Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal

(Redirected from S:PORTTALK)

Welcome to the main talk page for the Scratch Wiki!

We recommend that before you ask a question, you search the archives first to make sure it has not been answered before:*

Archives (oldest first)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
91 92 93
If you do not think a discussion is done, you can move it to Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done.

How to edit on the Scratch Wiki

We recommend that before you create your question, you read these tips to editing on the Scratch Wiki.

  • Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) after your post.
  • To do various text formatting, follow the following rules, rather than using any other text-editing methods:
    • Make text bold with '''text'''.
    • Make text italics with ''text''.
    • Make text bold and italics with '''''text'''''.
    • Make a link to a page outside of this wiki with [ link text] or {{plain link|1=|2=link text}} if you don't want the Link icon.png symbol to appear (remember http:// prefix).
    • Make a link to an article on this wiki with [[Page name]] or [[Page name|Link text]].
    • Make a link to a Wikipedia article with [[Wikipedia:Page name]] or [[Wikipedia:Page name|Link text]].
    • Indent a paragraph by putting a colon (:) before it.
    • For more, see the help page on formatting.
  • Put new text under old text.
  • Always remember to be polite and respectful, assume good faith, and be welcoming, while following the Scratch Community Guidelines.

Not done

No Not done (this will never been done completely, so don't archive!)

Threads that need "long time and hard work" will not be archived, but moved to Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/not done. Actually you can read and continue following threads there:

To make sure that your thread will not be archive put the template No Not done at the top.
Don't forget to replace it with the Yes Done template when the thread is finally finished.
MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 17:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Help:Contents Is missing some help pages

No Not done
There are a few help pages which aren't in Help:Contents, for some reason.
We need to fix that.
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 14:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

+1 It's a contents page, it should have contents to all help pages. If you see a contents page in a book, it tells you where every chapter is.
290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 15:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 14:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
I think some of the articles in the Help namespace actually don't belong in Help:Contents. They should be linked to from other help pages instead.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
10:51, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Block Lag on Chrome (revived)

No Not done

I was scrolling through Encoding and Decoding Cloud Data recently, and I found that scrolling past scratchblocks is soooo laggy. This reminded me of a now archived discussion mentioning this... so now I want to bring it back up.

Does anyone else (besides Turkey3) have issues with this? It seems to specifically be a Chrome issue.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
05:00, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't, It is definitely a chrome issue, I use Firefox and I'm not experiencing any lag on pages. If you can download another workable browser, that's what I'd recommend. If its a Chrome issue, It'll properly not be resolved.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 06:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Customhacker Logo Blue.jpg Cυƨтσмнαcκεя ( тαʟκ | cσптяıв ) 10:34, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

A suggestion/question about indentation in replies

On the English wiki, when talking on talk pages, we indent every time, e.g.

User_1 (talk | contribs)

Reply to User_1
User_2 (talk | contribs)
Another reply to User_1
User_3 (talk | contribs)
@User_2: reply to User_2
User_4 (talk | contribs)

However, on the international wikis, we indent whenever we're replying.

User_1 (talk | contribs)

Reply to User_1
User_2 (talk | contribs)
Reply to User_2 after User_3's post but under User_2's post
User_4 (talk | contribs)
Another reply to User_1
User_3 (talk | contribs)

I feel like our system is a lot more straightforward, but the interwikis' system is a lot more organized. What do you think? Should we switch or just stick with our system?
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
02:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Question has been posted at least once before (don't know where - looking through the archives give me a headache). I believe the consensus was to do whichever you wanted.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Hm, but doing whatever you want is even more confusing than either of the two, though...
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
03:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
This is interesting! :)
I mean, if we switched, it would be confusing because all the older posts are using our regular system.
But I can see how the other system is better for understanding what's happening in the conversation... I actually don't know what my opinion would be on this. :P
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 21:43, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
FYI, you just implicitly hinted your opinion by sticking with the old system :P
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
09:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
What about outdenting? It will create problems.
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 14:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Outdenting should happen less frequently with the latter system; it might even just not be needed. On the former system, we have to outdent before the small space breaks formatting.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
14:33, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────there are a lot of topics that require outdenting even in the new system. also, User:Yzyzyz/Sandbox#proving_my_point.
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 15:11, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I think we should stick with the current system. It's a lot more straightforward, and just easier to understand and write in general.
Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 21:51, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, I think we should also keep it the way it is as well.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 22:27, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
@Kenny2scratch 6 posts up — No, I'm just using the old system because that's the system we're using at the moment :P But I wouldn't have had to say "@Kenny2scratch 6 posts up" if we were using the new system... :P
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 13:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion: a dedicated page for requests for admin/EW action; idea: subpages for each topic instead of sections

Please respond to each suggestion in its own subsection.

Dedicated page for requests for admin/EW action

I propose that we create Scratch Wiki:Requests for Privileged Actions (WIP title) - basically, if something needs an admin or EW to handle it, post a message there instead of on one of the admin/EW's talks or on the CP.


  • Makes requests for privileged actions more public and easier for all admins/EWs to see.
  • Clears up clutter on admin/EW talk pages as well as the Community Portal.


  • New page.

Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
13:34, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Any examples of what would required privileged actions that is not covered by a template (such as {{delete}})?
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:47, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I do agree with this.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 19:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree with KrIsMa — and also, if we don't have a template, we could always create a new one, right? :)
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 02:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
There actually is a template for protection but no-one uses it - they simply post on an admin's talk.
As for other actions, it's true that tagging pages with {{delete}} guarantees that it'll be deleted sooner or later... good point.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
07:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
+1 with K2S:Templates aren't very useful forediting protected pages or deleting logs, and some. I asked an admin to add ja-interwiki to the News, but he didn't.--
Apple502j (talk | contribs) 12:57, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Support. (PS Apple502j the admins are very busy and can't get to everything on time) I think this page will therefore be a nice addition. How are we going to deal with the templates mentioned then?
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
@Apple502j: interwiki is only done by bureaucrats (i.e. Scratch Team members) on this wiki.
@KrIsMa: I think we can just use both - it's always helpful to have multiple points of contact and if the categories for those templates have a large backlog we can post on that page too, instead of here.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
00:38, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Subpages for each topic

My idea here is: for each new topic, we make a separate subpage. So this topic would not be a topic - it would be Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Dedicated page for privileged action requests; subpages for each topic. Once a discussion is resolved, it will be "closed" by having the page protected. Once it is old enough to be archived, it is archived, by moving the contents to one of the normal archives (which will remain in effect) and either deleting the subpage (might break links) or redirecting it to that section (better).

To summarize the above novel:

  1. A user thinks of something that they want to say to the entire community.
  2. The user creates a subpage of the Community Portal, the title being what would normally be the section title (avoiding slashes).
  3. Other users respond to the topic in that subpage, and a consensus is reached as to how to proceed.
  4. Once the consensus has been implemented, an admin protects the page, preventing further discussion, and thereby closes the topic. Other users can ask (at "requests for privileged action", suggested above, or on an admin's talk) for it to be reopened if they think more discussion is needed.
  5. After a while, any admin can decide that the topic is old enough to be archived (meaning truly locking further discussion and requiring a new topic for revival) and moves the contents of the topic subpage to an archive.

Since a central place for asking questions in general will still be needed, I think, we could create something similar to Wikipedia's "village pump"

  • Organizes discussion immensely - this frees each topic from being in context of another.
  • Requires topics to be more important - it's a waste of space to make a separate page asking "how do you make things bold?".
  • Makes it easier to link to particular CP topics - Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/topic name is a lot less ephemeral of a title than Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal#topic name, and also makes it easier to show which topics don't actually exist.
  • Drastically decreases load time.
  • Increases the number of pages drastically.
  • Makes flipping through topics more difficult - you can't scroll through them, you have to navigate to a separate page for each.

I understand this is quite a momentous suggestion - please post your opinion.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
13:34, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I think it is good the way it is. It may make it more complicated for new users then just making a new topic, and is it really needed to protect the page, because further discussion is good sometimes.
Another thing about the request, is that, it just makes the wiki seem more untidy (in my eyes) and would be annoying to get around. Plus: The users would have to make a new sub page for it, then make it into a talk page, Etc. Excuse me if I missed something here.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 19:00, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Another pro would be the shorter load time of the CP :P
But..I'm going to have to go with purplewolves — in my opinion it's easier the way it is
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 02:08, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
That's true, it would make loading time shorter, but as I said, it would get annoying.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 03:59, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
There's a reason I suggested having something similar to Wikipedia's village pump - things that would require easier flipping could be posted there, while momentous things that need separation from each other could go in subpages instead. I know it seems like defeating the purpose of the suggestion, but maybe instead of making a separate page for easy-flipping talk, instead making a separate page for suggestions might work?
Basically, the major point of this is that suggestions need to be distinct and worth suggesting; questions can be simple questions that wouldn't need such distinction.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
07:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Should I create this page?

Should I create a page about advertisement? I mean advertisement as in commenting on a featured project or anywhere else it shouldn't be.
290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 18:57, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

That might be a good idea... Maybe an FAQ page, like Where are the right places to advertise?
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 19:17, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Or a section in Spam?
Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 19:25, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
I almost forgot!!! I need to add the Yes Done template!
290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 15:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Never forget the Yes Done template XD
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 19:17, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

SDS Description?

If you havent noticed, the SDS on the FP of this has no description of it.
Customhacker Logo Blue.jpg Cυƨтσмнαcκεя ( тαʟκ | cσптяıв ) 03:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to report this but I got lazy :P
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
07:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes Done by KrIsMa
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
14:54, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
@Customhacker Wait, couldn't you have updated that yourself? :P
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 00:11, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Page deletion (revived)

Hello! I think this page should be deleted as it is about an SDS studio and none of the other SDS studios have their own articles. I also would like this subpage (from my user page) to be deleted as the redirect is broken.
290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 18:08, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

I deleted the subpage. I moved the other page you were referring here. I agree with you that it is not notable, but I would like to give the community and the creators of the article some time to debate the matter.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 21:57, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Okay! So I guess this is Yes Done now.
290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 13:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 05:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Creating Pages for each SDS Studio

See the conversation above this one & debate. :)
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 18:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I see little to no reason why we need to create a page for each individual SDS studio. It seems extremely unnecessary because:
  • Creating a page for every single one would be tedious and time-consuming.
  • There's not a lot to write about for each of these pages and so it's unlikely that they'd be more than a few lines each usually.
  • Furthermore, the information that would be given could likely just be found by going to the studio itself and reading the description.
As a side note, please only use Template:Delete when a page has already been agreed upon to be deleted. You can use Template:NotUseful for articles that you personally think deserve deletion.
Hamish752 (talk | contribs) 08:51, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
The Hamish talks!!
As another side note, don't move pages to your userspace, either - they should remain where they originally were while discussion is completed.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
09:11, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Hamish, it isn't necessary whatsoever. That is what the current SDS page does, and I don't think we would have all the information to fall back on.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 19:16, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
@Ken I did not actually think that their would be debate on this issue so I removed it from the mainspace.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 21:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
I also agree with Hamish — there are more than 100 SDS studios.
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 23:42, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Okay anyway, I agree with Hamish. There are just too many SDS's, and they would probably all just be stubs anyway.
Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 18:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

New Account

Hi I have made a new account [1] for my shop of help shop project on Scratch. How do I create a new account on here, or change my username so that this matches my account on Scratch??
Minerman6 (talk | contribs) 17:34, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Generally,
  1. Unfortunately you cannot create alt accounts. We also don't allow accounts made just for shops (why do you require a separate user for a shop?)
  2. We can't change usernames
So unfortunately we cannot create a new account for you :(
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 18:13, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Only bot owners have two accounts, Sorry.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 18:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
I am not creating two accounts. I am going to delete my old one and stick to the new one. I want my usernames to match on Scratch and here so I will be having one account, apart from now where I have two accounts on Scratch during the transitioning period. I want to setup my new account on Scratch bypassing the requierments for memebership as I have already passed them once. Is this possible to do with the new information I have given you.

Minerman6 (talk | contribs) 18:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Nobody can delete your account, either. Please use User:Minerman6.--
Apple502j (talk | contribs) 08:03, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Please see and This proves there are ways and means to go about removing myself from this site.
-unsigned comment by Minerman6 (talk | contribs)
Unfortunately, we are not wikipedia, and our rules are different from Wikipedias. I linked the guideline page for convenience.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 16:40, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I think you've gone a bit to far. As KrIsMa stated, the scratch wiki has a different system to the Wikipedia (not to mention our rules are very different). Accounts can not be deleted, and as Apple said you have a choice whether to use your current account on the wiki. Or just go inactive.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 18:39, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Wednesday

Hello everyone, it's that special time of month again. Gather around as we have another Wiki Wednesday!

This is a tradition dating back for 20 months. We as a community get together to pick an article that shares insightful, cool information about Scratch. It will then be advertised on the front page of Scratch for everyone to see. Anyone may suggest an article, and all it takes is editing this page.

When suggesting a page, it's recommended that it has a few images and follows wiki guidelines.
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 06:15, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Hour of Code is just around the corner, so maybe something about Hour of Code?
The_Grits (talk | contribs) 13:54, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
This is Yes Done - the Wiki Wednesday article was How to Make a Basic Platformer.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
13:21, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Deleting my Talk Page

Yes Done


I want to delete my Talk page on the Sccratch Wiki. To do this I need to reach a consensus with the people of the Scrath Wiki. Please let me now if anyone has any objections to this.

Sections of My Talk Page


Main posts of Interest This post is about how I do not have EU rights on this site. I see no further benefit of this post being in the Scratch Wiki Community if I leave as it is ony aimed at me.


Welcomed me to the Wiki and told me to put my posts at the end of the Talk Page. I see no benifit of this post being on my talk page if I am not as it is ony aimed at me.


Welcomed me to the talk page - First post on the talk page. I see no benfit of being welcomed to the wiki if I am not there.


Told me that a page was moved to my section. As that page is now deleted I see no further reason to continue disscussion


Informing me to use the show preview button. As I will no longer be on Scratch Wiki a post stating to use a button which I won't be using servers no purpose on the Scratch Wiki


Thanking me for contributing. I won't be contributing any more so I see no need for this post


Informing me not to delete topics of the Scratch Wiki Community Portal. If I no longer have an account this serves no purpose than a warning for me. If I am not using the Scratch Wiki then I cannot comment on the portal


Warning me that my account will get banned. As the wikipedia rules do not apply on this site that information is factually inaccurate and therefore should be deleted on that basis.


Telling me that the talk page has to remain open. As I am requesting it to be closed I see no reason to have that comment which conteracts what I am trying to do. That post was aimed when I deleted my talk page. As I am not going through the proper channels of communication it serves no purpse.

Posts from WikiMoniter

I beleive that you are alowed to delete bot messages.

I hope that this sums things up for people and I hope I have included enough information to puersuade the communtiy that I do not want to have a talk page any more.
-unsigned comment by Minerman6 (talk | contribs)

Well, you've posted - now for a response from one community member.
Delete. I say this should be fine - you haven't exactly been very active for the past year or so, so I don't think anyone will really need to contact you. The discussions on your talk page seem to be useless (as per your points) or done now, so they can be safely removed.
Oh, yes, you can delete bot messages - you can go ahead and remove WM messages from your talk page now, actually.
Warning Note to future posters: Include either Delete or Don't delete in your post for a quick summary of your opinion.

Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
11:49, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
In my opinion, don't delete. Those are other people's messages. If you'd like your talk page to be a clean slate, you can create a talk archive. :)
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:45, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
In my opinion, Delete, but not fully. You can delete any message which is related to this whole event, but the ones that aren't should stay.
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 15:52, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm going to have to go with Yzyzyz on this one, Delete, but not fully.
Vuton Logo.png -ᐯᑌTOᑎ- (TᗩᒪK | ᑕOᑎTᖇIᗷᔕ | ᑭᗩGEᔕ) 18:19, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Actually now that I think about it I’m going to add+use a third option: Archive and delete. Simply move the messages to a subpage of your talk page, to keep them accessible, then we can delete the original.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
00:11, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── That seems a better idea actually. ^
Vuton Logo.png -ᐯᑌTOᑎ- (TᗩᒪK | ᑕOᑎTᖇIᗷᔕ | ᑭᗩGEᔕ) 11:17, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I also agree with ken. Archive and delete.
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 14:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Tried to move and got following error "A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software." Would it be possible for an admin to do this as I don't seem to be able to. Thanks
-unsigned comment by Minerman6 (talk | contribs)
deleted page.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:53, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Template Suggestion

I think we need a new discussion template that would signify that a topic has had discussion but needs a reply from the owner or one of the participants. This would be very useful when something needs done and a user needs permission to do that thing but the topic has gone a bit inactive.

The template would look like this: Awaiting Reply

Please note this would not be the same as the doing template because it wouldn't be used when someone is doing something, only when they are about to do something, need permission to do something etc.

Vuton Logo.png -ᐯᑌTOᑎ- (TᗩᒪK | ᑕOᑎTᖇIᗷᔕ | ᑭᗩGEᔕ) 12:56, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I think this template is actually somewhere between {{not done}} and {{doing}} - nobody's actively working on it, so it's not done - but specifically, the discussion is waiting for... not a reply exactly, it's waiting for action. Maybe change the name to "awaiting action"?
By the way, if a template has two words, the second word should really never be capitalized. Therefore the name should be "awaiting action" and not "Awaiting Action".
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
14:14, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, That sounds better :D
Vuton Logo.png -ᐯᑌTOᑎ- (TᗩᒪK | ᑕOᑎTᖇIᗷᔕ | ᑭᗩGEᔕ) 08:12, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Actually, now that I think about it, the name could be "waiting" instead - that's a lot shorter, and more concise. The text can stay the same, though.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
02:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

SDS description is missing again


By the way, it looks like WikiMonitor is removing the description for some reason...
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
07:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Add {{NoBots}}. This is the easiest way.--
Apple502j (talk | contribs) 09:01, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
No, the point is that WikiMonitor automatically updates the "new curator" announcements - but it looks like when doing so it also removes the description for some reason.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
09:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
That's a good point, how could admins/EW's resolve this problem though?
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 18:49, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
The bug in WM has been fixed. Also, the curator update script is separate from the main WM script, so NoBots won't actually do anything (the curator update script doesn't check for it).
jvvg (talk | contribs) 22:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Yay! thank you Yes Done
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

A talk about capitalization of article titles

So here, currently, the convention on article titles is title case. However, this poses two major problems:

  • Linking to articles is less natural, as instead of [[linking like this]] you have to do your [[Linking Like This|linking like this]].
  • Searching for articles is more difficult, since searching up (let's say) "list of controversial topics on Scratch" does not immediately proceed to the page List of Controversial Topics on Scratch - it instead either proceeds to a redirect, or shows a search results page, the first result of which is the correctly capitalized article.

This makes the Wiki's articles less accessible, and makes searching more cumbersome and therefore less effective (though it's one extra step, plenty of people will turn away if they don't immediately get results).

Besides this, some pages (e.g. help pages) don't follow this convention, making it not only cumbersome but inconsistent.

The solution: change the convention to sentence case. Page titles should have only the first word capitalized, except for words that are proper nouns, e.g. "Scratch". In this case, List of Controversial Topics on Scratch would become "List of controversial topics on Scratch".

  • Makes linking more natural and saves some space.
  • Makes searching much quicker.
  • Moving every page that is currently in title case will take quite a while, especially since it can't be done by bots (bots are unable to judge which words are proper nouns).
  • We'll have to make a bunch of redirects, so that old links will still point to the correct pages. However, we have tons of redirects anyway (around 8-10K redirects) so this shouldn't be too big a problem.

This is a rather large suggestion, but I believe it has some merit. Thoughts?
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
13:45, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I think Kenny2scratch is right
This really is a problem we should find a solution for.
the problem is explained and many different solutions are suggested:
Case sensitivity in MediaWiki is both a blessing and a curse. Sometimes case matters, and preserving case allows mediawiki to handle those few cases where case matters. However, the case sensitivity can result into a failed search result. For example, when you are looking for an article BBQ by entering bbq, an untwisted MediaWiki will think that this page (bbq) does not exist and ask you to create a new page.
IMHO following suggestion could be the best, because it results in a non-casesensetive search and so there is no change of capitalisation needed:
Wikimedia solution

One of the solutions used by Wikipedia is to create a separate table for the keys, so if it works cleanly it can be deployed without an expensive rebuild of core tables, and dumped when Wikimedia gets a nicer backend through lucene. For Wikipedia, this is done by installing Extension:TitleKey. It usually can solve most problems related to the case sensitivity during making a search query.

MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 15:35, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
I prefer capitalization as it is now.
Turkey3MiniProfilePic.pngTurkey3Sig1.pngTurkey3Sig2.pngTurkey3Sig3.pngContributionsTurkey3Sig5.png 16:52, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
How do you want to solve the problem: "However, the case sensitivity can result into a failed search result." ?
MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 22:11, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
If we were to move all the pages into sentence case, I have a procedure suggestion:
  1. Add a temporary category to all pages
  2. Move pages and remove the category from them until no pages are left in that category.
That way it would be clear which pages hadn't been moved yet (if a page doesn't need a move, still remove the category).
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
11:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
My question above was to User:Turkey3 who said: "I prefer capitalization as it is now". I either don't want to mass-change articlenames but I think, a solution, where seaching is no more case-sensitive, helps best and easiest.
MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 13:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
I also prefer the capitalization as it is - there is no need in changing the titles themselves. How long it would take!!
The extension Martin brought up seems like a better idea
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:19, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


@KrIsMa: However, that doesn't solve linking - it's still more natural and also much easier to do
there is a [[list of controversial topics on Scratch]] on this wiki
there is a [[List of Controversial Topics on Scratch|list of controversial topics on Scratch]] on this wiki

Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
02:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Makes linking more natural - I would (and others may) rather link unnaturally than have the name change of most wiki pages. I haven't seen others mention/talk about unnatural links yet; I see it as a petty issue.
About the ease of linking in sentence case, is it easier to capitalize more words in a title or un-capitalize ~1000 wiki pages?
  • ...and saves some space - Really? I thought it would be negligible.
  • Makes searching much quicker. - This I agree with. An extension solves this.
  • Besides this, some pages (e.g. help pages) don't follow this convention, making it not only cumbersome but inconsistent - there are more mainspace pages than help pages, etc so I presume there will be more pages that use title case. This would equally bring up the case of changing all sentence-case titles like help pages to title case for consistency - which is a contradiction of what you are suggesting.
  • We'll have to make a bunch of redirects, so that old links will still point to the correct pages. However, we have tons of redirects anyway (around 8-10K redirects) so this shouldn't be too big a problem. - we removed capitalization redirects a while ago.
Don't support link change, support extension.
KrIsMa Anamation2.gif KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I brought this up around 5 and a half years ago, and a bunch of people were in favor for the reasons Kenny2scratch mentioned. JSO, who essentially founded the Wiki and was a bureaucrat at the time, stepped in and pushed it down. Clearer heads prevailed, and as you can tell, we never made the change.
I'm sorry to disappoint you all, but I really think this is a change we should not put our efforts and time in. I think the titles look just fine as they are, but most importantly I think it's not worth either breaking every single link ever created to the wiki or messing up the wiki by creating hundreds of redirects.


Since we long ago removed capitalization redirects, this would require bringing back that discussion, and fixing thousands of double redirects. JSO also suggested finding an extension, so i agree that that is the way to go.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 08:47, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

A question about the Privacy Policy and DMCA pages

Why do we have them if almost all they are are the Privacy Policy and DMCA word-for-word? Shouldn't we have a summary like the Terms of Use wiki page has?
Bigpuppy Logo.png bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Privacy Policy is there for the footer link to link to in the Vector skin (in Vector, there are three links at the bottom of every page - "Privacy policy", "About Scratch Wiki", and "Disclaimers"). I feel like both that and DMCA should actually document the corresponding documents, though, instead of only copying them word-for-word (it's good to have the policy and DMCA in there anyway, though).
However, I suspect the main reason they are simply word-for-word copies is because no one really knows how to document them - so if you can, feel free to do so.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
00:55, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Switching Hosts

Hello everyone! There is tons of news to share with you right now.

The Scratch Team will be transferring ownership and hosting of the Scratch wiki to @MartinWollenweber. The main reason for this is that the ST hasn't been able to spend much energy caring for the wikis. With the transfer, we will gain full autonomy and control of the website, allowing us to respond to all requests, incidents, and needs very quickly.

In addition to the move, we will be switching web domains to The Scratch Team will maintain for one year, and possibly longer depending on the amount of web traffic going to it. The Scratch website will also, hopefully, support links to other language wikis.

During the move, we will upgrade Mediawiki to v.1.29. Bot owners, please be aware that API token requesting will be different. Scratchblocks will be updated as well, causing invalid scripts in places.

The transfer is planned to happen in early 2018. An official time will be announced later.

There may be potential problems with the move. When the DACH wiki moved to its current server provider, some files were truncated. We will be looking out for potential issues like this.

Feel free to ask questions!
ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 01:53, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Some FAQs:
Why is the Scratch Team doing this?
As Scratch grows, the Scratch Team has not been able to divert enough attention to the Scratch Wiki. The transfer should allow us to divert our own attention to it much more thoroughly. Though this transfer will further disconnect us from the main site, the Scratch Team still plans to have Wiki Wednesdays and keep the link to the Wiki in the footer.
Will Scratch policies, Community Guidelines, etc. apply on the Wiki?
All policies will likely still apply, with the possible exception (I think) of personal info (since ConfirmAccounts uses emails by default).
Why couldn't we have backend access before?
The Scratch Team can't give backend access to MIT servers to non-Scratch Team or MIT staff members.
That should answer some potential questions.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
02:17, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
For Sysops: Please change interwiki settings from en→ to en→ --
Apple502j (talk | contribs) 08:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
For Pywikibots: Please remake the family file.
Apple502j (talk | contribs) 08:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
When you say the ST will maintain this domain for a year, what does that mean? Redirect? Mirror? Host the old version? I would assume redirect, but in that case what's the harm in just leaving it up indefinitely?
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 13:09, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
"maintain" in this case means redirect - i.e. all requests to will be forwarded with the same path to After a year, the Scratch Team will decide to continue or not to continue supporting the domain based on web traffic.
Kenny2scratch logo.jpg kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory 
13:26, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Additional Infos:
  • The Scratch Team says that it has not the capacity to mantain the Scratch Wiki in the way it should be cared for and that it wants to strengthen the Scratch Wiki by the opportunity to care for mantainenance itself (FTP, Addons, server...)
  • I think the Scratch Team asked me to host the english Scratch Wiki, because I'm hosting all other Scratch Wikis for the international Scratch Wiki community since years and our community is active since has Scratch launched in 2007. So we alteady prooved the experiance and the long-time interest to care for the community as good as possible.
  • FTP-Access will be given to admins of the english Scratch Wiki, so the community themself will mantain the english Scratch Wiki what will be a big advantage regarding possibilities to fullfill the needs of the community much better and faster than before. Many admins of the english Wiki have alredy experience with that job by helping the international Scratch Wikis, see FTP access here
  • The "bureaucrat state" that today is hold by Scratch Team members will be hold by me and long time admins. I'm not interested to get deep involved in admin work at the english Scratch Wiki, so this will continue to be done by elected Scratch Wikians themself.
  • The Scratch Team rejected our sugestions to have an own main-menu-button for the Scratch-Wiki and to bring back the menu-button for the forum. We suggested: "use an icon for both, so there's is enough menu-space". They said it's not only about the menu-space but they want to strengthen the communication at project-, studio- and user-pages. They said statistics showed, that there has been no decrease of forum-posting after taking away the menu-entry.
  • The Scratch Team promised to continue Wiki Wednesday, so this strong connection between Wiki and website will continue. Also the Scratch Wiki link in the footer of the Scratch Website will stay
  • The Scratch Team promised that we will have "blue clickable links" resulting from all kind of edits containg Scratch Wiki Links at the Scratch Website. This will not only refer to the english Scratch Wiki like today, but also to Scratch Wikis of all languages (today edits with links to this wikis result in nonclickable url-adresses)
  • The Scratch Team said that for legal reasons they will have to implement a kind of warning like "you're leaving Scratch website" when changing to the Scratch Wikis. We hope this will be as restrained as possible.
I hope we can concentrate on the advantages here. As I see it, the Scratch Wiki community loses not much, but wins a lot of freedom. Which suggestion do you have for using that that freedom?

MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 21:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

  • This page was last modified on 7 December 2017, at 08:47.