Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal

Shortcuts:
	SWT:CP; S:CPORTAL; S:CPTALK; S:PORTAL; S:PORTTALK; S:TALK; S:CP;

Welcome to the main talk page for the Scratch Wiki!

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

Archives (oldest first)
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10
11 • 12 • 13 • 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 • 18 • 19 • 20
21 • 22 • 23 • 24 • 25 • 26 • 27 • 28 • 29 • 30
31 • 32 • 33 • 34 • 35 • 36 • 37 • 38 • 39 • 40
41 • 42 • 43 • 44 • 45 • 46 • 47 • 48 • 49 • 50
51 • 52 • 53 • 54 • 55 • 56 • 57 • 58 • 59 • 60
61 • 62 • 63 • 64 • 65 • 66 • 67 • 68 • 69 • 70
71 • 72 • 73 • 74 • 75 • 76 • 77 • 78 • 79 • 80
81 • 82 • 83 • 84 • 85 • 86 • 87 • 88 • 89 • 90
91 • 92 • 93 • 94 • 95 • 96 • 97 • 98 • 99 • 100
101 • 102 • 103 • 104 • 105 • 106 • 107 • 108 • 109 • 110
111 • 112 • 113 • 114 • 115 • 116 • 117

Size of Community Portal: 78,017 bytes

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

See Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done to contribute to discussions that are long-unfinished.

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

To contribute to discussions on other article talk pages, see this list of talk pages with unresolved discussions.

Bulletin Board for Not-Done Topics

(this will never be done completely, so don't archive!)

Threads that need "long time and hard work" will not be archived, but moved to S:CPND.

Here's some things that we need your help for.

Logging server faults

See dedicated subpage
kenny2scratch Talk Contribs Directory 09:38, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

FINAL VERDICT from Twitter vs. X Megathread

Resolved ^{(since 19:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC))}

Recently I made a post regarding the status of the discussion debating Twitter vs. X. I have made the following proposal, but it was archived. I have decided to bring it back without bringing back the full topic (since that would be insane). Here's the message:

@Purin2022, Co0lcr34t10ns, Mybearworld, BrilliantGamer6, Mrsrec, Vdiu, Kenny2scratch, banana439monkey, Lovecodeabc Alright. There don't seem to be too many major objections, so I propose this:

All instances of Twitter are replaced with X as a rule.
- First mention is "X (formerly Twitter)"
- All subsequent mentions are just X (as we seem to have determined that we can assume people somewhat know what X is)
- This WILL be a mass edit, unlike mentioned earlier (since my proposal of mass-editing didn't get shot down), so all articles mentioning this will be change to reflect these new rules.
- This will occur for ALL mentions, not just the ones that speak of X after its name change.
All links to the X main website will (this is new) link to x.com, because, as of 5/28/24, x.com no longer redirects to twitter.com.

If anyone has any major objections, please object by replying to this thread and {{@}}-ing me BEFORE June 1^st. If there are no major objections by then, everything listed above WILL be done on all pages on the wiki.

Please don't object with small little tiny things that only apply to one or two pages. This can be discussed on that articles talk page, and just makes this massive conversation take longer. I am sorry if this seems harsh, I'm just trying to say things as matter-of-fact-ly as possible, to get this megathread conversation over with. Thanks for understanding.

Please reply to this message by June 1 if you have any major objections. If there aren't any the wiki community will start making the above outlined edits starting on June 1.
Note: obviously I cannot ban anyone from taking part in a discussion, but it would probably better for users to not join in on this discussion if they haven't already been a part of it. Almost every single humanly possible point has been brought up, so I'm not sure how that would help too muchThis is a suggestion, not a 'rule'
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 02:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 I'll repeat what I have said in the archive:

That looks mostly reasonable. There are a few very minor problems that haven't been properly addressed, but:

People don't read an article from top-to-bottom as they may read from a specific section (redirect exists). That said, we can assume that most people know Twitter => X so it should be fine.
There's no definitive conclusion on that 'what to use in headings' thing although it seems like writing "X (formerly Twitter)" in headings is somewhat a consensus. So I propose that to be used. (although there's only one such situations so far, namely Scratch on Social Media, so it can go to another page if someone objects)
Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 10:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 "X, formerly Twitter" and x.com look reasonable but I object to further instances just referring to X; I do not believe that reflects the content of the discussion. It seemed split between giving equal weight to X and Twitter and giving additional weight to Twitter. Respectfully, it does seem like you are the only person in favour of X, so I think that one might not be used. My belief is that Kenny2scratch's proposal most closely reflects the consensus-- let's say "X, formerly Twitter" initially-- and after that point, either don't use a name at all (use context), or just say Twitter. Just saying X does not reflect the content of the discussion or any precedents, in my opinion. However, changing the links to x.com does make sense-- while it did not make sense at the time given that they were being changed from a direct link to a redirect, now that that URL is the direct URL it would make sense to do so.

Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mrsrec Ok, so we have to have the entire conversation over. I did forget to mention that we would use “the platform” when possible, but that doesn’t always work. I think we need to use X for that. The links are x.com, our first mention is “X, formerly Twitter”. Why would we suddenly call it Twitter for one sentence?

Do other people think it needs to be Twitter in this very specific case or is X okay?

Personally I think that this should be a talk page conversation in those articles - most articles mention X once.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 11:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@han614698, Mrsrec Okay, there are: one, two, three, four... four articles on the Scratch Wiki that mentions Twitter at least twice, excluding twitter.com and X... Grant it that the platform can be used in some of these articles, that still a bit too much in my opinion for individual discussions...

There's like seven mentions on Maintenance Mode, and like none would make sense with the platform. Take this action, "reminding the user to check their Twitter", as an example. If we replaced Twitter with the platform, then, well, who knows what does the platform refer to what platform. If we replaced it with X instead, then, "reminding the user to check their X", well, it works. The general consensus, as far as I'm concerned, is to use X in this (and many other case), it should be used. If anyone finds a mention where X is not suitable, prove me wrong.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 11:47, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022 I was under the impression, after the previous discussion, that it was to be avoided entirely. I also don't think it is suitable in your example, "check their X" could mean any number of things, especially without clear context. Therein lies the problem with just using X: it's just a letter-- and often one used to stand in for something else. What is the problem with the common name?

Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 13:22, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘@han614698 I propose remove to remove the part If there aren't any the wiki community will start making the above outlined edits. My opinion is that kenny2scratch's last point is in order to avoid mass-edits that isn't too consturctive in terms of a reader.

@Mrsrec You have raised a good point that, after 42 days of discussion, has been forgotten. So I certainly agree that "X" could mean a billion things — variable names, letter names etc. Also re-reading the conversation there's not actually a clear consensus of any sorts — it's more like people coming up with their own proposal but there's always problems or alternative proposals to that proposal. In fact, there isn't any problem with the common name.

@Co0lcr34t10ns, Mybearworld, BrilliantGamer6, Vdiu, Kenny2scratch, Lovecodeabc So where are we leading this conversation to? This really shouldn't be a topic this long, so at some point we might have to do the last resort method: voting. This has been avoided many, MANY times before, but if we don't we just don't lead to anywhere. And my intentions is to not get this topic to S:CPND. Plus that it's mostly a debate with repeatedly-restated-evidences by now, where none of the sides/evidences are outweighing another. This is different to, for example, the Griffpatch Argument, where points are mostly-different-in-strength, thus far this topic has its argument had mostly simliar-strength arguments which could be manipulated for the other side. If you don't like this idea, say it.

Redacted by OP on 14:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 14:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022 I think, with everything that has been said up to now, we can leave this alone. We have covered all our bases and also ran around the field enough times to win the baseball game, if you get what I mean.

@Mrsrec I disagree with this point. While it's true that in all aspects of Scratch, there are many uses of X, in the context of all articles that mention X, it doesn't matter.

This is MY final verdict. I have no further grievances with this proposal, and I am fine with it's current state.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 15:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Here's what I think about some of these:

@han614698 — I think the best thing to do is mention both in some way, whether it's doing "X (formerly Twitter)", "X, formerly Twitter", "X/Twitter", etc. As I said originally in the archived version, this does not add much to the page size at all. Adding "/Twitter" adds only 8 bytes to the page for each of its mentions, adding ", formerly Twitter" adds only 18 bytes for each mention, and " (formerly Twitter)" adds 19 bytes for each mention. If a page were to mention X seven times, that would only be adding 133 bytes maximum.

@Purin2022 — Your first and third posts are fine, however I'm mainly talking about your second in this response. Saying "reminding the user to check their X" sounds a bit weird in my opinion, and it sounds like it would probably be confusing to others. However, it'd be somewhat okay to add more meaning to it that shows it's a social media platform, such as saying "reminding the user to check their X account" instead.

@Mrsrec — Yes, this is true. In my very first reply to the currently archived topic, I said that X could be interpreted with many different meanings, as shown on Wikipedia's disambiguation page for X. There's 159 meanings shown, if I counted correctly.

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 20:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I am trying really hard to not escalate this as Kenny2scratch pointed out, but I think I need to stop participating in this conversation so I don’t start getting rude. I feel like nothing I’m saying is being heard, especially the stuff about my proposal. I proposed that we have a mass edit for consistentcy, and instead of talking about the points, people just said that Kenny2scratch said we shouldn’t - the fact that Ken said we shouldn’t isn’t a point.

I propose that we have a vote since we really aren’t getting anywhere. I apologize for all of this but I am still of the opinion that Twitter is a deadname (of course no one will get offended) and we should not be mentioning it anywhere on this wiki as twitter does not exist anymore and it’s basically a slang term for C (even though the name X might be controversial).

Is everyone good with a vote? We can decide what exactly we’re voting on after the fact, but for now, can we choose that?

Alternate option: we replace all twitter.com links with x, and we have individual discussions on article talk pages instead of a mega thread about many different things.

I did not @ anyone since I’m on a phone and this is really hard on its own. If someone who sees this could reply with their response and all of the @s that would be nice.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 20:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I'm fine with voting. I really don't want to participate in this discussion anymore, so just set up the vote and I'll say my peace there. This is getting so draining. I'll @ everyone as you requested: @Purin2022, Mybearworld, BrilliantGamer6, Mrsrec, Vdiu, Kenny2scratch, Lovecodeabc

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 00:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns You forgot banana. @banana439monkey

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 00:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

leave me alone.

banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (3,483))

09:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I didn't forget Banana. They didn't want to be pinged, so I didn't ping them.
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 09:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@banana439monkey, @Co0lcr34t10ns Geez, how should I know? I never saw anything that said this.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 11:21, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

They said that they didn't want to be pinged in [[1]]. Purin removed it. I saw the edit history and took note of it. So please stop pinging banana.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 11:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns It's off topic but note that I didn't remove the message in question. What I did remove was the last part of my 3^rd reply, which I originally appended that part after an edit conflict of banana saying that message. It was this edit by someone else who remove the message instead. But either way, don't ping banana.

Back on topic. So so far no one said that they don't want to vote. Now not everyone had voiced their opinions on their vote so far but oh we really need to sort this out ASAP, so here is the situation:

This isn't perfect, but are everyone happy about this? Or simply we don't vote?

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 13:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022 No objections.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 02:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns, Mybearworld, BrilliantGamer6, Mrsrec, Vdiu, Kenny2scratch, han614698, Lovecodeabc — Welcome back to this ~~horrible mess~~ calm discussion. It has been two-or-more weeks since the last post, so I assume that nobody is against voting. Therefore, we can start voting. The voting would start now and end on Tuesday 2^nd July, 23:59 UTC. Under my previous post, I'd cast my vote as Part A: 1st: 3; 2nd: 4; 3rd: 1; 4th: 2; Part B: option ii.

Thank you very much for your time.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 17:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Purin2022! I welcome you to this ~~miserable hell~~ friendly voting time :))))))) I vote 2. BTW I'm using 2 in Scratch on Social Media#X (formerly Twitter) as a placeholder before we come to an agreement.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 17:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not really sure that voting is a substitute for discussion, but if nobody can close it then I guess it can't hurt to say my opinion. I will go 3, then 1, then 4, then 2. And @Co0lcr34t10ns, you haven't given your alternative preferences yet, you've only voted for one option. You should rank them all in order of most to least preferred.

Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 21:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘2, 4, 3, 1. essentially reverse Mrsrec lol
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 23:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Here's my vote, according to what @Purin2022 said. I'd either vote 3142 or 3412. I think I'll go with 3, 4, 1, 2 though. As for part B, I'm not really sure what it's saying, so I can't really give a vote on that. That's just my vote for this ~~intense argument~~ mild voting.

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 00:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns, Mrsrec, BrilliantGamer6 — It looks like I need to apologise for not making part B clear. There was an argument between, (i), "mass-updating our existing articles for consistency", or, (ii) "clean up the rest of each article you edit in the process". Basically it's between whether you want consistency but clogging Recent Change, or the other way around.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 18:31, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

1.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 18:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

I saw that, but I don't think the second part is necessary, because it's not our place to call a vote to prohibit certain types of editing, especially when doing so would undermine this discussion in the first place. I think anyone can change according to the results of the first vote if they see fit. How would such a rule even be enforced? By reverting them to things against the first result?

Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 20:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022 A: 2431 B: Option 1. (note that I have become very inactive due to some personal things)

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 14:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Voting Period is now over! Final tallies:

For A (the main bit)
Option	Description	Tallies	Ranking
1	Always use "Twitter"	1+2+0+1+0 = 4	4^th
2	Always use "X"	0+0+3+0+3 = 6	3^rd
3	Avoid the use of either names where possible, but use "Twitter" if not.	3+3+1+3+1 = 11	1^st
4	Avoid the use of either names where possible, but use "X" if not.	2+1+2+2+2 = 9	2^nd

So it's pretty clear that we should, "[a]void the use of either names where possible, but use "Twitter" if not." As for B), although it was my bad at explaining stuff (oof), it seems like the "mass-update it all" (2 votes) is a bit more popular than no (1 vote). So you're free to edit a page simply because of this Twitter/X thingy! Just don't flame war...

Anyway this is FINALLY the end of this, wild, wild, journey, spanning across two topics. Now we can Finally resolve this topic!
Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 19:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

Here are the thanks for May 2024.

User	Thanks
MagicCoder330 (talk \| contribs)	Thank you for your continued dedicated to small, but useful, changes. It all adds up! Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Jvvg (talk \| contribs)	Thank you for your continued scheduled commitments to the wiki Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Purin2022 (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for your respectful tone in controversial topics Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

See you next month Scratchers! Keep improving the wiki and being awesome while doing so!
Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

S:PRO and summaries.

Does S:PRO apply to edit summaries? I was told to stay professional everywhere on the wiki, but I usually like to inser witty, fun comments while still trying to convey what the edit is about.
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 17:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

No as far as I know. Of course I didn't made that rule so I can't be 100% sure but at the top of the section it says "treat all articles on the wiki as encyclopedia entries", which doesn't include edit summaries. Otherwise "I fixed grammar" is also incorrect. But if you're going to make it funny just make sure that people can actually read the summary.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 17:46, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns, Something like «whittled a little silly teeny tiny typo» should do the work. However, «42nd french street», «opyt a dexif» or «ꍏꀸꀸꍟꀸ ꍏ ꉓꂦꂵꂵꍟꈤ꓄» probably won't.

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 14:27, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Asking for consensus for making a template

So, I've already made a prototype of a template (User:Jmdzti_0-0/measure) that can convert km to miles, meters to feet, centimeters to inches, and vice versa. I have 2 ideas for making this:

This would be the template «{{convert}}» and would have 2 parameters, {{{from}}} and {{{to}}}
Having separate templates for different results ({{km to miles}}, {{in to cm}}, between others). Is this a good idea?

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 14:27, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Not sure where in mainspace would that be useful.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 21:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

The german Wiki needs Administrator Help please

Resolved ^{(since 8 June 2024)}

Hallo ich grüße euch. Ich der deutsche Wiki Administrator benötige Hilfe von den englischen Administratoren. Das deutschschpachige Wiki hat ein Problem bei dem ich überfordert bin und keine Ahnung habe was ich da machen kann, https://de.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/ Auf der linken Seite des gesamten Wikis fehlen die Infoboxen mit den Links. Normalerweise werden dort die Links zu den Tools, Navigation & Spezialseiten angezeigt. Bei dem deutschen Wiki fehlen diese Infobaxen alle. Das Wiki ist somit komplett unbrauchbar. Ich habe keine Ahnung wie und wann das passiert ist. Ohne die Links zu den Spezialseiten bin ich leider nicht in der Lage der Fehler auch nur einzugrenzen. Unser Bürokrat Martin Wollenweber erzählte mir damals bei Problemen könne ich mich auch an die englischen Administratoren wenden. Jetzt ist es leider soweit denn ich habe keine Ahnung was ich da jetzt unternehmen kann. Ich hoffe ihr könnt da irgendwie helfen. Danke

I have a google translation: Hello, greetings. I, the German wiki administrator, need help from the English administrators. The German-language wiki has a problem that I am overwhelmed with and have no idea what to do about it, https://de.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/ The info boxes with the links are missing on the left side of the entire wiki. The links to the tools, navigation & special pages are normally displayed there. The German wiki is missing all of these info boxes. The wiki is therefore completely unusable. I have no idea how and when this happened. Without the links to the special pages, I am unfortunately unable to narrow down the error. Our bureaucrat Martin Wollenweber told me at the time that if I had any problems I could also contact the English administrators. Now, unfortunately, the time has come because I have no idea what I can do about it. I hope you can help somehow. Thank you
Lichtrebell (talk | contribs) 03:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Odd. I entered the DACH wiki and the info boxes were there. Does it matter if you have an account?

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 10:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. The info boxes are actually still there. My eyes aren't that good anymore and that's why I probably enlarged the pages too much. The English wiki must have a different width. I'm a bit embarrassed now. I really thought there was a bigger problem. Thank you

Lichtrebell (talk | contribs) 13:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

[SUGGESTION] View Source CSS of page without editing

This situation has happened to many editors: They find a page with some sort of fancy mechanisms or code or whatever. They view the source code by pressing edit source, which takes a long time to load. They then exit the editor, satisfied, but then it also takes a long time for no reason. If we kept separate pages with nowiki tags and called them Source pages or Raw pages, it would make life for a lot of editors easier.
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 13:24, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns, you mean something along the lines of keeping the «View Source» button in every page (without being protected, of course)?

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 14:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. The fact you have to go into the editor just to view source isn't great imo

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 14:43, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns

But imo, viewing source without the color coding/highlighting is kinda confusing.

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 14:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I agree but something is better than nothing

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 15:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns Ig so, but I kind of rely on highlighting, so it's kind of a nuisance

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 15:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns

Although this is a great idea, I'm guessing (lucky shot) that this is a MediaWiki thing, and modifying it would be spaghetti code.

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 19:12, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Not like they haven't done it before, check the Scratch Wiki GitHub.
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 19:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

@Jmdzti_0-0, Co0lcr34t10ns — Edit Conflict If you have proper clean code then there probably wouldn't be spaghetti on the plate. However this looks like it is going to involve a bot or an extension of MW. The bot is going to fail a significant amount of S:BOTNEEDS (it isn't even necessary) so bots are no good. On the other hand the extension isn't impossible but it's not like extension development is easy and I don't think the devs would like to spend hours developing this thing that is unnecessary. So I don't think that is going to be a good idea.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 19:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022 In that case why not just a view source button that automatically generates? It doesn't have to be a bot.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 19:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns

If it was that easy to implement, the wiki would’ve added this already. However, sadly, it is not.

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 08:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Thankful Thursday 53

Hi Scratchers. Here are the Thanks for June of 2024.

User	Thanks
‎Purin2022 (talk \| contribs)	Thank you for your continued verification of information accuracy Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 20:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
‎Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for your nonstop tireless activity to clean the wiki of errors Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 20:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
‎Za-Chary (talk \| contribs)	Perhaps it's a bit non-conventional to thank someone who doesn't have a wiki account, but I do believe that those who contribute from the Scratch site are those who evidently do just care about helping and improving; maybe they will request one day or maybe they just won't. Either way your contributions are important. Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 20:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

A bit of a non-conventional one but interesting nontheless. See you all next month!
Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 20:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Don't have to thank me for error-correcting. Natural habit of mine, that's why I made the account. Also letting Za-Chary know rn

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 12:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

[Suggestion] An article about TurboWarp.

Resolved ^{(since 10:15, 7 July 2024 (UTC))}

If we have an article about Snap!, Insanity, Tosh_(Scratch_modification) so, why don't we have one about TurboWarp? Should it be added, along with Adacraft?

Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk|Scratch profile|contribs (354) ) 15:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

A rule that disallows the creation of pages about Scratch Modifications was added (see Scratch Wiki:New Page Policies#Modifications), but old pages that were created were remained to stay up. Really, I think that most of the old Scratch Modification pages should be deleted since they're no longer very relevant.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 16:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

It was made after the ban on mod pages, existing mod pages remain though.

Adzboy • Talk • Contributions • Scratch Profile 17:27, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Grandfathering (wait that's American but I digressed) problem! This involves the question, "should our old articles be regulated under our (relatively) new rule?" There is quite a bit of problem with S:NP#Modifications, for one, most of the mods documented on the wiki are not "notable examples", but rather, "historical mods"; there is little-to-no mods documented post-1.4. And there are not, "several", mods documented, but rather, 18. TL;DR of the last two senteces: S:NP#Modifications is quite bad at documenting things. But again, I digressed.

The thing with Grandfathering is that it often gets regulated under the new rules after a period of time. Well in our case, that period of time must have been at least 5 years. So, uhh, we should delete those articles? Or that probably should go to another topic?

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 20:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022 I've made a separate topic regarding this under Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal#Removal of Scratch Modification Pages.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 06:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Twitter Adjustments

I worked on all of the Twitter/X adjustments. Is what I did good? Anything else we agreed on changing differently?
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 02:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Removal of Scratch Modification Pages

Currently, the creation of pages about Scratch Modifications is disallowed (see S:NP#Modifications), but old pages which were created before this rule were allowed to remain on the Wiki. Times have changed since then, and most of the pages under Category:Scratch Modifications are no longer relevant. Aside from BYOB, basically all of the Scratch Modifications with their own dedicated pages are no longer relevant to Scratch 3.0 or its community, with most people on the website probably having never heard of most of them (not really a "notable example").

As such, I propose to delete all pages which have "(Scratch Modification)" in their title (this doesn't include BYOB, as it turned into Snap!, which is not a Scratch Modification). While this may seem extreme, as I've said, none of the Scratch Mod articles are relevant today, and they're no longer in-line with the page creation rules found at S:NP. What does everyone else think about this?
Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 06:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright, let me list all the mods to see if they matter. How-to pages can stay, someone will find them important.

Snap: Actively Updated This is our baseline.
Bingo: Somewhat Dead Copyright is updated, but the mod is stuck in eternal V2.0 and the website is partially broken. You can still download it.
Chirp: Dead but somewhat notable This is one of the first known Scratch mods to exist. Maybe we could work that into some sort of article.
CoCo: Actively Updated It's a live collaboration project that essentially mixes Zoom with Scratch 3.0. This is the Snap of 3.0 to me.
Dream: Dead This one is just dead. Not really much to write about either.
Enchanting: It's not even a Scratch mod It's a Snap mod, why did we write this article?
Mod Share: Sadly very dead Servers are up but nothing happens there and jvvg told me it's gone for good.

You get the point by now, most of them are dead but CoCo we keep. If anyone finds any updated 3.0 mods that are already on the wiki yet still updated let me know but otherwise they can be trashed.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 10:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns I think it's safe to get everything with "(Scratch Modification)" in its title as well as Mod Share and Scratch for Second Life due to their lack of updates and relevancy. CoCo (platform) can stay as it's not a Scratch Modification as far I can tell (I guess it's just it just integrates with Scratch without tampering it?). It's not like we're removing all mention of them from the Scratch Wiki, as they can still be listed in List of Scratch Modifications.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 12:36, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Is lack of updates of the thing the page is about a reason to delete a page though? The Scratch Wiki does document the history of Scratch, which these mods could be considered a part of (S:NP says they kept only "notable examples" of mods, so, at least at one point in Scratch history, they were considered notable). Also, is there any harm in keeping the pages?

Mrcomputer1 (talk | contribs) 12:54, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

As mentioned by others, the inactiveness of a page is not why whether we should delete it or not. Otherwise, we should delete most of our Scratch 1.4 pages. Basically, it's either delete them all (to be consistent with the new rules), keep them all (grandfathering), or keep the absolutely notable ones (for "notable example"). Anything else would likely destroy the purposes of all sides. In my opinion, keep them all seems like a good idea since there isn't much of a reason to delete them besides for the sake of rules.

PS: Notable examples would probably mean that the TurboWarp argument would start again, because a lot of people would call it "absolutely notable". Maybe not a good idea.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 20:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022, Mrcomputer1 Yes, their inactiveness is not the main factor for wanting to delete the Scratch Mod articles, although it really isn't helping them. CoCo (which is technically not a Scratch mod but whatever) is currently in active development, so when completed, it will probably gain some popularity, especially if it keeps getting updated. Dream (which as far as I can tell has stopped development) does not, at least not in its current state, and will only continue to dwindle in popularity. Every page on the Wiki should strive to have a purpose, and it's pretty hard to argue this with the Scratch Mod pages in my eyes (although feel free to give any arguments against this if you have some). Reasons being:

Unpopularity: I really wouldn't be surprised if I'm the only person that visited the Dream page in 2023, as it's a 12-year old mod of an outdated Scratch version that's arguably inferior to the likes of Penguin Mod and TurboWarp (these are updated constantly, are based off the current version of Scratch, and are most importantly way more popular than any 1.4-mod in today's community).
Historical Irrelevancy: All of the 1.4 pages could technically also be classified as "unpopular", but they're relevant because they shaped how Scratch 3.0 is currently. I don't think that Dream has nearly the same level of historical relevancy. The idea of TurboWarp (a mod that speeds up Scratch) isn't something that existed before late 2.0 as far as I can tell, or at least isn't covered by any article on the Wiki. Even if it mods like Dream were historically relevant to mods today, that really should be covered in a "History of Scratch Modifications" article, not in a standalone one.
Rules: The S:NP#Modifications rule was put in place for a reason (at least I hope it was). I don't know why specifically, but I can think of a couple of good reasons for putting this rule in:
1. It's basically advertising (user-generated content)
2. It's not safe for kids (a bad actor could theoretically inject malware into their mod and make an article about it)
3. It avoids cluttering the Wiki with hundreds of similar/irrelevant mods

What I'm trying to show is that the rule is there for a good reason. The Scratch Modification article shouldn't be evaluated solely on whether it was created before the rule, but rather if it breaks the rule in a way which doesn't break the spirit of what the rule is trying to achieve. I don't believe this is the case here.

It's confusing to see why TurboWarp can't get an article while an arguably outdated mod like Dream does, especially for new wiki editors. Sorry for the long reply, but hopefully I've shown why I think getting rid of the old Scratch Mod pages is a good idea.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Gdxfor — Nothing should be classified as "irrelevant" just because it didn't shape today. For example, if Dream were very popular in the Scratch 1.4 days, then Dream shouldn't be deleted, as it is "significant". Simliar to Project Trends and other pages, it might be better to put a big, new "Scratch Mod" page that has each section as a mod, instead of the historical ones having an entire page and new ones have... absolutely nothing.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 16:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘You may have misunderstood my original point. My point was that a Scratch mod that brings enough to the table to keep on the wiki must have a large userbase, backed by either a large amount of fans (Turbowarp) or the ST themselves (CoCo, Snap), and is updated at a consistent rate. Essentially something that is an alternative/separate from Scratch. In my opinion, Turbowarp is notable and important enough to be mentioned, while PenguinMod isn't, if we go by these rules. Hmmm, to Turbowarp or not to Turbowarp? This is a simple argument that only affects a few pages, but it is important to have anyway. Hold on, this reminds me of- *zones out*
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 19:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns Ahh, Twitter/X. Great fun. "Notable" is subjective (so its definition varies by person-to-person) so it shouldn't even be on the "why we don't create more Scratch Mods pages" page, and thus the line between keep/create, or delete.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 20:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Purin2022 I agree. I think S:NOSP is different when it comes to relevancy. Making an article about a tool that Scratchers use regularly without directly recommending anything is allowed, as long as we be careful.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 20:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Co0lcr34t10ns, Purin2022 — I disagree - this is the same thing as us allowing kaj. I think that Turbowarp is arguably something more notable, and that's not subjective - it can be decided by community consensus. I'm sure there's a user out there who thinks they're more notable than kaj, which means that's subjective. This doesn't mean we can't create an article on kaj. So, my opinion - all Scratch Modification pages should be either deleted OR merged into one big article, similar to the List of Scratch Domains Article which a short blurb on each one. The exception to this (although I think it should only be Turbowarp) is that the mods the we come to a consensus on in the CP should have their own unique articles.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 01:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@han614698, Co0lcr34t10ns, Purin2022

Support for han614698's proposal To Purin2022's first reply to my message: while yes, Scratch Mod pages like Dream (Scratch modification) shouldn't be classified "irrelevant" just because they're not used as much today, I should have articulated how the page in its current state is not providing anything that's historically relevant. Such a page would only provide use to people who want to look at what the mod has to offer (which is pretty much no one these days); you can't really figure out its historical relevancy by just looking at the page. Employing han614698's merging proposal would show why a mod was popular back in the day while also allowing for new and important mods to be added in.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 06:28, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 Actually that's what I meant, so I perfectly agree with you.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 10:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 Perfectly fine with that, although I would prefer to have the minimum number of exceptions possible. (and also it's what I meant)

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 17:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I think @han614698's idea is good, merging them all into one article. However, I still have one question. Do we either: 1. Add all pages to the Scratch Modification page and add one or more sections showing the mods, 2: Make a new Scratch Mods page and put all the mods in there instead, or 3: Make a disambiguation page for Scratch Mods and put all of them in there. Which idea would we do? Anyone can also suggest more ideas too.
BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 20:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I vote 1. No clutter, just mini sections. Wait, how many lines is this now? 37? That's quite a bit... HUH! ...w w what was that? Oh no, I have a bad feeling about this. it's coming, we have to keep it short or else it will become a thing.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 22:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@BrilliantGamer6, Purin2022, Co0lcr34t10ns, Gdxfor I think that we should just modify the "List of Scratch Modifications" page to include a multiline blurb about the mods we have information on. I don;t think a disambiguation page is relevant for this.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 01:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 I think that'd make the most sense for this.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 01:12, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 Yes that's a good idea. There's no need for more than one page on Scratch mods.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 17:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘@BrilliantGamer6, Purin2022, Co0lcr34t10ns, han614698 There's just one more thing that needs to be address, and it's which pages need to be merged into the "List of Scratch Modifications" page. I counted 10 Scratch Mods which need to be merged:

Feel free to discuss any that I've not mentioned or any you think shouldn't be merged.
Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 22:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Wait. That's it? No excruciatingly difficult, long, energy sapping, glorified argument? I could get used to this

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs)

@Gdxfor Isn't it all mods but Snap!?

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 17:08, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘@Gdxfor, Co0lcr34t10ns, Purin2022 — I wrote a response to this last night, but apparently it didn't save.
I don't agree. I think that most mods need to be condensed to the list page, which would include the following:

Note:

I think that we initially need to include every single mod (including Snap!) in our proposed merge (we don't actually need to merge it), to be fair to everyone. Even before we merge, we can decide not to merge it, but as of now, that decision hasn't been made yet so it should be included.

Here's the list of all mods I could find that we would be focusing on:

Once we have the list established, then we can go about creating exceptions.
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 19:04, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 The reason I didn't include Snap! is because it's not a Scratch Modification. While I would love to get rid of the Phosphorus Player page if TurboWarp can't get one, it wouldn't really be correct to merge in the List of Scratch Modifications page since it's not a mod, but rather a program written from scratch (this would include Tosh (Scratch modification) since that's a Phosphorus mod). If we were to merge these pages, it would have to be merged with a brand new "List of Programs Inspired by Scratch" article or something like that.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 00:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Gdxfor To be fair Snap! is on the list of Scratch Mods AND in the Scratch Mods category.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 00:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 Well then it's just wrong, GP for example isn't even related to Scratch apart from the fact that it kind of looks like it.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 01:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘@BrilliantGamer6, Purin2022, Co0lcr34t10ns, han614698 There's been no discussion for a few days now. Since everyone seems to agree that all pages about things that are definitely Scratch Mods can be merged, I'll go ahead and add the This page's contents needs to be merged into (...) template to articles from my list.
Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 11:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay maybe not that template specifically since it doesn't support linking to other Scratch pages

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 11:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thankful Thursday 54

Hey Scratchers. I was a bit unexpectedly (but happily!) surprised to see a not-blank table; we are now once again thanking each other!

User	Thanks
Jmdzti 0-0 (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for being a good sport on the wiki! Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs) 19:43, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Purin2022 (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for staying calm and collected in more difficult environments! Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs) 19:43, 28 June 2024 (UTC) Thanks for being able to always give your opinion straight forward. That helps with everything! han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 01:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Mrsrec (talk \| contribs)	I know we have disagreed at times, but thanks for helping with everything on the wiki. All of your edits are in good faith and help everything! han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 01:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Gdxfor (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for being an active opinionator in Community Portal discussions. Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs) 12:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for not letting me be the only person thinking about Thankful Thursday this month. I'm happy that with enough perseverance it may finally be coming back, and other users join in as well Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 21:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

See you all next month! Feel free to leave your own thoughts at S:TT!!!
-unsigned comment by Mrsrec (talk | contribs)

Did I just get thanked thanking people causing others to thank and be thanked making for a more thankful Thursday for everyone, whether they got thanked or not thank thank? Wow. Thank you.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 22:45, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mrsrec, you forgot to remove the sample thanks.

Vdiu | Talk | Contributions | Scratch Profile 08:08, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Citing the Wayback Machine

When editing a page regarding a feature that no longer exists on the Scratch website, is it acceptable to use a snapshot from the Wayback Machine as a citation when describing the feature?
Scratch137 (talk | contribs) 20:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Scratch137 Most likely yes.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 20:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Probably, because a lot of pages do this.

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 21:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Should there be misspelling redirects?

Unresolved ^{(see all...)}

When trying to visit one page in the search bar, but accidentally misspelling the title, it might be slightly more time-consuming to go to the correct article. So, should there be redirects that take you to the correctly spelled page? For example, the page "Scrtch" would redirect to the Scratch article. This might make it slightly easier to go to pages that someone is looking for.

Note that Wikipedia does this too (as shown here), however this is not the sole reason I am suggesting this. It's mainly just for finding articles faster.
BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 02:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it is a good idea. It saves time and if Wikipedia does it, why doesn't the Scratch Wiki do it?
Dj greener (talk | contribs) 08:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

See S:NOTWIKIPEDIA. For the redirect thing, as per S:REDIRECT, redirects should not be made ffor spelling changes and differences in capitilization and punctuation.

Vdiu | Talk | Contributions | Scratch Profile 10:09, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Vdiu Well, we could just get rid of the "no spelling redirects" rule if we have community consensus.

Anyway I don't see a reason why not, and we could even make redirects because of spelling differences (eg. color vs. colour). This would massively increase the number of redirects on the wiki but I don't see a big problem here (unless this massive amount of pages is what causes 508). Also, this seemed to have came from this edit in 2014, with no evidence of consensus anywhere.* In fact, the previous revision have it the other way around.

*So the first source is CP Archive 68, which refers to this section of jvvg's talk page archive 6, which is a backtracing dead end... so no idea where did the rule came from, just that they have a disagreement about it. Please correct me if that's wrong.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 14:50, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you on the spelling differences between british and american english part, since lots of people use different spellings, but redirects for misspellings as well would be a nightmare to implement and would take up a lot of wiki space unnecessarily.

Vdiu | Talk | Contributions | Scratch Profile 16:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Vdiu, Purin2022 I agree with Vdiu - I think that misspelling redirects is something that logically should stay not allowed - the amount of misspellings is infinite, and then we'd have to create rules and have more giant conversations just about what counts as a misspelling. I do agree on the British vs. American English thing - those should have redirects IMO.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 14:28, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Degeneralize Help pages

I saw a lot of the Help pages on this wiki simply say "your wiki" instead of "the Scratch Wiki", and also miss out on mentioning some Scratch Wiki guidelines. I'm assuming these were copied from MediaWiki.org, because they look a lot like a help page I would find, copy, and paste from that site if I were to build a wiki. Should I de-generalize these pages?
A-MARIO-PLAYER (talk | contribs) 20:35, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@A-MARIO-PLAYER Can you give an example of such a page? Cause I don't think I've ever seen one before.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 01:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gdxfor A lot of these MediaWiki generalisation (but not all) have already been "fixed". For example, this edit (which happened recently) and this permalink (which still starts with "MediaWiki" as of writing).

@A-MARIO-PLAYER I don't see why not.

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 12:43, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Citation Template Proposal: Wayback Machine Template

I think it would be nice to have a Wayback Machine Citation Template similar to the {{cite post}} template. I don't have a ton of time at this moment to type up a couple paragraphs about this, but I think this is enough to start a conversation for now.
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 00:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

This makes sense. From what I've seen, the Wayback Machine is trusted by the Scratch Wiki (although I can't confirm this). However, would this be added to the interwiki, or would it just be a separate template that links to the website with the date/time and website parameters?

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 01:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@han614698, BrilliantGamer6 I don't think it would go on the interwiki template, as it's not exactly a wiki but a representation of an old page/piece of information. This should probably get it's own template, perhaps Template:wbm.

Vdiu | Talk | Contributions | Scratch Profile 16:48, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

~~Why not just add the feature to {{cite post}}?~~ Actually, {{cite post}} does have this feature already, so why create a new template?

Purin2022 | 💬Talk | 📝Contribs | 🐱Scratch 14:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Sticky Page

I know I don't need community consensus to create a new page, but I don't want to do the work for this if it will get deleted. Do you think it would be okay to create a page, List of Stickies by Forum that just has every forum (Suggestions, Annoucements, etc.) in a list and then listed the stickies and who owns them? I feel like that might be beneficial, but maybe not. What do you all think? I'll probably create it if no one says that it doesn't make any sense (in a couple days).
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 14:22, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Seems helpful. I'm fine with it. I'm not an experienced editor by any means, though, so get some more opinions.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 14:36, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't really think this is super necessary. Topics keep getting stickied and un-stickied, and so it might be difficult to constantly check every forum if stickies have changed. Also, it's quite easy to find the stickies. Because stickies are always shown at the top of list of topics in a forum, it would probably be just as easy to look at the forum.

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 17:01, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@BrilliantGamer6It may not be super necessary but I feel like it would be good - I often forget which forum stickies are in and it would be nice to have a list to check. I also don't feel like they change very often - especially with active forumers as wiki editors, I don't see updates being an issue.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 23:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 This would double down as a history of stickies via the revision history. Sounds useful.

mybearworld • Talk • Contributions • Profile 09:31, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

If no one has any major objections I will create the article on August 21^st.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 14:59, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Some things came up in my life so I won't be creating it until later today. Sorry!

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 15:20, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Getting used to scratch wiki

Can you answer a question? do you have to code in the scratch wiki and how do you?
-unsigned comment by Memes codes (talk | contribs)

@Memes codes No, you don't code in the Scratch Wiki, you mainly edit pages. You edit an article by clicking the pencil icon on the header and selecting "Edit" or "Edit source". See the welcome page for more detail.

(Also, remember to sign your posts when posting on a talk page by using four tildes (~~~~))

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 23:11, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Thankful Thursday 55

WOW! A lot of thanks this month! Keep up the good work, guys.

User	Thanks
Mrsrec (talk \| contribs)	Thank you for taking up the responsibilty of Thankful Thursday! Vdiu \| Talk \| Contributions \| Scratch Profile 10:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC) Thanks for always being willing to help on and off the wiki! han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 14:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC) Thanks for starting this project. I truly believe that this might be one of the best things ever created on the wiki and I'm happy to show off other's contributions. After all, we're all just trying to make a user-friendly safe haven for tutorials and info. Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs) 19:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
jvvg (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for being an admin on the wiki and always helping to make sure everything goes right! han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 14:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Zydrolic (talk \| contribs)	How can a user be thanked when they haven't made a single edit? As @Mrsrec has stated beforehand, it's quite unconventional to thank someone who doesn't have a Wiki account, or is unregistered. But anyone can help on the wiki, even someone unregistered. We have a portal where wiki editors and readers can converse about the wiki. But this topic comes with a mild curse. With this portal being an endorsed, stickied topic, large amounts of spam floods the topic. People post random crap there. It's a chaotic sight. That makes every contribution from a reader even more special. And Zy has contributed SO MUCH to the wiki, without making a single edit. They kept eyes on pages, watched for changes, tracked errors, just like an editor would. That level of dedication is telling that all any of us, editors and helpers, just want to make the wiki a better place. And that doesn't require a single edit. So, thank you. Truly, thank you. Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs) 14:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
JSO (talk \| contribs)	I know it may seem weird at first to thank someone who hasn't made an edit since 2017, but this person helped create the Scratch Wiki to be what it is now. And, I understand this was also done with two other people, but this person has the latest edits of the three (not including automated edits), showing that they made the wiki as it is, and then continued to help in it for more years, even still staying on Scratch. So, just thank you for creating, and also continuing for more years, to create and help build an amazing wiki, which eventually became what it is now. BrilliantGamer6 (talk \| contribs) 02:34, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Mrgame2012 (talk \| contribs)	I'd like to give a thank you and an apology. First off, thanks for fixing all of the errors on the domain article - all those tiny changes add up. Second, I'm sorry to you and allow of our fellow wikians for messing up that article so badly - it may have been decent changes but they were poorly executed (and I had drafted that article to be very different, as the current state was supposed to be temporary, but it never got off the ground). Thanks for your hard work and sorry for the problem. han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 03:15, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

See you in September!
Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 21:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Wow that's a big Thankful Thursday. Such a massive one, like honestly... WOW.

Jokes aside, thanks to everyone who participated. This might be a record for number of words in a TT.

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 11:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

user pages

so i have a question. it might seem dumb but there's no such thing as a dumb question. see kenny2scratch's userspace for example, and notice the monospace font. how do you do that on your own userpage?
A-MARIO-PLAYER (talk | contribs) 17:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

(sorry if this is the wrong place to ask)

@A-MARIO-PLAYER <span style="font-family:Courier New, monospace">text</span> produces text

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 18:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gdxfor yes, i know, but is there a way do do it without span tags? and what about more obscure customizations such as little nav popups at the corner, such as han614698's page?

A-MARIO-PLAYER (talk | contribs) 18:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@A-MARIO-PLAYER There's no way to change the font without a <span> tag as far as I'm aware (you can also use <div> but that's basically the same thing). As for the navbar, a very basic one is done with:

<div class="mw-collapsible" id="mw-customcollapsible-sidebar" style="background:#fff;color:#000;position:fixed;left:0px;bottom:0px;border:1px solid #000;border-radius:0px 7.5px 7.5px 0px">
<div style="text-align:center;font-size:140%">hi</div>
</div>

Moreover, you can always look at a userpage's source code in order to see how they're achieving something specific (just make sure to not accidentally submit anything you change). If you see something in curly brackets that starts with a slash (like in User:Kenny2scratch), that means that the page is using a template located at that name (for example, the {{/Header}} used in the User:Kenny2scratch means that the page uses the template at User:Kenny2scratch/Header).

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 02:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Server Fault Not 503/8

idk Where to log server faults anymore, so I wanted to report this rather unusual one. Details:

05 Sept 2024
- 7:25 PM CST
This error.
Worked upon reload

Anyone know the cause?
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 00:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 This also happened to me a few times. When this happens, the page title just says "MediaWiki", which means it could be an error with MediaWiki. I'm not entirely sure though.

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 02:21, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@han614698, BrilliantGamer6 This happens quite often to me, and at seemingly random times. The backtrace in the screenshot isn't very useful as far as I can tell, just saying that there's a connection error.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 13:58, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Scratchwikiskin

Wiki skin is literally crowded.

The search bar is only wide enough to show the icon, at least under my username.

If anyone has a css snippet to fix this it would help.

A-MARIO-PLAYER (talk | contribs) 06:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC) (Pulled this from the community portal topic)

Major Image Recategorizing

Hi everyone,

Consistency is a big thing that bothers me, and when looking at images on the wiki it bothers me.

Their are many images in mainspace that aren't used (nor ever have been) or categorized wrong.

Currently, their are 3 website image categories - 1.4 Images, 2.0 Images, and 3.0 Images.

I'd like to name them Historic/Archive Images, Scratchr2 Images and scratch-www images. Misconception - Scratch 2.0 categorized images are currently NOT from 2.0 - just from 2.0 styled pages.

Anyway, I'd like to do the daunting task of re categorizing a ton of images. However I want to get a community consensus to make sure people are okay with me changing a ton of categories and images. I won't get in to everything I'd change, because that would be insanely long. But basically just renaming some categories and moving some things between some. Please share your thoughts.
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 22:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

yes that sounds awesome

Co0lcr34t10ns (talk | contribs) 12:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

This does sound more accurate, however those terms might be slightly confusing. Content on the Wiki should be able to be understood by lots of Scratchers, and those terms sound either ambiguous/not clear enough or just jargonistic. Maybe the pages for the categories could give more information about what images are really in the category.

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 14:32, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

If there are no negative opinions by Sunday, the 15^th I will go forward with this.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 01:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright I am starting this, may be messy for a bit.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 01:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Over 100 edits tonight... not done yet. Messy for now.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 03:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Are these images still being updated? I don't want to sound like I was ignored or my opinion needs to be heard, but it seems like nobody else replied to this topic, which means I am still slightly unsure and/or confused about this. Although, I don't know if it's necessary to elaborate any further or ask for further discussion, since this has already been/is being done.

(Also, was I supposed to outdent here?)

BrilliantGamer6 (talk | contribs) 01:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@BrilliantGamer6 Did you have an issue with some of these things? If you did, obviously we should discuss but I was not aware of any issues. This is mostly just changing categories to make more sense.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 11:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

show me the differences between the versions no longer work

Resolved ^{(since 14:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC))}

Hello to the English-speaking administrators. There has been a problem in the German DACH wiki for a while. The links that are supposed to show me the differences between the versions no longer work. The following error message always appears:

Hallo an die englischsprachigen Administratoren. Seit einer Weile gibt es im deutschen DACH-Wiki ein Problem. Die Links die mir die Unterschiede zwischen den Versionen anzeigen sollen funktionieren nicht mehr. Es kommt hierbei immer die folgende Fehlermeldung:

Not Found The requested URL was not found on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

Even as an administrator, I am unable to see more than the current version of an article. This makes it almost impossible for me to properly assess changes. I usually take a close look at every change made by users.

Selbst mir als Administrator ist es so nicht möglich mehr als die aktuelle Version eines Artikels zu sehen. Das macht es für mich nahezu unmöglich Änderungen richtig einzuschätzen. Normalerweise sehe ich mir jede getätigte Änderung der Benutzer genau an.

Since the problem has been around for a while, I'm wondering if you are perhaps familiar with this problem? The error does not seem to occur in your EN wiki. Could it be that some changes were made to the WIKI and the German WIKI was simply forgotten when fixing the problem?

Da das Problem schon eine ganze Weile besteht frage ich mich ob euch dieses Problem vielleicht bekannt ist? Bei Euch im EN-Wiki scheint der Fehler nicht aufzutreten. Kann das sein das irgendwelche Änderungen am WIKI vorgenommen wurden und das deutsche WIKI bei der Fehlerbehebung einfach vergessen wurde?

It would be very nice if someone would answer me on the German community portal:

Es wäre sehr nett wenn mir da jemand im deutschen Gemeinschaftsportal antworten würde:

de:Scratch-Wiki_Diskussion:Gemeinschafts-Portal#show_me_the_differences_between_the_versions_no_longer_work

Thanks / Danke
Lichtrebell (talk | contribs) 06:56, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

@Lichtrebell I don't have access to the German Wiki, so I'm going to post here. The diff button's functionality has been temporarily removed for non-editors as a website stability measure. If you're an editor and the diff button still doesn't work, you should probably contact @jvvg.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 12:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

No Problem i have read it here. Thank you for your quick answer. I am not a normal editor. I have the status of an administrator. Normal editors have the Problem too. OK, i try to contact jvvg. I will give him the link to this. Sorry witout translater i fear my english is very badly.

Lichtrebell (talk | contribs) 13:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

@Lichtrebell It should be fixed now. They still are only available for logged-in users.

jvvg (talk | contribs) 14:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

just here to fix the ping

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 15:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you jvvg very much. Now it works and i can reed it all. But i have testing this. I am log out the wiki and it is the same. I can see all the pages who swow the differences. I think this is not what you want.

Lichtrebell (talk | contribs) 02:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Since when and why are diffs and history not available when signed out?

It’s very very frustrating, because I check RC on a device that is very challenging to sign in on. It takes upwards of 10 minutes and lots of cellular data sometimes due to cookie issues and some other complicated stuff. I only log in on a different device if they’re something to do - something I’d like to know about by checking diffs. Why the change and what would it take (from the community) to get this reversed?
han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 20:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I've asked @jvvg this before, and the answer to why is here. As for how to fix this, I have no idea and he should be the one to answer that.

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 01:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@han614698 The link in the previous message explains the reason. There isn't really anything the community can do to help fix this, unfortunately. This is really only something that can be done with internal engineering work.

jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@jvvg Okay, thanks for your response. My first guess was for safety reasons, in which case I thought a community vote could help. I understand.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 02:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@jvvg The diff button now works even when logged out, is this intentional?

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 11:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gdxfor Yes, it is. I added a bit of logic to distinguish legitimate traffic from bot traffic. It's not perfect but it's an improvement from before. I didn't publicly announce it at the time (it's been in place for about two weeks now) since I wanted to see the impact on traffic first.

jvvg (talk | contribs) 14:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

A bit of a problem with Internal Links.

Hey Wiki-wizards! So i have a bit of a problem. I was trying to design a custom wiki signature, and i tried adding a link to my talk page, but when i used the same method i did for the link to my userpage, it looked...very off, it had the number 1 in square brackets and the lil external link icon. I tried making it into an internal link, but that also did`nt work. Even tho the method i used for linking my userpage worked perfectly fine. So im thinking about using the internal link code in the help section for editing pages n`stuff, but thats also kinda confusing, cuz idk what to put in the "Page Title" section- Sooo yeah, good job if you read through my rambling, and thanks in advance for putting up with my newcomer sillyness :P
Iam_monki (talk | contribs) 15:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

OMG IM STOOPID- so i got it fixed, and turns out the userpage code i used DID WORK, i guess i just did it wrong-

Iam_monki (talk | contribs) 16:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Editing a Scratch Project's JSON code.

Resolved ^{(since 15:36, 24 September 2024 (UTC))}

Hey everyone! Recently, I’ve been having fun experimenting with Scratch by modifying the project.json file to create custom blocks and other unique features. However, I realized this process can be quite time-consuming and difficult on certain devices. To make things easier, I’ve developed an online SB3 file editor, allowing you to edit your Scratch project files directly in the browser!

At the moment, I’m hosting it on PlayCode as I work towards getting my own domain. To use it, just click "Skip Intro" on the PlayCode page, upload your .sb3 file, and you can start editing right away!

https://sb3editor.playcode.io
-unsigned comment by PaSc_Clan (talk | contribs)

@PaSc_Clan — What does this have to do with the wiki? This topic is only for wiki discussion. Also, please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~.

han614698 talk • contribs (2,390) • profile 01:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Thankful Thursday #56

Here are the thanks for this month.

User	Thanks
Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for commiting to the Wiki, and never giving up! Jmdzti_0-0 ( talk\|Scratch profile\|contribs (354) ) 15:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Jvvg (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for always ensuring a consistent influx of new users, so that the wiki can always have people active on it. Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 16:00, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Lastly, thank you all for not calling me out on the fact that today is not Thursday. For some reason I thought Thankful Thursday took place on a Friday and had been looking at a Friday all month. Oops! I will get it right next month.
Mrsrec (talk | contribs) 16:00, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Thankful Friday? Never expected that

[

A-MARIO-PLAYER | Talk | Contribs ] 18:06, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Signautre

Hello, is my signature valid? I heard it could break pages if it isn't.
❯❯ | ᵍ ˡ ᶦ ᵗ ᶜ X | 💬 Talk | 📝 Contribs ❯❯
22:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Visual Editor Issues

Hi, I noticed this in the visual editor. Amy chance this could be fixed? Like this, its hard to read the notices on a page.
GvYoutube (talk | contribs) 13:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

@GvYoutube Can you give an example of a page which displays warnings?

Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 15:55, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

The page in the image (Get Energy Units) Is an example.

GvYoutube (talk | contribs) 15:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

User	Thanks
MagicCoder330 (talk \| contribs)	Thank you for your continued dedicated to small, but useful, changes. It all adds up! Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Jvvg (talk \| contribs)	Thank you for your continued scheduled commitments to the wiki Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Purin2022 (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for your respectful tone in controversial topics Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 10:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

User	Thanks
‎Purin2022 (talk \| contribs)	Thank you for your continued verification of information accuracy Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 20:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
‎Co0lcr34t10ns (talk \| contribs)	Thanks for your nonstop tireless activity to clean the wiki of errors Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 20:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
‎Za-Chary (talk \| contribs)	Perhaps it's a bit non-conventional to thank someone who doesn't have a wiki account, but I do believe that those who contribute from the Scratch site are those who evidently do just care about helping and improving; maybe they will request one day or maybe they just won't. Either way your contributions are important. Mrsrec (talk \| contribs) 20:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Help the wiki!

Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal

Bulletin Board for Not-Done Topics

Other Topics

About Scratch 3.0

Articles

About Wiki Management

Backend

Page Management

Rules

Interwiki

Community

Logging server faults

FINAL VERDICT from Twitter vs. X Megathread

Thanks

S:PRO and summaries.

Asking for consensus for making a template

The german Wiki needs Administrator Help please

[SUGGESTION] View Source CSS of page without editing

Thankful Thursday 53

[Suggestion] An article about TurboWarp.

Twitter Adjustments

Removal of Scratch Modification Pages

Thankful Thursday 54

Citing the Wayback Machine

Should there be misspelling redirects?

Degeneralize Help pages

Citation Template Proposal: Wayback Machine Template

Sticky Page

Getting used to scratch wiki

Thankful Thursday 55

user pages

Server Fault ***Not 503/8***

Scratchwikiskin

Major Image Recategorizing

show me the differences between the versions no longer work

Since when and why are diffs and history not available when signed out?

A bit of a problem with Internal Links.

Editing a Scratch Project's JSON code.

Thankful Thursday #56

Signautre

Visual Editor Issues

Server Fault Not 503/8