Guys, shouldn't we chang the caption under the picture to say bitmap editor of 3.0?
-unsigned comment by jbrow78 (talk | contribs)
- We're probably going to replace this article at some point with something about Scratch 3.0. In the meantime, the caption serves as one of the flaws in the article people can find when submitting account requests.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 03:02, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
New article
When is the new article going to start to be used? Acebsa (talk | contribs) 21:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Minor change to the Flawed Article
Done
I'm leaving this here instead of the Community Portal because it's a very minor change. 4096bits posted on my talk page and pointed out that the link to -Jie-'s profile in #Notable Creations is not an interwiki link. The reason for this is because interwiki links such as users: were only introduced this May; however, I think we should change that as well as the link to the project by Golden-Angel to interwiki links. I doubt that many users requesting will point this out as a flaw, since they are not yet users on the Scratch Wiki and likely don't know how many of the processes work. Also, it doesn't really fit any of the categories of flaws in S:CONTRIB.
Thoughts? 
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:23, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- The links would have been changed automatically if it wasn't protected. Changed.
kenny2scratch Talk Contribs Directory 03:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Notable Projects section
The projects in the Notable Projects section of the flawed article, despite being made by alt accounts of a Wiki contributor, do not seem to fall under the definition of notable. Both of the projects have less than 100 views, so it would be inaccurate to call them notable. I think it the links to those projects could be replaced with actually notable projects. 
Jammum (💬 Talk - ✍️ Contribs) 08:19, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
- The user who edited the page especially created these accounts as a sample accound as far as I saw, so I think it's enough. (also notice that this is a flawed article for simulation, rather than a real content page)
ahmetlii Talk Contributions Directory 19:56, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Should this be a newer version of the april fools page for 3.0?
It would be funny tbh.
-unsigned comment by Imabanana22 (talk | contribs)
- This is not the intention, however. The article is specifically written for being a flawed article as an example for account requesters, not for joke. ahmetlii Talk Contributions Directory 21:12, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
