done ===
This Thread is {{not done}}! Because I think we should find a way to Interwiki-connect the community portals of all international Scratch-Wikis here:*
* [[Scratch_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal]]
* [[:de:Scratch-Wiki:Gemeinschafts-Portal]] i
*[[:id:Pembicaraan_Scratch-Indo-Wiki:Portal_Komunitas]] 
*[[nl:Scratch-Wiki:Gebruikersportaal]]
* http://test.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Test-Scratch-Wiki_talk:Community_Portal
<scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 12:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
:I am currently looking into this problem. It seems to be stemming from the fact that our CP is a talk page, but the DACH/Indo CP are not.
:This problem is even present on the DACH wiki. See my talk page: [:de:Benutzer_Diskussion:ErnieParke]
:Do you mind if I do a quick interwiki test on the Test wiki? <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 15:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
::Yes, do that test, that's a good idea! <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 15:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
:::The only other way is to change the cp into mainspace, which is not feasible.
:::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}} 17:38, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
::::I tried looking up some information but it is proving to be hard to understand. For now, I will try translating a DACH article (if there are any not translated yet). <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig>
::::::Thank you very much for trying, I also try to learn more about mediawiki-namespaces and their different effects, perhaps we find a solution in the future. Until than this thread will stay have the state {{not done}} <scratchsig>MartinWollenweber</scratchsig> 07:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
{{Outdent|6}}it's not possible to put interwiki on a talk.--{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 12:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
:Because the CP is a talk page, direct interwiki is impossible. Interwiki links must go on the mainspace page: [[Scratch Wiki:Community Portal]]. We may end up simply redirecting the mainspace page to the talk page, if it becomes that important, but that would also mean that we can't interwiki-link to other wikis.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 11:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
::I have created a template that mimics the interwiki box! It is currently in my user page, but I would like to move it to the template main space. Here is the link if you want to try it out: [[User:Jakel181/Templates/InterwikiTalk]] :) <scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 01:40, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
:::You found a very interesting solution to this problem. Thank you! That is realy a way to solve this issue I didn't thought about. But I'm not sure if this will always show the box at the right position: At least at my mobile it displays the box in the midle of the article. {{User:MartinWollenweber/signature}} 03:50, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
::::Yeah, Jake, unfortunately a template won't cut it because the sidebar is hidden on mobile, whereas your thing is always shown. Ideally we would use an extension to show interwikis on the talk side of mainspace pages, but I don't know if even that is possible.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 04:29, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::What about JSes?{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 10:20, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
::::::I just made a JavaScript file that adds a fake interwiki box on talk pages for pages with interwikis: [[User:Kenny2scratch/interwiki.js]]. If you want to test this for yourself, create [[Special:MyPage/scratchwikiskin2.js]] with the content <syntaxhighlight lang="javascript" inline>mw.loader.load('https://en.scratch-wiki.info/w/index.php?action=raw&title=User:Kenny2scratch/interwiki.js&ctype=text/javascript');</syntaxhighlight> (or add it to the bottom of your scratchwikiskin2.js page if you have already created it); whether you test it or not, though, please read the code - if you think it looks good I will add it to [[MediaWiki:Scratchwikiskin2.js]].{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 14:00, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::::I think it looks really good! Though for me it only shows the german wiki in the cp (since I have a DACH account), and it would be helpfull if it shows every cp. But I am in supoort of adding it! <scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 01:17, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|:::::::}}
It only shows German for me as well, because only the German wiki is interwiki-linked on the main side of the CP! I've now added interwikis to all the other language wikis that have community portals. It should show those when you visit the CP.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 03:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
:Full support in adding it now, though I have 2 Questions: What about vector skin? Will this show for logged out users? <scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 12:43, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
::1st: it will break on vector. 2nd: it also works for anonymous/logged-out users. {{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 12:58, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
:::1: I should have re-phrased the question, Should we make a vector option, or will the vector skin not have an interwiki? 2: Good :)<scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 13:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
::::I think we don't need to worry about vector, those who really want interwikis on vector talk pages can write their own script.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 05:41, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
:::::I think it looks nice, but should we also add the test scratch wiki CP? <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 22:58, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
::::::I would say yes (and I would add it right now too), but the test wiki has multiple CPs in it so, I'm not sure if only the main (English) one should be added or all of them.<scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 23:10, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
:::::::Huh, I didn't know Interwiki doesn't work on talk pages. But in my opinion, I don't see why it should work in any Wiki because the CP is a place where people can discuss ideas for the Wiki and if people need to respond a lot this could be frustrating. If talk pages have Interwiki disabled, then why don't the CP's? I feel like the system here should remain as it is, and the system in the Deutsch Wiki should change. But it seems like Apple502j has already added the feature to the other CP's, so my opinion is of no use now. 

:::::::Either way, Interwiki still does a good job so I think it would be nice if this were changed and even nicer if this was not changed. I'm going to be lopsided on this one.<scratchsig>Nambaseking01</scratchsig> 13:20, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|7}}
This might already have been said before, but maybe the links to the Community Portals in other languages could go in the Community portal header? However, the Community Portal header is quite large, so maybe another section (like the how to edit the Scratch Wiki section) could be collapsed into a box? {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 06:52, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Embedding of Scratch Projects ==
{{unresolved}}

Hey! :) I was thinking it'd be cool if we could embed Scratch projects into the wiki. They could be used in place of the existing example projects in the [[Pen Projects]] article, used on certain tutorial pages to demonstrate an expected result or even show a process more easily using an animation.

At the moment, you can't use the <iframe> tag required for embedding a Scratch project on the wiki. I've done a little research, and it looks like the easiest way to allow iframes would be to install this [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:IframePage Media Wiki plugin]. The good thing about this extension is that it doesn't allow the embedding of any iframe, it can be configured to only allow the embedding of Scratch projects, for example.
<scratchsig>EH7meow</scratchsig> 22:02, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:My concern is that having projects load on a WIki page could be slow and take up a lot of RAM and make things slower overall.{{User:Turkey3/Sig}} 22:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
::I definitely take your point. As long as we only embed one low-asset project per page though, it's impact on loading times would be more limited.

::One article I thought could benefit is [[Pen Art Examples]]. For example, this [https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/167560366/ project] could be used to let readers see how it is rendered, in addition to the existing pictures. Readers could also then click the link and see inside to learn more.<scratchsig>EH7meow</scratchsig> 17:18, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
:::We could just make a gif of the pen being rendered.{{User:Turkey3/Sig}} 17:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
::::I have a(n) (possibly better) idea. If we could enable video files to be uploaded, then we could make screen recordings of example projects and have those recordings directly in articles. Thoughts?{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 07:07, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
:::::If I'm correct, mp4's were suggested before and accepted, but support was not added to the wiki.
:::::This time around, when I re-suggest mp4's, how about we compile a list of what pages would benefit from it? Having examples is good motivation. <scratchsig>ErnieParke</scratchsig> 14:18, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
::::::Sure! I think over 3/4 of all [[:Category:How To Pages|How To pages]] and [[:Category:Tutorials|tutorials]] would benefit from this :P{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 09:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
:::::::Support! It would be like the YouTube videos on the Minecraft Gamepedia Wiki! <scratchsig>Forested</scratchsig> 19:38, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
::::::::This wouldn't take up almost any ram at all if we just use iframes to the main scratch website. :/ <scratchsig>TheUltimatum</scratchsig> 19:12, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
{{outdent|8}}I made an extension which allows <nowiki><scratch project=""></nowiki> tag. ([https://github.com/apple502j/mw-embedScratch github]) Code is reviewed by [[user:kenny2scratch]]. This can only embed Scratch projects, and you don't have to upload big files - like mp4. Big files are laggy.{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 03:31, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

:Yeahhh, but I don't think certain articles would benefit. Take [[platformer]]. A video won't show the controls, and how you make it. I think embedded video tutorials would be the best in this case. <scratchsig>Knitt</scratchsig> 02:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I was thinking maybe a button that when clicked, creates an iframe linking to the scratch project. If there is not a way to do it directly, we could possibly use a third-party website such as Sulfurous. <scratchsig>Logabe</scratchsig> 15:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
:This is a good idea, '''+1 support'''! The main problems are that a. it would slow the wiki and b. we can't monitor the changes made to every project very well. What if the creator of the project decided to change it to something else, or remove a feature we've pointed out? And then, would we show the notes and credits or instructions? If so, people could notice their project displays on the wiki and advertise there. We couldn't put the notes and credits and/or instructions in that case. Finally, we can't ''fully'' trust anybody over the internet (or anywhere, for that matter), so if we put a project on here and, once again, they notice, they could advertise within the project. We'd need to find a way around this. Maybe we could do something where we save the project in its current form, use that, and recreate notes and credits/instructions?{{User:EIephant Lover/Signature}} 18:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
::Also, if we didn't do the saving in its current form thing, we would have to put a report button by the project, right?{{User:EIephant Lover/Signature}} 18:04, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
:::I think we'd just have to only embed projects that are guaranteed not to change - ideally, either by or remixed by a Wikian. Displaying projects uploaded to the Wiki is very difficult to accomplish.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 05:41, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
::::Dont forget we alredy link to projects on the wiki without that level of trust. Also, we could still trust offical ST projects and projects by ST members, and we could trust known users like griffpatch and TheLogFather.<br>https://uploads.scratch.mit.edu/get_image/user/29590234_18x18.png [[User:Ideapad-320|Ideapad-320]] | [[User talk:Ideapad-320 | Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ideapad-320 | Contribs]] | [https://scratch.mit.edu/users/ideapad-320/ Scratch] 15:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
::::{{Note}} I do not help in the Community Portal a lot. I help more on the Scratch discussion forums, so sorry if I don't use the correct terms.

::::Meanwhile this could be extremely useful for tutorial pages, I see a lot of posts on here that say this will slow down the Wiki. I can't really think of a way to fix this. There could be a system that detects if the project has way too many loops or data sources (variables or lists) and prevents the user trying to embed it from not doing it. I don't understand how an external source like the Wiki will be able to connect with Scratch programs though. As Kenny2scratch said, displaying projects on the Wiki will be an extremely difficult task. There are many complications listed in this thread.

::::At the same time, I can't seem to think of anything else then loops or data sources that cause major lag. If someone knows, please inform me. But either way, I don't know whether to agree that this needs to be implemented or not. I'm not going to take a decision now, I'll return to this once I have a clearer view of what can cause lag and how you can prevent it. Being a web development coder, I understand the difficulties (I don't know if MediaWiki uses HTML, but as I said I'm new to the Community Portal)<scratchsig>Nambaseking01</scratchsig> 20:34, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
:::::We can use thumbnails of the projects rather than run them. For example, take a look to a code: <code><nowiki><span class="plainlinks">[https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/392399555 https://scratch.mit.edu/get_image/project/392399555_144x108.png]</span>
</nowiki></code><br/>{{note|Also, why hasn't done?!!}}<span style="color:grey">(edited in 23.06.2020 (UTC))</span>{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 18:59, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

::::::This is a interesting idea but I want to know why this would be helpful<scratchsig>AirMargaret33</scratchsig> 21:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
:::::::I think just videos is a bad idea, because you cant show an interactive example. As with the lag issue, it is hard to become an editor so that would not be an issue.<scratchsig>Ideapad-320</scratchsig> 19:05, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
::::::::I don't think this would work because readers could just click a link to a project, so embedding a project would have very few benefits. {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 23:42, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== 3.0 updating ==
{{unresolved}}

{{note|before writing please read [https://scratch.mit.edu/preview-faq#h.8pv6nytgzul9 this]}}

As a result of Scratch 3.0 releasing, we have to update a lot of articles.
# Is there anything more to update?
# Is it OK to use bots?
# When to update?

Updates are:
# {{t|Pen Blocks}} to {{t|Pen Extension}}
# Change {{t|block}} for 3.0 blocks (it's  larger than 2.0!)
# Music Extension, LEGO WeDo Extension categorize and put a new template
# remove {{t|unreleased}}
# if there's XX (1.4) and XX, XX moves to XX (2.0), and XX (3.0) moves XX
# TOC remake
# Tutorials remake
# Upload blocks' images
# Remake scratchblocks
# put {{t|Obsolete feature}}
(everybody can edit this list, with Siggy!)

--{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 04:58, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:The ScratchBlocks plugin might need a style update.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 14:21, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
::[https://github.com/apple502j/sb3-wiki I'm making  for it.]　{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 10:21, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
:::...that repo is (effectively) empty? Also the current ScratchBlocks version is 3 - if we rewrite it the new version will be 4.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 13:34, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
::::i don't know how to use source from other repo..{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 22:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
:::::The ScratchBlocks extension is fairly complicated. I think we would have to rely on Blob8108 to update it, if he feels like it. If you want, you can ping him on his [https://scratch.mit.edu/users/blob8108 Scratch profile] to let him know he needs to get cracking on updating ScratchBlocks.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 10:51, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

{{outdent | 5}} +1 Kenny2Scratch, I second. <scratchsig>S-zhangcha</scratchsig> 02:50, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
:I am currently working with [https://scratch.mit.edu/users/blob8108 blob8108] on updating scratchblocks to fit the new format. The sourcecode is up at [https://github.com/s3blocks github.com/s3blocks]. I need to get some work done to allow you to use it with the wiki. {{User:NitroCipher/signature}} 15:02, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
:For articles that are needing updates: Can I put {{t|update}}? {{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 13:13, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
:* Change Links
:::For 2.0 articles that use scratch blocks would they all change to 3.0 blocks? If so that would be confusing. Also are the current 2.0 articles that are being replaced by 3.0 articles, being deleted or are they going to be saved and just add "(2.0)" or something similar to the title?<scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 22:45, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
::::You said "6. if there's XX (1.4) and XX, XX moves to XX (2.0), and XX (3.0) moves XX". What does that even mean?{{User:EIephant Lover/Signature}} 21:49, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::{{done}} This has been implemented. (also what apple meant was "if there's 'Page title (1.4)' and 'Page title', then 'Page title' moves to 'Page title (2.0)', and 'Page title (3.0)' moves to 'Page title'".) {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 17:13, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
::::::Could you put done/not done after each of items so we know what is done?<br>https://uploads.scratch.mit.edu/get_image/user/29590234_18x18.png [[User:Ideapad-320|Ideapad-320]] | [[User talk:Ideapad-320 | Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ideapad-320 | Contribs]] | [https://scratch.mit.edu/users/ideapad-320/ Scratch] 16:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== We have to delete Fair Use ==
{{unresolved}}
The server is in Germany now. German copyright law doesn't allow Fair Use, so we have to delete all the fair use images. For example, screenshots of games are prohibited.{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 08:13, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I don‘t like that idea, even if I am the one that would have to bare the struggle, if we would really get legal problems. Until now in the DACH wiki we acted according to the saying „without complaint, there is no redress“... but you are right, that we must take the matter more serios. I‘m even considering moving our sever somewhere, where we have less legal problems...{{User:MartinWollenweber/signature}} 09:20, 21 February 2018 (CET)
::I think that legally, the images are not illegal until the owner of the game or whatever claims the images as their own - that is, until someone says "you cannot use this image, it contains my project in it" then that image is not illegal.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 11:00, 21 February 2018 (CET)
:::Are they copyrighted?<scratchsig>Dilek10</scratchsig> 00:08, 22 February 2018 (CET)
::::Just move the server to a different place!
::::{{User:PrincessPandaLover/Sig}} 02:29, 22 February 2018 (CET)
:::::@PrincessPandaLover: That's not "as" easy: It needs trust (in the new place, e.G. the new host should not sometimes "pull our plug"), knowledege of and trust in the law of that country + trust that we could cope better with that countries law than with German law, + econonomic work (which hosters offer's best), + technical work to analyse new server and not the last doing the transfer itself...IMHO - because we never got problems since 2012 wether with the DACH Scratch wiki, nor with the others - and because I don't got the time, we should postpone decissions about that. {{User:MartinWollenweber/signature}} 13:07, 22 February 2018 (CET)
:::::: Hi everyone! I consultet with someone who is studying law in Germany and has some knowledge. Pictures like eg. a Mario sprite can not legally be on the Wiki. We could be fined for it. It is more likely that we get a "Aufforderung zur Abgabe einer Unterlassungsverpflichtung" which means we need to sign something that states we'll remove the picture and won't upload that content again, else we need to pay something (probably 5000€+). However, we can most probably put screenshots of Scratch games or so on here that have these sprites, since this would be categorized as "Kunstfreiheit" (freedom of art) because a new piece of art is created with it. Which images are these pictures that fall under fair use? Are they all in a certain category? Also, how do people upload profile pictures? They should not have copyrighted content. We should add a notification or so for that. - <scratchsig>LiFaytheGoblin</scratchsig> 18:43, 23 February 2018 (CET)
{{outdent|6}} I made a template {{t|fair use}} and a category [[:Category:Images under Fair use]]. {{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 07:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
:@Apple502j: Thanks! It‘s good to have an overview and to have the users of that pictures warned, even if we wait with the decission what to do with that pictures. How did the pictures that are already in that category get there? {{User:MartinWollenweber/signature}} 08:07, 27 February 2018 (CET)
::I checked a lot of images one by one.{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 07:53, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
:::I'm sorry, but why are you treating Fair Use images like they have to be burned immediately?
:::{{User:PrincessPandaLover/Sig}} 00:37, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
::::Because they basically do. Now that the servers are in Germany, we have no right to keep such images without being sued. So unfortunately all your game screenshots are now effectively illegal, and will likely need to be taken down.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 04:39, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
:::::Screw lack of fair use.
:::::{{User:PrincessPandaLover/Sig}} 23:26, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
::::::I'm clearly not some big-shot lawyer, but the images should really be deleted. We don't want to be caught by the image owner and have Mtwoll fined $1000, and in some cases a year in prison (according to legalzoom.com)!{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 21:55, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::}} Wait, isn't all of Scratch under Creative Commons or the MIT license, meaning we're allowed to use screenshots from Scratch...? Or is this about screenshots from Scratch of copyrighted work e.g. a Pacman sprite? In the latter case, from what I've found on Google, educational organizations are generally excempt from copyright restrictions, and I would argue the Scratch Wiki is educational. {{User:VFDan/Sig}} 00:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
: Scratch's license is irrelevant, as this largely refers to copyrighted works referring to Scratch (i.e. [[:File:Step by Step SCRATCH Programming.jpg]] and [[:File:Scratch 2.0 Idea Book.jpg]]) or just things not related to Scratch at all (i.e. [[:File:Spam_meat.jpeg]] and [[:File:My windows 2000 desktop.png]]). The Scratch Wiki is not an educational organization by any sense of the legal term, as well as the educational exemption generally not referring to publicly available material. <br/>[[File:Naleksuh.jpg|20px]] [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]] ([[User_talk:Naleksuh#top|talk]] | [[Special:Contribs/Naleksuh|contribs]]) 01:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::I don't live in Germany, but I still think it's unfair. {{User:Smilebird5/Sig}} 10:45, 27 December 2022 <scratchsig>Smilebird5</scratchsig> 15:08, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Smilebird5
{{collapse bottom}}

== [[Help:Contents]] Is missing some help pages ==
{{unresolved}}
There are a few help pages which aren't in [[Help:Contents]], for some reason.<br/>
We need to fix that.<scratchsig>Yzyzyz</scratchsig> 14:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:+1 It's a contents page, it should have contents to all help pages. If you see a contents page in a book, it tells you where every chapter is.<scratchsig>290Scratcher</scratchsig> 15:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
::bump<scratchsig>Yzyzyz</scratchsig> 14:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
:::I think some of the articles in the Help namespace actually don't belong in Help:Contents. They should be linked to from other help pages instead.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 10:51, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
::::I think we should have all the Help pages in Help:Contents because they're helpful tutorials for editing, and I refer to them a lot, especially when I was starting out. It would give them much more visibility (I didn't even know that all these help pages existed) and organization. Maybe we could put related pages in drop-down menus underneath other pages somehow, sort of like how Recent Changes groups multiple changes to the same page (if you have that option on)? <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 03:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::I think that it should have all of the help pages for the reason 290Scratcher mentioned. Ken, could you give some examples of pages that don't belong there? As for Groko13's idea, we could also use sub-headings (which some of the pages at [[Help:Contents]] are under already).<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 21:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
::::::I think put all of the help pages to [[Help:Contents]] isn't necessary, there has been a [[:Category:Help]] page already. Also, [[Help:Contents]] page is using for [[mw:Help:Contents|most important pages(that's standard for all wikis)]], or [[wikipedia:Help:Contents|using for search engine(for example, Wikipedia).]] We can put a search engine, I think.{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 07:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

==Account Request Notes==
{{unresolved}}
I, when, recently doing account requests (yes, I do still use this thing) I have noticed that I am not learning much about what this user wants to edit and why they want to join the wiki. I like this system which identifies things to fix, but I feel that we should also add back some of the old application. I suggest adding the wiki experience, why they should be accepted, and an article to edit, and then have the current Find 3 Add 2 system. Opinions?{{User:Customhacker/sig}} 02:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
:Take Example:

There is a capital S in the word "Screen" in the middle of a sentence that should not be capitalized.
There is a dead link to the page "Oranges."
There is the first person used under the paragraph called "Pineapples."
It would be possible to add a section about Kiwis under the header of "Awesome Fruits."
It would be possible to add a picture of an orange to the section titled "Oranges".
The secret word is "Bananas"

With this example (which is totally about fruits) as long as they use complete sentences and basically fit this point:

*In the request notes, does the user properly identify at least 3 flaws in the flawed article and 2 things to add?
*Saying "I found a grammar error" is not clear
*Users must actually make sense of what they are talking about.
*If the specific examples of what they would add to the flawed article are not allowed on the Wiki (e.g. writing about their projects), fully reject if there was little effort, partially reject if it seems like you could get more ideas out of them or explain to them why it's not allowed.

Then they can be accepted into the wiki. This system, In my opinion, only tests the reading comprehension and if the user can write in complete sentences. It shows nothing about if the user can navigate the wiki or know what they want to edit. We get nothing of why they deserve to be a wikian. I belie these systems need to be combined.{{User:Customhacker/sig}} 02:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I'm hesitant about making request notes more intensive like this because it makes it harder, and scares away more people. I think the current system is good enough on its own.
:That being said, I do agree that the current system doesn't really make users show why they want to join; perhaps require an actual article that they would edit, as before, but nothing beyond that.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 04:37, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
::Interesting; I do see what you are saying, Customhacker. But I also see what Kenny2scratch is saying. I don't think it would hurt to add another small thing, like "Please explain why you want to join the wiki in your request notes."

::I don't think that's too much, is it? {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 00:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
:::I would ask the question of whether we want to build a skilled community or a community with vision. @customhacker Experience certainly builds the kind of vision which you reference, and therefore I just don't believe that it is as important for a first-time wiki applicant. <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 11:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
:::As A user who used the request notes recently, I agree with Customhacker. There isn't so much to do for New Wikians so I think we might as well make sure the people who are doing something useful stay there, while the people who doing anything useful (like me) stay out of the way. <scratchsig>Dude613</scratchsig> 19:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
::::(Reviving) I think that after the current request notes, requesters could mention one or two edits they would like to do to the wiki. If what they put there is too broad (such as "I would like to edit pages") or breaks Wiki Guidelines (such as "I would like to make a page about my best project"), their request notes should be rejected. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 08:06, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::I agree with @Makethebrainhappy - For an applicant who has no knowledge of the Wiki at all, having such a "complex" application form, and, considering that it's their first taste of what the wiki is like, might be too overwhelming for a first time user. <scratchsig>MasterofTheBrick</scratchsig> 06:28, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Not Done doesn't get enough attention ==
{{unresolved}}
So I was browsing through [[Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done]] and realized that all of the discussions had been moved there and left to rot simply because they happened to last longer than an archive period. I suggest that we do ''at least'' one of the following things:
----
;Don't have a separate Not Done page at all and keep the not done discussions on the main CP.
:This would be '''effective''' but '''not feasible'''.
;Pros
:Great at keeping attention on topics.
;Cons
:Would likely break links and increase CP loading time.
----
;Link to them in a more obvious way
:This would be '''feasible''' but potentially '''not effective'''.
;Pros
:Saves space, keeps links.
;Cons
:Doesn't really solve the problem. Nobody wants to click an extra link just to get to topics they might not even care that much about. From my point of view, people comment on discussions because they're new and they want to get their opinion in. When a discussion takes an extra click to get to and has been rotting for so long, it no longer is attractive to comment on. Also, the Not Done page actually feels like an archive more than another discussion page - thereby discouraging new comments on it.
----
;Have an entirely separate page for not done topics <nowiki>(maybe "Scratch Wiki talk:Not Done"?).</nowiki>
:This would be '''partially feasible''' but potentially '''effective''' too.
;Pros
:Wouldn't break links (redirects exist, people), and would remove the feeling of an archive since it's a talk page of its own; would also save space on the actual CP because the content is literally in another page.
;Cons
:Still needs another click, and still seems too separate from the actual CP.

What are your thoughts? Do you have another suggestion for this problem? Do you have an opinion on or amendment to one of the current suggestions? Discuss!{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 14:12, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
: I think putting <nowiki>{{Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done}}</nowiki> is better - we can still put them here, and no problem for page size.{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 02:15, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
::Page size would still be a problem - the point is, there is so much content here that browsers need a long time to load the page. Also, by transcluding the not done page, it has to parse the contents of that page anyway, so the only thing that does is ''increase'' loading time.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 03:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
:::This is something that definitely needs to be addressed, I personally think the last option is the best, but it is a hard one.{{User:-Vuton-/Signature}} 22:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
::::I also vote for the last option. {{User:MartinWollenweber/signature}} 07:42, 19 February 2018 (CET)
:::::^  <br/>{{User:Banana439monkey/sig}} 12:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
:::::: Something like that is mentioned in different recent posts + continued at: [[#A little reorganization of old topics]] {{User:MartinWollenweber/signature}} 12:39, 22 February 2018 (CET)
:::::::I suggest adding a link in page options.  <br/>{{User:Banana439monkey/sig}} 13:19, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|7}}
Offtopic :D<br/>
This topic is not getting enough attention :D<br/>
This topic is in the place that isn't getting enough attention :D <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 16:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:This suggestion might seem  bit idiotic, but it'll get the job done. How about we make every active user post at least one comment on a ND Topic once a month?{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 22:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
::...no? Forcing users to do anything is not how we work...{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 10:50, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
:::Force users? No way! Plus, what would be the punishment if they don't comment? <scratchsig>TenType</scratchsig> 20:34, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
::::Why was this marked as done? It seems like the discussion is still ongoing. <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 15:17, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::One of the solutions that ken had layed out is marked as done, not the entire discussion. <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 15:46, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
::::::Just an idea, we could add the CPND TOC onto the CP page to link to it. <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 15:48, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
::::::: We can use your last idea i think. <scratchsig>Purvitekriwal</scratchsig> 07:11, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

::::::::Idea, how about we encourage users to look at the Not Done section. Like, give them a incentive or something.<small>Lol, I just realized this is in the Not Done section.</small><scratchsig>Vdiu</scratchsig> 13:12, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Relax [[S:NOSP]] even more ==

Okay, so the English wiki is obviously by far the most restrictive wiki out of the nine. Especially strict is our rule against user-generated content, [[S:NOSP]]. That rule was recently relaxed, to the point where as long as there is at least one Scratch Team member involved, it is allowed.

I feel like we could write so many more articles and have so much more activity, however, if the rule was relaxed further. I propose a relaxation of the rules to the following points:

* All of the following are still prohibited:
** All Scratch-prohibited things, including userscripts, iO, and the like
** Particular projects
** Certain forum topics or posts
** Specific studios
** Individual users
* Advertising gets kind but firm warnings, three warnings is vandalism, twice vandalism is a block.
* All user-generated content articles must have a template denoting them as such.

That means no Paper Minecraft, no Sigton's Shop, no Scratch OS Studio, no Griffpatch; articles about anything else should be allowed by default.

For a quick rule of thumb about what crosses the line under this system, basically specific things are prohibited but collections of them are okay. (Things like studios as collections of projects and forum topics being collections of posts notwithstanding.)
----
If you think these rules are too relaxed for mainspace articles, I have an alternate proposal. A separate namespace for articles about user-generated content, subject to the following rules:
* All Scratch-prohibited things remain prohibited (follow CGs, people!).
* Everything else is a go.
* Advertising will be treated almost as severely as vandalism, thrice advertising is a block.
* The entire namespace is treated as non-content pages (i.e. it's not indexed by default and isn't counted in the <code><nowiki>{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}</nowiki></code> ({{NUMBEROFARTICLES}})) [this rule is open for debate].

The namespace name would be something relevant, e.g. "User Content:" or "UG:" or something.
----
Which idea would you prefer? What are your thoughts?{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 22:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:How will this actually help the Wiki? I feel that you're trying to relax these rules for the sake of having them. What kind of user will go onto the Scratch Wiki and read about a user? How many Scratchers will actually be interested about reading about the development stages of Paper Minecraft? None. I also don't understand what you mean about your warning system. What is the difference between advertising and user-generated content? The line is very, very fuzzy between them. If you're going to give out warnings, at least be specific about what will get you a warning, and what is allowed.{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 08:53, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::As one wiki's admin, here's some examples that are not allowed here but allowed on jawiki.
:::List of Featured Projects by Japanese
:::Scratch Day Article in Each Year
:::Japanese Forum's Topics
:::0%control, 0%if
:::CoderDojo
:::Snipetch - would be allowed before the new mod rule
::{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 13:25, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
:::Drunken_Sailor - I think it was that things like Paper Minecraft ''wouldn't'' be allowed. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 20:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::::@Bigpuppy But in the second proposal, it states: "Everything else is a go". Meaning projects such as Paper Minecraft will be allowed. There is no line at all between what is advertising and what is allowed.{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 20:58, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::::'''Apple502j''' CoderDojo would be allowed as far as i know.{{User:Asqwde/sig}} 05:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
::@D_S I said how it would help the wiki at the start of the second paragraph: it would increase activity and allow us to write many more articles.
::"Relax[ing] these rules for the sake of having them"? That doesn't even make sense - relaxing rules means not having them as strict.
::Users and things like Paper Minecraft would only be allowed in a dedicated non-content namespace anyway, so you're exactly right there; it's just that pages like those are meant to be linked to, rather than searched for (e.g. someone could document Paper Minecraft and then griffpatch might link to the page from his project).
::It's not a warning system, it's just an expansion to the current one. Our current policy is that we warn users once for vandalism, and the second time we block. In my first system, advertising in a usergen article three times would count as vandalism. In my second system, advertisement in an article in the usergen namespace would immediately count as vandalism (or almost vandalism, since you get three chances not two).
::I know that there is a fine line between advertisement and user-generated content; that's why I ask that policing of advertisement in usergen articles be more strict than normal, tending more towards false positives than missed cases (in layman's terms, catching advertising when it isn't actually advertising more than missing things that actually are advertising).
::@jvvg Here are some things that would be allowed under the first system:
* [[Shop Federation]] as its own article
* "The Shop Federation", also as its own article (it is a collection of [[Shops (forum)|shop forum topics]], and not any specific shop, therefore it is allowed)
::And some things that would not be allowed:
* Paper Minecraft
* Griffpatch
::Here are some things that would be allowed under the second system ("usergen" is the name of the namespace, feel free to debate on this namespace name):
* Usergen:Paper Minecraft
* Usergen:Griffpatch
::Here are some things that would not be allowed:
* Usergen:Discord
* Usergen:isOnline
::I hope I've cleared up that my "warning system" is merely an expansion to our current system, and explained what exactly would be allowed or not.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 06:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
:::Okay, I misworded my first bit. I meant that I feel that we're trying to relax these rules for the sake of relaxing them. What good does having  articles about user generated content do? If griffpatch wanted to tell his followers about Paper Minecraft, he'd do so in the project notes, not in some Wiki article that he can't even edit anyway. The whole thing still seems a bit pointless.
:::Just saying "I know that there is a fine line between advertisement and user-generated content" doesn't actually specify where that line ''is''. It's like saying that my house is next to my neighbour's house: It doesn't specify anything. For example, if Usergen:Paper Minecraft and Usergen:Griffpatch are allowed, then could I create Usergen:Drunken Sailor? Or maybe, if it suits you better, Usergen:Late in Space or Usergen:Soulless 0? What classes as advertising, and what does not?
:::Aside from this, I still fail to see the point and use of doing this. It would "increase activity and allow us to write many more articles", would it? If we wanted activity, we could just enforce a mandatory mainspace edit every day. All in all, this just seems like an attempt to boost... ''certain users' ''editcount.{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 08:21, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
::::Have you considered that griffpatch would want to get an account for the sake of documenting his projects?
::::I know it doesn't specify where the line is, but you need to understand the fact that nobody knows where the line is. Can you truly say where the line is between advertising your project in another project's comments, and simply describing its purpose without encouraging them to check it out? In the first system, projects, users and so on are still disallowed, and what ''is'' allowed is likely impossible to link to. In the second system, it doesn't make sense to not link to the particular thing it's documenting, so you can't draw the line there, but where you ''can'' draw the line is between documentation and promotion.
:::::Documentation means ''de''scription. Explaining how the project works, listing different features; documenting the user's past actions, clarifying misconceptions about their personality.
:::::Promotion means ''pre''scription. Recommending that the reader visit the project page, even give it a love or favorite; stating opinions about the user's quality of work, suggesting that the reader drop them a follow.
:::::The line between documentation and promotion is one we already draw in mainspace articles: if there is an ''opinion'', it is advertisement and must be removed. If there is merely an ''explanation'', it can stay.
::::Under the second system, you could totally create Usergen:Drunken Sailor - you just could only document yourself, not advertise. I could just as easily create Usergen:Late in Space or Usergen:Soulless 0 (though why would I, ew), but again they would only be for documenting how the projects work, not stating opinions about their quality.
::::And yes, it ''would'' allow us to write many more articles! And no, we could not enforce a mandatory mainspace edit every day; what would the punishment be? how would we make up for the users scared away by the requirement of activity every day? And who are you accusing of having their edit count boosted? I certainly wouldn't be editing usergen pages, I have too many months of prejudice behind me. This would simply present more opportunity for articles to be created and edited, therefore increasing the general amount of activity.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 08:53, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
:::::I have been a proponent of relaxing S:NOSP for a while but not in the way proposed here. My ideas concerned the documentation of articles supported by the Scratch Team. Our first S:NOSP revision accomplished this already. Therefore I'm going to have to vote against this measure. I felt that it was appropriate to write articles about certain stickies such as The Shop Directory, while including others in the actual forum page descriptions specifically. These are all reviewed by Scratch Team members and through their sticky status recomended to the community. The "shop federation" (an idea cooked up by CrazyGoldFish3 and myself incidentally) can be mentioned in the one line description of "types of shops" (nothing against documententing the existence of that ''type'' of organization). While I would love to celebrate CrazyGoldFish3's work on the ''first'' Shop Federation (*cough cough* Chief Justice in the house), I'm not sure that it was really sponsored by the "Scratch Team". When it comes to making these determinations, people will also want to document the current establishments (maybe SPA in terms of Shop Federations; I haven't really checked in a while) which they are a part of instead of the historical predecessors. I'm not going to claim full credit for the "shop federation" idea, but I will say that it had its roots in a program at "MakeTheBrainHappy's Shop" (still like the 2nd largest shop ever & was the largest ever) called "Sub-Shops" where people would partner up and we would provide collective support to one another. Since this program (& many others) existed, does that validate my shop getting its own article. One could argue that it had as great or even greater an impact that the Shop Federation idea. 
:::::I honestly believe that the line between allowed and "not-allowed" is blurred in this case and would be in many others that we would consider. But if you were to grant an article to my shop, you would also have to grant one to Sigton's Shop (even though I was voted in as the 3rd Co-Owner I still have no idea what ever happenend there...) since it ended up being larger.
:::::Now to your UG section. First read this: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest Conflict of interest]. People usually assume the size of someone's page corresponds with their importance (i.e. a president has a larger wikipedia page than a local town official). If people are writing their own pages and don't need to provide any disclaimer about it, then they can really make their pages large & thereby inflate their own importance. I believe that the Userspace is the best place to put your own content about whatever. People '''should''' realize that you can use the userspace to write articles about whatever you wish and write your entire biography. 
:::::I vote against the idea and will not reconsider until major revisions are made on the scope and definition of these concepts. <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 13:24, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
::::::For reasons stated by MTBH, as well as my reasons stated above, I'm also going to have to vote against the idea.{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 17:56, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::}}
@D_S: that is a complete non-reply, try to only post messages when you have something new to say

The idea's core in the first place is allowing matters that are not "sponsored" by the Scratch Team. Requiring Scratch Team involvement severely limits the number of subjects we can document (as most of the ST aren't known for being active in multiple places).

If blurring the line is a problem, I would think you would go with the first idea, since the line between allowed and disallowed is the line between a single item and a collection of items (studios and forum topics are treated as single items).

Your example of refusing an article about the first shop federation is besides the point - you say it's not sponsored by the Scratch Team, but the whole point is to relax that guideline.

If you think userspace is a good place, what's wrong with the second idea? Userspace is just a namespace; a "usergen" namespace would also just be a namespace. The only difference I can see is that userspace makes it obvious who the page is affiliated with; usergen would not. But that's easily solved by writing a small extension that displays who created the article at the top of the page, or in some other way make it clear who the page is affiliated with (the extension could also add the namespace in the first place).

About whether "Makethebrainhappy's Shop" would get an article: if it's more than just one forum topic, then it would get an article under both systems; if it's just one forum topic then the first would forbid it, while the second would allow it (as long as it's documentation, not advertisement). Same goes for Sigton's shop.

About conflict of interest (assuming second system): we don't have paid editors (as far as we are aware, at least I do this unpaid full-time), so the financial relationship part is irrelevant. I see that there could be a problem if a user on the Wiki attempted to write an autobiography in the UG namespace; perhaps we could follow Wikipedia's example and disallow people directly related with the subject to contribute to it, as well as requiring people to disclose any indirect relationship with the subject when editing.

On a different note, please don't post inflammatory comments. "will not reconsider until major revisions are made" is far too blunt to be acceptable here - I had to prevent myself from swearing at my screen when I saw that, and I'm sure you've worsened the mood of any others who support the idea. You're here to constructively contribute ideas and bring up issues, not to subtly insult the topic without pointing out the problems. You can say things like "Unless you show how this would work, I don't think I like this idea at the moment"; things like "I will not reconsider until major revisions are made" are unnecessarily defacing to the topic at hand. Try to remember this in future replies.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 04:24, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

:"@D_S: that is a complete non-reply, try to only post messages when you have something new to say" - I'd like to clarify something for all the other wiki editors reading this. Ken is obviously very attached to his idea and want's to discourage people from disagreeing with it. The main point is: '''You do not need to have a novel contribution in order to state your agreement or disagreement.''' Knowing that someone feels one way or another is useful information and I hope that people feel that they can express their opinion. There will be no disciplinary action as a result any such comment and I encourage Ken to keep his opinion on the comments merit to himself. 
:"The idea's core in the first place is allowing matters that are not "sponsored" by the Scratch Team" - Let it be known that Ken wishes to document User-Generated content on the wiki mainspace. If this change were made, then '''all User-Generated content would be permissable.''' because everything is a collection of items. My profile is a collection of projects, my website a collection of posts, and my forums are a collection of responses. And yes we may disallow those items but we aren't really either. 
:CrazyGoldFish3 actually told me once why the ST refused to endorse the idea and the story went something like this: In 2013, they stickied a more "activist" directory with programs similar to Shop Federations, but then an issue arose and it was unstickied. Since then they haven't supported user-generated "collaborations" as it relates to the requests forum. 
:The reason why I think the "usergen" namespace is a bad idea is because it encourages competition among wiki editors as if it was a "popularity" contest. The usergen namespace is supposed to document accomplishments while the userspace is just like a personal bio (which is pretty obvious when one looks at all of pages). Knowing who wrote the page doesn't help a lot because I can just send my written article to you and have you post it. 
:Many, many things would deserve their own articles if MakeTheBrainHappy's Shop gets one. I mean we can't even document every SDS Studio individually. How are we supposed to document every Scratch Collaboration that is notable? Then go consider the Services Planning Department and try to pass judgement on it. I know you want to, but these judgements will just become more and more arbitrary over time. 
:There is no good way to get people to disclose conflicts of interest and enforce those policies.
:It also seems like I didn't state my views clearly. This is a '''terrible''' idea. I hope I've convinced others of that. We've already relaxed S:NOSP once; we don't need to do it again. If you think that what I wrote before is "inflammatory", just imagine the kind of debate that we would have after this policy is implemented as we argue with people who want their User-Generated content in the mainspace. Debunking this change is the whole point Ken, but I won't attack you personally even though you attacked both Drunken and myself for our dissent. <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 16:18, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
::Just a note on something you mentioned, Kenny2scratch - "Userspace" isn't simply a "namespace" (words in quotes you used); as is mentioned in [[Scratch Wiki:Userspace]], images are also part of userspace (when they are in categories that declare it, such as [[:Category:Users' Images|Users' Images]] and [[:Category:Users' Logos|Users' Logos]]), and parts of personal talk pages. So, I guess what I'm saying is that userspace is ''multiple'' namespaces. Or, rather, a namespace plus a certain section of another namespace, ''plus'' parts of ''another'' namespace ("User talk:"). {{e|:)}}

::Makethebrainhappy, I don't think we should be that, well, you know what I mean (near the end of your post). Constructive criticism is good though. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 17:05, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
:::Ken did not think I was honest enough. {{wink}} <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 20:17, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
::::Accusations of hypocrisy won't help anything, either, but I digress. And yes, that's ''exactly'' the point. Having all user-generated content being permissible (within the limits I set above) is the entire point of this discussion. I know you have a bias against documenting user-generated content - so do I, and you have no idea how much I'm having to force myself to write this because I believe it would increase activity.
::::Let me once again restate that ''documenting user-generated content is not a bad idea''. The major advantage of it is that activity would increase further as more content could be written without fear of breaking guidelines. How many ideas of yours to increase activity have been too complicated (or, on the flip side, too simple) to be accepted? The only solution to increase activity is to increase the amount of activity that can be had.
::::To put it in different terms: Scratch's design goals are "low floor, high ceiling, wide walls". "low floor" means anyone can get started, and it's not too hard to pick things up. "high ceiling" means there can be incredibly complex creations, as well as simple ones. "wide walls", the point I want to focus on here, means a wide variety of creations can be made.<br/>Our account request process notwithstanding, I'd like to believe we have a low floor. You don't ''have'' to use Wiki markup to write articles, though others will certainly come along and improve it to do so. And once you've learned some markup, it's pretty easy to pick up the rest. We certainly have a high ceiling - look at complex pages like [[Scratch@MIT 2018]] (oh yes, it's complex!) or anyone's sidebar. However, our walls are incredibly narrow. We are constrained by the limit of having Scratch Team involvement in anything we document.
::::Our mission is to document the Scratch programming language and its surrounding phenomena. The community, as well as community projects, are part of the surrounding phenomena. We would be shaming ourselves if we didn't document them.
::::"Knowing who wrote the page doesn't help a lot because I can just send my written article to you and have you post it." That's not true - I already said we would follow Wikipedia's example, and require disclosure when there is a relationship between you and the subject of the article. Even if you only told them to post the article, that's still a relationship of sorts.
::::There's no way to force someone to disclose affiliation, that's true, but it's perfectly possible to strictly warn people who are found to have ''not'' disclosed affiliation. It's also usually evident from the posted content whether they're affiliated; and if they are affiliated but their content seems otherwise, then that's just as good as being not affiliated anyway, since the major danger of affiliation is that it could be advertisement.
::::I know we can't document SDSes individually. (By the way, "SDS" stands for "Scratch Design Studio", so "SDS Studio" as you said would mean "Scratch Design Studio Studio" lol.) If you're worried about a flood of tiny articles, a minimum size requirement wouldn't be amiss. Or, if you think pagesize doesn't accurately represent content size (a point I agree with), we could have a minimum [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Article size|readable prose size]] instead.
::::I didn't mean to say "only post when you have something new to say", that was blurted out due to the anger at your last statement before then. I think what I actually meant was "if you have an opinion, justify it in your post instead of simply restating it". My mistake there.
::::@bigpuppy: I do realize that userspace ''rules'' encompass more than just the "User" namespace, but that's irrelevant - you wouldn't document yourself in a users' image anyway. {{e|:P}}{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 07:21, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::}}
I'll visualize it for you. I'm going to hold out two colored cards (choose whatever color you like). One says "people" on it and another says "idea." Here is what my statement concerning the people: "'''You do not need to have a novel contribution in order to state your agreement or disagreement.''' Knowing that someone feels one way or another is useful information and I hope that people feel that they can express their opinion." I will not think anything less of anyone (including you Ken) for expressing your opinion. 
The other is the topic at hand which is the idea being discussed. I do hope that I have persuaded others that it has little merit, but if I haven't, then I should know that. I wouldn't think any less of their ''character'' if they still agreed with this idea at this point. You on the other hand have gone after "character" by asking Drunken to stop giving his opinion & for me to be nicer to the idea. There is no hypocrisy in us taking different sides and arguing the case. You have just decided to use your ''gravitas'' to influence how people respond (i.e. don't respond unless you are ready to argue with me or don't respond unless you are willing to provide constructive suggestions to improve the idea). 
I'm not going to make those arguments. Anyone may respond with their opinion and if they add logic to it, then we can discuss it's merits. If there is no logic, then it becomes another consideration. If people are against the idea, then they can either provide suggestions for improvements or not. I'm not forcing comments to undergo the standards which I myself am creating as I read them. All I can do is respond to those which make arguments. 
In summary: I'm not trying to ''force'' people to express their opinion in a certain way; rather, I'm trying to convince them of an argument. I'm sure that Drunken will accept your apology. 
I think the limit's are arbitrary and will just cause more problems then they solve. The rest of your impassioned speech is very nice and dandy, but I'm going to skip making a similar contra-idea because I want to reevaluate what was said.
'''you have no idea how much I'm having to force myself to write this because I believe it would increase activity.''' - This is what resonated with me not because I feel that it vindicates me, but because it is actually the underlying cause of this discussion. This is where I can provide constructive suggestions.
But first let's do this exercise. Whoever is reading this ask yourselves these questions: "How do you visualize the scratch community?" & "Do you believe that the way you visualize the scratch community is similar to how another person visualizes the community?" The reason why the earlier system worked was because we had a common narrative: 40-someodd Administrators; the studios they were associated with; the announcements forum; etc. This would be lost if we began documenting UG- content.
Now onto the suggestions: If we are looking to increase activity, then we should be finding more active editors (*shoutout to the New Member Recommendations). We aren't going to get the kind of editors we want if people are joining to document User-Generated content. On the hand: Maybe we should focus on increasing our exposure. Increasing the traffic to the wiki increases our prestige and importance for the overall scratch community. That could in turn drive more high-quality editors to the wiki.
How would we accomplish this? Well maybe we could have a namespace for creating articles about ''programming'' in general and not just scratch-specific material. This would be in the general line of our mission of promoting Computer Science and provide information to Scratcher's seeking to move to text-based languages. Now there are articles like "Python" which document the language briefly, but the namespace would expand on this by providing specific tutorials in Python which would appeal to a more general audience. If we were able to focus on gaining exposure through search engines online, it would help scratch by driving traffic towards the main website. 
Here's the way I think about it: Would we get more traffic from 40 user bio pages or 40 high-quality python tutorials? Which one better represents our mission? 
Our main purpose is still to document the Scratch website which is why I propose creating a new namespace for Python (or maybe even general programming). I think it's a better solution to deal with the activity issue. <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 15:27, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
:<small>{{tip}} use two line breaks when you're the outdented reply</small>
:I'll only be responding to the actual suggestions, since those are the most to the point.
:New Member Recommendations are a good idea, but they don't seem to have been gaining any traction. That obviously suggests that something's missing, but that's a different story.
:The Scratch Wiki is a collaboratively-written wiki documenting the ''Scratch'' programming language and its surrounding phenomena. Our mission is not to promote CS; our mission is to document Scratch. Documenting other languages is worse than user-generated content (which is at least related to Scratch), unless the purpose of documenting the language is specifically in relation to the language's integration with Scratch. [[S:NOTWP|We are not Wikipedia]] - our mission is not to document everything. If people want to get documentation of other languages, they should search on Wikipedia.
:"Would we get more traffic from 40 user bio pages or 40 high-quality python tutorials?" The Python tutorials, but "Which one better represents our mission?" The user bio pages.
:That being said, your points imply a series of tutorials on ''moving from Scratch to other languages''. Tutorials like those would probably be a) much welcomed and b) quite useful, ''and'' would stick to our purpose. But that should be in a different section; propose it in a different topic.
:Our mainspace purpose is to document Scratch and its phenomena. I stick by my belief that user-generated content is part of Scratch's surrounding phenomena, and that we would be worse off for not documenting it.
:As to your point about not wanting users to join only for UG pages: we could have a "one mainspace edit per ugspace edit" requirement, as in for every edit a user makes in the UG namespace, they have to have a mainspace edit as well.
:"I think it's a better solution to deal with the activity issue" - I disagree, unfortunately, since writing such tutorials requires rather expert knowledge (or at least not just vague concepts), and it would only increase the activity of those who are already active.
:Looking at all your points, though, it seems pretty clear to me that UG pages should not be treated as content pages :P{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 05:11, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
::Okay <removed - you know my views>, calm down.
::First, I have never seen anyone use, ever, or be told to use, ever, two line breaks after an outdent. If anything, that tip seems to be done out of spite
::Second, please stop being so toxic. If you want people to listen to you and appreciate what you’re saying, not accusing or swearing at them might help. If somebody states that they do not agree with the idea, accept it and move on. Everyone has a right to freedom of speech.
::Third, ''"Would we get more traffic from 40 user bio pages or 40 high-quality python tutorials?" The Python tutorials, but "Which one better represents our mission?" '''The user bio pages.'''''" makes absolutely no sense. If we want to widen our range of articles, which you want to do, then we ''should'' follow MTBH's suggestion of Python tutorials because it branches out of Scratch and opens a whole new world up for Wiki Editors, which, as you want to do, would increase activity. Python tutorials, which you could actually help with, would also increase the Wiki's exposure (which, may I remind you, is one of the Wiki's goals, as said by MTBH) massively because people who don't even know what Scratch is can use our Wiki as a reference for Python tutorials. This would grow the Wiki from catering for a small community to supporting a large community as they grow and learn. It would, as you’d say, "widen our walls". By limiting the people we cater for, we lose exposure for the Wiki, and subsequently can help less people. ''Now'' what do you think better represents our mission?
::Fourth, ''"you have no idea how much I'm having to force myself to write this because I believe it would increase activity"''. If you’re forcing yourself, then why are you arguing so fiercely for it, and accusing others when they disagree? If you want to increase activity, why don’t we just encourage new & existing users to make constructive edits on ''useful'' mainspace pages. Edits on Usergen pages would rarely be useful as they would mostly be either biased or unnecessary, causing a drop in quality on the Wiki. As MTBH said, "''We aren't going to get the kind of editors we want if people are joining to document User-Generated content''". Editors would join for the sake of editing User-generated content pages, which would have no real use to anyone not directly connected with them. 
::Fifth, you said that with Usergen activity would ''"increase further as more content could be written without fear of breaking guidelines".'' However, you’ve still not explained '''what the guidelines are'''. As I said way back in my first post: "The line is very, very fuzzy". What classes as a good usergen edit, and what would you revert as vandalism/advertising?
::Sixth, just stating who created the page at the top doesn’t change anything. If anything, it makes the system worse because users would compete to see who could create the most articles. Basically, it would become another way of users to see who is the best, which is the opposite of what we want. Wouldn’t writing an extension also just cause more complications and confusion?
::Seventh, how would we force disclosure of affiliation? Even if we managed a way to do that, where would it be disclosed? In addition to this, most edits would need disclosure anyway, since you can’t create or improve an article which you have no knowledge about.
::Finally, even if we solved ''all'' these other problems, you’re stating way too many requirements for this to actually be functional. For example, how are you going to enforce one mainspace edit per one usergen edit? As you said to a separate proposition: ''"what would the punishment be? how would we make up for the users scared away by [it]?"'', which is exactly my point here.
::What about the "minimum size requirement"? How would that be enforced? Wouldn’t it also prevent new(er) users who want to create an article but only have limited knowledge from furthering the wiki’s information?
::That pretty much wraps up my long post. TL;DR: This is a terrible idea and has so many flaws that, even if you had the whole community backing you, it wouldn’t be worth the time and energy fixing them.{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 11:37, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:::...the tip was supposed to be genuine, when you outdent a single line break doesn't actually break. It takes two line breaks to actually break without indents.
:::I don't see how I'm being toxic, but that's a different matter that I think would belong on my own talk page.
:::Branching out of Scratch doesn't excuse being not Scratch. Tutorials only about Python aren't even related to Scratch, and this is the Scratch Wiki, not the Python Wiki (which incidentally already exists). Our mission is to document Scratch - how do Python tutorials represent that mission? The only kind of Python tutorial that has a place on this wiki is one about transitioning from Scratch to Python, or integrating Scratch with Python (the latter of which I think exists). Sure, tutorials relating to both Scratch and another language would help widen our walls, and I hope whoever else is reading this topic makes one (I can't make a tutorial about transitioning from Scratch to Python, seeing as I learned the latter first and the former second and never really transitioned between the two). Increasing traffic is a secondary goal - the primary goal is to document Scratch. We ''don't'' want people to come here for Python tutorials that have nothing to do with Scratch - that defeats our entire purpose as a wiki! What we ''do'' want is one of the following:
:::* People who have already encountered/learned Scratch coming to see how they can transition to other languages
:::* People who have never heard of Scratch learning about it and joining its community because they read articles on this Wiki about Scratch
:::"encourage new & existing users to make constructive edits on ''useful'' mainspace pages" yeah, we've been trying to to this for 10 years now (the Wiki was created in 2008 iirc). Doing what we've always been doing hasn't yielded any results - so I'm proposing getting rid of our old biases and opening up to an opportunity to have a more healthy buzz. Yes, biases. That's why it's hard for me to say all this - I'm biased against user-created content being documented here, so I certainly wouldn't participate in it, but I want to give others who have no such bias an opportunity to document much more than before.
:::I already stated the line between documentation and advertisement: opinions are advertisement, explanations are documentation. If someone made an edit saying "This project can be viewed here: link" that would be acceptable (assuming 2nd system); if someone made an edit saying "This project is of high quality and should be viewed here: link" (notice the formality but opinion nonetheless!) then it would be advertisement and reverted.
:::Writing an extension isn't that difficult (at least for me, anyway :P), especially for a simple purpose such as this (add a parser hook, quick db query, done). Users competing to get the most articles - you would have to have a page that lists all the/the number of usergen articles they had created, which obviously would be unnecessary. I do now realize that there isn't any point showing the name, though, so consider that point dropped.
:::Forcing disclosure of affiliation is difficult, and I have no immediate ideas as to how, but I think I already mentioned it would be (I hate to use the word "punishing") reprimanding for lack of disclosure, rather than preventing said lack. Disclosure can simply be in the edit summary, something like "(note: I am a member of the board of directors of this federation)" (I obviously don't know much about shop federations, it's just an example). If you have little knowledge, research for more! If the subject is worth documenting, there'll be plenty to document. How a shop federation works is certainly enough for reams of material, and that's not the only aspect of a federation to document; under the 2nd system, if a project is sufficiently complex then there will be much to describe.
:::You often ask, "How would this be enforced?" In the case of a one-mainspace-one-ugspace edit requirement and/or a minimum readable prose size, it could be technically enforced - you would be <s>physically</s> logically unable to submit a new usergen article without a certain minimum size, or edit a usergen article if you have less mainspace edits than ugspace.
:::"What would the punishment be? How would we make up for users being scared away by [it]?" Assuming you're talking about lack of disclosure, since minimums can be technically enforced, I think a warning system similar or slightly greater in severity to WM warnings would be sufficient. For first infraction, remind them of the guidelines; for second infraction, bring up the possiblity of a block (worded as "the Wiki may not be the best place for you"); for third infraction, make that possiblity obvious; for fourth infraction, block for a certain amount of time that grows exponentially with each subsequent infraction.
:::As to why there are so many rules/requirements, that's the nature of partially relaxing rules here - a single large rule, bent only a small amount, becomes many small rules. Our rules go mostly along the lines of "if it's not forbidden it's allowed", and while a blanket ban is simple, relaxing it a tiny bit turns it into minor prohibitions of everything except what we want to allow.
:::{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 12:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
::::Do you still want to try this? <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 23:27, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
:::::I still believe that this is a good idea; if you have further arguments to make go ahead and post them.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 05:48, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
::::::Ken, what do you mean when user-generated content WOULD be allowed, but then you go on to say about how Paper Minecraft, OS Studios, and Griffpatch (which are all UG content) WOULDN'T be allowed?{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 20:15, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::}}
I mean that certain kinds of UG content (rule of thumb: anything that is an individual thing and not a collection) would still not be allowed, including users, projects, studios, forum threads, and posts. Anything ''else'' that would still be prohibited currently would no longer be.

There's also the second option, which is to allow everything, but anything prohibited by NOSP now would go under a new namespace. Which would you prefer, or do you think neither of them works for some reason?{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 05:18, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
:RE: Option 1-Well then what would be allowed? A separate article on [[Shop Federation|Shop Federations]], and in it describing what it is, the different federations, and links to them, but it doesn't go on to say about how awesome the USS is or how awful the SPA is or something like that.
:E: Option 2-No way! There would be too many people requesting for articles about their latest project, their "coolest" studio, their largest shop; and it would just get overwhelming!{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 22:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
::Ok, can we mark this as done since it appears everyone except you doesn't seem to like this idea? (no offense){{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 22:20, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
:::No. I still remain unconvinced that this is a bad idea, and popular vote is not the final say against a proposal.
:::Responding to you:
:::Option 1 doesn't relax the rules much, actually, but yes, there could be a separate Shop Federation article which could even describe/somewhat document more notable federations; only articles about individual federations would be prohibited.
:::Option 2: Many people requesting for articles is exactly the kind of activity the relaxation is meant to promote. And remember, nobody's under any obligation to obey the requests, but if they choose to do so then there's really nothing against them creating something like "UG:Cool Studio 24" ''because that would lead to more activity'' which is healthy for any wiki. (Keep in mind that UG articles would still be somewhat subject to our notability and documentability rules! That means no articles about anything if there isn't much to say about that thing.) And if you're worried about people only editing UG articles, we could easily have rules requiring that each UG edit be "paid for" by a non-UG or even mainspace edit.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 11:09, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
::::About your second proposal: don't articles about user generated content already belong in userspace? And what is the good in promoting activity if it isn't furthering the Scratch Wiki's goal of documenting Scratch?<scratchsig>Jonathan50</scratchsig> 08:10, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
:::::What is the point of having more activity to the wiki if this won't help it? "Many people requesting for articles is exactly the kind of activity the relaxation is meant to promote." Why? Scratchers probably wouldn't actually want to read about someone else's studios, or anything like that. UG content should belong in userspace, which has far less activity than mainspace, which is healthy, because mainspace actually helps document Scratch.
:::::And what do you mean by for each UG edit, there should be a mainspace edit? Scratchers that get accepted, if that rule was implemented, would pay less attention to their edits on mainspace, simply because they would want to edit UG content more, if that makes sense. Users should focus on mainspace editing, not just UG content.
:::::For now, I disagree on this idea. <scratchsig>TenType</scratchsig> 20:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|5}}
First, Will somebody want to read these posts? Umm, I think probably not. :)

To my opinion, people should create their user-generated context but it can be harmful for the wiki, so we should create a limit to create  an user-generated article to prevent vandalism.<scratchsig>Ahmetlii</scratchsig> 20:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
:I don't think this rule-change is a good idea at all. It's far too complicated, and I don't see any point in increasing activity on the wiki just for the sake of increasing activity. As you've said, kenny2scratch, we are not Wikipedia, and opening the wiki up to articles on the thousands upon thousands of projects, studios, users, etc. on Scratch would just be too much to document. And for what? What's the point of documenting random users, studios, and projects? People can go check it out for themselves on the Scratch website if they want to see it, no need for an article. I don't believe that the activity that this would bring in is the right kind of activity for this wiki. Aside from all this, Drunken Sailor's last post sums up all of my thoughts on the matter very well. <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 19:43, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, user-generated content would probably clog up the wiki. We'd need another wiki to provide information about the content, like the one I recently created [https://scratchugc.fandom.com/ here]. {{User:Ssvbxx/signature}} 02:22, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
:@Ahmetli, yeah, I only was able to read half of it. I had to take a break and read the rest. Just a general tip- add frequent line breaks in long posts.
:Also, @kenny2scratch, why exactly do you want to relax the rules? According to me, they're fine now, and no offense, but you've warned me when I broke one of these rules so it seems like your support them?<scratchsig>Vdiu</scratchsig> 13:51, 10 August 2022 (UTC)


{{collapse bottom}}

== Not Done ==
{{unresolved}}
I know someone already brought it up...<br/>
Anyways, Not Done is not getting any attention. I know that Kenny2scratch already added “Things To Do” on the left sidebar, and the TOC of Not Done, yet no one seems to notice it. I think that we should release an announcement to all existing editors about ND, and all incoming users about ND on their welcome page. In fact, I’m going to add that to my welcome right now.<br/>
Any thoughts?{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 23:53, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:Nice idea, support! <br>{{User:Asqwde/sig}} 12:06, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
::Thanks!{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 15:15, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
:::Support, I think that is a great idea. <scratchsig>Purplewolves</scratchsig> 20:32, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
::::Thanks for support!{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 22:15, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
:::::No worries. <scratchsig>Purplewolves</scratchsig> 22:53, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
::::::Support better way to mark not done. Should the TOC on the CP mark out all the not done discussions in a different text color, or something like that? One idea
::::::{{User:KrIsMa/Sig}}  03:45, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::}}
Perhaps make all of the Not Done topics have bold titles? That should attract attention to them for those who browse the TOC.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 03:47, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
:Maybe what we could do is put the Not Done Topics in Red in the TOC of the CP, the done topics Green in the TOC of the CP, and the in progress discussions the blue color it currently is.{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 12:47, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
::I agree with KrIsMa, Kenny2scratch, and NYCDOT on having some way to show which topics are done and which are not done, but how would we make topics show as a different color in the table of contents?<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 15:31, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
:::That...is a really good question. I have no idea. I really don't.{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 19:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
::::I noticed that {{user|Jedibrine|name}}'s userpage's TOC has different colors and font. You can ask how they did it. <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 20:18, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
:::::A very simple solution would be to put the {{t|done}} and {{t|not done}} templates ''in'' the title of the post instead of right below the title. If everyone put <code><nowiki>{{not done/done}} {{-}} <title here...></nowiki></code> in the titles of their posts, everyone could easily see whether a post is done or not. [[User:Groko13/Sandbox|Here's an example]]. It even shows up bold in the TOC! I see no reason why we shouldn't implement this, considering that the CP already says to put {{t|not done}} at the start when creating a new post. <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 01:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent}}
I give my support. Nice idea, but I also agree with Kenny2Scratch with the idea about making the titles bold. <scratchsig>Filmlover12</scratchsig> 13:53, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
:And this discussion has '''also''' ended up in the place that doesn't have enough attention. {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 20:54, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
::(reply to both this and [[#Not Done doesn't get enough attention]]) I propose that the Not Done link, currently called 'Things to Do' is moved further uo in the sidebar, likely under 'Community Portal'. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 18:27, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Suggestion: [[Scratch Wiki:Featured Image Suggestions]] ==
{{unresolved}}
It's as it says on the tin.

As part of this new revival of featured images (and leading on from [[#An Interval for Featured Images]], I propose that we create a page similar in concept to [[S:WWS]], where users leave new section saying which image they think deserve to be featured. This will clean up the CP (just slightly). At around the same time as Wiki Wednesday, the EWs/Bureaucrats review the suggestions and pick three images which will then to onto [[S:FI]]. If necessary, we could also edit the current Wiki Wednesday suggestion forum post to incorporate Featured Images too.

What do you think?{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 15:24, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:This is a great idea! '''+1!''' {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 17:23, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
::Yes!{{User:Millie S/signature}} 18:12, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
:::Thank you! Any bits that need improving?{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 18:26, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
::::I think the featured images are too minor to have a dedicated projectspace page. I propose instead to have a miscellaneous "homepage tasks" page (or something like that) where you can suggest news items, featured images, and edits to other things that appear on the homepage. Does that sound better?{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 19:51, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
:::::good idea{{User:Millie S/signature}} 19:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
::::::Nice idea, {{done|support}}{{User:Asqwde/sig}} 21:46, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}
@Ken won't a homepage tasks page just get cluttered up? If they had to filter through edits and news items to find featured images, wouldn't it be harder for the admins? Also, having a dedicated project space is better because it's a) more obvious to Wiki Editors what the page is for, and seems less boring and gruelling than "homepage tasks", which sounds like just a big long list of stuff to do. And b) it would be easier for editors to suggest, because having a clearer Featured Image Suggestions would be more obvious to others what has already been suggested and what hasn't, et cetera. And c) having a dedicated page would make it so much easier to implement into the current WW forum post.{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 08:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
:We could have [[Scratch Wiki:Homepage Tasks]] and have there be a section for featured images, news things, and any other sections that may be needed. Then it wouldn't be as messy (if there were sections). Then we could make a shortcut called [[S:FEATUREDIMAGESUGGESTIONS]] (although that's a pretty long "shortcut") and have it redirect to [[Scratch Wiki:Homepage Tasks#Featured Image Suggestions]]. Or we could have [[Scratch Wiki:Featured Image Suggestions]] redirect to [[Scratch Wiki:Homepage Tasks#Featured Image Suggestions]]. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 15:32, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
::If we're talking about shortcuts, how about [[S:FIS]], since [[S:FI]] redirects to the featured images?{{User:Drunken Sailor/Signature}} 08:44, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
:::Yeah, that'd probably be good. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 16:33, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::::Support to Bigpuppy's and Drunken's last two suggestions. :) Also are we going to have somthing smilar to [https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/288005/ this]?<scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 23:45, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
:::::Perhaps even simply add the featured image suggestions to that forum topic's purpose? That saves effort :){{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 02:32, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
::::::Nah, keep it on the wiki. Editors should be the only ones that can propose changes to the front page that are as minor as switching out the images.{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 21:34, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}
I have to disagree to you with that. Just like non-wikians are able to talk on the [https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/294197 CP in forums] and suggest Wiki Articles for WW, they should be able to suggest for Featured Images. '''+1''' for putting in forum.<br/>
Also, is there already a forum topic for Featured Articles? (or is that WW?) <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 00:15, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:After thinking about whether I agree with putting it in the forum or not, I've come to the opinion that I disagree, at least somewhat. Perhaps we could have that as ''one'' place where people suggest featured images, but look at the recent replies to that forum topic. We're on page seven right now, and the first reply on that page was in January of this year. Furthermore, the majority of the posts on that topic are ''not'' Wiki Wednesday suggestions. Now look at [[S:WWS]]. That shows that the last suggestion for an article was in ''December,'' not even January. If not many people outside of the wiki would like to submit articles for Wiki Wednesday, then why would they want to suggest featured images? Again, perhaps we could have that as an ''option,'' but I also feel like maybe the fact that that's the place where ''wiki editors'' suggest articles too causes it to be neglected by wiki editors.<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 18:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
::I'm not sure that I see the point of a page for homepage tasks. How much is there that actually needs to be done on the homepage? If someone wants to make changes, they could probably just post something on the Community Portal. Although, I think that the Wiki Wednesday and Featured Image suggestion pages could be grouped together/merged into one page on the Wiki, since they're both updated at the same time now. We could have the forums open to suggestions from non-Wikian Scratchers for both Wiki Wednesday articles and Featured Images, and I think that Wikians should just be able to suggest articles or images by editing the page directly in the wiki (is there a reason that they have to use the forums instead?). I think that this would make it easier to get Wikians and New Wikians into suggesting images and articles as well.

::So, to summarize, I think we should have a page for editors to suggest Wiki Wednesday articles and Featured Images for upcoming months, as well as a forum post for Scratchers. I don't really think lumping it into a "homepage tasks" page would be a good idea though, because it might not get a lot of attention (I mean, just look at [[S:CPND]] {{e|:P}}). <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 03:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
:::Drunken Sailor kind of already said this, but I wanted to add: a dedicated page would make it much easier to see which images have already been suggested and used previously as well. <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 04:01, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
::::What if we also advertised the featured images along with the featured article each month, in the Wiki Wednesday forum post? <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 04:09, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::{{done|Supported by myself}}<s>, but also if someone share featured images in Announcements forum, we need to upload another source manually; because Scratch Wiki photos isn't working on forums. </s>
:::::@Groko13: I agree your opinion, but also we're adding stars to featured images/articles.{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 11:18, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
::::::Ahmetlii, the Scratch Wiki is an [[Image Hosting#List|approved image host]].<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 16:04, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}Actually, the correct link is [[Image Hosting#Host List]], sorry.<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 16:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
:<s>Yes, Scratch Wiki is an approved host; but it's not working correctly on forums as I know - if</s> I'm wrong, sorry about that. You need to use real image source rather than file's link, also you cannot shrink it with [img] code.{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 17:06, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
::I can see the image you posted [[post:4181522|here]].<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 17:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
::Me too.{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 17:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
:::I think this is a really good idea although I don't think we need to edit the current Wiki Wednesday suggestion forum post. Good job! {{e|meow}} <scratchsig>Filmlover12</scratchsig> 09:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
::::It seems tht we've come to a general consensus that a dedicated spot on the Wiki to suggest featured images should be added, but we haven't settled on how to implement it yet. Here are the suggestions I've seen:
::::* A page such as [[Scratch Wiki:Featured Image Suggestions]] for Wikians to suggest images.
::::* A forum post/editing the current forum post to allow featured image suggestions from people outside of the Wiki.
::::* A page such as [[Scratch Wiki:Homepage Tasks]] for suggested changes to the homepage, with a dedicated section for suggesting featured images, along with a shortcut and/or redirect.
::::* Merging a page for suggesting featured images into [[S:WWS]] and allowing editors to suggest images and articles directly on the page.
::::Did I miss anything? Which of these  should we implement, or does anyone have any other ideas? {{e|:)}} <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 04:29, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
:::::'''+1''' for everything! This seems like a great idea! However, we must decide whether there should be another forum post for suggestions or if we edit the current post. I'm fine with either option. {{e|:)}} <scratchsig>TenType</scratchsig> 19:38, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== New page for mall simulators ==
{{unresolved}}
Should we make a new page for mall simulators? Mall simulators are sort of big with the biggest mall simulator (Palace of Points) having more than 1400 members. Should we create a page for it? <scratchsig>Sti_scratch</scratchsig> 04:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:Maybe not as a whole page, but as a section in [[Simulation Projects]]?<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 16:11, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
::Mall simulators, let me explain, are studios where people can register and make projects and add them to the studio. These projects are shops, where people (that are registered in a mall simulator the shop is added in) can buy from. Mall simulators invent their own currency, not tradeable for real money, that is used within the mall simulator itself. So, I don't really think it would fit there since it's technically not a project. <scratchsig>Sti_scratch</scratchsig> 08:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
:::That's a new kind of [[shop]]. Actually, there is no article to write about it, I think. {{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 12:56, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
::::Yeah, it means that we have to create two pages. for the shops and the sim itself. <scratchsig>Sti_scratch</scratchsig> 03:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
:::::Couldn't shops in the mall simulators be a sub-section?<scratchsig>Purple_Ember</scratchsig> 04:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
::::::@Purple_Ember Yeah, that works too. <scratchsig>Sti_scratch</scratchsig> 06:00, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}I haven't heard of mall simulators until now, so I don't they're that necessary.{{User:NYCDOT/signature}} 22:24, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
:Actually, doesn't scratch ban users that participate in such activities? e.g. Mattcoin<scratchsig>Kritav</scratchsig> 03:44, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
::Yes, some users banned because of that, including sti_scratch(not active anymore); and nobody want to use cryptocurrencies or mall simulators. Some of ironic. Maybe we should close this topic..{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 11:23, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Split the Paint Article  ==
{{unresolved}}
I was browsing the wiki and noticed that the Paint editor article ([[Paint Editor|here]]) is '''really''' long and could possibly be split up into three different articles: History of the paint editor, 2.0 Bitmap Paint editor, and 2.0 Vector Paint Editor. <scratchsig>Jakel181</scratchsig> 20:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:It is kinda long, but so is the CP, and do we split this? I realize it's not exactly the same thing, but it's not long enough to truly need splitting.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 07:03, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
::in Japanese wiki, we ''did'' split it. At that time, "Types of Graphics", "Bitmap Editor", "Vector Editor", "Bitmap and Vector Comparison", "Paint Editor Conversion", "Interaction With Other Programs", "Example Uses", and "Alternatives" section is kept. Others are moved to version subpages, such as [[Paint Editor (2.0)]]. Guess what will happen next January here, without the change. 
::By the way, block workaround page is enough big to split, too, I think. It will be good for performance issues. {{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 08:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
:::Currently, [[Bitmap Editor]] redirects to [[Paint Editor#Bitmap Editor]]. The bitmap editor is a large part of Scratch, so I think it needs its own article. {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 01:29, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
::::So [[Vector Editor]] too?{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 03:25, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
:::::I merged the previous 'The "Bitmap Editor" Page' topic with this one that I pulled from the archives, as I realize that the original one shouldn't have been archived. If the replies by CrazyBoy826 onwards seem out of context, that's why.
:::::Next question: "Paint Editor" will have to redirect to either Bitmap or Vector Editor (not a disambig page, because there's only two). Which one?{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 05:19, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
::::::There are some sections that cannot be on the two: Types of Graphics,  Bitmap and Vector Comparison, Costume Pane, Basic Options, Interaction With Other Programs, Example Uses, History, and Alternatives. Keep them on [[Paint Editor]].{{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 10:40, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}
The paint editor article is not <i>too</i> long, especially after the release of Scratch 3.0. The article has been trimmed down a lot, and splitting it really wouldn't help users looking for content. There could be short sections with "main article" at the top, but most of the page describes the tools in the paint editor, which would be a headache to look for if the article was split. {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 04:21, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Block Problems ==
{{unresolved}}
{{Not done|Not done, as blocks are still unfinished or broken}}<br />
Today I started to finish up the script for [[How to Evaluate an Expression]], and things got out of hand. When I first completed it, I realized I did some of the block loops wrong, and it like wrapped around some things that I didn't want to wrap around, while I also couldn't get this one if then else block to wrap around something else {{-}} it was all a mess. I cleaned some of it up, but I am afraid I'll make it worse and I already spent more than an hour on it. Also, I have to save it each time I want to check if it is correct, since for some reason the blocks won't load up in ''Show preview'' mode (it appears in code) but loads when the changes are saved. Can somebody please fix up the script to match the one in post #19 in [https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/292813/ this forum topic]? <scratchsig>TenType</scratchsig> 04:22, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:The blocks still don't match the one in the post, I tried again on my sandbox and it still does not cut out. Anyone who is an expert at doing this? <scratchsig>TenType</scratchsig> 05:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
::You can use [https://scratchblocks.github.io this page].<scratchsig>Ahmetlii</scratchsig> 07:34, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Curse Garamol56 for not using forum scratchblocks!{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 13:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
::::@Ahmetlii That website may come in handy...
::::@kenny2scratch Yes, it is so exhausting to convert it into proper scratchblocks! <scratchsig>TenType</scratchsig> 19:07, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::Wait, is it possible to convert forum scratchblocks to wiki scratchblocks???? {{User:VFDan/Sig}} 03:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
::::::    <code><nowiki><scratchblocks>define scratch</scratchblocks></nowiki></code>
It will give:
<scratchblocks>define scratch</scratchblocks>
See also: [[Block Plugin]]<scratchsig>Ahmetlii</scratchsig> 20:30, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent}} Hmmm. I'll see if I can help although I'm not sure if I'll be able to. <scratchsig>Filmlover12</scratchsig> 18:18, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Scratch Wiki Adventure ==
{{unresolved}}
On Wikipedia, there is an option for new Wikians to complete the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Adventure Wikipedia Adventure].  This teaches them skills and covers all the basics of using Wikipedia.  I think it'd be a good idea to create a Scratch Wiki Adventure of our own to teach new Wikians the basics of the Scratch Wiki.  This would include editing tips, rules, etiquette, etc.  I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on this idea and/or if anyone would like to work with me on creating this.<scratchsig>54329</scratchsig> 17:08, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:<b>+1</b> {{e|:D}} <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 22:41, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
::I hope you're prepared to put in the amount of work involved, because The Wikipedia Adventure is really involved (I've [[wikipedia:User:Kenny2wiki|done it]] once before) and a lot of stuff has to be created for it to work. I like the idea, but I don't know if anyone here has the follow-through to actually focus on a project like this that could take a week or more to make.
::If you think you can commit yourself (and furthermore get others to commit themselves) you can make a [[Template:SWP|Scratch Wiki Project]] of it. Good luck!{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 03:22, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
:::Woohoo; we got bureaucratic approval!  I think we can do it (maybe not ''as'' well as the Wikipedia Adventure, but still good).  I'll start thinkin' up some basic ideas to start us off.  If anyone is interested in working with me on this, please let me know on my [[User talk:54329|talk page]]. {{e|:)}}<scratchsig>54329</scratchsig> 05:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
:::: Isn’t this going to be a duplicate of the  [[Help:Welcome|welcome tutorial]]? {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 06:41, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
:::::No, the Wikipedia Adventure is really involved and more interactive. <scratchsig>TenType</scratchsig> 06:44, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
::::::Adding on, when I did it, it felt a lot more like a game/activity than a guidebook.  It allows the user to actually collaborate, talk to people and create/edit a page all in a sandbox setting.  It helped me learn the basics of Wikipedia far more than a guide could (probably because I was really interested in it and getting those shiny badges was nice).<scratchsig>54329</scratchsig> 06:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::}}
{{Scratch Wiki:Scratch Wiki Adventure/project}}{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 10:45, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
:I can help some tech stuff maybe? {{User:Apple502j/siggy}} 17:55, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
::I can help too! <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 22:33, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
:::I want to help too, so should I add myself or should 54329 do it as he's the owner? <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 01:38, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
::::In reply to both of you: Thanks for offering to help out!  I'll add both of your names to the list.  For future people that wish to help: feel free to just add your name under the "Assigned" section. <scratchsig>54329</scratchsig> 05:11, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
:::::I just took a quick glance at the Wikipedia Adventure, and that looks cool! I created a very different page a while ago with the same goal of educating New Wikians using a sort of quest system - you can check it out at [[User:Bigpuppy/Quests]]. {{e|:)}} It seems like this would be very different than that, though. {{cool|Good idea}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 02:32, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
{{outdent|5}}That's super cool that you made a quests page.  This will be semi-similar.  Feel free to stop by if you have any ideas for it. <small>''wink wink''</small><scratchsig>54329</scratchsig> 08:03, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
We could make a scratch project and link it when people get welcome notficiations on their talk page.

<scratchsig>ACS_Scratch_admin</scratchsig> 14:56, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm new to the scratch wiki and am kind of counfused so i think this would be a great idea<scratchsig>AirMargaret33</scratchsig> 21:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, it would be nice if we included such a project. It can benefit new wikians. <scratchsig>MitFieldatdawn</scratchsig> 12:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
:BTW, anything? I'm going to restart the project..<br>{{User:Lovecodeabc/Sig}} 18:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Suggestion: Mention that the Privacy Policy and Disclaimers are in German ==
{{unresolved}}
Currently, the links under the 'Legal' category do not are not mentioned that they are in German. I suggest that the footer mentions that the content under the Legal category are in German. 

Without mentioning that, some people might be confused that they are in German, and not English. They also [[Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 105#Privacy Policy Article|cannot be translated into English]] without it being inaccurate. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 13:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:Why would they be German?<scratchsig>OurPrincess</scratchsig> 16:35, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
::The Wiki servers are located in Germany and therefore follow the rules/regulations of Germany. <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 00:33, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
:::Would you be amenable to using the [https://example.com external link marker] on them instead? Putting "(German)" on a footer link seems unorthodox...{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 10:33, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
::::The servers are German because they are owned by Martin Wollenweber, who lives in Germany.<scratchsig>OurPrincess</scratchsig> 11:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
::::: Maybe the Privacy Policy and the Disclaimers can be individually labelled that they are in German, or is that still 'unorthodox'? They could have 'in German' put in brackets after them. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 13:29, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
::::::I think it's fine the way it is, but it should get translated for other wikis so we know what happens to our data.{{User:Dominic305/Templates/Signature}} 17:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::::}}
Did you read the OP? They can't be translated accurately.

Having a notice at the top of the actual pages saying something similar to what I say on my userpage (the "many other wikis link here" thing), ideally translated into everything, would also be fine for me - I'm only opposed to changing the footer.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 11:03, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
:Perphaps if you hover over "Legal", "Privacy policy", or "Disclaimers", for the last two it will talk through the mouse to say something like "This hyperlink will lead you to lead you to a page that is in German", and for the first it will say "The hyperlinks below will lead you to pages that are in German". I also like Ken's "many other wikis link here" idea. Perhaps even both, so, even if someone wouldn't see the message through the mouse, they will still see that warning.{{User:TheTrillion/Signature}} 05:20, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Scratch Wiki YT Channel ==
{{unresolved}}
Hi everyone! I wanted to put a little feeler out there to see who was interested in participating/creating content for a possible Scratch Wiki YT Channel. We would publish wiki-like content within YT's video format. We could then link to this content from within the Wiki. You could for example create a Scratch tutorial, run-through a certain block or feature, or discuss a recent community venture you participated in. If y'all are interested in seeing this idea come to fruition, please comment to express your interest and volunteer yourself for content creation. Thanks! <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 14:51, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I think that this would compete with the [[Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal#Scratch Wiki Adventure|Scratch Wiki Adventure]] though... {{User:VFDan/Sig}} 15:04, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
::I don't really see much benefit in it. Why would we need this? We already have Wiki Wednesday.{{User:Dominic305/Templates/Signature}} 15:47, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
:::Well we would be able to produce varied content aside from Wiki Wednesday. People have also suggested tutorials for S:WELCOME to me privately. We'd be modeling it in some regards to Wikipedia's YT Channel. <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 16:32, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
::::I'm interested! But... What do you mean by "volunteer yourself for content creation"? Is there a specific page to apply? {{User:Dilek10/Minisig}}
:::::I'm interested too {{-}} I'd like to help make a few videos. I already have a YouTube channel but I can't share it because of my real name and face reveal. I'm just ten years, but I don't think that will affect anything as I enjoy talking on-camera and a lot of people tell me I have a talent for vlogging / gaming (not to brag though). I also have a Scratch tutorial series, so I already have some experience with it.<scratchsig>Nambaseking01</scratchsig> 09:18, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
::::::I am interested, too! I have a channel already. How do I start? <scratchsig>R4356th</scratchsig> 19:26, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}Hey MakeTheBrainHappy, are you still planning this? {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 20:56, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
:Not actively no. I believe that it's a project that we would need to seriously reconsider given our new funding model. <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 01:57, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
::I'd be willing do to some work on this. I feel like learning things in a video format can be more engaging than reading an article, especially for younger users. Let me know if this will move forward anytime soon, if at all. <scratchsig>Venyanwarrior</scratchsig> 16:48, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Constructiveness in Community Portal - An Idea ==
{{unresolved}}
Hello there!

In case you didn't know, I'm a Forum Helper (https://scratch.mit.edu/studios/3688309/) on Scratch, which means I generally help out on the the Scratch discussion forums. One day, I headed over to the Community Portal and it seemed like a sort of "discussion forums" within the Scratch Wiki, and I understand that the concept is different, but for me it personally seemed that way. 

Anyways, I mostly help around a lot on the Suggestions forum, which, yet again, redirects to the Community Portal since there are a lot of suggestions for the Scratch Wiki here. One difference is though, that the Scratch Team and some Scratchers (like me) enforce the rule of "constructiveness" while making posts, and I'm pretty sure most of you know what that means but I'll just clarify:

* It means that one does not simply post "Support!", "Good idea!", or "+1!" and explain why they like the suggestion, that they provoke discussion, and look for possible issues instead of continuosly leaning on one side, like "I love this suggestion" or "I hate this suggestion"

* It means that one does not simply add one sentence to act as if their post is constructive. For example, "Support, because this might be useful for many Wikians!" seems constructive but it isn't really constructive, because they're not stating how it would be useful for many Wikians or why it would be.

Now, I've been looking around in the CP, and I've been seeing a couple of responses just saying "+1!" or merely "Support!" without provoking any further discussion and merely showing your satisfaction. So I thought, maybe, we could enforce the constructive rule on the CP as well. Especially because the ideas here much more mature and complex, and not like Scratch where it's just new blocks or random new features. 

I do agree that many people are already following this rule, but maybe just enforce it more? I do think it'll be incredibly helpful for the type of suggestions being given here.

<small>wow... that's... long</small>
<scratchsig>Nambaseking01</scratchsig> 09:31, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:While I understand what you're saying, I don't think it would be necessary to enforce constructiveness here. The discussion forums and Community Portal are two fundamentally different things. The Scratch Team has an extremely large userbase. Thus, there are many possible people contributing to discussions, and also many people that decisions will affect. It makes sense for there to be an expectation that people are constructive. However, as of writing, there are 72 [[Special:ActiveUsers|active users]] on the Scratch Wiki. This is much smaller than the userbase on Scratch. And yes, you might argue that our "userbase" is not just our editors but also our readers; yes, but our editors are the ones who are supposed to make the decisions here.

:Anyway, on the topic of having fewer active users on the wiki, it helps to see if someone ''supports'' your idea. And it matters, too. If multiple people like your idea, it probably has a better chance of being successful here. This is in stark contrast to the Suggestions Forum, where that is simply not true. This is why simply saying "support" or "no support" on that forum is not helpful, nor constructive.

:In summary, yes, I think it would be ''helpful'' for people to provide a reason that they like or dislike an idea (perhaps we could recommend it), but I don't think it's necessary to ''enforce'' it. I don't think that it's fair to compare the convention ''here'' to the convention ''on the Suggestions Forum,'' because the CP is fundamentally different from the Suggestions Forum and the discussion forums in general. That said, if someone ''dislikes'' an idea, I think it is more necessary to provide reasoning than if they like it, as they are disagreeing with the reasoning provided by the OP, and thus need to provide their own reasoning.

:So, to end this off, I agree that we should recommend it, but I disagree that we should ''enforce'' it.<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 14:13, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
::Good idea! I suppose that could work too.<scratchsig>Nambaseking01</scratchsig> 09:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
::: Depends on what you mean by "enforce". The policy of discussion over polling already exists, however if by "enforce" you mean removing comments like <span color="lime">'''Support!'''</span> is not a good idea, as such comments generally should be left as-is, however, explaining that such a comment holds no weight can be done. <br/>[[File:Naleksuh.jpg|20px]] [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]] ([[User_talk:Naleksuh#top|talk]] | [[Special:Contribs/Naleksuh|contribs]]) 22:17, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Merging Cloud Data Articles? ==
{{unresolved}}
I think that there are far too many articles on Cloud Data. I think these should all be merged or certain ones removed to reduce the amount of potential editing.
<scratchsig>ContourLines</scratchsig> 06:42, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
{{collapse bottom}}

== Suggestion: Have a dedicated page for feedback on the account request system ==
{{unresolved}}
I was browsing through some old CP archives, and one of the topics reminded me of a suggestion I thought of earlier. My suggestion may have been partly inspired by an account request I reviewed that included feedback on the account request system.

Currently, I leave users one of two messages if I accept their account request. I use this one if their request meets all the requirements already (I have preserved the external links, since this is how I post it on the Scratch website):
{{quote|Hello, (USERNAME). Congratulations - your Scratch Wiki account request was accepted! You can log in here with the password sent to your email address: https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Special:Login Begin here: https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/S:NEW Make sure to follow the guidelines, shown at https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/S:GUIDES. If you have questions, visit https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/S:FAQ and if they aren't answered there, feel free to ask me or any other Wikian! Have fun!}}

Now, some people inevitably miss something in [[S:CONTRIB]]. When we're reviewing account requests, and someone seems to have put in effort and has not missed too much of S:CONTRIB, we first put their request on hold. We comment on their profile and ask them further questions. If they satisfy the requirements after replying to our comment(s), we accept their request. This is all outlined in [[Scratch Wiki:Become a contributor/Admin Guide]].

This is the comment I leave on people's profiles if I first put their request on hold and then accept it:
{{quote|Thanks, that's all. Congratulations - your Scratch Wiki account request was accepted! You can log in here with the password sent to your email address: https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Special:Login Begin here: https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/S:NEW Make sure to follow the guidelines, shown at https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/S:GUIDES. If you have questions, visit https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/S:FAQ and if they aren't answered there, feel free to ask me or any other Wikian! Have fun!}}

Some Experienced Wikians have a slight variation of this message, but we all link them to [[Special:Login]], [[S:NEW]], [[S:GUIDES]], and [[S:FAQ]] (or other shortcuts that link to those pages). Now, why am I mentioning the messages that I use when accepting someone's account request? Well, because those may be changed if my suggestion gets implemented.

What is my suggestion? Well, in short, I think we should have a dedicated page for feedback on our account request system. As a wiki, we should always be looking to improve; and this is a way to do it. People can already give feedback on the account request system (or anything else wiki-related, for that matter) in the CP, but feedback is not actively facilitated. This is why I think we should have a dedicated page.

This page would be specifically designed to be easy-to-use for people who are new to the Scratch Wiki and wikis in general. Users would be able to click a link or button, and the "new section" interface would be filled with a form where they could insert their feedback. The user's signature would be automatically inserted at the end. It would be similar to [https://en.scratch-wiki.info/w/index.php?title=Scratch_Wiki_talk:Elections/October_2019/Nominations&action=edit&section=new&preload=Scratch_Wiki_talk:Elections/October_2019/Nominations/Template the link users click] to nominate themselves for an EW election.

However, I don't think that the page should just ''exist'' {{-}} I think we should actively make New Wikians aware of it. When someone gets accepted, the account request system is fresh in their mind, and they may have some ideas on how to improve it. However, they may not know where they can put that feedback, or may be too nervous to make us aware of it. My first thought was to add a link to the page to the messages used when accepting users. If we feel that that already has too much information, we could also add it to [[S:WELCOME]].

Of course, all of this is subject to change. What do y'all think of this idea? Is it a good one? A bad one? Do you have any ideas to make it better? Everyone's feedback is equally valued. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 02:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:[[Project talk:Become a contributor]] <br /><small>''-unsigned comment by {{user|Naleksuh}}''</small>
::Thanks for your comment. However, did you read my whole suggestion? That page does not include everything I suggested. Plus, my suggestion would not encompass feedback on ''just'' [[S:CONTRIB]], but also on the [[Special:RequestAccount]] interface, how we manage account requests, etc. {{e|:)}} Thank you for reminding me of that page, though! {{e|:)}} <br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 02:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
::: I understood what you were saying. However it may have been my fault for including only a link instead of an additional explanation. My point here was that I do not believe a whole new page is necessary, but that the existing page should suffice, and that discussions there can be extended to this new ground (since Special pages do not have talk pages). b<br /><small>''-unsigned comment by {{user|Naleksuh}}''</small>
::::Alright. So, assuming that we would not create a whole new page, but rather extend that page to be about feedback on the account request system in general, what do you think of my other suggestions (e.g. actively facilitating feedback, making the page easy to use even for people new to wikis, etc.)? Thank you for your quick response, by the way {{-}} it is greatly appreciated. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 02:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::I think these are good suggestions! it's a good idea to actively facilitate feedback from New Wikians, and putting a link in the acceptance or welcome message will hopefully make them aware of the page. We could probably add the button which you suggested that automatically creates a form to the top of the [[Scratch Wiki talk:Become a contributor|S:CONTRIB talk page]], and/or have the link do it automatically. I think we should also create a shortcut for the talk page if possible, if this suggestion gets implemented. <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 22:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent|5}}Great! I've created a draft of what the feedback page could look like [[User:Bigpuppy/Account Request Feedback|here]]. (As we've discussed, the feedback page might be the [[S:CONTRIB]] talk page.) I also think it might be a good idea to create a Scratch Wiki Project for this. The users assigned to the project would be in charge of creating the page and maintaining it. The job of maintaining it might include:

* Observing how users use the page, and finding ways to improve the user experience
* Answering users' questions about how to provide feedback
* Archiving old feedback sections

If you would like to participate, feel free to add your name [[User:Bigpuppy/Account Request Feedback/project|here]]! You don't have to process account requests to be a part of this Scratch Wiki Project!
{{User:Bigpuppy/Account Request Feedback/project}}

Feel free to make edits to [[User:Bigpuppy/Account Request Feedback|the draft of the feedback page]] as you see fit. {{e|:)}}
<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 05:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
::: So, this is expected to post to [[Project_talk:Become_a_contributor]]? If so, I see few objections to this, although I would have preferred a single section myself. It might also help to say what you are planning to do with the responses. <br/>[[File:Naleksuh.jpg|20px]] [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]] ([[User_talk:Naleksuh#top|talk]] | [[Special:Contribs/Naleksuh|contribs]]) 05:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
::::Having it as the talk page of [[S:CONTRIB]] is a possibility. It all depends on what we want to do. Currently, I'm keeping it in my userspace since it's just a draft.
::::For the second part of your post, could you clarify what you mean? We will find trends in the responses, then propose changes to the account request system if those trends are major enough. Thanks! (Would you like to join the SWP?) {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 05:58, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent|::::}}
I'm not sure I see the point of this. I've never heard of anyone having feedback on the account request process, especially not immediately after being accepted. All the changes to the account request system have come from proposals by EWs, as far as I'm aware.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 10:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
:Right {{-}} that's why we should have a dedicated page for it. {{e|:)}} As I said in my original post:
:"When someone gets accepted, the account request system is fresh in their mind, and they may have some ideas on how to improve it. However, they may not know where they can put that feedback, or may be too nervous to make us aware of it."<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 15:53, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
::Furthermore, they may not think their thoughts are important enough to point out. Or, they might not think they have feedback, but when we facilitate their feedback, they think of feedback. New users have a unique point of view when it comes to the issue of account requests; thus, I think we should actively facilitate their feedback on the account request system. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 16:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
:::In that case, we should direct them to the Wiki CP forum topic, so that both accepted and rejected users have equal representation, instead of silencing those who were rejected. The Wiki isn't a good place for feedback about account requests if not everyone who might have feedback has an account.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 20:56, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
::::I understand what you're saying, and I think I may have considered that issue before too. I do agree with you at first thought. However, after I think it through, here's my view: Time has shown that many people are able to get accepted with our current account request system. The account request system is designed so that anyone who reads ''all'' of [[S:CONTRIB]] can get through, if they put in the work. I feel that if we actively facilitate rejected users' feedback, we might get feedback from a lot of people who haven't actually read all of [[S:CONTRIB]]. If we get feedback from a lot of people who haven't read [[S:CONTRIB]], then we're getting feedback from people who don't really know everything about how the account request process works. This is not to say that we should shield our eyes from rejected users' feedback, but I'm not sure whether we should actively facilitate it.
::::I disagree that actively facilitating accepted users' feedback and not doing so for rejected users is "silencing" rejected users, though. If a rejected has a valid concern about the account request process, I would assume that they would let us know of it. They might not know about the CP forum topic, but they could reply to the account processor and tell them their thoughts.
::::Please keep in mind that I'm not trying to discriminate against rejected users; the above thoughts are just things to think about. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 21:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::You took me way too seriously - I was just pointing out that rejected users are shut out by your proposal, not saying that you have a vendetta against them.
:::::I still don't think that the Wiki is the place for it, though. The account request process concerns the people as Scratch users, not Wiki users, so the feedback should be done on Scratch. But if you think rejected users have a less informed opinion, we can simply invite accepted users to give feedback on the CP topic and omit that invitation for rejected users.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 21:56, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::I think many rejected users have a less informed opinion (those who have not read [[S:CONTRIB]]). If someone has actually read all of [[S:CONTRIB]] and is still getting rejected, I think there should be a place for them to give feedback. However, we shouldn't necessarily put it in the rejection message because many rejected users have not read [[S:CONTRIB]].
::::::I disagree with your logic on why it should be done on Scratch, though. The account request system is a product of the Wiki, so it should be done on the Wiki. It's also a good chance for them to have a "first experience" with how things like talk pages work.
::::::However, this is just my opinion. Again, I am not trying to be disrespectful to rejected users. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 17:01, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Tip of the Day ==
{{unresolved}}
{{User:Bigpuppy/Tip of the Day/project}}
I created a [[User:Bigpuppy/Tip of the Day|Tip of the Day]] system that will show one tip for each day of the year. It's inspired by [[Wikipedia:WP:Tip of the day|Wikipedia's tip of the day]]. However, we need tips! If you would like to help, feel free to [[User:Bigpuppy/Tip of the Day/project|add your name to the project page]]. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 02:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:Ooh! Sounds interesting :) Should I just add my name next to yours or somewhere else? {{User:Illusion705/Signature}} 02:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
::How do we add tips? Is every tip going to have it's own subpage? If so, it would be cool if the "Add one?" link for adding a tip linked to the subpage for the current day's tip. <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 04:31, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
:::Is there enough to know about the Wiki for 365 tips? (Regardless, I've fixed your {{t|SWP}} usage, Bigpuppy - the <code>page</code> parameter is meant for the /project page itself.){{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 07:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
::::Based on what Ken said above, maybe there could be tips for each day of the month (eg. on the first of January, February and the rest of the months, one tip shows, and so on for the rest of the days in a month)? {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 09:00, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::I agree with what Jammum said. I think the Scratch Wiki doesn't need 365 tips for each day because this wiki isn't a Wikipedia.{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 10:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::Wow, I didn't expect so many people to reply in such a short amount of time.
::::::* @Illusion705 {{-}} You can add your name to [[User:Bigpuppy/Tip of the Day/project]] similar to how ahmetlii's name is. {{e|:)}}
::::::* @Groko13 {{-}} Currently, it's just one page with all of them. While that would be a lot of subpages, I think that might be cool too.
::::::* @Kenny2scratch {{-}} I mean, there might be, but there might not be. (Thanks for fixing that.)
::::::* @Jammum {{-}} I think that's a good idea. I'll do that today.
::::::* @ahmetlii {{-}} As per above.
::::::However, after I made this, I had another idea. We could run a Scratch tip of the day as well. It would show tips related to Scratch, its editor, and its website. Unlike the wiki, I think there ''is'' room for one tip for each day of the year. We could have this be part of the same Scratch Wiki Project. What do you think? {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 17:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::::I think that's a good idea. Would that be separate from the Wiki tip of the month, but in the same SWP? Also, I think that if there are enough Wiki tips, we could expand it to a tip every week, but that depends on how many tips we can come up with. <scratchsig>Groko13</scratchsig> 18:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
{{outdent|7}}I think they would be part of the same SWP, since they are both Tips of the Day. I've created two separate pages: [[User:Bigpuppy/Tip of the Day/Scratch Wiki]] and [[User:Bigpuppy/Tip of the Day/Scratch]]. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 20:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
:Do you think we'll be able to find 366 tips for Scratch? While I understand the concern that we won't be able to, I also don't want us to be limited by a lower number. We can take all the time we need to write them. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 21:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
I'm currently making tips and already have about 75. Will share when done
<scratchsig>Acebsa</scratchsig> 19:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::Ok here is the huge list of quite a few tips I made/ found online:
You can use the language extension to make your projects multilingual.

To become a SDS curator you need to help around the studio.

 There are 2 types of paint editors bitmap and vector

Use the Scratch Wiki to find helpful info. About many scratch topics.

Use turbo mode to make projects run faster.

 You can use cloud variables to store data on Scratch Servers

 You can use starter projects to help get started on Scratch!

 You can join the welcoming committee to welcome new scratchers by making a project on what scratch is about.

Use the discussion forums to give suggestions on new Scratch features.

 Use the report button to let the ST know about inappropriate projects or comments.

To delete multiple sprites, Shift+ click with the Scissors tool (it won't revert to the arrow).

Find a sprite: To show a sprite that's off the screen or hidden, Shift+click on its thumbnail in the sprite list (bottom right-corner of screen) - this will bring the sprite to the middle and show it.

To turn a costume into a separate sprite, right-click (Mac Ctrl+click) and select "turn into a sprite".

Drag the blue line on sprite thumbnail (in the middle of the screen) to rotate the sprite.

To rotate a sprite from the stage, shift+click on the sprite.

Shortcut to get a sprite to "point in direction 90": double-click on sprite thumbnail in the top middle of the screen.

To delete multiple sprites, Shift+click with the Scissors (it won't revert to the arrow)
To make multiple copies of a sprite, Shift+click with the Copy tool (it won't revert to the arrow)
Drag to reorder thumbnails in sprite list (bottom right corner of screen)
Drag to reorder costumes in the Costume tab area
To make a sprite that looks like part of the background, Right-click (Mac Ctrl+click) the stage to grab a portion of the image on the stage.
 
BLOCKS AND SCRIPTS
 
To copy a stack of blocks from one sprite to another, drag the stack to the thumbnail of the other sprite (at the bottom right corner of the screen).
To clean up the script area, right-click (Mac Ctrl+click) in Scripts area.
Get help for any block: right-click (Mac Ctrl+click) on the block
You can fit some blocks within other blocks. For example, you can put any Number or Sensing blocks with curved edges inside a "switch to costume" block or any block that has a white number or text area.
Want to get the current x-y of a sprite? Click on the Motion category to update the x-y numbers in the glide and go-to blocks in the palette.
 
PAINT EDITOR
 
To crop an image, outline it with the Selection tool, then Shift+delete (or Shift+backspace)
To rotate part of a costume, use the selection tool, then click the left or right Rotate button (curved arrows).
To rotate more precisely: Shift+click on the left or right Rotate button. It will let you enter a # of degrees to rotate
Grow or shrink more precisely: Shift+click on the Grow or Shrink button (arrows pointing out or in). It will let you enter a % size for a costume
To stamp multiple times, press Shift while using the Stamp tool.
Press Shift with the Rectangle tool to make a square.
Press Shift with the Oval tool to make a circle.
Press Shift with Line tool to make a straight horizontal or vertical line.
Press Shift key when clicking on a color square to change the other color.
To pick up a color from outside the paint editor, select the Eyedropper tool, click in the Paint editor, then drag while holding down the mouse key.
 
REPORTERS & VARIABLES
 
Click a monitor to toggle between options (hide monitor name, show slider)
Check boxes to show monitors on stage
 
 
KEYBOARD SHORTCUTS (some of these are repeats with above)
 
To delete multiple sprites, Shift+ click with the Scissors tool (it won't revert to the arrow).
Check boxes to show monitors on stage
To make multiple copies of a sprite, Shift+click with Copy tool (it won't revert to the arrow).
Ctrl+S to save your project.
 
OTHER
 
You can drag multiple images at once into Scratch. They will become costumes within a sprite.
You can drag in an animated gif.
You can drag in images from a web browser, Word, and some other programs (on Windows).
You can drag in a Scratch project from a file folder.
 
Right click a block for help.
Visit the Scratch wiki for more help.
There's a whole community of Scratchers that have come across a multitude of issues and would also love to help.
To join the community make an account!

Hope this helps! <scratchsig>Acebsa</scratchsig> 20:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
:Really awesome project! I didn't realize that we were planning this kind of thing. Would you like me to post the tip of the day on our twitter account @ScratchWiki? <scratchsig>Makethebrainhappy</scratchsig> 17:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
::Semi-necro-reply, but I think the Tip of the Day for Scratch could be 31 days as well (or even two to three months repeating because there is lots more to know than the wiki) because 365 is a huge number and there might not be enough facts to fill 365 up. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 08:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
:::We could also have a bot randomly choose a tip (that hasn't been used too recently). This way, we wouldn't need to have 365 tips. There are enough tips on the page, so we could start showing tips on Scratch Wiki Home immediately. (but we would need to plan some things first) {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 21:52, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
::::There is a discussion at [[User talk:Bigpuppy/Tip of the Day]]. {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 23:20, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== [[Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 107#Tell users on Wiki Wednesday topics not to spam in replies]] continuation ==
{{unresolved}}
I am just reviving the discussion  mentioned in the title above because it was archived and it did not seem to be completed. Also, on the latest Wiki Wednesday topic, no notice in the first post telling Scratchers not to spam in the topic was put in.

In the discussion linked above, I mentioned some examples of what the notice would mention as being spam. I also think posts only saying 'Hi', 'Hello' or something similar could also be mentioned as being spam. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 15:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
: Isn't it just common sense ''not'' to spam?  It's already against the CGs, so I don't see a use for it or it's because I stalk the Announcements forum, get a first-page post, and move on. It could be useful to the 5 year-olds here that need a notice saying "Don't spam, it's sUpEr AnNoYiNg!11!!1" <br />{{User:Garnetluvcookie/Sig}} 15:42, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== json Editing ==
{{unresolved}}
Many pages have similar instructions on how to access the json inside sb3 and sprite3 files:

{| class="wikitable"
! Page !! Steps Taught
|-
|[[Making Invisible Code]] || extracting, opening, editing and recompressing
|-
|[[Hidden Blocks]] || extracting, opening, editing and recompressing
|-
|[[JSON Tutorial]] || extracting, opening, editing and recompressing
|-
|[[Scratch Lab#Custom Fonts]] || extracting, opening, editing and recompressing
|-
|[[Layer (value)#Viewing the Specific Layer Value]] || extracting, opening
|-
|[[How to Save a Project#Uploading a Project]] || extracting, opening
|-
|[[Exporting and Importing#Scripts]] || extracting, opening
|-
|[[Scratch File Format#Project Files]] || extracting
|}

This could be simplified by using [[Help:Templates|templates]] with instructions for each step, so maybe such templates should be created.
<scratchsig>Mlcreater</scratchsig> 01:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I made a draft:[[User:Ideapad-320/JsonEditTemplateDraft]]<br>https://uploads.scratch.mit.edu/get_image/user/29590234_18x18.png [[User:Ideapad-320|Ideapad-320]] | [[User talk:Ideapad-320 | Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ideapad-320 | Contribs]] | [https://scratch.mit.edu/users/ideapad-320/ Scratch] 00:25, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
::I don't think there is a need for a template for this. A separate page that goes more in depth on the instructions could be fine. <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 02:29, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Hide 'Save changes' in the editor until Show Preview is clicked ==
{{unresolved}}
This might not be possible, but I think the Save Changes button in the editor should be hidden until Show preview is clicked. If this is possible, this would decrease WikiMonitor warnings for editing too many times. 

Apart from the possibility of this being a major problem, some users might be confused that the button is missing. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 18:04, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I think it is a good idea but I'm not sure if the change would be 100% necessary. There are some downsides but if someone thinks of a solution to those minor problems, then I think it is a '''very''' good idea. {{User:Filmlover12/Signature}} 09:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
::I've just had an idea. Well, one of the problems you said was that some users may be confused if the button is missing. Maybe, if it's possible, the button could still be there but not able to be clicked on until show preview is clicked. That way, users would still be able to see the button but not be able to press it. {{User:Filmlover12/Signature}} 15:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
:::Maybe something only for newer users (1 week or less) so that they understand they should use preview. I would dislike this for myself though as it'll soon become irritating. Maybe an opt-in or opt-out? <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 02:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
:::: I agree... Maybe it could be in Preferences, similar to the "warn me when I leave an edit page with unsaved changes" and "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary)" settings.
{{collapse bottom}}

== About the block ==
{{unresolved}}
Many articles on specific [[Reporter Blocks]] have paragraphs at the top with messages like:
{{about|the block|more information on the value this block reports|Direction (value)}}

There could be an <nowiki>{{</nowiki>About the block}} template (or one with a similar name) to take a value's article's name as its argument, and create a paragraph with:
<pre>{{about|the block|more information on the value this block reports|[[{{{1}}}]]}}</pre>

Such a template could be used on the pages:
* [[Direction (block)]]
* [[X Position (block)]]
* [[Y Position (block)]]
* [[Size (block)]]
* [[Volume (block)]]
* [[Loudness (block)]]
* [[Mouse X (block)]]
* [[Mouse Y (block)]]
* [[Timer (block)]]
<scratchsig>Mlcreater</scratchsig> 02:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
{{collapse bottom}}

== Expanding 3D projects ==
{{unresolved}}
So it looks like a few users are creating more articles on 3D projects, so we should probably have a well-defined approach to this. We need to decide: what is worth including/not including, how will we organize them, what deserves its own article vs. being part of another article, and what amount of depth they should go into.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 18:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:By other articles do you mean the raycaster and how to make a 3-dimensional project articles?<scratchsig>HiPeeps124816</scratchsig> 15:54, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
::I am talking about creating new articles as well. I mean expanding the ''idea'' of 3D projects, not just the articles we already have.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 16:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
:::Let's make a page for raymarching, raytracing, pathtracing, painter's algothirm, and researtion (I am a big misspeller).<scratchsig>PenguinLover1123</scratchsig> 16:21, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Horizontal Blocks ==
{{unresolved}}
The user  on the forums [[post:5095469|suggested that we make an article about horizontal blocks]], pointing out that the French Wiki already has one. ([https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://fr.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Blocs_horizontaux You can see a Google translated version of the French Wiki article here]) I am hesitant to make that its own article here since horizontal blocks were never actually released, and we are not a Wiki about [[ScratchJr]] (we document that it exists and what it is, but that is mostly just contained within that article). However, it may be worth including in [[Development of Scratch 3.0]]. Thoughts?<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 17:13, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I agree that it shouldn't get its own article. I remember it being discussed in the early stages of development of 3.0 that horizontal blocks were going to be used instead of vertical blocks on mobile devices but nothing ever came of it... it was never included in any public betas. Keeping in mind that it was only really considered briefly at the start of development and was scrapped later on, I don't think it deserves anything big, perhaps just a few sentences at some point in the article explaining the concept and how nothing ever came of them - they were essentially just an idea. {{E|meow}} {{User:Redglitter/Signature}}  18:49, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
::Creating the article would be a bad idea, however including it that article would be a good idea since it was part of its development.{{User:TheTrillion/Signature}} 16:46, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
::: I think it is a nice idea to make an article on it as it will help people know about what was going on in background during release of 3.0.<scratchsig>Purvitekriwal</scratchsig> 05:57, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Would this be an ok article? ==
{{unresolved}}
Would list of stickys in the forums be a good enough article?
<scratchsig>Bobcat0701</scratchsig> 15:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I'm not sure. Although the forum stickies would be a nice article, I have a few problems with what you're asking here. I'm going to list them here.
:'''1.''' What forum(s) would be in this article? [[Announcements (forum)|Announcements]]? [[Suggestions (forum)|Suggestions]]? Maybe even [[Help With Scripts]]?
:'''2.''' Would ''all'' the stickies be featured here or just the top ones?
:Finally, '''3.''' Would this potential sticky topic feature the stickies of hidden forums (i.e. the [[Welcoming Committee Forum]])?
:And that's all I have to say about this. Please, answer the questions, because otherwise this might not be an okay article. Thanks for reading.
:{{User:8bitjake/Sig}} <div style= " class="plainlinks" title="Why does it go onto the next line like this? ...I don't like it.">16:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)</div>
1 All but read number three
2 What does that mean
3 I can't add that info since i'm not in any of those groups
<scratchsig>Bobcat0701</scratchsig> MEOW yes my cat told me to write that. 00:16, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
::My two cents (not speaking in my official capacity as an admin here, just my personal opinion) is that this isn't significant enough to warrant its own article. Most stickies are by users (including [[topic:6986|one by me]]), and [[S:NOSP|we do not create articles about user-generated content]].<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 01:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
:I think that would be unimportant. First of all, here is the lacking points:
# Is it really possible to maintain an updated list regarding sticky topics? They generally tend to be replaced/unstickied when there's no longer a need for them.
# It would be a kind of user-generated content. (as jvvg pointed out; though there might be dissident voices questioning this rule, like the opinions expressed in [[Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done#Relax S:NOSP even more|this]] stale discussion. Under the current policy, it's banned.)
# I'm not really sure about notability, even though we have had a list like [[List of Scratch Modifications|this]] before the introduction of user-generated content ban.{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 19:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Should pages with many editors notes have them collapse ==
{{unresolved}}
Tall editors notes can ruin the experience for non editors. i have an idea for a solution: Collapse those notes. example:
[[User:Ideapad-320/Sandbox/manyissues]]<scratchsig>Ideapad-320</scratchsig> 01:58, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:Do you have an example of a page where this is actually a problem?<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 02:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Can we make all dicussions be on separate pages? ==
{{unresolved}}
This scratch wiki forum is so cluttered up
<scratchsig>PenguinLover1123</scratchsig> 19:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:{{Not done|No support.}} Discussions which only relate to a certain page can be kept on that page, but other discussions that relate to the whole wiki need a central place for discussion. The main page? No, as talk pages for main pages should deal only with issues relating to the main page.{{User:Dhuls/Signature}} 20:18, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
:::Well, separating them and transforming the Portal into a decentralized one will make it worse, and that's actually why we have a portal: to discuss everything about the wiki on a determined space, to enable that everyone is able to participate discussions and noticing it on a faster speed, as well as acting as a noticeboard for important updates on software, wiki rules, etc. The Community Portal is also frequently archived for finished discussions to not to do it too way cluttered. Not to mention that there is a table of contents for finding the topic you're looking for.{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 20:24, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::Well, the table's really really long...<scratchsig>PenguinLover1123</scratchsig> 22:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
:No support either. Probably, it would be quite annoying when people press 'Random Page' as it will mostly just give them discussions. <scratchsig>Mr-Argon</scratchsig> 12:22, 10 April 2022 (UTC)Mr-Argon
::{{not done|No support}} doing this would make discussions harder to use and would reduce the amount of activity on discussions. (The random page feature only goes to mainspace pages, and discussions wouldn't be on the mainspace.) {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 16:58, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
:::Semi-bump: I do not consider the Community Portal's size to be too large or cluttered; the page reaches 125 kilobytes around once every several months when it is archived. Additionally, topics not strictly related to the wiki as whole, such as about individual articles, can go on other talk namespaces, which in practice might reduce the size of the CP. 
:::The Community Portal is manageable enough for all important Wiki discussions to go there; I do not think it needs to be separated out. Putting every discussion on separate pages might not be worth it; doing such might litter the Scratch Wiki talk: namespace, with many topics might only viewed or edited a few times, even basic editing questions.
:::Although the last replies to this topic were months ago, several other users here are against splitting the Community Portal (which would probably include me as well), although I am unsure whether to consider this discussion done or not. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 11:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== A draft namespace suggestion ==
{{unresolved}}
I think there should be a new namespace (similar to Wikipedia's Draft: namespace) for mostly incomplete pages or for pages that have the Wiki Standards template and need a lot of edits to the entire page to meet editing guidelines. Such namespace could be called Draft:, WIP: or something similar.  {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 15:55, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:A good idea- in theory. I don't really know how this works, and there might not be enough articles to count for the namespace. Maybe let someone more experienced handle this. {{User:ILikeProggraming123/Signature}} 23:54, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
::As ILikePRoggramming123 said, I don't think we have enough articles to justify this, though this could be a chicken and egg problem (i.e. people don't create drafts ''because'' there's no "official" way to do so). For now our system seems to be create an article at '''Article Name/Draft''' for drafts, or alternatively your user sandbox.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 00:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
:::<small>(Edit conflict)</small> If you don't know how this works, try checking out [[wikipedia:Project:Draft]].{{User:Dhuls/Signature}} 00:25, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
::::My suggestion for a Draft namespace (based on Wikipedia's) is for articles that are expected to be actual articles soon (so incomplete tutorials and pages that need a lot of work before it meets wiki guidelines) that other users can edit (so Draft pages should follow all rules of mainspace pages, including notability guidelines (draft pages on subjects which are not notable enough could still be moved to userspace)). The namespace could be used to store pages that need some more editing before being presentable, with the title the article is expected to have with a Draft: prefix. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 06:10, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
:::::(attempted revival) A few minutes before I wrote this, I tagged the article [[Scrolling With Lists (Pen) - Tutorial]] with the expand template. However, that article has very little content to be a useful article right now, and moving it to userspace would prevent other users from editing it (unless the userspace owner was aware of open userspace and added it), so an article like that would go in a hypothetical Draft: namespace (that page is intended to be an actual Scratch Wiki article)
:::::(Something else about a hypothetical Draft namespace) I think having pages that have the Wiki Standards template or are very incomplete until they no longer have problems with their content in a Draft namespace could make mainspace overall higher quality (although Scratch Wiki readers could still find them). {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 08:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
::::::{{done|Support}}. However, there wouldn't be enough articles in the namespace, so we could have drafts as subpages of a project page (like how april fools pages work) {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 17:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
{{outdent}}
:(attempted revival) [[How to make a basic racing game]] (title might change soon) would be another example of a page that could be created in a Draft: namespace, as it was created very incompletely and I put the Wiki Standards template on it. Putting pages like these in a Draft: namespace might increase the overall quality of non-draft mainspace. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 16:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Proposal for new [[scratch:explore]] style content-actions tabs ==

{{unresolved}}
Hi all,

There is a new proposal for "page", "discussion", etc. tabs currently found in the pencil menu to be included in tabs at the top of the page (which could be instead of or in addition to the pencil menu) in the style of the Scratch Explore page.

The pull request, which includes mock-up screenshots, can be found here: https://github.com/InternationalScratchWiki/ScratchWikiSkin2/pull/95 However, please keep discussion that isn't code review on this topic.

There are several things that still need discussion:
# Is this change even necessary?
#:I think so, because this location for the actions is a click less.
# Should these tabs replace the pencil menu?
#:I think not, because the original explore tab design is unfortunately not very accessible at all... The contrast is simply far too low. The original menu can remain as a more accessible alternative.
#:However, it's also not completely out of the question to mildly modify the tabs to be more accessible.
## If so, should the pencil now-button remain (perhaps as a quick edit button) or be removed completely?
# Should this be made a user preference?
## If so, opt-in or out?
# Current behavior is to still not have these tabs (i.e. hide them) for anonymous users. Is this ideal?
#:I'd say so: readers won't be using those links and it would only be visual clutter for them (while being convenient for editors).

This is a major change to Wiki interface design, so I would appreciate as much community input as possible.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 07:13, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:I like the idea; it definitely creates a 3.0 feel on the Wiki, which helps to match the main site. This does make it easier to do things like watch pages, go to a talk page, etc., since you don't need to click the pencil icon. I feel like in Preferences, there should be an option to toggle the "buttons" to pencil and back; not just fixed. For New Wikians, I think it'd be beneficial to have the icons as default, as they are, as you said, easier to use. <br>[[File:Wangat scratch profile picture.png|20px]] [[User:Wangat|<span style="color:#4ca6ff; font-family:Verdana">'''wangat'''</span>]] [[User talk:Wangat|<span style="color:#4ca6ff; font-family:Verdana">talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contributions/Wangat|<span style="color:#4ca6ff; font-family:Verdana">contribs</span>]] • [[Users:wangat|<span style="color:#4ca6ff; font-family:Verdana">profile</span>]] 20:07, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
::Just to confirm that I understand you properly, this means your answers to my questions are the following? 1. Yes 2. Unspecified 3. Yes 3.1. Opt out for New Wikians 4. Unspecified{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 02:11, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
:::My thoughts are: 1. It may not be strictly "necessary" but it definitely is helpful, it will make the interface easier to understand since it may not be obvious to new users to use the pencil menu. 2. I think we should retain the pencil menu for backwards compatibility. 3. Might as well, I would go with opt-out. 4. I'm not sure, since anonymous users may still want to see the talk page or be able to view the source, and they're the least likely to know about the pencil menu. Also, two other comments: I think it may be worth including icons and an alternate display would be like "projects" and "studios" instead of the categories. Not 100% sure how we'd be able to integrate that with the Wiki UI, but imo it might look a bit better and would help with the contrast issues.<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 02:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
::::Alright, it has been made an opt-out preference. The "projects" and "studios" tabs would make the whole thing far too tall - it would evict most of the page content and leave very little to be seen without scrolling.
::::However, there are issues with other languages - [https://github.com/InternationalScratchWiki/ScratchWikiSkin2/pull/95#issuecomment-949309820 see this comment]. Any other suggestions or is my current solution as good as it gets in your opinion?{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 06:15, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
:::::I don't think this is necessary, though it is definitely useful. And it does help explain what certain buttons do (like the rename button).
:::::I think that the pencil menu should remain. I personally don't quite like this idea and I don't doubt that there might be others that wouldn't be interested in this idea either. Nevertheless, it does sound as if this would be useful for New Wikians since, I assume, most would already be used to a more 3.0 skin rather than 2.0. I agree with the opt-out option because of this. (If possible, maybe make a banner for those who may want to opt out for a short duration).
:::::Anonymous users won't need all of the buttons, but certain buttons may be useful for them: Project page and discussion button and the edit button. <br/>{{User:12944qwerty/Templates/Sig}} 14:42, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
::::::Thank you for suggesting this, Ken; it is an interesting change to the layout. That said, I personally do not think it is necessary, nor do I think it should be the default layout if it is added.

::::::I don't follow the thought process of the users who think it should be added because it might be easier for New Wikians. Learning how to use the wiki's interface is an inherent part of learning how to use the wiki, and I don't think that learning that you can access editing tools through the pencil icon adds a significant impediment to this learning process. I think many users probably see the pencil icon, think "oh, this is a pencil icon, I can probably use this to edit the page," and then realize that they can access other editing tools (such as page history and talk pages) through the pencil icon after they've clicked it. In my experience, when new users join the wiki, they usually seem to have the most trouble with aspects of the wiki such as indenting on talk pages. I don't see many users asking how to access the editing interface, probably because they likely realize right off the bat that they can access it through the pencil icon.

::::::I also don't understand why the editing tools need to be able to be accessed through one click instead of two. It makes sense that something like [[Help:Rollback|rollback]] should be able to be accessed through one click because of its urgent nature (although I and several other EWs have two-click rollback enabled anyway to avoid accidental clicks). However, I don't think that accessing the editing interface or viewing the history of a page have this time-sensitive nature. In my opinion, having two clicks instead of one to, say, move or edit a page does not add a significant enough amount of time to the moving or editing process to warrant this change.

::::::I feel that this change would add unnecessary clutter to the interface. That said, Smrman's suggestion on GitHub of using icons does make it less cluttered.

::::::For the reasons outlined above, if this is implemented, I feel that it should be '''opt-in''' and that the current layout should stay as the default. {{e|:)}}<br/>{{User:Bigpuppy/Real Signature}} 23:19, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
{{outdent|6}}
''Short answers to the questions asked on the top of discussion:''
# (1 & 2) Depends. The pencil icon is widely adapted and documented, and this change shall not make it automatically obsolete. I'd compare the situation with new Vector vs. the old Vector.
# (3 & 4) The buttons should definitely be opt-out during adaptation process. However, I think that it may be opt-in once it's widely adapted by the community. The buttons are also shouldn't be enabled for anonymous readers, as long as it's intended for editing. Though, I think it may be possible to make an "anon-user only" or "light" version with fewer buttons and removing the editing buttons at all. But again, this should also be opt-out while getting feedback from the users, as this is a major change on the appearance of the wiki.
{{User:Ahmetlii/sig}} 07:25, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
:bigpuppy honestly i forgot the pencil icon even exists as a vector user, i was sat there for ages trying to figure how to access a page from its talk page  <br/>{{User:Banana439monkey/infrastructure/sig}} 09:21, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
::Bigpuppy, I think the problem of the pencil menu is an opaque one - it's easy to figure out, but it needs to be figured out, as opposed to something that's obviously right there in front of you. It's an unnecessary friction in the learning process. Also, if we stick to the current behavior of it being shown to users and not viewers, then New Wikians logging in for the first time will conspicuously see the tabs appear after they have logged in, and thus be invited to try using them, as opposed to there being no visible change to the pencil menu without clicking on it to check.
::I think the icons smrman suggested are probably the way forward, so hopefully that minimizes clutter as well. Keep in mind the screenshots I posted are from an admin account - regular users will have two fewer tabs to use, which should again not be quite so cluttered. If you as an admin feel that it's too cluttered for you, you can opt out personally; but most people here seem to not find it quite as much of an issue.{{User:Kenny2scratch/sig}} 02:51, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
:::I think that the buttons would clutter up the interface, espically on small screens, when there is already a way to acess various pages or actions related to the page, which isn't too complicated to acess or to show to new users. However, I noticed there is a commit to remove it on mobile, but it would still impact small screens on computers.
:::I also noticed text being replaced with icons, which means it takes time to figure out which icons do what, unlike the pencil menu which says what each button does clearly because it says what each button does. It doesn't need time to be figured out. But, if text is used, people will understand which buttons do what faster, but then it takes up more space. But the pencil icon's buttons don't take up much space and are understandable. So, I think they should not be added. If it does get added, I think it should be opt-in.{{User:TheTrillion/Signature}} 00:34, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
::::I don't think this would change the Wiki experience significantly but I could live with either way. I would recommend though not to go for complicated opt-in/opt-out constructions since it would mean having to support (and test) two versions of the user interface in the future which would be an unnecessary effort IMO. In any case I appreciate the lifely and constructive discussion. You may count my vote as an ''undecided'', I'm looking forward to the outcome though. <scratchsig>Frodewin</scratchsig> 13:44, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
:::::I think this is a good idea, but it should be opt-in because most readers wouldn't need to see these buttons. {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 19:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Suggestion: Warn users if they add first or second person pronouns to an article ==
{{unresolved}}
I think it is very common for more newer users to use first or second person articles to mainspace articles, even though not doing so is part of the guidelines (implying that that section might have been skimmed over) So, I think users should be warned in the editor if they introduce non-third person articles, explaining that the wiki is supposed to look professional and that third person pronouns must be used.

Since quotes and reference citations must be put in articles as it was originally written (unless it needs to fit the Scratch Guidelines), and articles like [[My Blocks]] have to use the word 'my', I think a template should be used to mark where it is okay to puy first and second person pronouns (and would not be triggering a warning) or what is used to detect the pronouns could skip over quotes and references as well as the template.

I think AbuseFilter can warn users if a certain condition is met, but there might be a chance warning users for using these pronouns in mainspace articles could be a bit too complex. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 07:16, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
{{collapse top|title=Discussion}}
:{{not done|No support}} This would be very difficult to implement. The only real tool we have for this is AbuseFilter which relies on regex, which is a fairly blunt instrument and it would be very difficult to catch all the edge cases for something this complex (and it doesn't help that the word "I" is a single letter, making it all the more difficult to distinguish from legitimate uses), and building a custom extension that actually looks at the parse tree would also be ridiculously overkill for this. Also I think it would be an unnecessary burden on editors to require them to include a template just to say it's ok to use first/second-person pronouns. We also do have a few exceptions where articles are written in first/second pronouns for various reasons, including some cases in tutorials as well as articles like [[What should I do about unfriendly comments?]]<scratchsig>jvvg</scratchsig> 16:19, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
::(Sort of revival) Would it be feasible to tag (as in the MediaWiki function) edits which appear to add several first and second person pronouns (expect in several cases such as [[My Blocks]] and quotes and references) so users are more likely to be drawn to removing/replacing them? {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 16:25, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
:::{{not done|No support}} users adding first/second pronouns isn't too much of a problem. Also, we now allow second person in tutorials when addressing the reader, so adding this would prevent constructive edits from being made. {{User:CrazyBoy826/sig}} 17:09, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
::::We could change the aplication process and say "Your request notes must meet wiki standards" or "Write your request notes as if they where a section of a article" or somthing like that. That includes 3rd person only. So insted of saying "I would fix error x" or "i found error x", it would be "There is error x" or "Error x should be fixed". And insted of saying "I would add y" or "I noticed that y was missing and would add it", it would be "the article can benefit from the addidtion of y" Of course, those are just examples and you would not say "The error of the word rainbow being colored in rainbow under the color picker section should be fixed" {{User:Ideapad-320/Signature}} 15:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
:::::This topic is about the page editor, not account request instructions (and they already state to use proper spelling and grammar). I think it is fine to use first and second person in account requests, as long as they use proper sentences. {{User:Jammum/Signature}} 06:43, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}