Board Thread:Watercooler/@comment-5590118-20151007212201

Part n headers - I get that it helps to break things up to make scripts easier to find but there are better ways of doing it. Instead of using very vague terms like "scripts" we should have have headers for a handful of different categories such as: chat, site-improvements, personal tools, and task automation and then either place the scripts in a list sorted in alphabetical order or use some form of cards.

Translations - First of all, we should all be building i18n into our scripts to that separate scripts don't need to be made in order to reach altlang audiences. Second, for all of the translations that do exist we do not need separate headers for them. Instead they should simply be a note in the script list. i.e.


 * QuickTools (es) - Blah blah blah

Co-installable - This honestly is like eating a mouthful of sand in my opinion. Instead of saying "co-installable" we should simply just say that it is fit for both personal and site-wide use. Plus, for people who aren't really acquainted with scripts, it makes a whole lot more sense.

Non-recommended installations - We don't need three separate classifications for this. First of all, if something is out of date or broken you can note that in much the same way as the previous example. i.e.


 * QuickTools (broken) - Blah blah blah
 * ChatTags (unmaintained) - Blah blah blah

And if something is in beta it would be best either not put it on the wiki at all or simply not list it there. The former being a better option.

Well... that concludes this minor little rant, Let me know what you think about this. 