< Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal

Archive This page is archive 69 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
Unfinished discussions

about the order of S.A, E.L and Refs

over at User_talk:AonymousGuy#Thanks, we had a quick discussion on the order of the See also, External link and References sections, and I just wanted to bring it up on the CP for further discussion. The possibilities are:

order 1
  1. S.A
  2. E.L
  3. Refs
order 2
  1. E.L
  2. S.A
  3. Refs
order 3
  1. S.A
  2. Refs
  3. E.L
order 4
  1. E.L
  2. Refs
  3. S.A
order 5
  1. Refs
  2. S.A
  3. E.L
order 6
  1. Refs
  2. E.L
  3. S.A

Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:00, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I think that the References should be at the bottom. :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 00:03, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Me too, on other wikis, references are always at the bottom.However, there was a very very old discussion before stating that the order is always order 3,
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:04, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
It's not always order 3, I normally see it in different ways. ;)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 00:05, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I feel bad because my bot has been correcting it to order 1 the whole time ;) but yeah that is true sometimes I see it as order 3 and order 1 and order 6 sometimes too ;O
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:16, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I personally think order 2 would make the most sense on this wiki; first important links, than somewhat related pages, than sources of information.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:20, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree with that. :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 00:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes I like #2. And before someone brings it up, no, we don't need a bot to change this stuff.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 02:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
That's a very touchy subject for me :'(
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:34, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
bots should only stay in one "sphere of influence" in editing.
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:14, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I like 1, 2, or 5.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 05:28, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
I like 1,2 too *;) others like order 2 ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I think that I like 1 or 5 the most.
Anyway, since we vary a bit in our answers, maybe we could have a vote on the order?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 15:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
ok. I'll use most wins! I say 1 and 2, ErnieParke says 1 and 5, Scimonster says 1 and 2 and 5, Turkey3 says 2, MathFreak231 says 2, Derpmeup says 2. Any corrections/more to add?
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I personally like 3 the most, followed by 1.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Link section order votes

So currently here are the results:
order one
order two
order three
order four
order five
order six
Take note, this is most votes wins ;)
updated 01:13, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
I like two the most.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 18:45, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Changed my mind, i prefer 1 over two. Removed my vote.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 18:57, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
lol I want to change my mind too but I'm not sure that is a good idea ?
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:52, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Nothing wrong with it.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 20:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── ok thanks! I want to change to order one now, no two ;) "" changed!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 20:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I change my mind I like #1
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 21:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Number one makes the most sense to me as well.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 01:29, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm sticking with number 2; I think the See Also section hasn't proved incredibly useful on this wiki, at least to me.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 12:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
You made me change again I'm sticking with 2.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 12:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Scimonster: 1
Derpmeup: 2
Mathfreak231: 2
Turkey3: 2
Swampert11: 2
ErnieParke: 1, 5
veggieman001: 1
jvvg: 1
KrIsMa: 1

1 = 5
2 = 4
3 = 0
4 = 0
5 = 1
6 = 0
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
hmm, the discussions have waned, and we have a tie between order 1 @ 2! What shall we pick? We could all vote for preference between order 1 and 2?
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:46, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
I vote 1.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Once we have decided on which order, should we have VoxBot or TIaA change it for every article? If you don't mind waiting two months, I could do it too.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

if no one minds my bot already covers out of order references so I could change them ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
order one wins? Final votes?
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 22:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes The vote orders have been picked! order one wins! The order goes: see also, external links then refs!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Aww....I didn't vote yet.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 13:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Custom welcome messages are messing up the format even more

See User talk:ScratchGameing for an example. Anybody know how to fix that?
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:30, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Is it now considered fixed?
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 01:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
It's only fixed on that one page. There needs to be a formatting change to the message that fixes it everywhere. I will try one now.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
There, check out User talk:Scillog for the new message with the header.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
If the indentation between the edit box and the signature was the same and that big space between the box and the signature was decreased, i think that would be better
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:27, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Can you draft the HTML? See MediaWiki:Confirmaccount-welc for the current code.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 02:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Sure.  Doing...
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Yes Done! Some minor adjustments and a comment at the end highlighting the changes!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:39, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

oh also , instead of </div>(space)signature can we do </div>Signature? ;) example in my sandbox page ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 21:48, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
I also made some adjustments to the html as well ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 21:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

WikiMonitor and New Wikians

However many times WikiMonitor tells new users to categorize file pages, most do not heed the bot's notifications and continue doing their own things. Does anyone know why people aren't looking at those notifications?
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Another option are people that don't know about their talk page. But since a change to their talk page yields a conspicuous notification that their talk page has been changed, I then conclude that some people deliberately not read things on their talk page. I may be wrong, though. I have brought up this conversation with jvvg, and will be divulged as soon as the discussion is deemed important to the community.
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 04:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
True, they seem to ignore WikiMonitor notifications, but oh well, what we can do? It's almost like an "I got my eye on you" situation where WikiMonitor is looking at the user but the user senses Wikimonitor's presence but will not look back (aka respond back).
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Maybe we should remove the blue box from the WM messages.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 18:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
That wouldn't accomplish anything, I don't think.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Why would we remove it? Where did Turkey3's box originally come from? I am open to changes though. Keep in mind to tell me, and not Jvvg.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 19:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
? The blue box came from Turkey3's imagination lol
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:04, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Yes, Krett12 is operating WM until mid-August. I will still be around and active through this weekend, and may be able to check in every few days while I'm gone, but I will be on a tablet and will have limited time.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

wow mid August, ohh I get it now nvm ;) red is too scary but attracts more attention ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, the whole discussion earlier was about how to make bot messages friendlier. However, it seems that since they are now "friendlier", everybody is ignoring them. You can't have your cake and eat it too (I never understood that expression), and in this case we might have to decide between messages being intimidating and users actually following them or the messages being more friendly and users just completely ignoring them. I also think not letting users remove them helped, as people wouldn't want them on their talk page. However, since I changed the mechanism for checking for duplicate messages, users can just delete them and pretend they never got them.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:13, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I am going to change it to red, if that's what needs to be done. WM is already supposed to leave a message on my talk page. Should we revert to the harsher ones?
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 19:16, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I think the problem is just people aren't reading it not deleting it ;) if you delete it it means you read it (if you didn't read it how would you know it's not a bot notification, etc.)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:17, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
@Krett12: Well, let's not do that immediately. Let's make sure we're all ok with it first. Also, btw, you'll need to restart the program for online config changes to take effect (local config changes should take effect immediately). To stop it, press Ctrl+C (still use control, whether on a Mac or Windows).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Yeah, now that I think about it, deleting it isn't the problem. The "DO NOT DELETE THIS MESSAGE" part is a little unnecessary. However, the red border may attract more attention. Just remember that this is at the expense of intimidating new users.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

I am okay with the red border.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 19:39, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Yep, the red border will be better.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 19:43, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Maybe there could be different messages for different levels of experience. Or it could search via page contents, not history, so if you delete the message, it'll just post another, BTW, I will restart Tweaker.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 20:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
It used to use contents, but I got a lot of complaints that users couldn't delete messages. I also think that detecting levels of experience would be a huge pain, and having the same message for everybody would work better.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:31, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
maybe do like they do on Wikipedia with different levels of reminders depending on how much you have neglected the rules?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 22:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Do you honestly think changing a box (a very beautiful one :P ) to red will fix this entire issue? I think the true reason new people don't notice the messages is that a talk page looks exactly like an article in structure.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 23:13, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── To see the new message in action, it's on my talk page.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:17, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

It does stand out! At least we didn't have to turn to something like a flashing arrow.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:19, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
or blinking text (which only some people can see because it is OBSOLETE! yay thank you!!!)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:44, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Or a flashing, BLINKING arrow.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 15:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
That's just going to hurt peoples' eyes. Keep it with the red border, but don't add more.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:01, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
oh we were just adding to turkey3's post that we didn't go to extremes ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
if it really doesn't work we can use mathfreak231's idea above ^^^^ :)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:37, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way...

To detect if someone is editing a page as opposed to viewing it, using some magic words I would suppose, to change a few page contents accordingly? (I only need it for personal user page use)
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 01:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

There's no magic word that will tell if someone is viewing/editing a page :(
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
There has never been any way on the whole Wiki system to do that. Sorry. :( To do that, we would have to be working for Wikipedia or something :(
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 02:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I have been wanting that for a long, long time. And also to tell if you have editing powers or not.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:19, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Editing powers or not? What do you mean?
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) 03:20, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I think Krett12 means if you are able to edit.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 03:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I did.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

How to change text color on wiki?

I want to know that so I can create a sig that I want. :P
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) Rank: Autoconfirmed User :L 03:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

You can, hold on a sec I'll get you that code.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
<span style="color:blue;">TEXT</span>
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
OK! Thanks! :D
SuperSmashScratch (talk | contribs) Rank: Autoconfirmed User 03:38, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I think your custom signature is a bit long. After relaxing the rule that says your signature cannot be ~275px long, I implemented a new rule, the 8 colon test. Basically, it is demonstrated in the Sandbox. The rule is stated here. Is it possible that you shrink your signature down? After all, it is a custom signature :)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:51, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Basically, it prevents signatures that will break and ruin talk format when using big indentations. However, I have posted on the CP about this. thanks!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

custom signatures

Which rule is better at Scratch Wiki:Custom Signatures#Creating custom signatures?


Signature cannot be wider than 275 pixels or higher than 25 pixels. To test, go to the sandbox and place your signature (excluding timestamp) between the tags:
<div style="background-color:silver; width:275px; height:28px; overflow:auto;">sig here</div>
If scrolling arrows show up, your signature is too big.

2.Signature cannot be very long. To test, do the eight colon test. Go to the sandbox and place your signature, with timestamp, after eight colons (:). If your custom signature breaks lines, it is too long.
And please tell me what to change in the rule you pick ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree with rule 2.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 03:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I just made a new Common.css rule! You can now use <div class="sig-test">sig here</div> to test your sig for rule #1!
See it in action.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:44, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
ooh cool mathfreak231! But are we sticking to rule one or two or none of the above? ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:29, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Happy 4th of July!

Happy 4th! (Americans)
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 14:01, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Same to you!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 14:44, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I have a suprise for you all. Last night, I found a bunch of Firework videos and got one for all of you as an Independence Gift. Turkey, here's yours.

If you want to get yours, put this code at the bottom of your userpage:

[[User:Krett12/Firework|Krett12 will send me a firework!]]

BTW, I will remove that tag when I send it to you, be aware that putting it there is like handing me a key to your userspace.

I will use What Links Here and give you yours.

Thank you, and Happy 4th of July!
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 14:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and same to you!
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 14:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Happy 4th of July! :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 15:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I put that on the bottom of my userpage.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 15:20, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Happy 4th to all of you too!
jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Happy Fourth of July!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Happy 6th of July!
I'm a bit late, am I? :P
By the way, here's a photo collage of some of the photos I took during the 4th of July: Collage
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 19:51, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── happy 7th (in an hour) now ;) i like the image with the white sparks flying out if it (the middle left one) ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:07, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

We are talking about WIki time? P.S. This is my 250th edit.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

guys, i think you should look at this

Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 55#Are users allowed to blank their talk page?

did the rule suddenly change without consensus? did I miss something?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 15:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

You are allowed to do that as long as the talk page is your page and I do not think the rule changed.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 15:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
No, I don't think it did.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 15:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
current admins think that active discussions on talk pages shouldn't be deleted ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, the question really comes down to what you consider "active".
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:03, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
hmm, if someone wants to add to the discussion that is important to the discussion, then the post should be un deleted?
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
That's usually what people do.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

We Must Decide......

....We already had a discussion about this a little while ago, but I'm going to rewrite it.

We were talking about making friendlier versions of the messages, and they were still getting the point across, and still being quite nice.

However, it seemed that with the new and improved, "friendlier" messages, users do not even follow their instruction, as if it were not important at all, "I'm not gonna let one little Tweaker warning ruin my day!". And some users may even remove the messages from their talk page, and pretending they never got them.

So, we must decide.

Do we want messages that users follow, but run the risk of sounding like you are in trouble


Do we want friendly messages, that users might ignore

I have already changed the blue box to red, human eyes just scientifically do not miss that color."

However, until we get more replies, I am going to change the messages back to the original, sharp ones.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 13:57, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the first one.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 14:51, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I think friendly messages are easier to follow. A while ago I brought up how Wikipedia does it; they have different levels of warnings based on how much you violate the rules or stuff. IDK how tough that'd be to program based on how WM/Tw does it.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 15:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I think your bot should store an multi-dimensional array of users and which messages they have already received. If a specific user has received the same message once, THEN send the more scary message, but the first time only send the friendly one.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:06, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
It could be something like
$userStatus = [["turkey3", 0, 0, 1, 2], ["jvvg", 0, 1, 3, 0], ["Mathfreak", 2, 2, 0, 0]];
So basically the array starts with the user's name, then afterwards are how many times it has received a specific message.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Turkey3.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 18:12, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry if I have mixed JS/PHP syntax there but you get the point.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:12, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
That would be a good idea. Krett12, if you can't do it, I will do it when I return.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── How about this?

Time 1 : Turkey3's friendly messages

Time 2 : Regular messages

Time 3 : Extended messages with links to previous ones and slightly more sharp language

Time 4 : It will threaten to warn a bureaucrat about the behavior

Time 5 : It will warn Scmb1 on the main site (I'll have to get her consent)

Time 6 : A request will be mailed to request that their account be blocked for a few days.

Time 7 : The bureaucrats will have to deal with the issue, it is now beyond bot capabilities.

Seem good to everyone? It so, I'll let Scmb1 in on it.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 23:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Banning somebody for not categorizing pages, no matter how frequent it is, is completely outrageous. If this were implemented, I would be blocked and you wouldn't have your favorite admin. Also, this would put a lot of strain on scmb1, who I think already has enough on her plate (I believe she is a student at MIT, which is a lot of work). You should also go by time. Instead of just doing the first/second/third/etc. time ever, you should work by however many messages the user got in the past month or something of that nature. I have forgotten to categorize well over 7 pages, but I shouldn't be blocked for it.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:06, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
That message above will be my last message here for a long time. Tomorrow, bright and early, I leave for my vacation. I will return in August, but until then I will only be able to check very intermittently. It was very nice taking part in administrating the Wiki while I was here, and I look forward to resuming my duties when I return. We really do have a very awesome community on this Wiki. We have very few disputes and are able to resolve issues pretty quickly and nobody seems too upset about those decisions. Although this may seem simple, it's rare that a group of people can get together and work like that, especially for an extended period of time like we do here. We're all very lucky to have each other to rely on to keep things working, and I will miss you all while I am gone. I trust that everything will still run smoothly while I am gone (Scimonster and Mathfreak231 are pretty good guys too ;)), and now I say goodbye.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:15, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Bye!! darn it I was away so i couldn't say bye on time :(
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, you were only 41 minutes late. :P
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 18:02, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
By jvvg! I hope that you'll have a delicious vacation!
By the way, thanks for the heads up that you're leaving. I'll start looking at account requests later today, when I can.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 19:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

User talk page standards

I think we need to have a standard format for talk pages, as many users have talk pages that use colors that make it near-impossible to read, spacing that ruins formatting, etc. So, I propose these rules:

  • The text alignment must remain to the left
  • The font color, size, etc. must remain at the default setting
  • The background color must remain white
  • The contents may not be hidden in any way (like those collapse boxes or whatever)
  • New messages must be added as L2 (==) headers

jvvg (talk | contribs) 14:35, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 14:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes we indeed need this. However, maybe the background shouldn't always have to be white? Maybe there should be standards on the saturation and brightness scales?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs)15:03, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Requiring the background to be white makes sure that the format is consistent with the rest of the Wiki and that nobody has trouble reading it. In addition, it's much easier to enforce a simple rule than a complicated one.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
If this extends to user talk pages, then I don't support. That would hurt my talk page, especially the larger font that I have. Normally I do have my glasses, but now that they're broken, the larger font is helping my eyes. I also agree with Mathfreak231. If you implement a regulation on background color, I'd like to see a less stringent rule.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:36, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
darn. although I do agree with consistency, there is a very slight difference from a page with white background and one with another color background (which is light and is not close to black!) although i do know someone who has an unlegible talk page.
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 17:26, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I'm not sure If I can mention it but I could tell you that the background is black and text therefore cannot be seen ;(
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Do we really need to put our ranks in sigs?

A few people have put "Autoconfirmed" in their signature. It's worth pointing out that we are all autoconfirmed. Ranks usually only matter when it comes to deleting and stuff. For the most part, we all treat each other pretty equally. Putting ranks in signatures does not really help that.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 14:57, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't even know what my rank is. I don't think we need to show off what level we are. Let's act professional. Jvvg and Mathfreak don't have "Admin" in their signatures. They are the ones who should be showing off.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 15:03, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
i don't want to show off ;_;
The rank is definitely not needed; it can be found easily.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 15:04, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree that we do not need to put our ranks in our sigs. You can find which people are in which groups here.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 16:14, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
It's not "showing of" because everyone has this rank.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:20, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Once EWs and admins start putting it in, it will be showing off. Also, as evidenced by the discussion on your talk page, users don't always know they are autoconfirmed, so they might get jealous.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:28, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I knew I was too. I was joking.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Well that means they didn't bother to read help on the Scratch Wiki, that's why they don't know.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:41, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes Done!
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:12, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
people's custom sigs are too long; they break lines even without indentation...
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:27, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes Fixed! It only breaks lines when indented.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
JC what happened to your sig?! No offense but it's a bit flashy and too noticeable.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 18:11, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
It shouldn't break lines with indentation either. A signature should be able to go up to 8 indents (8 colons) without breaking the line.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:15, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I'll add that it is the eight colon rule  ;) the other one could be for special occasions only.
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Fixed..... :(
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 09:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Should we redesign the block categories?

Well, I have created some drafts of the Motion blocks. Do you think it's necessary? By the way, I created linked scratch blocks, so it could redirect to the block description.

The link is here
This is Julianthewiki; imagining, programming, sharing. 01:17, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

i think it is cool, but we need to remove the picture of the blocks on the right later. ps: please observe Scratch Wiki:Custom Signatures thanks!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Looks cool!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 01:27, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I thought we already said it was a good idea. ;)
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 07:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)


I was surfing the Wiki and on List of Scratch Modifications, I clicked on a reference and the site was down. Would it be alright if I went through those and deleted the ones that aren't up or are broken?
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 13:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

I personally think that would be great; however, let's wait for more opinions.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:57, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 14:10, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I would also go through references on other pages to make sure they were all working.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 14:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, you can delete them or recite them. :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 14:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Ok. I don't know how to cite stuff.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 16:22, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I am okay with it.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 17:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Cite = reference ;) Can we ask blob first for why the site is down? ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:52, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Citing something is referencing something. :)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 17:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
here:References ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
If the site is still down next week, you can probably uncite it.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 20:06, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Why would the site be down?
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 20:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
i am not sure, maybe ask blob first? ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:06, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
About what?
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:12, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Sometimes I comment out broken references until they come back on.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 01:15, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

ON help:references

When there is text that should be referenced, but a reference cannot be found, add {{citation needed}} in the place where the reference would go. This lets viewers know that this fact is unreferenced, and may not be accurate. When at least three of these notes are on a page, you should also put {{inaccurate}} at the top of the page.

That's a lot of pages that need to be inaccuratified, should we keep that rule and persue it or delete it altogether? :0
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:10, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

I think we should keep that rule.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 18:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Since we've been neglecting it, and we may have to change it to include {{fact}}, maybe we should just delete the template?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 18:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
hmm, there are some cases when there are no {{cn}} tags on the page but it still has the template on it :-/
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:33, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
@KrIsMa new post: I don't see any right now.
@KrIsMa old post: I think that the rule should be kept. It's a nice reminder that we need to add more citations to the article. Now that I think of it, this would be a nice task for WikiMonitor or a bot to take up.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 19:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I just looked at pages that linked to that template :) and I don't think that adding the template to pages should be that important that a bot should do it! :)
coding-wise, adding citations will be an insanely hard bot to program, as it would include parsing English ideas :[
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 19:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I think that you mean bot, not bit. ;)
Anyway, I didn't say that a bot could be adding citations, but that they could add the {Inaccurate} template. I thought that there were a few articles in the Scratch Wiki that needed the inaccurate template, but that haven't gotten one yet. I haven't noticed any, so maybe a bot doesn't need to do it after all.
I also looked at the pages linked to the template, as well as Category:Inaccurate Articles, but I still can't find any pages that don't have {{cn}} tags. Could you point me to one?

ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 20:05, 6 July 2014
Seems like a good rule to me.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 20:07, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
oops, I looked at one of the pages on mobile so i couldn't find one o.o - there was one page with 2 cns and an innapropriate tag, if we are enforcing this rule, then lets remove it. oops i ment bot ;) mobile typography error checker is really odd ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Scratch News

Creative Characters Camp has officially kicked off. Please add this to the Scratch News. Thank you.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 21:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

New Help Topic

I think that this guide to accepting accounts would be a nice addition to Help:Contents. Does that sound good?
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:43, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

hmm, put the page under wiki administration section?
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
It sounds good as long as you put it under Wiki Administration section.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 23:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Okay. I'll be putting it under there in a second!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 00:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good with me.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ambiguous Vs Disambiguous

How come we have pages like Objects (disambiguation) and Mod (disambiguation) when "disambiguation" is not even a word? Ambiguous is a word, so why can do we not use that? The definition of ambiguous is "unclear or in exact because a choice between alternatives has not been made". Doesn't that sound more like the correct word? Furthermore, adding "dis" would make it the opposite, meaning "clear and in exact choice with no alternatives".
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 02:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

As Wiktionary says, the word means "the removal of ambiguity". Ergo, it is making the term not ambiguous by explaining different uses.
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 03:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 16:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
oh, it is a word, here. I think disambiguation is dis-ambiguate, to remove the ambiguity. Wow, the word 'disambiguous' is causing so much dis ambiguity!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:27, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Curator update!
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:39, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I updated that already. ;)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 01:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Please do not claim permissions you don't have. Oh, wait, you didn't mean the main page, you meant on the curator page. I didn't.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 13:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

border radius

What's the point of moz-border-radius and webkit-border-radius, it doesn't make a difference to normal border-radius.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 09:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

For very old browsers.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 10:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, lol, I won't need it since I'm running chrome sometimes, and opera sometimes.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 10:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Safari uses Webkit I know and some other odd browsers like Opera use moz ("moz" is NOT for "mozilla")
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 16:47, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
But I mostly use chrome.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 16:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Chrome uses border-radius ;) chrome uses the standard css3, other browsers have specific properties which can get confusing :(
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Isn't moz for mozilla? What else would it be for?
veggieman001 (talk | contribs) 17:37, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
moz was developed for the Gecko browser engine - Mozilla applications - Firefox
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
old opera was actually -o-
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
@Veggie: I thought I recalled, yes, that moz was for Gecko not Firefox. Unless Gecko is made by Mozilla?
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 02:29, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Firefox is run by the gecko web engine
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── and yes gecko is made by mozilla. wikipedia:Gecko (software) enjoy!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:38, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit Count

Umm, User:BWOG/Edit Rankings is different to Special:EditCount/JayceeMinecraft, which one is true?
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 11:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

The second one.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 13:18, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, but User:BWOG/Edit Rankings displays Special:EditCount/JayceeMinecraft because I checked the code and it said {{Special:EditCount/JayceeMinecraft}} which means that it displays Special:EditCount/JayceeMinecraft so that does not make sense...
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 14:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Both are true but the BWOG one only shows total edits whereas the special page displays great detail.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 02:30, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure the Edit Count magic word doesn't include file uploads, but the special page does include them.
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 02:39, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, perhaps. I'll go test that hypothesis!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:35, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
strange, if the magic word doesnt include fiel updates, it should have less edits than the statistic page one. but some how, it is vice-versa! how odd
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────maybe the transcluded one includes deleted contributions but the one on the actual page doesn't?
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 14:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


How about a template called {{project}}. It looks like this.

When gf clicked 
This article teaches you how to make a project.

Or you can do {{project|<some text>}} It will give you.

 When gf clicked 
This article teaches you how to make a some text project.

JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 11:49, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

For the fourth time, we really don't like templates that tell you the contents of an article.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 12:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 13:53, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
This template is useless, so we do not need it.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 15:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


I came up with an idea, something called a user template, not like a normal template, I mean creating a subpage of your user page and making it a template, here is an example. To see how it works, look at the top of this page. I was just wondering if you are allowed to make a template of your user page?
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I think that it is just a given. And when you join its says not to edit others' userpages.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 17:55, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
you can make a template of ur user page already, if I think I know what you mean. Just try {{User:JayceeMinecraft}}! I think that wasn't what you were asking originally o.o
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Question About Files

I was wondering if there was a page with a list of all the files that are currently uploaded. I wanted to look through them and make sure they all had a category. Thanks!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 17:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Special:ListFiles enjoy!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
if u just want to find uncategorized files look here.
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
OK. Thanks!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 18:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


Alright, I will be going through the File list a lot now. I made a list for Admins to see what files aren't used in any pages. I created a subpage for them to look at. I will update everytime I look through the Files.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 18:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the maintenance reports already cover that: UnusedFiles
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I'll admit, you have a lot of dedication to the wiki, and thank you so much for that! Only a dedicated person would look at the uploaded files and check to see if it is used ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:39, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
OK! Thanks! I will still use my page.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 18:43, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I am still scanning through the Files. It is ridiculous! We should not have these many images without a page!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 18:49, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── True, but the admins wanted to keep the old scratch 1.4 blocks and delete everything else ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Then they can look at my subpage! I think all of them aren't 1.4 blocks!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 18:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
@-PRO- That is because most of them are block images, they are used, but the Special Page does not register them because they are used in a template, @Everyone I am finding use for each one of them now.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 18:54, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Look at my subpage. They aren't all blocks! Actually, one of them are yours.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 18:56, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I didn't say all of them were blocks, I said most of them were blocks, and I need someone to delete the page.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 18:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Did you look at this page? Yours is the first one stated.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 19:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Yes I looked there, but I need somebody to delete it for me.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 19:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ask User:Mathfreak231 or User:Scimonster.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 19:04, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Or User:ErnieParke. Anyway, I just deleted the image for you. I'll take a look at the others you listed @-PRO-, but later.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 22:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 22:42, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Now that I've looked through your subpage, there's an image that I'm hesitant to delete:
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Delete what you need to.
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── There are 2 others besides the Explore 3.0 file that you didn't delete. Do you want to delete those?
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:49, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Nice catches! I thought that I had accidentally deleted File:S2exe.jpg... Anyway, that's another image that might be left for historical purposes. File:ToolBar.PNG on the other hand doesn't look useful. So delete.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 23:54, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Glad I could help!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 00:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you -PRO- for bringing this up! That was helpful of you! (And sorry about not putting this into my last post...)
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Unused Categories

There are a few Unused categories, if you don't need them then I won't touch them, but if you want to keep them, I will make use of them.
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 10:08, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

They're fine as they are.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 10:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

New SDS Studio

The news needs to be updated. Thanks!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 15:50, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes Done
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 07:28, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Straight Line

How do you create that straight up and down line? I have always used copy and paste but it would be nice just to use my keyboard. Does someone know how to?
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Unless it's on your keyboard (usually right side) you'll have to copy paste or use an on-screen keyboard.
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 00:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
you mean the pipe character? |? its on the left of my enter key ;) if you still cant find it, you could take a photo of ur keyboard and we could try to find it there ;)
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 00:51, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
On a standard American keyboard, hold down shift while you press the key above the enter key. Looks like this : |
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 05:17, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Found it! I have to hold shift while I press the button above my enter key. Thanks!
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 11:35, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome. Also, the colon and the bar together look like the emoticon :)
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 03:12, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 11:57, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Tweaker/WikiMonitor (Mass Amount of Edits)

How are we only allowed to make 7 edits in an hour? That is 1 edit every 8 and a half minutes! I have made more edits that that and never got notified. What is with that?
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:46, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I think you get notified if you make 7 edits in a hour on the same page.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 23:50, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
-PRO- (talk | contribs) 23:53, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Swampie is correct. And it also skips talk pages, the Sandbox, and the Not Requests.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 12:55, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Article About Templates?

Yes Done! This is not needed!
We probably should have a Wiki article about templates on the wiki. It would make more sense to new Wiki members.
Mariobros406 (talk | contribs) Talk to me here! 17:06, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

We already have one.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 17:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 17:25, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 18:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Beat ya to it. [:<
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 18:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Derpmeup (talk | contribs) 20:09, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
So, the final decision is we do not need the template.
Swampert11 (talk | contribs) 20:12, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Yup. Adding.
Krett12 (talk | contribs) 21:14, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


For me _TOC_ and _FORCETOC_ never work, how do I fix it?
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 13:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

It's __TOC__ and __FORCETOC__.
SSS User 13:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
two underscores on either side, not just one
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 13:06, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, thanks :)
JayceeMinecraftlogo.png JayceeMinecraft user | talk | contributions 13:15, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.