Talk:Follower

Outdated for 3.0?

I found this page and it says that the page is outdated and applies to 2.0 and not 3.0, but I don't think that's true as it seems the same now.
 Dominic305  Talk  Contribs (1,791)  Scratch  Directory  12:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it hasn't been updated yet.
TenType (talk | contribs) 05:04, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Just updated.
TenType (talk | contribs) 05:06, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Griffpatch

Do you think we should add a part about Griffpatch, since he is the most followed scratcher?
Ravenclaw900 (talk | contribs) 02:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

No, that advertises him which breaks the Wiki Guidelines.
TenType (talk | contribs) 02:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Top Scratchers

Would adding a table with top scratchers be relevent or would that be advertising?
Andreto (talk | contribs) 19:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

That sounds like unnecessary advertising to me. What would such a table be about?
Groko13 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Top 10 most followed. Plc, Username, Followers ; But as you said, maybe its just advertising. I persenally think i would add some value for showing the scale and importance of Followers.
Andreto (talk | contribs) 09:55, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with this. It doesn't really add any useful information to the article and is just a violation of S:NOSP.
Daring Sailor [ Talk | Contribs | More... ] 09:57, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree that adding Griffpatch's specific username would be advertising, but what about just adding "The most followers someone has ever had is (number)<ref>[https://scratch.mit.edu/users/griffpatch/followers]</ref>?" That wouldn't really be advertising. ::::
Queer_Royalty (talk | contribs) 00:08, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Merge with Friend List

It is the same as friending kinda.
MyScratchedAccount (talk | contribs) 08:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Not really, though - friending is not even a feature that exists anymore, while following is.
mybearworld • Talk • Contributions • Profile 05:20, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Can I remove the merge header now?
ninjahanzo ( Talk | Contribs | Scratch ) 04:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

I think it's fine to remove the header. This refers to the concept in 2.0/3.0, while the other article refers to the feature in 1.x. General practice is we refer to features from different versions separately.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:56, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks!
ninjahanzo ( Talk | Contribs | Scratch ) 04:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC)