User talk:Naleksuh

I've reverted your moves

I reverted your moves for Pixel Art and its talk page because they actually followed capitalization rules - on wikis, almost all words in a title should be capitalized. Please see Scratch Wiki:Editing Conventions#Capitalization for more info. Thanks.
TenType (talk | contribs) 05:07, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

That is definitely not the case for "wikis" as a whole. Maybe for the Scratch Wiki specifically though. Editing conventions for Scratch Wiki is a bit unusual, but I hope to adjust at some point. Is there usage behind its creation? Naleksuh (talk) 05:11, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Looks like it was made as a reference article to show how wiki articles should conform to. Thanks for your contributions by the way! Edit conflict :P
TenType (talk | contribs) 05:17, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Please change your signature

Hello! I mentioned this in my welcome message, but I'm not sure if you saw it.
Could you please change your custom signature so that it conforms to the guidelines at S:CSIG? This involves adding a profile picture and link to your contributions. See that page for the full details. Thanks
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 20:07, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Also, thank you for getting started so quickly! I can tell you are already pretty experienced with wikis.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 20:09, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

I see- why the note about the icon? I would very strongly prefer not to use one if that is possible. Naleksuh (talk) 20:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, for one thing, profile pictures can help identify users quickly. That's just my view of the matter, though. In addition, not having a profile picture would cause inconsistency, since the default scratchsig custom signatures use profile pictures. Speaking of the default signatures, have you considered using the default scratchsig syntax? <scratchsig>Naleksuh</scratchsig> It looks pretty similar to your current signature, just with a profile picture and a link to your contributions.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 20:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Of course, you can also create a custom signature that follows the guidelines by following the instructions at Scratch Wiki:Custom Signatures#Best Method for Using Signatures. The reason I suggested using the default is because it's pretty similar to your current signature.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 18:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Actually the entire purpose of my signature was to remove the silly icon. Naleksuh (talk) 18:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

You could always use a different icon for the Scratch Wiki — my icon on Scratch is different from this one.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 18:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Of course, that would mean you would have to create a custom signature instead of using the default.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 18:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but can you please either change your signature so it follows the guidelines or suggest changes to the guidelines instead of using something similar to the {{unsigned}} template for your posts? Thank you, I greatly appreciate it.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I posted a message at Scratch_Wiki_talk:Custom_Signatures and can't change my signature until this is answered.
-unsigned comment by Naleksuh (talk | contribs)

Creating your userpage

Although it isn't needed, it could be helpful to create a userpage. It would make it easier for other users to get to your userspace via signatures and they can be quite fun to make, yours can be found here! Hope that helped
ContourLines [ Talk ~ Contributions ~ Directory ] 08:02, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, but I prefer keeping my userpage as a red link :) -unsigned comment by Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 08:04, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay, although, your signature seems to be acting weirdly...
ContourLines [ Talk ~ Contributions ~ Directory ] 08:20, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Raspberry Pi Blocks

Thanks for creating all of those block articles; it's greatly appreciated!
I noticed you didn't categorize them. I think it may be worth creating a new category for them (possibly a sub-category of Category:Scratch Extensions). What do you think? (Also, if you agree, should they all be grouped together, or split into Raspberry Pi Simple Electronics Extension blocks and Raspberry Pi Sense HAT Extension blocks?)

Again, thank you for creating all these articles and for being such a great wiki contributor in general!
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 01:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I think they shouldn't be grouped together, unless all extensions are grouped together (also not a good idea). Also, there are three categories: the two you mentioned and Raspberry Pi GPIO Extension. I would say to follow the scheming system of the current categories (like Category:Pen Extension). -unsigned comment by Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 02:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

So Category:Raspberry Pi Simple Electronics Extension, Category:Raspberry Pi Sense HAT Extension, and Category:Raspberry Pi GPIO Extension would all be sub-categories of Category:Scratch 3.0 Extensions and Category:Block Categories, just like Category:Pen Extension?
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good, i will add them later today. -unsigned comment by Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 02:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Alright,  Thanks!
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 02:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Sic template

I saw you tried to add a {{sic}} template. Perhaps it would be worth creating; what do you think?
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 19:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Sure. Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 19:27, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Abouut^[sic] usage

I think that the ^[sic] template in the Cat Block article should go after "Fool's" because I'm pretty sure it goes directly after the misspelled word (assuming that's the word you meant), though I could be mistaken. If you don't think it should be moved, though, it should probably go after the comma.
Groko13 (talk | contribs) 21:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

It does mainly go after the misspelled word, but not with well-established phrases. In those cases, it goes outside of the phrase. There is also no reason for it to be outside of the comma, as we refer to April Fool's Day, not April Fool's Day,. Hope this answers Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 21:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense. I do still think that {{sic}} templates should be placed outside of punctuation, though. In my opinion, it would look better, and references and {{cn}} are superscript text and go outside punctuation as well.
Groko13 (talk | contribs) 22:09, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Using gf instead of green flag

I just wanted to point out that I believe the point of using gf is to minimalise the size of articles so it would be more ideal to use that.
ContourLines [ Talk ~ Contributions ~ Directory ] 08:38, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Green flag is more transparent. You can also reduce the size of the blocks by removing every single space, but thats not helpful.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 18:14, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

3RR

I saw you mentioned the three-revert rule in an edit summary. However, we don't really use that rule (as far as I'm aware). We use the Bold, Revert, Discuss rule.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 17:51, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hello, thank you for your contributions to the wiki! I've noticed that in many of your edits, you do not include an edit summary. It's generally good practice to leave an edit summary in every edit you make, since then other editors can see the purpose of each edit at a glance. Of course, it's okay if you miss a few here and there. If you don't have it enabled already, it may be helpful to turn on the "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" option in your preferences (Located in the "Editing" section of your preferences).

Thank you again for your contributions to the wiki!
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 21:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi there — is there a specific reason why you don't leave edit summaries in many cases?
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 23:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I use edit summaries when they are expected (i.e. removing content, reverting good-faith edits), but not always.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 23:19, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for clarifying. The issue is, they are expected always:

“	Leave an edit summary, or explanation of what you changed and why, whenever you can. This is done in the text box that says "Summary:" below the editing box. Edit summaries make it easier to track edits without having to look at the actual diff, or comparison between two edits.	”
– Scratch Wiki:Guidelines

There may be cases where you don't think an edit will be contentious, but it actually ends up being contentious. Leaving edit summaries is also more convenient for other editors, for the reason stated in the quote above. I will leave this here, but I would like to politely encourage you to use edit summaries as much as you can. They don't have to always be super detailed, but please use them. Thanks for understanding, and thank you for your wonderful contributions to the wiki!
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 23:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Capitalization of blocks in the intro paragraph

In the Introductory paragraph section of the Editing Conventions, it says that "capitalization of the title should not be included in the bolded word... exceptions retaining to this restatement include... capitalization for blocks remain the same as the title." To my understanding, this means that the bolded block name should be capitalized and follow the article's title's capitalization. Please correct me if I got anything wrong! Hope this clears things up
Groko13 (talk | contribs) 01:00, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm actually not entirely clear on what it is supposed to mean here, because they immediately show "Project Downloading" as an example. So that may need to be changed to be clearer. Regardless, I don't think it should be that way either, as there is no reason to capitalize names that aren't capitalized in Scratch. So, you can propose an edit to it on the talk page if you want.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

If you mean I can propose a change to the Editing Conventions, then you should propose that edit if you want to. If you mean an edit to the pages where the block isn't capitalized in the intro paragraph, then I brought that up here.

I think that the "Project Downloading" was given as an example because they removed the "(1.4)" part. The text says "Brackets are not kept," though that is a bit confusing. Maybe it should be split into two separate bullet points.

Anyways, I think that we should change the capitalization of the bolded words back to follow the Editing Conventions as they currently are. Does that sound good to you?
Groko13 (talk | contribs) 02:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Creating Pages

Hi! I'm not entirely sure if you created the page about Scratch Camp because of the images that I uploaded or not, but if you did, in the future if I upload images that seem like they could be becuase I'm creating a certain page, could you ask me on my talk page before creating the page? This way we won't both try to create the same page. Thanks :)
  Illusion705 talk | contribs  22:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind. I see that you didn't because you created the page a minute before I uploaded the first image
  Illusion705 talk | contribs  23:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Picture edit description

Hello! I see that in the quote button picture, you used some incorrect spelling. Please try next time to use correct spelling. Thanks!
HacksonJackson (talk | contribs) 11:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Spelling/grammar is not important in summaries or talk page comments. There is no obligation to do so in a peer-to-peer enviornment rather than an article. Editing the comment would be a violation of talk page policy, as well as the fact that summaries are not able to be edited.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 18:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Learn to follow the rules. Correct spelling is REQUIRED!
Acebsa (talk | contribs) 00:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Acebsa Says what? Also, that sounds kinda rude, it would be nice if you try to tone down your messages a bit in the future.
 Dominic305  Talk  Contribs (1,791)  Scratch  Directory  22:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

About the links to your website

If you have links to download old versions officially, can you add them to the Wiki? Thanks for your helps, and I'm really appreciated your contributions.

Note:

I know that you would like to keep your User: page as a red link, but you can add there a redirect to your user talk page. Just a suggestion.

 ahmetlii  Talk  Contributions  Directory  11:04, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind, I saw that you added the official link to your page. Thanks again!
 ahmetlii  Talk  Contributions  Directory  11:16, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop changing my edits

Hi!, I have noticed recently that you have reversed some of my good edits such as 2020-09-10 21:05:04 . This edit was neccesary and made good sense. I would appreciate it if you stopped doing this as I don't want to get an admin involved. Thanks
Acebsa (talk | contribs) 21:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I think the footnote puts it better than I could: "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here."
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 21:48, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but if they are unreasonable, it can be classed as vandalism and you can get blocked.
ContourLines [ Talk ~ Contributions ~ Directory ] 16:31, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

They were unreasonable there was nothing wrong with them. I will be going to an admin. with a admin. if this happens again.
Acebsa (talk | contribs) 23:05, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop reverting my edits

Please stop. I know that this is released under CC, but I changed it back and you've reverted my edits relating to Pre-1.0 too many times. I ask you to stop, or I will get an admin involved.

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 00:43, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I see that you replied to my comment on Talk:Scratch 0.6. However, I am not sure what purpose this serves. Unless you are asking me to categorically never revert any edit made by you again, which I cannot promise to do. In addition, your actions such as move warring and then requesting protection appear to be an attempt at gaming the system-- by attmepting to have the page protected on your preferred revision.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

It's unfair to revert my edits if I am NOT breaking a guideline, which I wasn't. I've seriously had ENOUGH with all this reverting, I'm even considering leaving.

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 15:59, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, folks! I hope you are doing well. Please, everyone, take a few deep breaths. It is clear that both of you feel strongly about improving the wiki. That's a good thing; committed editors are amazing! However, we have rules such as S:BRD to make sure that disagreements on the wiki are handled constructively. If someone reverts your edit and you think they should not have done so, please leave a respectful message on their talk page or the talk page of the article that the edit was on. Say hello, ask them how they're doing, and then politely explain your point of view. This will ensure that the activities on the wiki are constructive and maintain a friendly environment. If you see someone breaking a rule, please report the revision. This also helps us maintain a friendly environment.

Thank you both for your contributions to the wiki; they are greatly appreciated! I would appreciate if you both could reply to this message and state that you understand the above. If you have any questions, feel free to reply here or ask me on my talk page.

Have a great rest of your day!
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 22:30, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

This is true. The editor in question has taken a strong reaction to their edits being reverted, usually simply restoring it instead of using the talk page. To Garnetluvcookie, I will say that simply because your edit did not violate the Wiki Guidelines does not mean that reverting such an edit is a violation. The entire purpose of the bold, revert, discuss cycle is built upon this, and leaving comments blanketly telling others to never revert edits by you or even bad faith accusations such as claiming that others are "targeting you". To Bigpuppy, thank you for staying uninvolved and handling the situation maturely. Although I did not believe administrative assistance was needed from a single content dispute, it appears that not all editors agree so it is nice to hear the policies and procedures restated from an administrative account.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 22:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I am trying my hardest to assume good faith, but it's gone too far. I'm only human, I'm not a perfect bot that does everything correctly. Also, I've asked you many times to not capitalize the G in my username. I am very sensitive about this and I ask you to respect it. I also might not be "mature" all the time. I'm not using this for defense or anything, but I'm only in grade school. I still have much to learn. I also have good reasons to believe that you are targeting me, or in a less immature way, scrutinizing my edits. If you don't want a situation like this to happen again, please do not contact me at least for a week. I already have too much stress and anger from school, i have no need for more.

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 23:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with garnetluvcookie on this one. It is clear you target people you don't agree with. Also, you refuse to follow rules about your signature which makes it clear you don't want to help the wiki, you want to command it.
Acebsa (talk | contribs) 17:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘1. Do you have any proof? 2. I think they followed the siggy guidelines? Just stop falsely accusing people. (Edited at 06:43, 22 July 2022 (UTC)) It seems like this is a topic from two years ago so nevermind.
　-iviedwall-　‖　talk　contributions　🐱　  06:00, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Please set your signature so it follows the guidelines at S:GOODSIG

I love your signature, but it's breaking a rule. It looks kinda ugly when all of the code is splattered over the editing area. Can you make a page containing a transclusion of your sig and set the signature to that so code doesn't splatter all over the place?

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 02:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your concern, however my signature has already been approved by several other people. In addition, I oppose transclusion and retroactive changes on talk pages.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 03:04, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

GLC is correct here. If you're not using ScratchSig (which considering your current signature's layout, you might as well do), then you must use a template instead. You don't have to change posts you've already signed, but please use the minisig method or switch to ScratchSig.
kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  05:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I was confused as you had previously approved my signature, but it appears you have changed your mind. I do use signature pages for complex sigs, but in those cases I will usually simply substitute them. Very well, in that case I will likely change to the default signature at some point.

In addition, I have restored the "please stop targeting me" message that Kenny2scratch removed. While I do believe that the message was both contradictory to policy and by no means civil, I prefer to leave such messages as-is (except in the case of revdel-worthy content), although a response is certainly not required.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 05:45, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

WHy don't you just follow the rules instead of fighting everyone and fighting the system?
Acebsa (talk | contribs) 00:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

userpage?

How come you haven't made a userpage?
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  01:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

In an earlier discussion on this user's talk page, they decided to keep their userpage as a red link.
Jammum (💬 Talk - ✍️ Contribs) 06:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Is it in an archive or something?
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  13:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, found it lol
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  13:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@naleksuh Woah wait what. I was on the CP and I found ONLY ONE of your signatures without the red User link. And I only saw one for some reason. pic
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  19:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

that's normal scratchsig syntax, veggieman001 has a deleted userpage. example:
veggieman001 (talk | contribs)

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 19:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

But that sig was only there once in the entire CP. And it was just yesterday, way past him joining and everything....
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  22:03, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop miscapitalising my name

I have asked you many times to do so. It's something I'm extremely sensitive about, to the point I want to leave the Wiki. I've given you many tries, and you just ignore my comment. I am starting to believe that these edits are in bad faith.

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 16:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

bump?

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 20:35, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Your recent move

Hi there! I saw you moved Set Set () Effect to () (block) to Set () Effect to () (Looks bIock) (with an "i" instead of an "L" in "block"), presumably in preparation to move it to Set () Effect to () (Looks block) (with an "L" in "block"). However, did you first discuss this with the editor who originally moved it back after your original move, as per S:BRD? Thank you, I look forward to your response.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 21:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah. I was not aware that the move was reversed and simply moved the page as I saw it at the wrong title. However, in this case I do not consider my move to be a bold action, as this is the standard for all articles (despite the comment that it "is not needed and won't be"). It can also fall into the same boat as stuff like removing user-generated content, as a change to this would need to be done by a change to policy (although this is not a content policy and is purely housekepeing/maintenance). In addition, there is no sense in having the title be bIock or anything like that (the fact that the person performing the move was attempting to bypass a restriction put in place for a reason is a problem as well; but for another day). The editing conventions involving blocks in multiple categories involve using this system, and there is certainly no mentions of bIocks. That is why I flagged the page for deletion. Thank you.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 22:01, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I have invited the other user to this discussion so that everyone is on the same page and they can state why they believe the other title is better. Even if this convention is codified in policy, I feel it would be best to get everyone's view on the matter. (Could you possibly provide a link to where this is codified in policy, if you don't mind? Scratch Wiki:Editing Conventions#Topic says to "Use parentheses after the title to clarify what the title refers to, such as the difference between Curator (front page) and Curator (studio).", but the section doesn't specifically mention this case. Thanks.)
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 01:21, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Yep, that is exactly what we are doing. Clarifying between Set () Effect to () (Looks block) and Set () Effect to () (Sound block). For blocks that have the same name under different categories, (block) is changed to (CATEGORY block). We already do this for a number of other blocks, including but not limited to () Contains ()?, Tilt Angle (), and When () Key Pressed
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 01:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't think I understand the proposal.

garnetluvcookie (talk | contribs) 19:58, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

There is no proposal. I made a move that aligned the page with the naming conventions, which you then reverted in violation of them. As such, the redirect in question should be deleted per S:EC
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 03:15, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

S:MOS

Hello,
Thanks for creating the shortcut above. However, what does "MOS" stand for in the context of the shortcut?
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 16:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

If it stands for "Manual of Style," shouldn't the target be Scratch Wiki:Style Guide instead?
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 17:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I see. Yes, the Scratch Wiki does have its manual of style split into two pages. In that case, the shortcut should probably be retargeted.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 17:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 17:47, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Special:Diff/263719

Hello,
Regarding the above diff: the fact that the  Not done in your message doesn't indicate that the discussion is not done doesn't mean the discussion is done either, though.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 19:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, if you're going to remove it from Not Done, then please at least add it back the main Community Portal. Thanks.
bigpuppy talk ▪︎ contribs 20:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Bold, Revert, Discuss

Hi! I saw your edits on LEGO BOOST Extension. Our policy on reverting - Scratch Wiki:Bold, Revert, Discuss says that if an edit is reverted, you should not revert back, and instead discuss on talk page. We don't like edit wars, so please keep this in mind. Thank you.
Apple502j Talk/Activities 2,243edit 17:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Where did I violate here? Namebaseking01 made a bold edit that removed a red link, which I then reverted. Unless you are referring to the same interaction on 22 September, but I had forgotten it was attempted to be removed already and thought it was the first time.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 17:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I checked the history when I was notified that someone is causing edit war - and it seems like things started from that September 22nd edit, and all reverts to add back red links were by you.

Anyway, the rule is now clear; jvvg protected that page with the reason "don't intentionally redlink - if you want the page to be created, make the page BEFORE linking it".
Apple502j Talk/Activities 2,243edit 18:09, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I was not trying to revert more than a single time, I just simply was not aware it occured previously. As for whether or not that makes "the rule" clear, I think that would depend on content policy. Red links are designed to help know what to create (for example, Special:WantedPages) and requiring them to be created first immediately defeats the purpose. It might be worth having centralized discussion if you feel strongly on that issue.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 18:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

"Red links are designed to help know what to create..." I have not seen this at all on the Wiki, where are you getting this information? In my experience the link is always deleted.
 Dominic305  Talk  Contribs (1,791)  Scratch  Directory  19:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Whether or not "the link is always deleted" or it has happened "on this wiki" does not change its purpose. Red links are designed to encourage the creation of new content. That is why the action when opening one is to create the page. That is why the collection of red links is called "wanted pages". That is why it is the number of incoming links is useful to know. Whether or not Scratch Wiki has been removing them does not change that (and they should not be removed).
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 19:59, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘But again, where did you find this information? I haven't seen anything supporting what you said.
 Dominic305  Talk  Contribs (1,791)  Scratch  Directory  16:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Did you read what I said? I already explained the design of red links. Are you saying that this link does not take you create that page? That this page is not called "wanted pages"? This is not information that I "found", it has been laid right here in front of you. In addition, I somewhat find the message challenging of my expertise (although this may have been not your intention, but simply to inquire). Regardless, I hope that any confusion has been cleared up, and that removing red links defeats the purpose.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 17:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Apologies, I could've phrased it better. I think you're incorrectly reading in to this, all anyone has ever done on both the SW and Wikipedia is remove them. I don't think red links should be used to suggest new pages.
 Dominic305  Talk  Contribs (1,791)  Scratch  Directory  17:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

You are not correct. That is the purpose whether you agree with it or not. You also seem to have the idea that Wikipedia removes red links when in fact they do not and explicitly say not to remove them in bold text (and even if they were that would not influence the decision here). I also did not red links were used to "suggest" new pages but to identify what pages would be useful, are needed, and should be created. Changing text to text is not how to remove red links, creating the page is.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 19:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

(for information) Wikipedia has an editing guideline (wikipedia:Wikipedia:Red link) that states red links can be helpful, but we are not Wikipedia.
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | 8,242 edits | Scratch 23:30, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Reasoning for deletion?

What was your reason for reverting my redirect page?
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  23:19, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

The edit summary (i think) said shortcuts are for project pages only. Which is true, the destination page is not under the Scratch Wiki: namespace.
 Dominic305  Talk  Contribs (1,791)  Scratch  Directory  16:33, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

What? I didn't understand that sorry.
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  19:30, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The edit summary said something along the lines of, "Shortcuts are for project pages only," aka the Scratch Wiki: namespace.
I'm tired, sorry
 Dominic305  Talk  Contribs (1,791)  Scratch  Directory  19:55, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, it was just a quick way for updaters to go there quickly...
 12944qwerty  Talk  Contribs  Scratch  20:09, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I cannot open a .image file

Hi, You linked some download links on the Scratch 1.0 page.But my computer cannot open the file, can you please tell me how do you can open the file after downloading it ?
-unsigned comment by Scratcheur-2020Send (talk | contribs) 09:16, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

You need a squeak VM to open them. You could probably just drag them onto Scratch.exe from 1.4, although there will be some changes such as the X close button not working properly.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 17:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh...
-unsigned comment by Scratcheur-2020Send (talk | contribs) 18:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding recent page edits

Hi, I'm going to continue the conversation from jvvg's talk page. The reason I put the "Update" template on the page Offline Editor (2.0) is because we are no longer in Scratch 2.0, and the article in question contains words relating to the 2.0 editor like "is," which refers to the present tense. Therefore, the article needs to be updated to include past tense words. I admit that I was incorrect by labeling the article as a duplicate of the "2.0" page; I believe that I put the wrong link in it, but I am pretty sure that there is a duplicate article that I stumbled across recently; I am currently trying to find it. Other than that, I'm sorry if I caused any inconvenience earlier.
84375 (talk | contribs) 18:42, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I see. Well, the 3.0 page is not a duplicate of the 2.0 page, because obviously it's different content. I also thought that by the update template you were suggesting it be updated to 3.0 when of course it should remain 2.0. You are right that any present tense needs to be changed to past tense though, which I will do right now.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 18:51, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Again, I apologize for the misconception; I understand my error. Thank you.
84375 (talk | contribs) 19:01, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Please be more respectful in discussions

Hi Naleksuh,

A number of your recent messages have had a fairly hostile tone. Some examples:

“

To the deleting sysop I will say that this is why discussion is important and not simply running around deleting whatever.

”

“

Apple502j, this page is labelled "Admin Requests" and involves the undeletion of a page. You are not an admin, nor may you undelete pages.

”

“

Out of [apple502j]'s 50 most recent edits, only two of them were to mainspace. Yes, two.

”

“

Kenny2scratch, it should be abundantly clear that the page in question was not a "Scratch modification" in the slightest

”

There are the ones that came up on a quick glance at the Community Portal, but there are definitely more and I think these are sufficient to illustrate the point.

So, for the first one, you are being unnecessarily accusatory. While I understand you may disagree with a deletion, in the end it was an admin decision made with some justification (more on that coming, please keep reading). I understand you may disagree with the decision and find the justification insufficient. In that case, the proper channel would be to make a post in the relevant place (in that specific case, the Community Portal) explaining why you disagree with the decision. Also, please do so in a respectful manner and not a condescending, dismissive manner. Also, being accusatory at the person making the decision is disrespectful. Please voice any concerns you may have about a decision calmly and respectfully.

For the second one, again, please do not be condescending and dismissive. For that specific discussion, apple502j had a relevant comment to add explaining the original decision (and I will grant you that comment was worded in a less than polite fashion, but that's a separate matter not related to the point I am making here).

Your wording in the third message is also condescendingly dismissive. In particular, the way you end with "Yes, two." Without commenting on the original issue (please keep that to the CP) rather than simply state the fact, you feel a need to emphasize it as a put-down, where you are crossing the line from stating why you don't think apple502j merits being an admin to simply attacking apple502j on a personal level.

In the final message, you are, yet again, being extremely condescending. There isn't much to say there that I haven't said already.

So, please be respectful when editing. You may disagree with other users (including EW+), but please voice your concerns in the appropriate channels and do so respectfully. In particular, voice your concerns with the decision (already made or being discussed) you are contesting and do not turn it into a personal attack against the person who chose the decision. Also, word your posts in a polite way. Do not be condescendingly dismissive. Focus on the facts of the situation, not your opinion on the other users (for example, in the last quote above, simply staying that you did not believe it was a Scratch Modification or otherwise the policy on mod pages didn't apply rather than adding unnecessary language to be condescending to kenny2scratch). The Wiki can only function if we all respect each other.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 23:49, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused at your comment that I am making my comments about the person and not the topic. I go out of my way to not do this (I ensured multiple times that my oppose was fair and based on actions). Another thing I did is refer to "the candidate" and not by their username, whioh you nullified in your quote by reinserting their name via brackets. Can you explain why you did this?
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 03:09, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I do not see what is unclear about my comments. I indicated there is a problem where your messages came off as rude and condescending, backed up by selections from recent messages you have posted. Ultimately whether or not you made an effort is not something I am able to discern (remember that in the end, all I see is the message you post). I will assume good faith and operate under the assumption that you did indeed make such efforts. In that case, your efforts are insufficient. Your messages came off as rude and condescending. You need to strengthen your efforts. As for your second comment, the reason I added apple502j's name was to make the context clear, since the quote was stripped from its context. Regardless, that is unimportant, since in context it was very clear from the situation that the discussion was about apple502j. An in-person equivalent would be in a group saying something about "the person sitting to my right" when everyone can see who is sitting to your right. The fact that you did not explicitly mention by (user)name does not in any way change the tone of your message.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 03:44, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I'll admit it may not have been the choice to add Yes, two in bold, but the previous part is not uncivil, it's simply stating the situation.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 03:51, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I specifically said that mentioning mainspace edit count is not in and of itself rude/condescending, provided it is done so in a tactful and respectful manner in a context in which it was relevant (in that context, it was). However, that is marginal to the main point, which you have not really addressed. That is, the fact that you have posted a number of messages that are rude and condescending (irrespective of efforts you may take to prevent that).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 03:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

If you have a problem with my conduct, you are welcome to highlight it on this platform. However these extremely dubious claims are unlikely to get very far on a noticeboard (especially when most sources do not support your statement such as the last one), so it may be better to simply end it entirely.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 08:22, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Reply

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that I replied to you on the Talk Page for Camera.
Jackson49 (talk | contribs) 01:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

I noticed.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 03:07, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Good, Thanks!
Jackson49 (talk | contribs) 03:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Flame War

What specific style guide violations did you find in Flame War?
Mlcreater (talk | contribs) 15:26, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Minor stuff like improper use of hatnotes and links. What I mean to draw attention to is things such as Flame_War#What_to_do_if_a_Flame_War_is_seen. Entire sections like that are fundamentally flawed and unencyclopedic. Most likely I will just throw it out and rewrite from the ground up.
Naleksuh (talk | contribs) 19:14, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, just reminding you, don't use underscores in links.
Vdiu | Talk | Contributions | Scratch Profile 14:29, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

User page

Hi, Naleksuh. I was just wondering, do you not have a user page?
J_Coder26 (talk | contribs) 21:16, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Why don't your account exist?

I tried to visit your user page on Scratch, but it returns a 404 page. What happened to your account? Are you banned? I'm sorry for bad English btw.
Tematikkp (talk | contribs) 06:16, 16 May 2022 (UTC)