Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 19

This page is archive 19 of Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Community Portal Archives

The FAQ Thing...

When are we gonna do it? Should we wait ages for JSO to reply or something?
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 10:41, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

"Edit Conflict" - it didn't really take ages apparently :) Let me check EDIT: It seems to me like things are sort of sorted out, what do you want me to reply to? :S
JSO (talk | contribs) 10:47, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

But... Wait what? Things are sorted out? But we're supposed to move every single thing from the FAQ to the wiki, that has not been done, unless I've missed a heck of a lot from going into a coma or something...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 10:51, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

It hasn't been done, so everyone is free to do it :) And we're not actually moving the faq, more like copying it over and expanding it so we can give a lot more and richer information. We'll then link from the FAQ forum threads to the wiki (most probably)
JSO (talk | contribs) 10:56, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I was thinking, should we add something like this:

This is an FAQ page, which is an enriched version of its thread in the Scratch Forums.

at the top of every FAQ article. That text isn't very good, but something similar. I'm not sure how to do it, but maybe we could add something like "The forum thread for this topic can be found..." and then allow the wiki editor to add the link, like in the Main Article template.

Also, to anyone creating an FAQ, since JSO has gone now, I thought I'd tell you this... JSO discovered that the only way to get a question mark in an article name is to put %3F at the end of it...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 11:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I like WeirdF's 'template' :)
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 11:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Can we make our own FAQs as well as adapting ones from the forum?
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 17:14, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I guess so; it'd be silly to limit ourselves to what's in the FAQ forum, wouldn't it?
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 05:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I likez.
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 07:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Article Count

You know it says that there are 1,498 articles on the wiki? Well if you go to the "All Pages" section then it lists these articles. The ones in italics are redirects, not actual articles, however at the moment there are almost 800 redirects. This means that it only counts some redirects into the article count... First of all, why is this? Second of all, I don't think redirects should be counted at all...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 06:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello?
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 08:42, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Oops, missed your edit in Recent Changes, sorry to be late ^_^

Odd... I think we need JSO to give us a good answer :P
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 08:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

*posts to show I've read this*
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 09:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

What makes you say that the "1,498 articles" includes some redirects into the article count? If you go to Scratch Wiki:Statistics, it says that there are 1,498 articles, which doesn't include any redirects; so it seems reliable. Did you actually count the content articles or something? :P
Lucario621 (talk | contribs) 02:08, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I never thought of it that way... >.< Silly me!
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 21:31, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Collaborations table

Don't forget to update the collab table
Andresmh (talk | contribs) 01:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try and do some research for the table today :D

(Please remember to sign your posts with the four tildes :) I added your signature for you.)
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 02:22, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

List of Collaborations :)
JSO (talk | contribs) 21:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I edited Gray Bear's section of the Collab table. :D
Kingofdallamas (talk | contribs) 03:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)kingofdallamas

Woo! :D :D :D (You don't need to put your username after the four tildes; they'll automatically place your username for you ;))
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:34, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh sorry!
Kingofdallamas (talk | contribs) 20:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

ill continue to find more about other scratch companies and write articles about them :D
Scratchlive (talk | contribs) 01:22, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, cool! The more help, the better! :D
Kingofdallamas (talk | contribs) 01:06, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Wha-?

I dunno why, but I searched "z" in the wiki search bar, and it came up with this being the first option: http://wiki.scratch.mit.edu/images/deleted/m/z/

What on earth is it?
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 21:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I think its' just it's the place where all the deleted pictures on Wiki go to. I may be wrong.
Kingofdallamas (talk | contribs) 03:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Uh... JSO, we need help xD
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

0.o
Jwosty (talk | contribs) 04:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Blocktalk

Should I make a topic for Blocktalk? I mean, it won't come out for a long time though... :/
Jwosty (talk | contribs) 04:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I... take that as a yes. xP
Jwosty (talk | contribs) 14:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Whoops, missed your post ^_^

I don't think there's any strict rule, but we try and keep articles to things that already exist. If you really want to, create the article anyway - it never hurts :)
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Gender-specific in curator new sections?

As Chris, WeirdF and Scimonster will know, we had this discussion on the Scratch Wiki forum topic, but it should be discussed here instead... :P

Scimonster suggests that we be gender-specific in the curator news.

WeirdF (I'll give a direct quote, it's easier): "Well, I think that's kinda just the way we do it. I think it should stay as his/her projects. If some people get to have their exact gender stated, then other people may complain, just because we don't know theirs, however if everyone is referred to as "his/her" then that problem is eradicated..."

Scimonster: But I've seen some gender specific...

Chrischb: I assume that's the past :P

Meh: We should be discussing this on the community portal :P One, two, three, go xD

So here we are :D

My opinion: Uh... I really can't decide ^_^ Sorry to be so useless...
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I think if the user wants his/her gender to be specific, then we should correct it, but if the he/she doesn't, just leave the general gneders of he or she. It really depends on the user. :P What about you guys or ...gals?
Kingofdallamas (talk | contribs) 01:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

What if we left a comment on their newest projects asking for their gender?
OldWheezerGeezer (talk | contribs) 01:42, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't know either. The "he/she" is rather clunky, but we don't want to risk giving the wrong gender or giving out info the curator doesn't want given. Hmm. Maybe it should just say he/she (or she/he- ladies first! :P) unless the curator contacts the Wiki asking it to change. I don't like the he/she thing either, but we need to avoid offending people and giving out false information. Somebody really needs to invent a non-gender-specific, non-offensive, singular pronoun for humans... Get to it, men! :P
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 03:29, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

...or women. Yeah, that's what I was trying to say, too. :D By the way, I like the ladies first idea (she/he) versus (he/she).
Kingofdallamas (talk | contribs) 04:50, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I think I agree with scmb1 :D And scimonster did ask for his news section to say 'he'. I think we should wait for another agreeing opinion before changing it though.
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 05:42, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine with she/he and he/she :)
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 06:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

"Their" is officially plural, but is used in the singular form many times. We can do that.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 09:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)scimonster

But 'their' isn't grammatically correct with what we're doing... :/
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 09:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Why not? "[name] has been chosen as the [number] curator on the front page! Feel free to congratulate [name] on one of their projects." Sounds fine to me.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 16:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I see that everybody thinks that if they contact the wiki about it, then we'll change it to their gender. However, I don't agree with asking them about their gender. I suppose I'm fine with the she/he he/she idea...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 08:46, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Uh... I suppose I'll go change the news; I think we have enough opinions.
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 10:38, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey :P. I definitely agree that in the new curator sections, the people's pronouns *should* be gender specific, as long as the gender is known. :) I don't think it's that rude to ask politely what gender the user is; after all, in a professional news article, you wouldn't want to be always mentioning "he/she", would you?
Lucario621 (talk | contribs) 02:57, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, right... in news articles they try and be specific. But then again, they use real names in the news and not pseudonyms :P
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:51, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

True, true. *Unless* they happen to be talking about Mark Twain. :P I guess asking gender would be fine. Doesn't seem offensive to me...
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 05:12, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I think anywhere that someone is mentioned, it should be gender-specific. Of course, not every time someone is mentioned, but where it is applicable.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Linking to Scratch Website user pages in articles

I'm quite sure that in the past we were told to not place links to Scratchers' user pages (Scratch website ones, not Scratch Wiki). I was just wondering about everyone's opinions; I've seen some people add links, and I wasn't sure if the links should be removed or not.

It'd be nice if we could get confirmation from a bureaucrat on the links - though please listen to everyone's opinions before deciding :P
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 00:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I personally don't generally, mostly because I don't really like the look of external links, however I can see the strengths. It allows people to quickly access the user's page, meaning that they can check what else the user has done, besides what is mentioned in the article. We do need to choose one or the other, because it's unfair if some people are linked to and some aren't...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 19:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah...

As for the look of external links - meowmeow55's user page has two external links, and they don't have that arrow thing. It takes some HTML though, but it looks okay.

But the look isn't really what we're going to base our decision on, is it? :P

*waits for more people*
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 10:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't really like linking to users; it feels like "haha I got linked too woooooooooo". :/
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 03:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmmmm... that's a good point :/
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it is fine.
Andresmh (talk | contribs) 06:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)