Talk:Scorigami

Chart
It would be great to get a scorigami chart into this article. LukeSurlt c 14:07, 29 September 2022 (UTC)


 * i second that!
 * also, why "origami" in the first place?
 * i like these kind of portmanteaus, but they need to be relevant words! what does origami have to do with ANYTHING here?!  2601:19C:527F:A660:B9FC:7AA9:5EA2:188 (talk) 22:12, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah. The relevance needs to be explained. So far, it's just non-sensical, made-up word. Was it just "score" and "game" with stuff added so it sounded like something people would recognise as an existing word? Is it just a case of a clueless person doing stupid things? (The chart seems like a good idea, though. Relevant, even.) 84.250.167.255 (talk) 11:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It's a portmanteau of "score" and "origami". As Bois says in the very first line of the article on the Secret Base website and within ther first seconds of the video that launched the concept, its a word he made up. The name has stuck. It doesn't really make much sense, any origami connnection is tenuous to the point of non-existance. I can't see any sensible way of explaining it in the article because there's no real explanation. --LukeSurlt c 20:11, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * done -1ctinus📝  🗨  12:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Agree, I am working on one BigRed606 (talk) 07:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Year of creation
The article claims Jon Bois invented the term scorigami in 2016, but he has an article from 2014 about it (notably spelling it scoragami, with two a's). I did a few quick edits to the page, but I may have messed something up, and this might warrant some more major edits. NerdTheBox (talk) 21:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

how is tracking the latest scorigami considered "unencyclopedic" ?
In your latest revision of the article you deleted the tracker that obtains the recent scorigami. Is giving an example of the most recent example of something unencylopedic? Fair catch kick mentions the most recent example in the article, and is a good article. I am in favor of keeping the tracker. I am very new to Wikipedia so I would loved to see which rule it breaks in your opinion. -1ctinus📝 🗨  17:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I didn't say "unencylopedic" in the edit summary so I'm not sure what you are quoting.
 * My issue with this is that including the most recent example creates a requirement to continually update the aricle, otherwise such a statement will become false. Its also hard to verify, as a citation can verify that a particular scorigami occured, but it cannot verify that no others have occured since. The reader is trusting that this article is checked and updated each week.
 * Overall though, I don't feel too strongly about this - it did seem to be kept up-to-date this season. If you want to add it back in I won't remove unless it seems to fall out-of-date. LukeSurlt c 13:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Why not just say something like "As of [date last updated] the most recent scorigami is [insert scorigami]"? NerdTheBox (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, strictly speaking this is original research if it's not published in a reliable source. Remsense  诉  20:35, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * there are reliable sources that report on this when it happens, somehow. i’ll re-add it but not with the twitter bot. -1ctinus📝  🗨  00:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)