List of Operating Systems
 Resolved (since 19:55, 5 November.2021 (UTC))
|
|---|
What happened to that page? If it was deleted and it is not coming back, should we just delete it? 
ProgrammingFreak (talk | contribs) 19:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
The list
| Resolved (since 23:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC))
|
|---|
If we're going to have a list of OS projects, then what about lists on different pages (like RPG Projects or Simulation). And also, what is and is not allowed on the list? I don't think everything should be allowed on... maybe have a love-its quota so only projects with 25, 50 or more love-its can be added - this is a somewhat cruel method, but it will keep users out from advertising.
Wes64 (talk | contribs) 20:38, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- There used to be a requirement that an OS had to be here to be listed, but I removed that requirement during the move because it's not a good one. A different one is needed, like you said. And even though 25, 50, x love-its sounds cruel, it's much better then views. Views can be spammed by a user, and favorites are tough to go by... Meanwhile, love-its are an easy way for other Scratchers to show a project is quality, so I think love-its are a good idea.
- As for lists on other pages, I think adding those would also be a good idea (though not a new one; look at Pen Projects).
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 20:46, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think that the list here has irrelevant information that only a niche audience would care about, for example "application loading" and "user interface". I also think "version number" is irrelevant because I do not know if users use a standardized version identification system. Definitely we should keep it anonymous, so no username row. Maybe amount of scripts/sprites would be relevant to denote size.
- Musing aside, I do think that if we're going to make example lists on multiple pages, we should at least standardize the criteria for a project to be listed, and the attributes listed. Wes64 (talk | contribs) 20:54, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with you on the issues of useless columns and what could replace them; they feel a bit like an advertisement, but the new columns of "# of scripts" and "# of sprites" are something that are solid, useful, and don't advertise at all.
- Also, about standardizing the criteria for a project should be added, I again agree. I feel that 30 love-its would be a good border. How about you? ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 21:18, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps it should be higher, because the intent is to assemble a select few projects that are outstanding examples, not a lot of projects that are good examples. There are countless projects with 30 love-its, especially in competitive fields like Platformers. Perhaps a border of 100 would do better. It is very high, but in the interest of listing only the best, perhaps it should do. Wes64 (talk | contribs) 21:23, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- Although 100 would constrict the pool of projects from which to choose to a number manageable, we would lose the ability to showcase projects by average Scratchers, not just one's who've become/were famous. That feels a bit like an advertisement to me, but I do agree, 30 is low. Maybe 70~80 would be better? ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 21:32, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- Although 100 would constrict the pool of projects from which to choose to a number manageable, we would lose the ability to showcase projects by average Scratchers, not just one's who've become/were famous. That feels a bit like an advertisement to me, but I do agree, 30 is low. Maybe 70~80 would be better?
- Perhaps it should be higher, because the intent is to assemble a select few projects that are outstanding examples, not a lot of projects that are good examples. There are countless projects with 30 love-its, especially in competitive fields like Platformers. Perhaps a border of 100 would do better. It is very high, but in the interest of listing only the best, perhaps it should do.
You make a good point. Furthermore, it has just occurred to me that often when I will make a project on complex math, it will get significantly less views and love-its even when I believe its quality is similar to one of my popular projects. Therefore, I don't think we should assign an arbitrary love-it ceiling at all. Perhaps we should just pool what is credible and good examples, and simply disallow people from adding their own projects - it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if someone did. Wes64 (talk | contribs) 21:36, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
I developed a prototype.
| Example projects | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Genre | Share date | # Scripts | # Sprites | Version | |
| Spectrum | Turn-based RPG | 2012 03-23 | 217 | 35 | Scratch 1.4 | |
Wes64 (talk | contribs) 02:35, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- I just implemented that table, but Mathfreak231 erased all my work with a simple list... And so, do you think this should be a simple list like it is right now, or a table like what you created above?
- Oh, and by the way, nice job on the prototype! ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 21:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- I chose a simple list so it looks like other lists of example projects. Sorry if I ruined your life's worth. :( :P
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:04, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- It's okay. It's not as my life is ruined... why cold cruel life? Why???
- Anyway, just to say, that list isn't entirely like every single list of example projects. For examples, there's a table in Remix and Pen Projects. (and please don't go dashing off to turn them into lists; at least not yet) ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 21:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- I don't even think a list of examples is necessary off there, much less a table, because the #'s of sprites/scripts are even less necessary than here, and "What the Community is Remixing" is a better and more up-to-date source anyways. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA! BEAUTIFUL WIKILISTS EVERYWHERE! *ahem* Excuse me. Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- For "pen projects", again, there isn't much to put besides the #'s of s/s's. (lotsa s's) It just makes the rest hard to read IMO, and makes individual projects (important link) easier to notice than the explanation of the type. Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:22, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- A list of examples may not be necessary, but does that constitute that we shouldn't have it? There are lots of things about Scratch that aren't necessary, yet we still have them. And this list helps Scratchers learn how to make and format an OS, meanwhile there is no other tool on the wiki about that. As for the number of sciprts n' sprites, that is helpful because a person looking for an example OS to base their code off won't want one with 100+ scripts. They'll want one simpler, which the numbers provide.
- I don't even think a list of examples is necessary off there, much less a table, because the #'s of sprites/scripts are even less necessary than here, and "What the Community is Remixing" is a better and more up-to-date source anyways. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA! BEAUTIFUL WIKILISTS EVERYWHERE! *ahem* Excuse me.
- I chose a simple list so it looks like other lists of example projects. Sorry if I ruined your life's worth. :( :P
- As for the Pen Projects, there is still a huge chunk of page to offset the fact that 3 examples are listed, and if we list them, it's best to make that listing more informative. And how are these examples shown in a way that doesn't work well with the article? They don't make the article harder to read at all; the text is still the same. ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 21:01, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- As for the Pen Projects, there is still a huge chunk of page to offset the fact that 3 examples are listed, and if we list them, it's best to make that listing more informative. And how are these examples shown in a way that doesn't work well with the article? They don't make the article harder to read at all; the text is still the same.
The purpose is to provide a uniform list of examples with additional factors such as age, version number, sprites, scripts, etc so people can get a general sense of what a project is without just the name. I don't think it's unnecessary, and if it is, then all the previously existing lists of examples are unnecessary as well. Wes64 (talk | contribs) 23:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
