Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 66

This page is archive 66 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

SVG files

SVG files are scalable vector graphic images. They are not supported on the wiki at the minute. I have Scratch cat and Gobo in SVG. Is there a way anyone could make the wiki support them?
Bbciplayer (talk | contribs) 11:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I doubt we could; we would need someone who really has access to the server settings to be able to. Like an ST member perhaps.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 16:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I know what you could do. Look up on the internet, "svg to png converter online" and find a free online converter. I do it all of the time! :D

arinerron (talk | contribs) 18:19, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Animation Hall of Fame article?

We have an article on what happened when a Pac-Man project was removed. What about on the new occurrence of an external party claiming copyright to a Scratch studio? Maybe a new article about the phenomenon in general?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 19:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I never knew that happened...
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 20:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

We should indeed have an article on this. It is the second case of this type of thing. If a third one ever pops up, we could merge them all into some article called "Scratch in Law" though that sounds dumb how about "External Corporations Holding Law Against Scratch". However, I don't think Scratch was required by law to rename it. But eh, we'll worry about that if it comes :P I say make a new article on the situation.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 23:55, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

You're Gonna Hate Me for Even Bringin' This Up

As said above, Scmb1 stated that we should not advertise when a user is blocked, as it is like openly shaming them. Well, don't we kind of do the same thing with Kaj? We openly shame that human being who was once Kaj and give that person a bad outlook. What if you were Kaj and got better, came back and saw there are Wiki articles and mockery (such as kajTheModerator) all over the site? I would not want to come back to a site that utterly only knows me as the person who threatened to hack Scratch.

My point is, we openly shame Kaj, so why is that acceptable at all? Is it really respectful to have an article on one individual user who threatened the website, because if you ask me, it shames Kaj.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Here's some examples in the article of how it is either very judgemental or mockery. "Kaj originally had no intention of causing harm"- I see no citation, for all we know Kaj could have wanted to do harm. "Some users put the word "Kaj" in their username to scare other Scratchers."- that's like saying Kaj is just plain-out bad and is mocked by people with their usernames. "On April Fools' Day 2011, KajTheModerator appeared on the Scratch Forums."- doesn't that seem like making a fool of Kaj? Maybe not the best quotes they are, but I feel like Kaj is just (over?)rated. There have been so many users banned for stuff like this- Kaj is just legend because he/she was the first really. This is an article on a user, legend or not, and I don't find it too reasonable.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 22:23, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't hate you for bringing this up. You have as valid an opinion as I do.

Anyway, time for my thoughts. I feel that although the article maybe be mocking kaj, we also have to consider that the Wiki is here to record and document Scratch, not to include only things we want. For example, let's think about the slavery that occurred in the United States. It was a very shaming event for slaves to have been whipped, called bad names, and forced to do every command. On the other hand, if you look in text books, this key part in American history wasn't wiped off the slate, or removed from every book everywhere. It was kept to preserve the integrity of history in the United States, and that's sort of what the Wiki is for. Not just for documenting the blocks and interface of Scratch, but for also recording the truth and history in Scratch. So even thought the article might be shaming, I feel it should be kept largely the same.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I kind of agree with Turkey3. I think that the way the Kaj article is currently written, it publicizes a lot of information that really should remain private. I also agree that things such as KajTheModerator are extremely rude. It's very likely that Kaj has matured and would be very said to see what people are saying about him/her. If I was a rude user on Scratch a few years ago and decided to come back later, I wouldn't want to see myself ridiculed and an article about me portraying me as a total jerk.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:10, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

You summed up what I was saying much better. I understand people's reluctance to remove it from the Wiki, because it is history as Ernie stated, but Miafan being banned is also now history, so why not tell the world that she was banned, too, and what she did wrong? The last thing I forgot to mention that really seems like mockery is the nasty logo of Kaj (the one KajTheModerator has). It's not really nice, and in all honesty it makes Kaj seem like someone who is, well, pitiful (in the nicest possible way to say it). Not sure if that was Kaj's original logo when the "threats" came, but it still seems like mockery. But whether it is nasty or not would be better fit for the forums, I guess, but the Wiki article needs discussed, too. As jvvg said, KajTheModerator probably matured. He/she could have been a 9 year old with some anger issues, for all we know.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 01:41, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Featured article suggestions

We need some! A list of past featured articles is on Talk:Scratch Wiki Home/Featured Article; please don't suggest any of those.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 06:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

How about the article Cloud Data? I know New Scratchers are interested in making their own multiplayer games, along with their own chat rooms, so why not inform them a bit about Cloud Data?

Gobo's Friends also sounds like a neat article to feature.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 15:37, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

We should have a page where users vote on what pages should be featured, such as the page Scratch Wiki:Elections.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:20, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

@Ernie: Thanks. It looks like Gobo's Friends was suggested almost a year ago and never used. Cloud Data would also be good, next time.

@KrIsMa: I don't think it's necessary.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 19:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

It's worth a try :) We need to set dates on when to change the F.I and F.As :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 21:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

That last suggestion sounds good. How about featuring a new article and images every month (or two)? What do you think of that?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I think a month is good :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:57, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Maybe just 2 weeks.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 05:01, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Agree!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 13:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

What routine tasks can be "bot-ified"?

I am currently writing WikiMonitor B, a bot to carry out any routine tasks. So far the only one I have is recategorizing (in the case of renaming a category). Does anybody else have any good ideas for features that should be added to it?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:01, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Other then a few tasks on Scratch_Wiki:To-do, how about adding in a feature to autocapitalize page headlines?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

1. What do you mean by "page headlines"? 2. Out of the tasks in the to-do list, the only one I think would be appropriate for my bot is fixing double and broken redirects.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I thought of another good idea: changing all links to a given page (i.e. if a page is renamed).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:12, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I call dibs on changing links to redirects to actual page :) - oh yeah - clearing the sandbox regularly

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:55, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

@jvvg: Do you see how you titled your discussion as "What routine tasks can by "bot-ified"?" I meant headlines like that one, or in other words, anything involving double pairs of ==, though you might want to skip talk pages for that suggestion.

Anyway, how about deleting all links to a page, in case a page was deleted?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I think the grammar rules for title case are a little difficult for a bot, especially because it varies by region and even by person.

Go ahead with fixing double redirects. Deleting broken ones requires admin privileges. Maybe it could just add {{delete}} to the top, thereby also breaking the redirect?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 04:21, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Deleting all links to a given page is good, and adding the {{delete}} to broken redirects also is a good idea. I will implement those later.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 10:58, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I have an idea for a bot task. I noticed a few days ago that the Scratch Statistics page had a graph of the Age Distribution of New Scratchers, not of the Age Distribution of Every Single Scratcher Adding up all the bars on the graph would give a really close estimate to the new Scratcher population, and then subtracting from the number of registered users would give the Scratcher population. That could be a nice statistic to go under Scratch#Count, but it would take a lot of time to keep up to date. Maybe your bot could do it?

In case you're interested, I had actually done the computations a few days ago leading to some interesting facts: Forum Link
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll do that later.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome Message

Currently the (automated) message is Welcome to Scratch Wiki! We hope you will contribute much and well. You will probably want to read the help pages. Again, welcome and have fun!.

I think that it should include a link to Help:Welcome

Should we change it?
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 15:39, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Help:Welcome is the very first link on Help:Contents, the page it links to currently. I don't think it's necessary.

By the way, in case anybody is curious, the message is located at MediaWiki:Confirmaccount-welc.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 16:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Since we're already talking about this, any other ideas for how it can be improved? I apologize for not writing a new one when programming the system, I just took the software default.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:57, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Improve the software? I would add a custom welcome box so you can insert your own custom welcome! I mean, doesn't the old message seem repetitive? ;)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:04, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey, Mathfreak, the page you gave has some differences from the message I (and all other users granted access by the new system) received.

Jvvg, I think we should improve it.

Im'ma work on a thesaurus extension ("We hope you will contribute much and well" might be "We are hoping that you will devote well, and much" and maybe we could use it? Actually, maybe someone else could do that, because I'm still pretty new, and I'm already working on something to make blocks private, only visible by bureaucrats
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:05, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Well certainly using the word "devout" is a good start ;)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:19, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey, you made that page 2 days ago (current date: 5/6/14). That's not a real page! That's fake! Besides, you didn't even make the system. But that's not the point? Why did you try to trick me?
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 14:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

It's not a trick. It's just a slightly confusing system. See here for the original default text.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 14:50, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

That's just how system messages work. The apparent "creation" date is just the first edit; if it was never edited, it appears somewhat as if it were never created.

And why would I trick you? I'm an admin. Do you even good faith?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:28, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

new page

i am not sure how to incorporate this into the scratch wiki (or even incorporate it at all), but can someone think of any uses for it? thanks!
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:59, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe a subpage of Scratch Wiki:Bots?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:15, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, ok! Do you know what the page should be called? I Am stuck on a title :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 13:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe SW:Bots/Areas or SW:Bots/Details.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:46, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

has anyone else noticed that the outdent is a bit off?

in #Bot, the indent of five colons is way bigger than what 5 indents should be, and the outdent demonstrates that. Is there something wrong about the community portal? it seems to only glitch in the C.P :O
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 04:35, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, maybe it is syntax in the C.P discussions that are causing it. Preview shows the regular indentations :O weird!!!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 04:37, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Time to change the featured images/articles!

What article/images do you guys want featured? :)
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 13:51, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Scratchers and Studios
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 15:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I like Studios; thanks!
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:05, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

No problem :)
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 15:13, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

How about File:() = ().png due to its usefulness in Scratch? Or File:404 Image.png because of its unique depiction of Scratch?

By the way, do we have a list of already featured images somewhere?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:47, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Good bot vs bot idea

Suppose someone makes a bot intentionally that pretty much wipes out 200 Wiki pages. Someone should have coded the ability for a bot to revert the last 10-20 or parameter-specified edits to counter this.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 21:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll code that into WMB.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Give That Task to That Bot!

Since we have two bots, we NEED to have a vote on what areas of the wiki the bot should do! Initially,

• WikiMonitor looks at the recent edits and changes edits made by users that are bad
• VoxBot cleans up the wiki

Since we sometimes have predicaments on which bot should do what task, we should have a vote to see which areas of the wiki each bot covers! No stepping outof those boundaries, bots! Please add some thoughts! Thanks!

For WikiMonitor

• Editing recent edits for anything

For VoxBot

• Find/replace words on all wiki pages

for ThisIsAnAccount

• Organize categories

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Well you need to leave some bot tasks for others, too. Unfortunately, Blob8108's client is broken, and making my own hasn't been going too well. :(
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:49, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey, did you see the new posts at #Categorizing redirects?? It is very important :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I think I will designate my bot for category-related automation. But it may be a long time before it is up-and-running...
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 17:21, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean it will automatically categorize pages? oh yeah, do you want to also make your bot clear all redirect categories or do it now?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 21:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll eventually program that.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so final verdict, you will remove the redirects! Great! We will wait for you. :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:49, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Be ready to wait a long, long time. :P :p :P
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Add Scratch Day to the News

^^ Happy Scratch Day!
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 15:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

yay!!!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Happy Scratch Day everyone! :)
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 21:21, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

WM Source Code

If anybody wants to see the WM source code, check it out.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Awesome!!!
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 01:34, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Okay.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 22:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)\

Am I Active?

Do I seem active, or do I look like one of those people who request an account and never do anything with it?
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 21:33, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Define active.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 22:51, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

I haven't seen you before, are you new?
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 13:09, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

You've made some edits today and in the past, so I'd say you're semi-active.

As for Swampert, Swampert joined sometime in March this year, so they're not new by now.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 15:52, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

You are active, but not as active as some other people are on scratch; about as active as me.--
Typemaster (talk | contribs) 00:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC)typemaster

I'm pretty sure that I'm more than semi-active. it?

Krett12 (talk | contribs) 21:33, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

What is the purpose of editlockedpages and uploader groups?

What is the purpose of editlockedpages and uploader group and why their is no one in either groups?
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 18:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

See Scratch Wiki: editlockedpages,Scratch Wiki:uploader ! (I'll update uploader page later O:-) ) currently, there is no use for being an uploaded or being placednin editlockedpages, and that is why no one is in each group :) we mainly use the groups Scratch Wiki:Users,Scratch Wiki: Experienced Wikians,Scratch Wiki:Administrators and Scratch Wiki:Bureaucrats :}

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:03, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Anyone want to work on the Scratchblocks article?

In this forum thread, some Scratchers are suggesting changes to the Scratchblocks page. Anyone want to work on it?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 01:42, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Block Plugin/Syntax#Hacks
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 04:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I will.
JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 19:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

It's already there.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 20:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Ah, indeed, thanks!
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 14:20, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

blob8108's forum archive

A wild mirror of the forum archive appeared! Should we replace the links to the archived forums with this?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:59, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

We should.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 16:03, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

But what if blob takes it down at some point?

You know what we should really have? A template for linking to the old forums, with the URL, so that it can be automatically updated. And obviously a bot to put it out there...
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 16:37, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

No. It's entirely temporary and will go away at some point.

What would be really helpful is to replace all the links of the form viewtopic.php?pid= with the redirected version. If the archive doesn't have to support post links, it makes it much simpler to host.
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 21:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

More WM problems

Yes, I know it seems like WM is like the Los Angeles Metro Blue Line in that they bot crash a lot (sorry, I'm a subway nerd). Anyway, there will be some more downtime because the bot is inexplicably stopping during the middle of operation. I am guessing it's an infinite loop somewhere, but I'm not sure. It might also be the API output caching. The issue is that it happens after several hours of operation.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:10, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Spam

Should we create an article about the spam in the Suggestions forum?
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 02:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't think so.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 08:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to do so either.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:03, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Should we create an article about the current MP3 glitch?

There is a current MP3 glitch going on on the site. Should we make an article about it, and how to turn MP3's into WAV's for Scratch to use? After the glitch is fixed, we could change it to a place in the history part of the Scratch 2.0 article.
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 11:52, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

We don't usually create articles about issues.
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 11:58, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I think that this will kind of be a tutorial of how to get past the glitch with Audacity, a program.
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 12:02, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you could put it in Sound or Sound File Format.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I use iTunes to fix it; much easier. Plus we already have Sound Editor#Converting a Sound to MP3 Format in iTunes
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 13:36, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's really notable. We don't have articles on bugs unless they are really big, and become a part of Scratch history.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@Turkey3 The MP3 glitch is a glitch where you can't import MP3's.
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 20:19, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@Mathfreak231 Thank you! :D
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 20:28, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

The glitch is now fixed.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 14:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, this glitch has been happening for me for around 6 months. I've been converting the audio to a .wav file for me to use in projects. Also, the bug is fixed now. :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 15:45, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Merge Motor Blocks with Lego WeDo Blocks?

I think Motor Blocks and LEGO WeDo Blocks should be merged and Motor Blocks should redirect to the other. They're about the same feature in different versions of Scratch, and it's confusing having them on separate articles. Does anyone agree with this?
Djdolphin (talk | contribs) 22:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Aren't those pages ST-maintained?
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 22:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

It looks like the only ST member who edited either of those pages was Natalie, who added information for obtaining the blocks in 2.0 on the Motor Blocks page. The LEGO WeDo Blocks page gives you the same exact information, though.
Djdolphin (talk | contribs) 22:42, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree.
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 11:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Now that I've taken a look, the two pages do look similar enough to be merge able. I also agree that Motor Blocks should be the redirect because LEGO WeDo Blocks seems like a more official title, and Motor Blocks is the more outdated of the two.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 17:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Dach

Add dach to the interwiki table.
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 18:19, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

What's wrong with using de?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:43, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Redirecting

How do you make something redirect to a page?
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 15:43, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Read this.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 15:58, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Lucario621 Active?

Is Lucario621 still active on Scratch or the Scratch Wiki?
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 00:13, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Nope.
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 00:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Your nest bet is to comment on scmb1's profile if you want a bureaucrat.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:52, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 00:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Wiki for Fools

I saw the Un-Scratch Wiki, and I just had to do something like it.

Anyone can edit it, just do whatever you want!

Here's the address.

http://wiki.scratch.mit.edu/wiki/User:Krett12/Wiki4Fools

Fresh and new, no articles made yet.

Come and be a part of it!
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 02:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The Community Portal is for questions, not advertising pages. Please remember that.
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 11:45, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Actually, if you want people to improve an existing page or range of pages (as is the case here), you are allowed to comment it on the CP. Otherwise, how are you going to let people know? Anyway, since Krett12 is still fairly new by Wiki standards, I'm not sure if hosting the AF Wiki in his/her userspace is the best idea. The idea is that the user whose userspace is used is in control, and I think it would be better if that were a more experienced user.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 14:21, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

We can always continue to use mine.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I would agree that continuing to use Mathfreak231's username subspace would be better because not only do we have a more experienced wikian, but it's not entirely certain we'll be starting from Scratch with the AF articles. In that case, why bother moving all those pages when their current location fits them well?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's fair to say he is more experienced than I am just because be has been around longer than I have. Plus, I called it first :P. But seriously, I am willing to let anybody edit, in which case I think mine would be good. However I am open to suggestions.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 04:35, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry everybody

I apologize for flooding Recent Changes with some accidental blanked pages. The issue has been resolved.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Going into Read-Only mode soon, for update

Hey everyone- I'm going to put this in read-only mode in a few minutes because I'm going to backup the database and do some updates.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 17:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the downtime, but it's back. We're now updated to mediawiki version 1.22.7. Let me know if you find any problems.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 21:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks nice! The editing interface is a lot slicker. The one concern I have is that the edit section buttons were moved to the left, rather than being right-aligned.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:33, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree; the new interface does look slicker and simpler! By the way, do you know if this update fixes the bug where you couldn't delete images?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:21, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I do not know. Probably your best bet is to try it out. :)
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 14:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Nope, file deletion has not been fixed. I'm still getting the error: "Error deleting file: Could not create directory "mwstore://local-backend/local-deleted"."
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Could you try again?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 17:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

The new interface does look better and I like how a message appears once you make an edit, but I do not like how the table of contents on some pages change.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 23:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Could you give me some examples? Maybe some screen shots and/or links?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 13:18, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Scratch Wiki:Bots the toc is stretching to the right too much! :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:39, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

here I uploaded a file

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

It also does does that on this page and I do not like it that the table of contents goes under an image.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 23:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I think this happens on all pages.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 23:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Help Page

Why you cannot access the help page in the navigation section?
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 00:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

 Fixed.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 07:28, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Who changed the log-in page?

I like it!
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 01:46, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I think the new log-in page was part of the update.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 02:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

But now it doesn't have a link to sign up. :/
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 07:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Woops! I'll look into that.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 13:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, I just added the link- but it's a janky solution. I'll look into making it prettier, but that should work for now.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 14:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Right-aligning [edit] link

With a few votes in favor, i will edit the skin to change that. So far jvvg and I want it.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 07:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay, that sounds good to me.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 13:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I also like the right-aligning [edit] link, but then again, I have seen several pages where the right-aligned [edit] link is covered up by images. If that's fixed, then I would support right-aligning [edit] links.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 16:22, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

+9001.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I may have fixed file deletion

I think. Try it out and let me know!
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 17:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Presumably admin-only? Anyway, some admin, get on Category:Broken_Images
blob8108 (talk | contribs) 17:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh yep, admin only.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 18:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I just deleted an image, so it's Experienced Wikians as well. Anyway, great job Scmb1! Thanks for all of the work!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 18:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Awesome! :)
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 18:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Woohoo!
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 13:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

#YESPLEASE
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

EWs and Admins: Let's delete broken images!

We can now delete files, so please delete a few of the broken images. Hopefully we can get rid of all of them soon.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:38, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

And the image deletion is done!

Should we delete broken images?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 19:13, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Since we no longer have any use for it, I'm going to do that now. I will also delete the template.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Coming Soon: ThisIsAnAccount actually doing something

I just found out about UrlFetchApp in Google Scripts, and I figured it might be a good way not only to use the wiki API, but also set it to run while I'm away.

Anybody oppose the idea of using a Google script?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

it's ok, but I think it all depends on the scripting of the bot itself.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

As long as it works properly, I'm ok with it.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:14, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Do we need to do the bot approval process?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Given that Mathfreak is an admin who has demonstrated a fair amount of programming experience, he probably doesn't need the same scrutiny that others do. However, he still should make sure the community is ok with the various tasks you want to do with his bot before writing them.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 11:10, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm probably a bit behind, but what are you using the Google Script for?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 13:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, the only task that I can think of off the top of my head is taking off the redirect category from >1000 redirects.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:46, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Scratch_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive_65#Categorizing redirects?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 15:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Precisely.

Anyways, the source code can be found here.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Please consider Scratch Wiki:Bots/Areas to make sure than when you are adding more bot functions to the bot, that it is not a duplicate of other peoples' bots! thanks! (we dont want that many bots that do the same things)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Speaking about bots, I'll run my bot today. It hasn't been run for soo long :P

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:39, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Bots are getting popular

I was planning on making a bot approval page, so proposed bot discussions can be hosted there. I was thinking that because old bot discussions therefore can be archived separately. Here, I'll start the page here.
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:10, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be better to do Scratch Wiki:Bot Requests? If you're ok with it, I'll start that page now.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 23:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh I was planning on working on it first from my subpages then copy and pasting, but sure you can start it

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Ps, clearly my language skills are down right now ---

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:22, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok I got it started feel free to change the english

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Shall we archive the discussions one by one, or maybe five to one page? And also, I was thinking of archiving all the discussions, even the smallest ones. Do you agree or disagree? And, I think we should just create a sub page of the main page and name each archive /archive1, /archive2 or something. Then, we can have an arcive toc like the one in the community portal! Sorry for all the questions, jsut want to see if you agree to all of them :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the archive naming, as well as archiving everything. I think that instead of having a stead fast number of discussions per archive page, we should do it by length like we currently do it in the CP. It wouldn't make sense to archive one little discussion, and it wouldn't make sense to wait for a fifth discussion when there's already 4 long ones.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:10, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Ok, I think that is an even better idea! I don't know, I think it is better to put one discussion into one archive page, or maybe not?
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Let's have jvvg comment.

By the way, in the bot table of Scratch Wiki:Bot Requests, maybe a Bot Use column would be helpful?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks!!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I think it's better to do one archive page. This will simplify things a lot.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:31, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean one discussion one archive page?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

No, I mean all discussions one archive page.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh I see. Ok, great! We'll archive it once it gets too long. However, what are we going to do with done discussions still on the main page? use {{Collapse top}}?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:44, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ We can just keep them there until the discussion is finished, then archive them.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:47, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Also, one thing to note: don't worry about WM notifying you about rapid editing the bot request page. I added it to the unconditional ignore list. Anyway, I'm off to bed now. I will work on this more tomorrow.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hehe, it's ok! I have nobots, but I rather remove it now cause it serves no real purpose other than to keep my talk page clean :) Good night! > Oh I see what you mean, wait until the discussion is over, then place in the archive page. Nice idea! Are we going to leave the table as-is when a discussion is archived? I personally think so :-)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I was thinking also archive table rows.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 10:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

deleting

are we still deleting all the images on Special:UnusedFiles? a while before, we decided to add the brokenimage template to all of these files, and those files got deleted, so are we deleting these files as well?
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Probably, although one or two of them still look useable.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Ahh ok :)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

do subpages need categories?

just wondering because I realized that Scratch Wiki:Bots/Areas has no category
KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it should.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 13:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Should we make a category for bots since we now have a bunch of bot pages?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:37, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

yes

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:04, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Archive CP?

Getting a bit long.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

It's not even 50k yet.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I would agree with Turkey3. This page does seem a bit long, although I would be fine with a bit longer of a CP.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:11, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Two Things About The New Footer.

1. We Need To Update The Copy On The Scratch Wiki.
2. We now have our own button on the main site. Should that be on Scratch Wiki News?
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 12:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay, added the new footer. How's it look?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Perfect.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 19:30, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Awesome. But maybe we don't need the SW button ON the wiki.

Good point-- but I added it for consistency. What do others think?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 21:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I like the consistency, but instead of having the link stay blue, maybe it could be blackened to indicate that you're already on the Scratch Wiki?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

TOCs fixed now?

I made a teeny edit to the skin that hopefully makes the Content tables look like they used to. Can someone verify that?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 13:42, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: you may need to clear your cache to see it.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 13:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I found no difference :( I am still on my iPad and the tocs look very vrey big ':)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Huh. Are you sure you cleared your cache? It looks like this for me: http://screencloud.net/v/1rFI
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 16:58, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Nvm for some reason clearing my cache took 5 minutes to work thanks!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 20:34, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

The TOCs are fixed for me too.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 01:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Criteria for rejecting bots

What should the criteria for rejecting a bot request be? I think it should be at least 3 posts disapproving and at most 2 posts approving by someone other than the user requesting.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

if there is a formal vote, i think >80% is a good place to start. Otherwise, it depends on the content of the discussion

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 20:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

However, often it can be established in the discussion that a bot is not necessary, and in that case a vote would be a waste of time.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:40, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

yeah, so far we haven't had a formal vote yet :( if the discussion has majority say no, then reject. Otherwise, take a vote?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 20:42, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. I am going to reject the archive bot, but there is still potential for the other one.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

WM checking for signatures in articles

The Wiki guidelines state that we shouldn't sign articles. New users often don't know this. Should I make WM check for that?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Definitely. Nothing but discussions should really have them.
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 20:12, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, Scratch Wiki:Bots is a hybrid page. However, I would only look in the mainspace.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

WikiMonitor Rapid Edit Ignore List

At User:WikiMonitor/Configuration/PublicRapidIgnoreList, you can submit pages that will be temporarily (for now until I manually clear the list) ignored when checking for excessive edits to one page. There are sometimes cases where one page needs a lot of quick edits, so I created that page to facilitate that. However, userpages are absolutely not allowed on that list (I specifically programmed WM to ignore them if added).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Welcome Sandbox

I'm gonna make the "Welcome New Scratchers" page have its own little mini-sandboxes along the way. If anyone doesn't like this idea, feel free to let me know.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 00:16, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary. Why would it be? Please don't do things like this without getting some approval first.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 06:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I also don't think it's necessary. Users can just use the Wiki sandbox. As Sci said, wait for someone else to give an opinion before starting.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 14:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Is Scratch Hacked!!!!!!!!!!!

Google "Scratch". What I saw was "Banned from Scratch" instead of the typical "Scratch? File:Hacked Scratch.png
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:13, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

The IP of the Google crawler probably got banned, or maybe there was another mini-IP ban disaster. When visiting the website, the normal title shows up.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:28, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

It's gone. hopefully it won't come up in the news.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:44, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Featured Images

Could we get the 'Featured Images' changed? They have been up there for like a month. I want to see other images. Thanks!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 12:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Please suggest an image. :)
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 12:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Um... Ok. 1.0 userface.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 13:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks!
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 14:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 16:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

What's the point of having EWs?

I was just wondering. I have gotten a bunch of requests to do stuff involve protecting pages, and I can't do that. I actually had to say that at the top of my talk page to avoid those. Anyway, this brings me to my main point: what's the point of having the EW rank? Before I continue, I am going to list the difference in rights. EWs have the following elevated privileges (from Help:Group rights):

• Confirm account requests
• Delete pages
• Patrol edits
• Quick rollback edits

In addition, admins have the following rights (I'm only including the important ones):

• View/recover deleted pages
• Edit the user interface
• Have edits automatically marked as patrolled
• Do stuff related to protection

Anyway, my point is that if someone is qualified to have the EW privileges, why not the admin privileges? It just seems to over-complicate things. There have been several instances where tasks would have been executed much more quickly if EWs could edit protected pages. There have also been many cases when there was a necessary interface change (such as better delete reasons) that I could have easily done myself, but I had to ask an admin. What is the point of having the EW rank, as it gives people some privileges, but often not enough to do what is really necessary. There also isn't really much of a risk - if a user is trusted enough to be an EW, I think that user is also qualified to be an admin. I remember the group was originally created so that extra people could confirm accounts because there were only a few admins. However, now the circumstances have changed (Mathfreak231 and I review almost all of them, and I review the majority).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I guess the point is because runner-ups in elections maybe not ready for admin yet (not saying that all EWs are not ready)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

If it is only used for confirming accounts, then i don't think ews are nessasary.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:21, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

If someone is ready for the EW privileges, he/she is probably ready for the admin privileges too. The rank was created due to the circumstances at the time, but the circumstances have changed. I think both ErnieParke and I would work fine as admins. At least in my case, I would actually be a lot more effective because I could make necessary changes myself and not have to ask someone else to do them.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Those are some good points, jvvg.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 06:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, I know we originally made the Experienced Wikians because we wanted more people to be able to help with account approval. We try to keep the number of admins to a minimum because, the more admins we have, the riskier it is. In other words, we don't just add admins because being an admin is fun-- we add them when it is really necessary to have more people with the additional permissions.
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 14:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Often, it takes days to update the front page (as well as many other admin tasks), and if the current EWs could do those tasks, it would be more satisfactory timewise.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense to me. How many admins are currently active?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 18:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

I think just Scimonster and Mathfreak231.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, so would everyone be okay with me making jvvg an admin?
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 19:18, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, he has proven worthy. He is no young padawan but a Jedi.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 19:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

I am okay with jvvg becoming an admin.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 22:50, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

I hate updating the news, so I'd love to get someone else to do it. But of course that's not the only reason why jvvg should be an admin. :P
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 23:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

lol new class: News Updaters
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 23:08, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I would be fine with jvvg becoming an admin. He's proven himself many times, and is quite savvy code wise.
As for jvvg's comment above about both of us becoming admins, I would be fine staying as an EW. As scmb1 said, it's good to limit the number of admins that we have, and jvvg would be better of us two.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:18, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm fine with jvvg becoming an admin. :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 04:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

jvvg! jvvg! jvvg!
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 12:22, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

YES! There is even a speech I wrote to jvvg somewhere in his talk archives

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:33, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

ErnieParke, you are so kind!!!

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:35, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, jvvg is now an admin
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 15:19, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Woo! Thank you for all of your support! I will not let you down.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:39, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

:)
Scmb1 (talk | contribs) 17:45, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘No problem! You're going to be a great admin. :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 19:10, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree. :)
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 22:23, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

New featured article

We haven't updated the featured article in nearly a month, I think it's time we do so. Any suggestions?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Scratch Wiki:Bots :3

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:22, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh please no :P maybe

• Separating Clone and Sprite Triggers
• Lag
• Separating a String Into Words
  Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 16:27, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

ooh! [1] sorry for link lol iPad

@Turkey3 lol

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Vote here!
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:41, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

it's a broken link for me :(

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

yay access denied :=[

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Well, you have to log in. Anyway, I realized that probably not too many people are going to vote, so I'm going to just pick one myself. In the future, we could do a Wiki election, in the style of the admin elections.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:47, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't have modshare lol but I voted anyways ;)

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:54, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

@jvvg: I feel that a Wiki election would be quite a bit just to find a featured article/images. I feel that the current system works well as is.

@KrIsMa: Nice idea on the featured article! I like Artificial Intelligence and how it's an interesting read.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 20:01, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Nonono to voting. :P Just nominate a couple articles, and whichever admin is on at the time will pick their favorite.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 20:26, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Archive

This page is getting pretty big, it might be time to archive it.
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 21:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

We still have a couple active discussions. I think we should wait until most of them have finished.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:03, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure!
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 22:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

So far, I think the only discussion worth keeping active (not archiving) is the discussion threading one. Anyone else think there are any others?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Typo

On the home page, the newest item on the Scratch News says New Scratch Wiki Administator instead of Administrator.
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 23:10, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Fixed.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:34, 12 June 2014 (UTC)