Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 65

This page is archive 65 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

Categorizing redirects?

 Not done

So, I asked scmb1 to promote ThisIsAnAccount to a bot account. Its main task is (was? i'm not sure the original conversation is finished yet) to check that all the redirect pages on the wiki are properly categorized and consistent in the matter of capitalizing "REDIRECT", putting a space between "#REDIRECT" and the destination, etc. (the second part possibly could be avoided but it's more convenient if it's there). Scmb1 asked for a more specific/supported description and I gave her it. However, I also said that doing so began to make me question some of the wiki's policies. So now it's a conversation over whether to keep the rule or not. And I have no idea on whether to keep the rule or not. Even if I could decide, though, it's best to discuss first.

(tl;dr version: big discussion between me and scmb1 on her profile.)

So I'm asking this:

Should we abolish the rule where redirects must be categorized in Category:Redirects or a subcategory of it?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I am confused. You want to make the bot account check redirect pages and categorize them? well if we remove categories then the bot can't categorize the pages! and the category lets users find redirects pages easily, and tells people that that page is actually a redirect. Also, mainpages must have a category on them, unless you want to change the namespace to redirect: ? sorry if i misunderstood your paragraph :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I say it's fine. Why does it matter if someone puts #REDIRECT[[]] or #REDIRECT [[]] (with a space)? I can think of many more important inconsistencies on the Wiki. And what's wrong with categorizing redirects? I think everything's just fine.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Surely it comes down to two things: is it desirable to be able to find a list of all redirect pages; and is possible to do that without using a category?
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 00:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@KrIsMa: I'm pretty sure you misunderstood my paragraph, because you're confusing me. :P Having just one person do the talking can be confusing, so how about you read the tl;dr version?

@Turkey3: That's not what I mean; the consistencies are only part of the program because it's easier that way (and I thought of it as slightly useful, too), and I'm not implying we should abolish that rule. The tl;dr version is much, much less confusing, so read it for a better idea of what I mean.

@blob8108: Apparently, there is. But is it slightly more convenient if capitalization redirects are separate?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 02:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, mathfreak231. Unfortunately, my bot already checked redirect pages (with the word #REDIRECT in then) without a category. However, if your bot goes through, I can disable redirect categorization :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 04:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Pros of keeping the category

• Because we've always done it?
• A little more categorization, what with the subcategories.
• Less work uncategorizing everything

Cons of keeping it

• More work when creating a redirect
• We have Special:ListRedirects anyways
• Wikipedia doesn't have it
• An extra rule

Apparently, i support getting rid of the category. (BTW, i remember an old discussion where there was a single uncategorized redirect; there was one more item in the list than in the category, and the admins of the time, Chrischb and Jonathanpb went through every single one to find it!)
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 10:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

so who is going to remove the categories when it actually happens? Keep in mind that there needs to be a six second delay between edits to prevent the wiki from crashing!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 15:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The wiki didn't mind the last time I ran a bot script, and I didn't sleep between requests...
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 20:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I talked to scmb1 and she said the time delay might be the reason the wiki is crashing a lot! :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:28, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Still, not all redirects are actually categorized; there are at least 100 uncategorized. My bot takes care of that.

I can also program my bot to un-categorize redirects. It will just take a little bit of re-organization. Just please let me program something; don't hog everything to yourself. :P
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) Revised 21:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Eh, bots. Ever heard of hands?
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:23, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hands are difficult to repeatedly carry out the process nearly 2000 times if we abolish the rule, about 100-200 times if we keep it. It's a simple script, really.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 23:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I know, just joshing you... 0_0
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 23:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I'm sorry you feel this way, mathfreak231, but that is not what I implied. If you mean you want your bot to categorize uncategorized pages, ok :) I'll need to remove my plugin for categorizing uncategorized pages! Just a note, do not categorize pages that includes a template that categorizes the page, and don't categorize talk pages and user pages :)
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:59, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Whoah. I just want to categorize redirects.</offtopic>
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 15:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

So, uncategorize or categorize? sorry for late post :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I support uncategorizing.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 14:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Last vote? If no-one is replying, then maybe we should remove categories from redirects. Mathfreak321, your bot can function and have a usage now!!! (excited)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 04:22, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I vote uncategorise. Categories are supposed to help users find related pages. But redirects aren't real articles so no-one needs to find them thus no categories are needed.
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 17:48, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Mathfreak321 are you going to make a bot? maybe a vote

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ If we need it in a bot, I can write it in WM.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:08, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

You know that VoxBot can do it equally :) --we really need to set boundaries of which task goes to which bot - yours patrol recent edits, and mine does wiki mass edits. What do you say? I really think it should help.edit: I have made a new C.P discussion I think will really help our two bots out

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

more reply: after all the redirects are removed, your bot can temporarily stop redirects from being categorized by the Recent Changes in the 'grace period'. That might be a great compromise!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:07, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I will set WM to ignore redirects and you auto-categorize them? If so, I can do that.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

i think time will tell ;) mathfreak really wants to make the bot account, but if he chooses not to, maybe I can remove all the categories, and you can make wm further look at the recent changes and alert users to not categorize redirects that were categorized? time will tell :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:55, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Whoah again. Let's get back to the original question. </offtopic>
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 16:42, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

We already discussed to remove the redirects :) now we are waiting for a bot to remove it :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Remove the categories. ;)

As of now, we're not categorizing newly created redirects, right? (Such as [1])
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 04:54, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Mathfreak321 will program the bot, however, he says that he might take a while ;) ;)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

title length rule

There should be a rule that page titles cannot be more than x characters in the title! who agrees?
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I think programming something of that nature would require hacking the software, and as such would be significantly harder than the other enhancements on the Wiki, as those are just software extensions.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 02:30, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Why would we need it? What if we need a long title?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 09:39, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Can I make a wiki page?

Can I make a wiki page for my collab?
Lallaway12 (talk | contribs)

The Wiki used to but does not anymore allow pages on collaborations. Also, when you make a post here, sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ at the end to show who posted it ;)
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 15:04, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Unreferenced

Here is my proposal for a new template, {{Unreferenced}}:

This article or section does not cite any references or sources. Its content may not be accurate. Editors can help by adding references and removing unsourced information.

It would be used whenever an article lacks references.
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 16:09, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Or we could use {{Inaccurate}}...
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 18:27, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Template Idea: Fun Fact

This template would look like this. You type:

{{funfact|In December 2014, the Scratch Team accidentally banned everyone on the website.}}

You get:

Fun Fact: In December 2014, the Scratch Team accidentally banned everyone on the website.

Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 13:26, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I am against, as this may get overused and take away from the factual information of the article. Some things in there may even fit in an article all their own.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 20:34, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess you're right.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 21:14, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Mathfreak, but...I also think it's a good idea. Weird, can't make up my mind. Although I like it more than I am against
Mariobros406 (talk | contribs) 21:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

i am proposing a template

we should have a template that marks pages that are recently created that need a bit more editing with facts and statements ect. for example, one writes a page about scratch cat but does not know a lot about it and some facts may be a bit off, so that person puts this template on the top of the page to signify that someone needs to double check the page.
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Isn't that quite similar to the "this does not meet editing guidelines" template (which I somehow forgot it's name)?
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:10, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Close but its when u dont know if all ur info is correct on ur new page :) the template will go something like "this page needs to be double checked for errors"

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:19, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Blocked user template

I'm not really a fan of the blocked user template. Publicizing that a user has been blocked is public shaming, and that's not something we're into doing. If you notice, we do not show when a user has been blocked on the main website-- we view a block as something that is between a user and the ST. Do you have any useful reasons for using the block template? Otherwise, it'd be best if we stopped using it. Thanks.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 21:29, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure why it was even (re?) implemented, and I agree, it is shaming. I never liked the idea of the template.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 21:45, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Here is the discussion that took place on the template talk (I only included the relevant parts):

And I also think it's cruel to put this on someone's user page :S On the forums it doesn't say Banned besides someone's name anymore when they get banned too. Putting this template up seems like saying "yo there, this user got baaaaaaaned".
-Chrischb

---

...I don't think this is cruel. This is to inform the people who view their page and wonder why the user isn't editing, or anything like that. If you want to see the reason for the person's block, then you can click "block log" directly on the template.
-Lucario621

---

We have so many inactive editors, I don't think anyone will wonder about 1 of them. :P
-Scimonster

Please note that by including this, I am in no way presenting an opinion. I am just adding relevant information to the discussion. The only reason I have added the template to other peoples' user pages when applicable is because there is a precedent to do that.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:06, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I really don't mind. I think it isn't a good idea because it shames the person. I can make my bot delete all those templates from user pages if you want :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

There are only 4 or 5 total, I don't think a bot is necessary.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 12:55, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

In Other Languages

So here's my latest thought. Scratch is really a language designed to jumpstart people to other, text-based, more advanced languages. However, it can often be difficult to make that transition or find the proper educative resources for learning a language properly with correct syntax. My thought is this: On all the block articles, we should have a section added called "In Other Languages" that would relate the block to its direct companion or similar code in another (maybe a couple) programming language. The section would describe the difference in the block to how it really is in the other language. What languages would be there? Whatever works! For example, if a block is meant for movement, it would not be compared to any block in Basic because Basic is not meant for making games.

I was thinking JavaScript code could especially be in this section due to the many similarities with it and Scratch. It would really help people looking to advance their programming knowledge, I think. Like the idea? It would be a lot of work adding that section to every block page, but hey, I'm dying for things to edit.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:44, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I like the idea of explaining other languages, but not exactly your implementation. There are hundreds of other languages out there. How would we decide which to include? (BASIC? Seriously?)

Additionally, many other languages are not graphical at their core, unlike Scratch. Many languages have several different graphics libraries, all with different specs.

In a little space, how would you properly show everything you need for a block in another language? Take the Change X by () block. In JS, you might do something like this: sprite.x += amount; But that doesn't update it on the screen. It just changes a value.

What might be a better idea is expanding the Alternatives to Scratch page to actually explaining some of those other languages, with relation to Scratch.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 07:56, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Good idea. And I was not planning on Basic (I don't even know Basic, I just skipped learning it and don't need to since it's too, well, basic)
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:45, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Lol basic is not that hard but it lacks usage :/ lol I like C++! its hard

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:08, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Delete

Please delete [2] too, thanks!
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:07, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

 Done
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:51, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Warning: WikiMonitor B testing in progress

I am now writing WikiMonitor B, a new script that will take care of routine tasks (it's different from VoxBot in that these tasks need to be executed at specific times). All edits will still be made by WikiMonitor. Anyway, I am mentioning this because I am testing the first feature: recategorizing all pages in a given category. To do this, I am going to have to add a temporary category to a bunch of pages. I apologize in advance for this.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:12, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

All testing is complete and the feature works. To recategorize something, please go to User:WikiMonitor/Configuration/ServiceQueue and read the documentation there. Please remember that once an item is placed in the service queue, I have to manually review it before executing it. As such, it may take a while at times before an action is executed. Also, does anybody else have any ideas for how I can improve WikiMonitor B?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Why do so many people quit the WIki?

I feel like there is at least 1 or 2 new users every day, but for the past year it's basically the same 8-10 active editors on the whole Wiki. Why do people tend to leave or just quit? Could we do anything to make Wiki editors feel more comfortable? I wouldn't mind making a YouTube video perhaps with a video tutorial on the whole process (though I need to still get Quicktime or a good screen recorder)
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 19:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Maybe someone should ask some of these disappearing users why they disappear.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 19:56, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I am not writing on the wiki as much these days - so I will tell you why - it is because some people are interested in the Scratch Wiki at first, but realized writing an article is hard work, then abandon the wiki. Secondly, homework I think the first reason is mainly why (i have been bogged down with homework recently tho)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:35, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I feel so strongly about this I think that it should have its own talk area. I'm gonna make one just for this at User_talk:Krett12/Active Wiki Editors.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 13:44, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Note:

The link above is now the official disucssion

Online WM Configuration

In order to increase transparency, as well as to make it easier for necessary changes to be made on WikiMonitor, I am making as much of the configuration as possible publicly available (and publicly editable with my permission). To see the current configuration settings available online, go to User:WikiMonitor/Configuration. Please remember that the pages are under userspace, so I still have complete control. Do not edit them without my permission (except the Service Queue).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good to me.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

really weird question

Who considers me active? I feel like I am not active anymore because of Language homework and also math :( just wondering :)
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I think you count as active. You've made several edits over the past few days.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 08:27, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

You are active.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 13:23, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh interesting! hmm maybe my thought of 'active' is different :) thanks!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:01, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

You're on my list. "My list" being at User_talk:Krett12/Active_Wiki_Editors
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 14:12, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

addendum

scratch users, please add to here = please! thank you, i am trying to populate that page to make it easier for people! thanks you!
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for adding your names~! It means a lot :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:05, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Weird Thing

What's the meaning of {{NUMBEROFACTIVEUSERS}}? How do I change its code?
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 14:18, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

It just counts users which has edited in the last 30 days. Check out Help:Magic words!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:40, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

request

I was wondering if I was aloud to make a template called {{finished}}? It will look like this

This article is complete please do not add any more information.

 JayceeMinecraft 13:14, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

But articles should always be open to new information. Really, there's no such thing as a "completely complete" article on a wiki.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

+1 to Mathfreak.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 14:25, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

How about one called {{Scratch}} that you use if you want an article to only contain things that have something got to do with the Scratch Wiki or Scratch which will look like this.

File:JayceeMinecraft Scratch Wiki.jpg

This article should only contain text that has something got to do with Scratch or the Scratch Wiki.

  JayceeMinecraft 14:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

But that's a wiki policy, so wouldn't we have to put it on every single page?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Thanks for trying to help out, JayceeMinecraft, but i think we have enough templates for now.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 14:53, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

OK and can I make a bot called GrammarBot which will correct spelling mistakes? JayceeMinecraft 14:56, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

How about you start a new discussion for this, and explain why we need it, and how it will work.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:21, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Not trying to judge you or anything, but you might not be the best person to white a grammar not when there are 2 mistakes in that post.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:49, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Bot

This Bot will be called GrammarBot, It will fix grammar mistakes using Python 2.5 This will be needed if someone made a grammar mistake, this bot will fix it.
JayceeMinecraft 15:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

How can it tell if someone makes a mistake?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

It has alphabet=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

JayceeMinecraft 15:39, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

And that will work because...?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Do you want to know the code?

JayceeMinecraft 15:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but if it's long (<50 lines, which it should be), please post it somewhere like http://pastebin.com or http://gist.github.com and link to your paste.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:48, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I'll email it to you so no one can copy it, what's your email?
JayceeMinecraft 15:49, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I am sorry, but we don't share emails :( use pastebin.com or your sandbox!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 15:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

ok I'll paste it in my sandbox check it there and reply to me here.

JayceeMinecraft 15:54, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

So, is the code correct?

JayceeMinecraft 16:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok check my sandbox, I pasted it there, reply to me here.

JayceeMinecraft 16:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

You don't need to worry about somebody copying your code. All Wiki bots need to be approved by an EW or Admin.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

After this initial process, we will need to see your bot in action! After that, your bot is ready to go!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:16, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

OK, should I create the account for the bot now?

JayceeMinecraft 16:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe later, because the bot will edit on your account first, then after if it is approved, it will be moved onto a new bot account! :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:21, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

So what should I do now?

JayceeMinecraft 16:21, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

How can I test my bot on my sandbox, what should I do?

JayceeMinecraft 16:32, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Just wait for Scimonster to reply! If your bot does get approved, show us what the bot can do by editing maybe one page on the wiki with the bot, and we can go from there :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No I meant how can I edit one page on the wiki with the bot?

JayceeMinecraft 16:38, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Have you looked into how to make a MediaWiki bot in Python? And would you like to explain how the code works, and checks for spelling/grammar errors?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 16:40, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ 1.I will do that now. 2.Ok I will tell you what it means in a few seconds.
JayceeMinecraft 16:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

What do you want to know what something means?

JayceeMinecraft 16:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I think sci wants to know how your script detects and changes grammar in the Wiki

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:59, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

The deletes code, deletes a letter if it's wrong, and then replaces it, and It just detects any word and checks for spelling mistakes, and it uses the alphabet and it knows the words by using the alphabet.
JayceeMinecraft 17:13, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Please test the bot on your own account. Given the nature of this bot, it needs to be extremely accurate. Also, one issue: Scratch has a lot of new vocabulary that's not in a standard dictionary, and the Wiki also has some technical language. How would you know that those words are acceptable?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:18, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Because It only changes words, not other things.

JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions

Could you please clarify what you mean by that?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:27, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ It detects all of the words, using the alpahbet, it goes every word to check if it exsists and if the word does not exsist, it uses the delete code, and then replaces a few things, and turns the word into the nearest word you could make out of those letters.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions JayceeMinecraft 17:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

With that, I can predict two possible scenarios: 1. The bot goes through every page first to come up with a list of words, in which case all misspelled words are counted as real. 2. The bot will have no idea which words are right when it starts, and it will make a massive amount of incorrect edits. Also, there is no guarantee that the word with the best match is the one that's supposed to be there. Often, I make typos and the correct word is several items down in the list of possible alternatives spell check gives me.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)No, that's not what I meant, the bot can understand what you are trying to type, then it will change the word into the correct spelling, it uses the alphabet so it can't do anything incorrect.

JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 17:39, 11 May 2014 (UTC) And how do I use the bot script on my own account???
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 17:41, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

My bot User:VoxBot already corrects typos it has a database of regexes and making a database of that magnitude takes a long time!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:42, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you saying that I did all that code for nothing? :'(
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 17:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No, but if you ever want to get some regexes i can give then to you

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:46, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

If VoxBot already works, wouldn't it be simpler (and a lot less likely to cause problems) to keep the tasks where they are?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:47, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

@KrlsMa no, I did do all that code for nothing because there is nothing else to use it for. :'(
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 17:49, 11 May 2014 (UTC) So my bot is unapproved, right?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 18:04, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, yes, it's not approved.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:08, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

why? :~(
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 18:11, 11 May 2014 (UTC) Wow, you just wasted an hour of my time ;_;
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 18:13, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

It's not approved because you haven't really demonstrated the effectivity of your algorithm. If you want to demonstrate it, please either publish it or test it by running the bot script with your main account.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

How can I run the code on my account????
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 18:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

The same way you can run it on a dedicated account. Just change the login info from that of the bot account you want to use to that of your normal account.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Can you please clarify that?

JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 18:27, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Do you even have a login script for the bot?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:32, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

no but I could use some help with that, I just wanted to code the bot' s functions.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 18:34, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

And I meant how do I implement code into my account?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 18:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

You could start by reading some documentation on making bots. See also mediawikiwiki:Manual:Pywikibot and wikipedia:Wikipedia:Creating a bot.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:47, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Don't be discouraged! Grammar is very hard to edit using a bit because bots are programmed. Humans can fix grammar because they have sophisticated brains. Captchas demonstrate this ability humans have :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:51, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ All I want to know is how to put the code into my account, please tell me, that is the only thing I need to know now.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 19:07, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

You need to write a script in Python (or any other good scripting language with XML or JSON support and some cURL or similar library). That script needs to log in, then look at the API documentation and do what you feel like.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 23:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

So do you mean I should create the bot account?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 14:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

No, first get the bot working on your main account.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:06, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

So I should put the code in my account? How can I put the code into my account? And how do I make it be Python? Please tell me :)
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 15:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

And I made a login script now. :)
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 15:39, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Please reply :(
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions . 15:47, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Whoa, have a little patience there. I'm actually not online 24/7...

So i guess have it make a few edits (just a couple, so that it can be easily reverted) from your account, and we'll see how well it does.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:02, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I am in total opposition of having a grammar-checking bot. We can not overdo the amount of bots that are on this Wiki. Also, not even spellcheck, made by total professionals, is always correct. Grammar also has many irregular forms, and we add "s" to the ends of words, some have weird plural forms and such.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:54, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I also agree here. As I stated above, grammar (especially in English) is very complicated, and creating a bot that can recognize and correct bad grammar is near impossible. Even Microsoft Word's grammar check often has false positives.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

For example, spell fixing is very hard, too. I need to insert multiple regex entries for the same word and I cant make my bot assume "had had" isnt a word. It's super hard to make a grammer bot also. If you do, I would make a bot script that detects possible grammar errors, give the list of possible grammar arrors to you, and you manually fix it. Even that doesn't need a second bot account.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I didn't literally mean grammar I meant spelling mistakes.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 15:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

As was stated above, properly correcting spelling is also difficult. Even the best spell check programs often don't have the right word.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

So how can I put the code into my main account?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 14:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC) I mean like, how do I put the code into my account then run it?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

You don't put the code on your account. You write a script that you run on your computer. That script needs to utilize the MediaWiki API.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:09, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

And what should I run it with?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:11, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Run it the same way you run any other program written in the language you use.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:11, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I never ran I any programs in Python before, so what should I run it with?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:18, 14 May 2014 (UTC) I usually don't run Python script so that's why I want to know :)
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Python

Can somebody please tell me how to run Python code? Because my bot is made from Python code and I never used python before. :(
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

And it says I need DLL to install Python
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

This isn't quite the place to ask for help on running your code. Have you used Google?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Generally, it's better if you have experience in a language before using it to write a Wiki bot. Before writing WM, I had been coding PHP for at least 2 years.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I have been doing Python, for 1 year, but not on my computer, and I tried to download Python but it gives me error missing DLL, how do I fix it?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 19:21, 14 May 2014 (UTC) OK, it works, now that I'm running it, how will I put it into the scratch wiki?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:13, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

If you set it up properly and coded it to make edits, it should make the necessary edits for you.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:03, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

No, I meant how do I import the bot to the wiki?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 14:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

It needs to have an account and be in the Bot group.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 17:25, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

OK, so should I make the bot account, now?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:34, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Mathfreak, you can run the bot on your own account. JayceeMinecraft, as I have said before, you need to code a login script. Just read up on the MediaWiki API. Also, please do NOT create the account, as we all want to see how well it works. If possible, could you also send the code my way so I can test it some? I promise I won't copy it, I just want to perform some tests on it to make sure it's accurate.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:47, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Where do you want me to tell you the code?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 20:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

You could put it on PasteBin if it's not too long. If it's really long, you could use Gist.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

for everyone's convenience,I have included the acceptance stages on Scratch Wiki:Bots

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:46, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

jvvg..... I put the code in my sandbox, but I didn't put the login script there, I don't want people knowing the password.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 09:01, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

So just blank out the password.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 10:32, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I looked at the code, and it looks pretty unreliable. Especially when it's first starting, it looks like it will let a lot of misspelled words remain and may choose the wrong word to correct others.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 13:19, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ You didn't even test the code!
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 13:25, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Part of programming is understanding algorithms and their effectivity. Yours appears to look for the closest match in the dictionary of known words, and if it can't find any close matches, just skip over the word. This takes two assumptions: 1. the correct word is the closest match, and 2. the correct word is in the dictionary at all. 1 does not work because human error can often be greater than the computer can detect. Often, when a word is misspelled, the correct word can easily be detected by a human (usually using the context), but a computer will find several other matches that are not correct, which doesn't help anything. 2 does not work because of the nature of this Wiki. Many words are specialized, and new words are invented on a daily basis. If your bot sees those words and there is anything close in the dictionary (e.g. I don't think Scratcher is a real word, so your bot would correct it to "Scratch", most likely), then it could cause massive problems.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 13:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

If you still want to write a spelling bot, I think a better way would be to write one that detects misspelled words, shows them to you with a list of possible alternatives, and you pick the one that works the best.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 13:50, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I googled most words, and it definitely wouldn't change "Scratcher"
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 14:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

That was just an example. There are many other words that this could also apply to, but the list is too long to include here. Also, when replying, please put colons in front of your message. This way it formats and indents properly. Put one more colon before your message than the message above it.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:22, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ OK, just test it please
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 15:27, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Which function should I run on the text of an article? The code isn't exactly that clear on what functions do what.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:13, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I figured it out as well as I could, and here are the results. Every word I checked is a real word available on the Scratch Wiki, and the dictionary I used is a complete list of words in the English language. Out of the specialized words I tried, 13 out of 46 weren't changed, meaning 28% accuracy. This also brings up another concern for me: how does it know how to capitalize each word? It appears to just make each word entirely lowercase. However, for some acronyms and stuff, even if you add them to the dictionary, how will it know which letters to capitalize? One more interesting thing to note is that I got different replacement words at different times. This further increases the unreliability.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:43, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm now running it on random pages, and seeing how the results work. Here they are: 90% 85% 83%.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I corrects spelling, not grammar! So capitals don't count.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:07, 18 May 2014 (UTC) And how did you run the code on the scratch wiki?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:10, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I didn't run it on the Wiki. I just copy-pasted Wiki articles into an input file. Anyway, my point wasn't about correcting capitals, it was about preserving capitalization. How does it know which letters to keep capitalized if the output is always lowercase? Also, I ran it on a Wikipedia article, and here are the results: 82%. For this algorithm to be acceptable on the Wiki, it needs to be at least 99% accurate for just about everything. Also, again, please put colons before your message. When replying to this one, put "::" so it indents properly.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:19, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

OK, but how do you run WikiMonitor on the Scratch Wiki?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Check out the source code. It's kind of spaghetti code, but it works and I will organize it more later. The code to log in starts on line 178, the code to read the source code of a page is on line 2, and the code to submit an edit is on line 41 of this file.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:36, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

No, I meant how do you get the bot to run on the wiki?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 18:38, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Divider

I run it on the Wiki by executing that code.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:43, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Also, please don't try running the code on the Wiki. The accuracy currently is not at an acceptable level.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:58, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I think he means how to run the code, like as in how to take code and actually run the code so that it will edit the wiki. (What program to put the code in. To run the code)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

@Krlsma yes, that's excactly what I mean.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions

You can download the Python tools at python.org. Also, as I said before, please do NOT use your script to edit the Wiki. We have made a decision that spelling correction bots are not allowed because there is no way to make them accurate enough and we already have a similar bot. Also, as stated above, the algorithm does not have acceptable accuracy anyway.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:14, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions

17:15, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Automatic category for uncategorized pages?

When WM detects an uncategorized page, should it add a category automatically, such as "Category:Uncategorized pages" or something?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe add a template saying it needs to be categorized, and have it NOT mark that one edit as bot, so that it'll show up in RC.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 07:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Can you even make a bot edit not show up as a bot edit? Seems a bit odd :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 13:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

you could make it so the bot goes through the wiki, finds uncategorized pages, then compiles all those page titles onto a list, and then you can look at the list and categorize the ones that aren't categorized! this is what I do for mass editing I am not sure about :) I call it 'preparse' xD

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:10, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure that the list would be helpful because we already have Special:UncategorizedCategories, Special:UncategorizedFiles and Special:UncategorizedPages. I also don't think that the bot needs to do anything about Uncategorized pages because we already have lists for them, and anything more would need human involvement.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 15:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

What Ernie said.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 15:03, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Good point. I guess I'll leave it as-is.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Can I make a page?

Can I make a page called Scratch reccomendations which is a page that list most of things that you can do or try out on scratch?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 15:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Examples on what you would include in there? Would it be similar to Getting Started with Scratch?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 16:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

No, it's not about projects it's about the website, it lists some things you can try out on Scratch and it lists things you can do on scratch, for example I would write try out cloud data(only available if you are a Scratcher) try creating a project, maybe even try and create your own studio! and stuff like that?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

So can I? :)
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:18, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

What would we need it for?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 16:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

If Scratchers are bored and want to do something or be challenged.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

So, am I allowed?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I still don't see why we would need the article. The wiki is not a forum. It's a collection of informational articles and tutorials.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I agree with Sci.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC) OK, I just wanted to make this so scratchers don't get bored and leave :(
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 19:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Clearing sandbox with WM

Another possible task with WM would be to automatically clear the sandbox. If it detects any edits, it will wait 2 hours, and if any edits have been made in those 2 hours, keep waiting until 2 hours have passed since the last edit, then clear it.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 23:04, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes! I agree! Maybe even more than 2 hours?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:16, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree with @KrIsMa; 2 hours does sound short. Maybe four hours would be a better grace period? Past that, it sounds like a good idea @jvvg!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:44, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

4 hours it is. I'll include it in the online config.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:52, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

While I'm working on WM, I'm also fixing the bug where category notifications are sent for moved images.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘  Done
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:39, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

New Page

Can I make a page called List of things, that lists things you can do on scratch? example:

== Things you can do ==

• Create a project
• comment
• love a project
• like a project
• create an account (If not done already)
• post on the forums

and stuff like that, so what do you say?
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 14:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I thought we already covered that above?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 16:36, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Nope, that's different the one above tells you what to try out, but this one just lists everything you can do on Scratch.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure people won't need a list of things on Scratch. Scratch is easy enough to start using that you don't even need a guide of what's there, and if there's a feature that someone's going to use a lot in their future, they're going to encounter it pretty soon. Nice idea though!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 19:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't think we need that on the Wiki. :P
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 04:10, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

OK :(
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 14:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)