Fools4wiki (the scratch wiki april fools thingy, but on snap wiki)

Administrative Categories Wiki
1

just like the april fools articles on the scratch wiki, we should have those for the snap wiki too!

why?: because for fun and giggles!

how?: idk, probably making articles i guess

(i named it fools4wiki not to offend people, because april fools literally has fools in it)

2

I'm assuming you're talking about this
https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Scratch_Wiki:April_Fools

@r4356th what do you think about this?

3

Yeah, let's have one.

4

for the first april fools page, it will be about the scisnap library

heres the page below

the page

scisnap

scisnap is a weapon used for chemical warfare, it can be only used by S.N.A.P co, during a flame war against scratch, they used a project to use scisnap, the project is now private, heres the only blocks that have been documented

[scratchblocks] point at (target v) [/scratchblocks] - points at a target

[scratchblocks] fire at (target v) with (poison tipped bullets v)[/scratchblocks] - fires at a target

[scratchblocks] drop (tsar bomba v) on lat (10) long (21.5) [/scratchblocks] - drops a bomb on a location

someone used the blocks to drop a bomb on the S.N.A.P co headquarters, which took 8394444492345678987654784398765 years to rebuild

that person was suspected to be kaj, since the location was from a fractal forest in iran called 'the kaj fractal forest'

5

I don't think that will be appropriate

6

go look at scratch's april fools pages

theyre literally the same as fools4wiki's scisnap

7

@r4356th sorry for ping-ponging, but can we put pages only for april fools similar to scratch AF pages?

(AF pages are pages from a normal article but made for april fools, made for pranking, jokes, or just fun and giggles)

8

Yeah, but in a much more appropriate way

9

I'm fine with that.

10

Hi, while I agree that this could be a fun thing and personally enjoy reading Scratch Wiki's AF pages, I would appreciate the number of such pages to be kept at a minimum. Our wiki is nowhere near the size of Scratch Wiki; it would be inappropriate for us to spend too much time writing joke pages instead of factual ones. Otherwise, it is fine.

11

Ok, probably thats fine

12

Off topic but I've seen you somewhere else

13

so youre saying we cant?

14

No, I am saying that you can do it, so long as the volume of such content does not become too much. (Too much being quite an arbitrary amount, just make sure to use common sense.)

15

ok

btw ill make sure its only 5-10 percent of the articles, or else ill have to remove some pages

16

breaking news: the first april fools page is released!

look -> Scisnap (april fools) - Snap! Wiki

this isnt advertising

17

I think if we're doing this, then guidelines should be made first. Plus, the scratch wiki uses this page format instead of just adding (april fools) at the end.

Scratch_Wiki:April Fools/() +() (block)

So I think we should adapt something similar, like

Snap_Wiki:April Fools/() +() (Block)
18

yeah

19

Indeed. Totally agreed on both points. We should follow Scratch Wiki's conventions.

I read the "Scisnap" page and here is what I find problematic:

  • The disclaimer is, to put it bluntly, ugly. We need a template for this.
  • It was in the main space (I have moved it to the "meta" space so it is now prefixed with "Snap! Wiki:". We are likely going to need to turn it into a subpage like Scratch Wiki.
  • Just because it is a joke page does not mean grammar should be completely disregarded in it.
  • Please don't upload too much media just for this.
  • The "references" section is too nonsensical. (Or not, I am not too hung up on this one.)

If this does not change, I am afraid we cannot have joke/AF pages. I want to see our community grow, but that cannot come at the expense of a lapse in quality.

20

so no giggles

Sad_Emoji_-FREE(50215487012)
Sad_Emoji_-FREE(50215487012)3174×3174 233 KB