< Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal

Archive This page is archive 12 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.

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
Unfinished discussions

If not misspelling redirects, then...

Don't worry, I'm not complaining about the removal of the misspelling redirects! However, I think that if we're not going to have them, then we should at least have something. Like what Wikipedia has, where it says Did you mean: _______. Because there are certain articles, like the Disappearing Text Bug article, where people are very likely to get the spelling wrong. If people try a spelling, and it doesn't work, then try a different spelling and it still doesn't get them through to the correct spelling, then they are likely to give up searching for what they're looking for and leave the wiki. We want as many people as possible to have the wiki as their main source of information about Scratch right? So that's why I think that since for some reason, misspelling redirects are a bad idea, then we should at least have something.
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 07:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

How could I not notice something good in Wikipedia, my role model? :O I likez! :D
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 23:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Ooh ooh ooh! Having the "Did you mean: ___" thing would be really nice! :D
JSO, come here... >:D Joking, we should wait for more opinions.
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 00:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but having "Did you mean X" will not be used for misspelling anytime soon. Besides, JSO is working on implementing a better search engine on the Scratch Wiki (:D) - so then we won't need to do that. So we shouldn't jump to conclusions too quickly.
Lucario621 (talk | contribs) 00:41, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
A better search engine? :D :D :D What'll it be like?
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 00:43, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Eh, I'm not really sure. Not to many details so far.
Lucario621 (talk | contribs) 00:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Somewhat related. I would suggest linking to the wiki when people ask about certain things on the forums, projects or galleries. For example, if you see a project from someone who could benefit from the content of a Wiki article, post something like "Hey, it seems like you want to do X, check out this page that explains how to do X". Doing this would be a good way to popularize the wiki AND it will also help search engines index the wiki pages under different search terms (perhaps some of them even misspellings). --
andresmh (talk | contribs) 17:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
I love linking to the wiki - especially now that links to the wiki in comments turn out right. :D
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 23:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
I changed the search to a customized google search engine. PLease try it out and share your thoughts on my message below :p
JSO (talk | contribs) 13:35, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Why is this wiki so thin? :P

Just wondering... :P Compare Wikipedia, Wikia wikis, and this. :/

Or is it because the rest of the Scratch Website is of that width?
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 09:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, it makes articles look longer. :P
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 09:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it's done this way to match the Scratch Website :)
Lucario621 (talk | contribs) 21:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Ah, okay! :)
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 03:26, September 28, 2010
Indeed, it's so thin to match the Scratch website layout. Also, sites like wikipedia were created in a time PC screens were only 800px wide, I personally hate reading wikipedia on my 1680x1024 monitor, it's way to wide imo. I personally think this wiki is easier to read. However, when people add wide images or boxes on the right it becomes quite stuffed indeed, we might want to think of better ways to present images :)
JSO (talk | contribs) 13:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Let's make a list of articles that should be created

I thought it'd be a nice idea to make a list of articles to create, and then tackle them all. :)

Oh - WeirdF, please don't suddenly tackle them all. xD

I'd start the list, but I can't think of anything right now... :P
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 06:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

:P Heh heh... I won't do ALL of them then... xD
Though I will attempt to start the list, we need a LEGO Education WeDo Robotics Kit article, there are 11 links to that... I'm surprised it hasn't been written yet, especially since, as far as I am aware, Lucario has one... Other ones to do would be Scratch Logo, Tutorial Projects, Simulation Projects, Story Projects, Game Projects, Music Projects and Art Projects.
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 16:13, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I actually posted a message on the Community Portal asking someone to create the article... and I hinted at Lucario. Strangely, he avoided that message... :P
I might ask him again... ;)
Back on topic (this is still my post): There's Special:WantedPages - that's the list right there. :P Should we go and tackle the articles?
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 05:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Question: Should the articles on project types instead be redirects to their sections in Project Types?
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 08:19, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Scratch Logo created.
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 05:42, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

@Jonathan: I read what you wrote and then deleted in the history of this page, and I agree that maybe he should be marked as semi-active, or maybe just not active at all. Though to be honest, if someone leaves a message on his talk page, we'll see it in Recent Changes and we can reply...
Back on topic: I dunno, because other project type articles have been created that aren't redirects. The Wanted Pages list contains a lot of stuff that aren't real articles... Most of it is either links that have mistakes in them, old links on talk pages to stuff that doesn't exist, or help pages...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 15:57, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
^_^ Chris checked with Lucario and he said that he has a bit of an internet problem right now - so when that gets fixed he'll be on more. :)
Let's see what Chris and Lucario think about the articles and if they should be redirects or not... :)
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 23:47, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay! :) And for other articles, what about writing articles about lots of modifications? If we could fill this page with loads of blue links, that would be brilliant.
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 06:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I think redirects would be fine in that case. :3
@WeirdF: Should we just shove in a bunch of [broken] links in there? I think that's how Wikipedia does it...
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 06:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay, well so far I'm overruled with the redirect thing, that's fine. Should we wait until Lucario's internet is fixed so we can see what he thinks, or go ahead?
And I agree, we should put broken links in that article...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 06:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Let's wait for Lucario... :P
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 22:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, I didn't notice this :P. Umm... how about you add a section to the main page of the community portal, titled "Wanted Pages", and then under it you can bullet different wanted articles, and add any notes if wanted to each one :) Then, after that, if you want, I can change the sidebar so that by clicking "Community Portal", it links to you to the community portal main page, not this talk page (it originally did, but we changed it). That's optional though. How's that? :)
P.S. @WeirdF: My internet wasn't broken, my computer was (and still is)
Lucario621 (talk | contribs) 22:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Sure... *waits for Chris and WeirdF*
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 22:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh - Lucario, what do you think: Should we make those pages into redirects or articles?
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 22:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Google Custom Search experiment

Hi folks,

I replaced the (awful) default MediaWiki search with a Google Custom Search Engine (CSE). It's less customized for wiki-use but it's way better in searching through page content, it has good spelling correction, ...

I can also add special Scratch-related words to the Spelling Correction. Suggestions?

Please share your opinions. It's ok when you don't like it, but please explain why so we can try to improve (or revert to the old search if really needed :( )

The only thing I'm missing myself is an easy way to create new articles. Before, I entered it in the search, it gave me a redlink and I started creating it. I'm thinking I could add a New Article button to the bar at the top.
JSO (talk | contribs) 13:27, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, the main problem is that it doesn't take you straight to an article when you type an article in. I searched for "Scratch" and the eighth option down was the actual article. I preferred the old one... :/
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 14:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I just found something else... I typed in "braodcast" to try out the spelling correction, and it did give me the correct spelling, but it also gave me the option to go to Category:Misspelling Redirects, which doesn't even exist anymore!
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 14:12, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Google will realize after a while that the page is gone, no worries :) Also, Scratch is a very general word on this wiki as it probably can be found on about every page. If you try slightly more specific things like broadcast, mesh, sensor, ... the results are better. Try searching mesh, it gives the main article about mesh but also articles about Mods that include mesh features. I know it doesn't take you to the exact article anymore, but I personally think that's good. Only the wiki editors know exact page titles... Take the mesh example again, it's useful to know what Mods you can download to use the Mesh features, instead of just being redirected to the article on 'Mesh'. But that's just my oppinion. Let's see what others have to say :D
JSO (talk | contribs) 15:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Eh... I like the old one. ^^ But still, great work! :D
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 22:16, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
It's ok to say you don't like it :p Just also tell me what you don't like about it please... XD And I think this search really is friendlier for new people.
JSO (talk | contribs) 22:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I preferred the old one... if you entered in a valid page, it would take you straight to it. And redirects are useless without that...
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 22:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
For me these are the advantages:
+ Friendlier for new users
+ Awesome spelling correction
+ Very good search through page content
+ Showing related pages right away instead of redirecting to main article
The cons for me are
- Not as straightforward when entering a valid page title
- No redlink to create page :p
Emmediate update of search index (however google is fast too on .edu domains)
For me I think the pros outweight the cons, what do you guys think?
JSO (talk | contribs) 22:34, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I just want it to take you to the page if you entered it in. :3 Please, is there a way to fix that?
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 22:46, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I doubt it's possible to add that but I can try. And it would certainly be a lot of work to save 1 click :p
JSO (talk | contribs) 22:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
It's not about the 1 click, it's that it'll make it so much less messy... :P
If it wouldn't be too much of a bother, it'd be nice if you could at least try; otherwise we'll have to get rid of the redirects. :3
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:35, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I just typed in Category:Redirects, and it gave me two pages of results, none of which were Category:Redirects! And also, some redirects don't have anything to do with the actual title of the page, and some of them are quite useful. I agree with Jonathan, either you find a way to change it so that it goes straight to the page, we delete all the redirects, or we get rid of this CSE for good. I personally would like to revert to the old one...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 07:02, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Hope JSO reads what we're saying... :P
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 03:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Wait, I just thought of something else, if we keep this CSE, then shouldn't we delete the disambiguation pages? For example Forum (disambiguation), if one types in forum now, they're bound to find what they're looking for...
WeirdF (talk | contribs) 19:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I think we better keep them for when people are browsing the wiki through, say, the new table of contents (more on that later). The search won't take over all other possible ways of browsing the wiki ;)
JSO (talk | contribs) 19:38, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

BTW... are redirects to be kept?
Chrischb (talk | contribs) 06:22, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

For now, yes.
Lucario621 (talk | contribs) 22:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Profile Pictures


I recently made a change to the wiki's internal configuration, you are now allowed to include images hosted on http://scratch.mit.edu/.

You can add your user profile picture to your user page (like I did), just copy this code to the first line of your user page (/wiki/User:Yourusername)

<div style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; border: 1px solid #000000;">http://scratch.mit.edu/static/icons/buddy/25062_med.png</div>

Replace 25062 with your user ID, which can be found by right clicking you profile pic on scratch.Mit.edu and checking it's properties.

Whenever you update your profile picture on scratch.mit.edu, it is updated on the wiki too (with some delay though).
JSO (talk | contribs) 20:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Nice work JSO! :)
Jonathanpb (talk | contribs) 04:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.