CleanSpeak
Paddle recently mentioned that CleanSpeak, a third-party service, was used to censor swear words. Should this be added to the article? 
Tymewalk (talk | contribs) 15:34, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
- I think it should be, since it is relevant information
Jokebookservice1 (talk | contribs) 18:18, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Hold up!
Why is this in Category:Easter Eggs?!
kenny2scratch Talk Contribs Directory 03:48, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Lol! I have no idea. I think it should be removed, though.
WolfCat67 (talk | contribs) 04:13, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Done
Scunthorpe
(I haven't tried to edit the wiki in a while and I've never gotten too familiar with it so I'm sorry if this is the wrong place or if I'm messing something up)
Anyway, the page on Wikipedia about the Scunthorpe Problem contains quite a bit of inappropriate language since it is talking about censorship. I know there is a warning at the top of the Scratch Wiki article, but are links that lead to pages like this allowed? If anyone sees this and I'm messing something up with this, I apologize
Wahsp (talk | contribs) 13:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
- Let's move this to the bottom
If it's profane, then it shouldn't be linked to.13:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Include a picture
I think there should be an image of a Scratch comment with the alert that appears when you try to post a censored comment
Donotforgetmycode (talk | contribs) 09:20, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Scratch Wiki section
A {{NotUseful}} template was added to the top of the Scratch Wiki section of this page, with "Scratch Wiki is a third-party site" as the reason. I would like to politely disagree with the template. Yes, the Scratch Wiki is a third-party site, but it's still connected to Scratch, and thus it is still relevant here (in my opinion). 
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 00:38, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Well, the point of this article is censors on Scratch. What the Scratch Wiki does has little bearing. Mod Share is connected to Scratch, but it isn't talked about like that. Stuff like that would be much more suitable for Project:Censor as this is a wiki about Scratch. Hope this sums up my view with the tag.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think it's an apt comparison to compare the Scratch Wiki to Mod Share. Mod Share is much more "external" from Scratch than the wiki. The wiki used to be partially run by the Scratch Team. Even though it isn't anymore, it's still linked from the Scratch footer, and links to it are still clickable in (for example) Scratch comments.
- Yes, this is a wiki about Scratch, but the Scratch Wiki is still heavily integrated with the Scratch community. Also, in the words of the Scratch Wiki page (underline added by me):
- Well, the point of this article is censors on Scratch. What the Scratch Wiki does has little bearing. Mod Share is connected to Scratch, but it isn't talked about like that. Stuff like that would be much more suitable for Project:Censor as this is a wiki about Scratch. Hope this sums up my view with the tag.
| “ | The Scratch Wiki is a collaboratively-written wiki available for free that provides information about the Scratch programming language, its website, history and phenomena surrounding it. | ” |
- Thus, I don't necessarily think S:SCRATCH prevents us from mentioning the wiki here. bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 01:12, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I believe the phrase in question refers to pages like Scratch Trends. I think the usage of the section here implies that the Scratch Wiki is a part of Scratch, which while it may be useful to the community, it is not a part of Scratch on the level of the project editor, its website, or its forums. The inclusion here would end up changing a lot. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:23, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Well, by that logic, Scratch Wiki would have to be deleted. bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 01:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Not necessarily, because Scratch Wiki is notable as a third party site and passes S:NOSP. Just like we have articles on things like Mod Share and Snap! etc... But the existance of that article doesn't make it useful here. We don't have examples of how Snap censors. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Not necessarily, because Scratch Wiki is notable as a third party site and passes S:NOSP. Just like we have articles on things like Mod Share and Snap! etc... But the existance of that article doesn't make it useful here. We don't have examples of how Snap censors.
- Well, by that logic, Scratch Wiki would have to be deleted.
- I believe the phrase in question refers to pages like Scratch Trends. I think the usage of the section here implies that the Scratch Wiki is a part of Scratch, which while it may be useful to the community, it is not a part of Scratch on the level of the project editor, its website, or its forums. The inclusion here would end up changing a lot.
- Thus, I don't necessarily think S:SCRATCH prevents us from mentioning the wiki here.
I'm interested to know, how do you think Mod Share and Snap! pass S:NOSP? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not sure those articles could be created today, since we stopped allowing articles on things like Scratch modifications (yes, they aren't Scratch modifications, but I'd say they are part of that general "category" of pages). We don't delete those pages, since they were created before the change in guidelines, but I'm not sure they could be created today.
Furthermore, as I said before, I don't think comparing the Scratch Wiki to something like Mod Share is an apt comparison. The Scratch Wiki used to be heavily supported by the Scratch Team (I mean, we were on their domain), and even now, we're still linked in the footer (as I said before). bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 01:38, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I do believe that Snap would pass NOSP in this case since it has had an integral role in Scratch's development (mentioned on countless pages, even the custom blocks feature came from it). If you don't think they pass it though, you should mark them as NotUseful as an encyclopedia should not "grandfather" but change retroactively.
- As for whether or not Scratch Wiki is linked in this way, I think the fact that the Scratch Team used to control it is worth noting for historical reasons, but that is no longer the case. It also appears that this section was added after it was at its current home. So it appears to be solely the documentation of third-party system that has never had any role in Scratch. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:56, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- (I fixed the indenting of the post above, but did not edit the actual post)
- "If you don't think they pass it though, you should mark them as NotUseful as an encyclopedia should not 'grandfather' but change retroactively."
- ↳ Perhaps that's what you believe, but that's not the path we chose. If you disagree with said path, feel free to bring it up on the Community Portal.
- Anyhow, I still don't think that Snap! is comparable to the Scratch Wiki when it comes to notability. The Scratch Wiki community is inherently connected to the Scratch community, while the same cannot be said for Snap!. The Scratch Wiki is a wiki about Scratch, while Snap! is its own thing. Just because the Scratch Team doesn't control it anymore doesn't mean it isn't connected to Scratch. bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:11, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I guess the point here is that Censor is explicitly talking about the way Scratch censors. And while the Scratch Wiki is "connected to" Scratch, it isn't a part of Scratch and stuff like that wouldn't really belong here. I think the best place for it would be Project:Censor or Scratch Wiki#Censor if it is truly wanted in article space. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 02:13, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- "I guess the point here is that Censor is explicitly talking about the way Scratch censors."
- ↳ Alright.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think simply changing the text of the article is a good solution here as it does not change the problem. While the Scratch Wiki is linked to from Scratch (as are several things not run by Scratch such as ScratchEd), that does not make Scratch Wiki a part of Scratch as this article tries to construe it as. Censors on the Scratch Wiki stay at the Scratch Wiki. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 02:20, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- How does it try to construe the Scratch Wiki as part of Scratch? Even though the Scratch Wiki is not a literal "part" of Scratch, that doesn't mean it's not inherently connected to Scratch. The Scratch Wiki is one of the puzzle pieces that complete the "Scratch ecosystem." The way the wiki censors is still an important piece of information to have here, since all of the contributors to the wiki are also Scratch users and the wiki goes hand in hand with Scratch. The "Scratch Wiki" section of this article isn't trying to say that the Scratch Wiki is part of Scratch (as far as I can tell); it's basically just saying "okay, so Scratch does it that way, now this is how another important part of the Scratch community—the Scratch Wiki—does it" (obviously not in those words). bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think the Scratch Wiki is as important to Scratch as you imply. A lot of the help links and stuff are internal, and most of the links to Scratch Wiki are either user-generated or from the single link in the footer (which also links to other stuff like ScratchEd having little to no use at all). In addition, the censor is explicitly for editing and conversation on the Scratch Wiki, which has zero bearing on most Scratch users who do not have a wiki account. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 02:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think the Scratch Wiki is as important to Scratch as you imply. A lot of the help links and stuff are internal, and most of the links to Scratch Wiki are either user-generated or from the single link in the footer (which also links to other stuff like ScratchEd having little to no use at all). In addition, the censor is explicitly for editing and conversation on the Scratch Wiki, which has zero bearing on most Scratch users who do not have a wiki account.
- How does it try to construe the Scratch Wiki as part of Scratch? Even though the Scratch Wiki is not a literal "part" of Scratch, that doesn't mean it's not inherently connected to Scratch. The Scratch Wiki is one of the puzzle pieces that complete the "Scratch ecosystem." The way the wiki censors is still an important piece of information to have here, since all of the contributors to the wiki are also Scratch users and the wiki goes hand in hand with Scratch. The "Scratch Wiki" section of this article isn't trying to say that the Scratch Wiki is part of Scratch (as far as I can tell); it's basically just saying "okay, so Scratch does it that way, now this is how another important part of the Scratch community—the Scratch Wiki—does it" (obviously not in those words).
- I don't think simply changing the text of the article is a good solution here as it does not change the problem. While the Scratch Wiki is linked to from Scratch (as are several things not run by Scratch such as ScratchEd), that does not make Scratch Wiki a part of Scratch as this article tries to construe it as. Censors on the Scratch Wiki stay at the Scratch Wiki.
- I guess the point here is that Censor is explicitly talking about the way Scratch censors. And while the Scratch Wiki is "connected to" Scratch, it isn't a part of Scratch and stuff like that wouldn't really belong here. I think the best place for it would be Project:Censor or Scratch Wiki#Censor if it is truly wanted in article space.
"I don't think the Scratch Wiki is as important to Scratch as you imply."
↳ Alright, then why don't we get rid of it entirely and see what they think? Someone tell MartinWollenweber! (</sarcasm>)
"A lot of the help links and stuff are internal, and most of the links to Scratch Wiki are either user-generated or from the single link in the footer (which also links to other stuff like ScratchEd having little to no use at all)."
↳ Well, there's also something to be said for wiki links being clickable on Scratch.
"In addition, the censor is explicitly for editing and conversation on the Scratch Wiki, which has zero bearing on most Scratch users who do not have a wiki account."
↳ Just because it's not relevant to most users doesn't mean it's not relevant to have in this article. The Scratch Trends aren't relevant to most users, but that doesn't mean they aren't relevant to have on the wiki. bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:59, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- The main goal here has still been derailed by a lot. Scratch Wiki is a frequently used tool by the Scratch community, like Cubeupload, but the Scratch Wiki is run externally and should not be implied that it is a part of Scratch. Just changing it to be about Scratch and the Scratch Wiki does not change that this is a wiki about Scratch, and stuff like this better belongs on the Project space. I think a lot of this mindset is from what predates the server transfer, but the transfer does mean a lot of difference in operations, and I think stuff like this should stay in project space on that grounds. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:55, 9 September 2020 (UT C)
- Please stop arguing.
Jettypumpkin07 (talk | contribs) 02:59, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Please stop arguing.
- I agree with Naleksuh — this section has no use. Mabye it could be moved to another section as a little note, or just deleted (which I think is the better option).
Lamp15 (talk | contribs) 22:10, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with keeping that section. If we have to remove that section because it is not about Scratch, then we would to the delete the Scratch Wiki page.
TheTrillion • Talk • 2,624 contributions • Scratch 05:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- I think it should be kept. Lots of articles reference the Scratch Wiki, for example, the April Fools Day page.
Jackson49 (talk | contribs) 04:39, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- I think it should be kept. Lots of articles reference the Scratch Wiki, for example, the April Fools Day page.
- I agree with keeping that section. If we have to remove that section because it is not about Scratch, then we would to the delete the Scratch Wiki page.
- The main goal here has still been derailed by a lot. Scratch Wiki is a frequently used tool by the Scratch community, like Cubeupload, but the Scratch Wiki is run externally and should not be implied that it is a part of Scratch. Just changing it to be about Scratch and the Scratch Wiki does not change that this is a wiki about Scratch, and stuff like this better belongs on the Project space. I think a lot of this mindset is from what predates the server transfer, but the transfer does mean a lot of difference in operations, and I think stuff like this should stay in project space on that grounds.
maybe don't give examples of false positives?
I feel like kids might end up finding out what the bad words actually are if we say what the false positives were 
Lapisi (talk | contribs) 23:34, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please remember to sign your post with the 4 tidles.
SpaghettiAG852097- (talk | contribs) 19:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Controversy
Add that the account creation filter whitelist removed 'grape', 'title', 'scrape', 'bass', etc. 
CodeLearnerSai (talk | contribs) 02:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
No Support In my opinion, I dont think it would be neccesary to be added.
SpaghettiAG852097- talk • contribs • profile 02:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- The Wiki does not really benefit from documenting what is inappropriate (and it's pretty obviously telegraphed by including these words). The Wiki is here to document what the censor does, why it's there, and its impact, not the exact list of things it blocks and doesn't block.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 03:14, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Also, they are still not allowed on Scratch by the way. SpaghettiAG852097- talk • contribs • profile 22:34, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Also, they are still not allowed on Scratch by the way.
- The Wiki does not really benefit from documenting what is inappropriate (and it's pretty obviously telegraphed by including these words). The Wiki is here to document what the censor does, why it's there, and its impact, not the exact list of things it blocks and doesn't block.
Should we add a list of banned words?
i mean up to you guys User:2tables/emoji
2tables (talk | contribs) 13:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
- No, I don't think we should. It'll be like when you tell someone 'don't press the button' they start having a huge urge to press it. Also,
| “ | The Wiki does not really benefit from documenting what is inappropriate | ” |
– jvvg, in the above topic | ||
Vdiu | Talk | Contributions | Scratch Profile 10:27, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Readding information about “follow” being prohibited from usernames
In revision 331964, the information about "follow" being prohibited from usernames was removed. While the community consensus is to not include a list of blocked usernames, I'd say this is an exception as this has a impact on bots and F4F. It is really up to the commnuity consensus for this one.
(By the way, the revision was suggested on this post in the community portal in the forums, so the editor probably didn't make that decision.)
Purin2022 (talk | contribs) 20:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- The reason I removed that wasn't because it was too inappropriate, quite the opposite in fact. Scratch allows me to create an account containing the word "follow" without telling me it's inappropriate (in fact I just created an account with username "follow314"). If it really is against the Community Guidelines to make such account, a mention of it should be elsewhere since the section talks about censoring usernames.
Gdxfor (talk | contribs) 21:26, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
