How do you add the "Note" and the "Caution" Thingies? I want to know... (Obviously) :P
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 01:04, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Oops, Nevermind. I had the brilliant idea to do the obvious and go look. Sorry.
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 01:06, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Is the page useful

I have a red banner at the top of the page that says: "This page is in question to whether it is useful or not. You can discuss whether you want it deleted or not on its talk page. Reason: I don't think we need an article on spambots."

Can some one tell me what this means? I'm new... Thanks!
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 00:28, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

This means if the page deserves an article or not. I putted that up because I think the Spam article is enough.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 16:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, I read that article once a long time ago, and then I happened across what was apparantly a spam bot....doesn't matter where, but it was on the forums. Anyway, I didn't know what I was looking at, so I didn't deal with it correctly. I thought about trying to incorporate this into the spam article, but that wouldn't let me go into as deep of detail as I wanted to go... At least not without having a huge section on spambots. :/ Also, how do you put that up? I might as well ask. :P
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 17:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Spambots have been quite a big issue on Scratch lately so I think this is ok. It could probably be merged into the spam article though.
EH7meow (talk | contribs) 18:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I'll take it down.
PrincessPandaLover (talk | contribs) 19:04, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Can you tell me how to put it up in the first place? I don't know these things. :P
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 13:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── actually, a merge would be great! A merge is simply when you take the most important ideas on this page you made and putting it on another page (Spam) :) Merging sometimes is great when a page isn't needed for a topic, but that topic is certainly related to Scratch!
Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 05:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I think an issue like Spambots deserves an article of its own.
Icey29 (talk | contribs) 13:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I do also. I want to know how to put up the red notifications though.
Amateurradiogeek15 (talk | contribs) 14:14, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Are Spambots Good or Bad?

I’m really confused. Are they good or bad? Who are they? What, exactly, is their purpose?
Forested (talk | contribs) 19:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Spambots are definitely bad. Here's my simplest explanation of what they are... Search engines (such as Google) rank pages based on how many other sites link to them, where sites that are linked to more are ranked higher. The idea is that more popular sites will show up at the top. However, some people write bots that go around and post links on forums to their websites in order to create links and therefore increase the rank of their site. These bots just make random posts that are completely unrelated to the subject of the forum and include a link to their website in them. This results in a lot of offtopic posts, and sometimes these links are to websites that are either malicious (viruses, scams, etc.) or inappropriate.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:31, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Forested (talk | contribs) 18:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Notable Instances

I added a history section for notable instances of spambot attacks. SpaghettiAG852097- has reverted my edit because

"it’s [not] really necessary to talk about the spam on griffpatch’s profile, because there’s like so many spammers each day you couldn’t even light them probably"

While there are many spammers active at any given moment, this instance is relevant because it was both organized and widespread, impacting multiple profiles and including dozens of spam accounts. This isn't some New Scratcher spamming emojis or links to a game, this was an organized attempt to disrupt Scratch, one that is intended to be repeated. Thus, I think it's relevant enough for inclusion, especially because this article needs expansion.
ScratchCatHELLOpfp.jpeg ScratchCatHELLO talk contribs user 00:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I disagree with you. It isnt very necessary in my opinion. Talking about kaj if OK but i dont think we need to talk about a spammer on griffpatch's profile. Dont change anything yet, lets wait and see other peoples opinions so we dont start a flame war or something and get blocked.
SpaghettiAG852097- Logo2.gif SpaghettiAG852097- talkcontribsprofile 01:35, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Also, there were many spammers before you even started Scratch so you would not be able to get the full history of spammers on scratch. If you create a history section, it has to have all spammer history in there it cant just start with Decenber 21st 2022 because spamming didnt start on December 21st it started way long ago. Also, a history isnt very useful, for example if someone comes to read the spambot page I dont think they would need to know each spambot and when they spammed, and where they spammed. Just because this article needs expansion, you shouldnt add stuff that isnt very useful for other people who read the wiki. Therefore, a history of spammers isnt neccesary.
SpaghettiAG852097- Logo2.gif SpaghettiAG852097- talkcontribsprofile 14:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Also one more thing, you added a web archive of a spampost which wouldnt probably be useful and also you spelled will-wam wrong here is the link to the edit btw
SpaghettiAG852097- Logo2.gif SpaghettiAG852097- talkcontribsprofile 14:32, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
There were many spammers before I joined. This is irrelevant because I'm not the sole contributor to this wiki. History sections are almost always unnecessary because it usually isn't useful to know how things were in the past. This hasn't stopped anyone. It's still useful to have a place to document the history of scratch. Clearly you didn't read the link, because the page includes the full text of the perpetrator's reasoning. You have to scroll down because the topic was archived and not the post. I already realized I spelled Will-Wam incorrectly, but that's not a reason to revert my edit, that's a reason to edit it.
ScratchCatHELLOpfp.jpeg ScratchCatHELLO talk contribs user 15:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that the concerned section should not be in the page. Below are the counterpoints I've spotted:
  • It hasn't really gotten any traction. Kaj is notable, mostly because of the fact that it got tons of coverage and references, and became a part of Scratch culture.
  • This didn't really affect anyone, except a handful of people. There is a very specific page called as Filterbot Outage on 12 April 2022; because it affected so many people and lasted for a noticeably long time, and was covered enough to warrant an article. And, the reasoning alone - that happens in a "famous" Scratcher's page so we should add it - does not make it notable, either.
  • It's no different from other instances of spam - there is not an unexpected technical fault, a notable issue, or such. Just open a random forum which is often not cared about (say, Africa), and it's probable that you'd see a spam post in every few topics.
I question why would one cite a dustbinned forum topic, anyways. If it's dustbinned, the Scratch Team probably don't want it to be circulating around, in this case due to drama; and Scratch Wiki is, most of the time, not an exception from that.
Ahmetlii logo.gif ahmetlii  Talk  Contributions  Directory 
20:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
I Agree with Ahemetlii. Also, if you knew you spelled will-wam wrong you should have changed it instead of just leaving it.
SpaghettiAG852097- Logo2.gif SpaghettiAG852097- talkcontribsprofile 22:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Obviously I didn't realize I spelled it wrong while I was typing. I realized after you reverted it and I wasn't about to break site rules to fix a typo.
ScratchCatHELLOpfp.jpeg ScratchCatHELLO talk contribs user 01:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
My argument wasn't that it was notable because it was on a famous profile, it was that it did enough damage to be notable. I would say that potentially hundreds of people having their accounts stolen and banned is decently widespread. Not enough to deserve an entire article, but enough to deserve three sentences.
Some time before the topic was dustbinned, the post was edited to remove the sixth reason, which was considered gossipy for including examples. I would cite a version of the explanation without that part, but I would have to put it outside Scratch, which I can guess is not allowed. I could just not cite anything, but I feel like people would be upset about that as well. The only other thing I could do is make a project summarizing the events and citing that, but citing something I made that doesn't list sources also feels wrong for similar reasons.
This is significantly different from most spam. It happened at a fairly wide scale and was actually malicious, unlike the spam in Africa and similar forums.
ScratchCatHELLOpfp.jpeg ScratchCatHELLO talk contribs user 01:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
First of all, dustbinned topics are probably not allowed on the wiki because if they were removed on scratch ST probably removed it for a reason. Also, the spam didnt really effect anyone. It did nothing to any scratchers. This same thing happened it August I remember it very well. A spammer came to griffpatch they spammed we went to will_wam the spammer came to will wam the we evacuated to wazzo tv and so on. I dont think it would be neccesary.
SpaghettiAG852097- Logo2.gif SpaghettiAG852097- talkcontribsprofile 02:45, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.