We are currently performing an upgrade to our software. This upgrade will bring MediaWiki from version 1.31 to 1.33. While the upgrade is being performed on your wiki it will be in read-only mode. For more information check here.

Minecraft Wiki talk:Community portal/Archive 18

From Minecraft Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This is an archive page of Minecraft Wiki talk:Community portal. Do not edit this page.
New sections can be added at the current talk page.

2016[edit]

Happy New Year! –:en:User:LauraFi - :en:User talk:LauraFi 00:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

       
Happy New Year
User:KnightMiner · (t) 04:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
=) click here:en:User:LauraFi - :en:User talk:LauraFi 04:56, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
300px
Happy (late) New Year! — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:12, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Please help, glitched notification[edit]

I have a notification up on my notifications bar that will not go away. I've read it already. I've logged out and back in. It's making me insane, please help.

--16 px DigiDuncan! (talk) 16 px 22:49, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

That is a known bug right now. Visit Special:Notifications and it will go away (there should also be a link to that page labeled "All Notifications" on the notifications menu). User:KnightMiner · (t) 15:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Announcement: Official MCW App live on iOS and Android[edit]

Hello, this is a general notice that the Official app for MCW is now live on the Apple AppStore and Google Play. We plan to do a full official launch in a few weeks, but we invite everyone to check it out in the meantime! CrsBenjamin - (talk) File:User_Wynthyst_sig_icon.png 19:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Note to all users: there are many issues with the app, causing many of the pages to not display correctly. I find it rather disappointing that despite me reporting many of these issues at the start of the development testing period, Curse's development team have basically ignored my bug reports and have gone ahead to release successive TestFlight updates without these fixes and to release the app anyway. Until these issues are fixed, I can't recommend any users to use the app. Also note that while not an issue per say, users cannot edit pages on the app. User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
06:15, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
We're still hard at work improving the app! The app works well for use as a reference, which is its primary purpose. Its not meant to be an editing tool and will likely never be. We released the app as a "soft" launch because we're hoping to get more users involved so we can continue to add polish in the coming weeks. Please know that your feedback is definitely being taken into consideration. Also, we took a break from development over the holidays, so that contributes to the delayed response as well. I'd encourage everyone to check it out themselves and provide feedback using the link in the app sidebar. CrsBenjamin - (talk) File:User_Wynthyst_sig_icon.png 06:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
The application for the wiki seems really unnecessary. Readers could just find the wiki website itself and read it through the browser directly. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 17:20, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
I also have to say the app is disappointing. The mobile version of the browser website is ugly and buggy (I always use the desktop version on my phone), and I think there are many people who browse the wiki using their phone so an app would be a good idea. Using an app to edit articles would be a great help for editing and to gain new (potential) editors. But since this won't be possible, the app will be unnecessary and wiki authors will prefer the browser version. For a wiki reader who only wants to have a reference, the app has no advantages yet too.
I am a beta tester of the Minecraft Wiki app. Advertizements sometimes randomly pop up (really annoying, although in the latest version, ads seem to have been removed), Navboxes and galleries don't work properly yet, and you can only read articles, no talk or user pages. You can't see the recent changes. Furthermore, you can only visit the English wiki. The wikis in other languages are not readable using the app. So the app is for English users only?
In conclusion, the app is really unnecessary (and ill-conceived) as it is right now. There is no reason to use this app since it cannot be used efficiently yet. I really appreciate that Curse is working on such an app. But there is still much to be done to make this app efficient and better than the browser version. | violine1101(Talk) 21:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
For the mobile view on browsers, we're limited by MobileFrontend. We'll be upgrading Gamepedia to Mediawiki version 1.26 soon and that will allow us to also upgrade to the most recent version of that extension, which hopefully will improve mobile browsing. For the app, its mainly focused on more casual users. We understand that most of you, as power-editors, will likely not be using the app, but since we're still in a sort of beta phase, we hope that we can get constructive criticism from folks here. In terms of languages, the app (and mobile) are both by domain. As of now, we haven't decided if we will be creating localized versions of the app or creating a settings/preference for language swapping. Either way, its definitely on our road-map, but as the vast majority of visitors are to the EN wiki, that's where we decided to start. CrsBenjamin - (talk) File:User_Wynthyst_sig_icon.png 22:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
I cannot test the app myself due to lacking a device that support apps, but I do support the idea; partly because I have noticed users seem to prefer an app over the mobile web version (most likely due to convenience, if not just skipping having to run web browser features that are unrelated to the wiki), and partly because there are a lot of unofficial/fake Minecraft Wiki apps out there, most of which I doubt are trustworthy but still look "real" enough to fool users. So hopefully a lot of the bugs mentioned by others will get ironed out by the official release.
I do have one question though, which is does the app currently support/plan to support an offline mode? I know the whole wiki is a lot of data to store, but being at least able to store a few favorite pages offline would be a major selling point for the app. User:KnightMiner · (t) 04:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
We're knocking out bugs and working to improve things every day! As for an offline mode, we do have a great feature that allows users to favorite specific pages which are then cached on the device for offline use. CrsBenjamin - (talk) File:User_Wynthyst_sig_icon.png 16:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Major issue, top of my wish list, is displaying tables directly in the page, not requiring the user press a button to view, as it currently does / recently did.
On a more positive note, I give my two thumbs up to the little floating circle nav button, that's something all of a sudden I wish was on desktop / mobile. Keep it up. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 18:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
We recently implemented a change so that tables that fit on the page are included as well as all infoboxes. The problem is that the majority of tables are either much wider than the page by default and require awkward horizontal scrolling, or get squished into the width available on the device and then are effectively useless. This is definitely an area we'll continue to work on. CrsBenjamin - (talk) File:User_Wynthyst_sig_icon.png 18:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Oh I see it, thanks for letting me know. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 18:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Pi Edition officially discontinued[edit]

Seeing that the Pi Edition has been officially discontinued (see here), I'm wondering what the effects of this should be on the wiki's pages. I know it has never been updated since its release, but I think we should no longer mark pages as Pi Edition exclusive, clearly mark that it is no longer officially supported, removed the Pi Edition mentioned features page, remove the Pi Edition version number/version history from the main page and remove references to the Pi Edition outside its own article. Thoughts? User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
01:38, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the mentioned features page can safely be deleted, though I am a little unsure what to do with it everywhere else. We already barely cover it on most pages (skipping Pi Edition exclusive/excluded features in most cases), so it might be better to just remove references to it and cover it only on the Pi edition articles (version history, a main one, and exclusive features which can maybe be changed into just "features"), as otherwise to keep pages consistent we would have to edit every page with Pi edition features to state what is not included (for example, on water) which is just about everything and will only grow over time.
so basically, I would agree to removing any pi exclusive markers, just stating those features it as Pocket Edition removed. Likewise, I would remove references from most other pages. User:KnightMiner · (t) 02:04, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I agree. Would we still keep it on the front page? My gut says we wouldn't, but then it seems like it would be buried. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 04:20, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok, so these are my preferences for what should happen in regards to the Pi Edition
Remove: Pi Edition only indications (on Old, Camera, Flower#Pi Edition and other pages), Pi Edition mentioned features, version history number and icon on main page (top right), Play the Raspberry Pi Edition link on main page, link to r/MCPi on main page, Pi Edition exclusive features
Keep: Pi Edition, Pi Edition version history, Version history link on bottom of main page, entries on the history table of articles
Change: Text regarding Pi Edition on main page and Pi Edition to state that it is no longer supported.
Thoughts? User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
07:22, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable. If this is what happens, I don't worry about being too buried. ... And remove the link to the Pi Edition Blog from the bottom of the main page, probably, since that's already linked on the Pi Edition page? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 14:20, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't agree with keeping its version history. There is a single update other than the initial release which just "fixed bugs", which can just be documented on the edition's page. I would change the edition's page to document it as an isolated edition, so rather than say about difference with other editions, we just document what it does have, or start from the most similar version (e.g.: Pi Edition is similar to Pocket 0.5.0 except for X).
For the main page, I have proposed my changes for the edition boxes on the editcopy. MajrTalk
Contribs
02:33, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I think we can probably just state what blocks are in the version on the Pi Edition page. I don't really think we need links to it other than in the main body of text, and we can add something like "The Pi Edition never received any subsequent updates and is now officially discontinued." User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
03:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
So basically like Minecraft 4k? I'd agree to documenting it like that, especially since I doubt most of our viewers use that edition. User:KnightMiner · (t) 04:19, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Yep, then a link to the Pi Edition can be added to the Pocket Edition template in the Versions row. User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
05:56, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Would someone be able to make all links to 0.1.1 in the history table link to Pi Edition? Apart from that I think most of the changes are done. User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
07:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Is there any reason the keep Pi in the history table? All the entries are just going to be "Added X." for a single version. MajrTalk
Contribs
08:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
True, the version table is probably not necessary at all. Other people - thoughts on this? User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
11:52, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
I agree to removing it, it really has no useful information that is not said on Pi Edition. A bot should be able to easily remove the section. User:KnightMiner · (t) 15:09, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
We should keep the history pages, but we will note that the game is no longer updated. I used a message box like this on the main Pi edition page, which we could use as a template. The Blobs16px 04:07, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Why? Both pages are completely worthless. The first version is the same info as the pi edition page, and the second version just says "bug fixes". MajrTalk
Contribs
04:37, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Adding captions/descriptions to tables[edit]

The mobile app collapses tables and uses the description data attribute (and potentially the caption in the future) to describe the collapsed tables. As such, we need to add the attribute (or caption, if it is appropriate) on most of the tables on the wiki.

:Category:Tables without description will be populated by pages with raw tables on them. Templates/modules which create tables will be done separately.

To add a mobile app only description, add the following to a table:

{| data-description="App only description"

To add a globally visible caption, add the following to a table:

{|
|+ Caption visible to all

MajrTalk
Contribs
03:07, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

The mobile app (android anyway) does display the data-description nicely, this is probably a good idea. It is awkward though when it spills over to the second line. The spacing between the lines is Too Damn High. Are you able to link the bug tracker here? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 17:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if there is a public bug tracker for the app, I believe you can report bugs if you're part of the beta, which I would assume you do from the app or the app store. MajrTalk
Contribs
04:25, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Found it. In the app, at the bottom of the app menu is a link to the google form they're using to report bugs / take suggestions. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 05:55, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
@Majr:, this category now contains only mods pages, custom servers pages, and pages that have been edit-protected. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 17:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Who deals with ads[edit]

I'm curious to know, Who deals with ads here? I wonder because a person on reddit says they saw this ad here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/43gvhu/i_saw_this_advertisement_on_the_mc_wiki_today/Sealbudsman talk/contr 03:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I believe Curse is responsible for the ad networks. The Reddit post only shows the ad itself, so we only have their word that it was actually displayed on the wiki. -- Orthotopetalk 03:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
True, it could have been anything. On the other hand, it could have been one of the unofficial wikis too. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 17:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Just report malicious ads to staff and we'll send it on to the appropriate place. As stated on the reddit thread, in the case of a MC-based ad like this, you can also contact Mojang about it. MajrTalk
Contribs
04:23, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Wii U edition in history tables[edit]

I just added the parameter {{{wiiu}}} to {{history}} for the console editions. It is used in the same way as the other parameters for versions, and the current articles need to be updated to include the Wii U edtion. I would just autopopulate the versions, but it is my understanding that not all Console features are in the Wii U edition yet, so a personal touch might be better.

Before they are added though, there is the question of whether to use "Patch 1", or "1" as the format for Wii U versions. "Patch 1" looks less empty, but "1" is more consistent with PS versions. –User:KnightMiner · (t) 22:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

"1" or "2" alone does not look like a version or a patch number. A "Patch" before it makes it clear that it is a patch number, so we should keep the "Patch"-prefix in my opinion. | violine1101(Talk) 23:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
For archive purposes, the Wii U Edition has since been added to the Console Edition version history page. Thanks, Maethoredhel Talk |-| Contribs 03:13, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Need Help[edit]

Gday Guys,

Not a pro at Minecraft. Kids play it, I don't.

They have Minecraft on their XBox 360. It did an upgrade on Saturday morning (from further research I think they call it TU32). Daughter was playing in the morning all good, came back after leaving it for a couple of hours and all her worlds and my sons world were gone. Very upset. Kind of got over it by Sunday. Started a new world and this morning, same thing the world is gone. Is this happening to others? Does anyone know how they can be recovered? Can you prevent future updates happening automatically so that backups can be done.

Please help. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Barrel49 (talkcontribs) at 7:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

The forums are a better place to ask; not too many people here seem to be experts on the XBox edition. -- Orthotopetalk 10:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I can't sign in[edit]

When i go to the sign in page and try and sign in, nothing happens, it just goes back to the page i was on. I also haven't got any acces to gamepedia.com and the curse website. Could that be causing the problem? -- 127.0.0.1 6:33, 2 March 2016 (UTC) 127.0.0.1 06:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Your IP address is showing up as the server's loopback address, which is impossible unless you're actually editing from the server, so there is clearly a configuration issue. Are you the same person that made the contributions attributed to that IP? MajrTalk
Contribs
06:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Since 20 August 2015 -- 127.0.0.1 10:25, 2 March 2016 (GMT) 127.0.0.1 10:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Could someone help please? -- 127.0.0.1 10:54, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
A fix was deployed for this yesterday, is it working now? MajrTalk
Contribs
22:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Nope --127.0.0.1 09:03, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
It looks like the fix was partially delayed, is it working now? MajrTalk
Contribs
05:06, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Still not working. --127.0.0.1 16:43, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for helping, its fixed now. AndrewAB (talk) 11:44, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Adding Info to Pocket Edition Data Values Page[edit]

Hello! ThebigsmileXD has supplied some information to be added to the Pocket Edition data values page, but he's getting timeout errors when he tries to edit the page. We're unable to reproduce the error, so this could be related to location/hardware/any number of things. While we investigate the issue, the user welcomes other editors to add the information he's provided to the page! The information is: "Tripod camera 5F, Witch 2D, Minecarttnt 61, thrown enderpearl 57, minecartchest 62, minecarthopper 60 - POCKET EDITION DATA VALUES 0.14 ***IN HEX***". Thanks! BriannaMCR (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

When do we describe bugs in articles?[edit]

No, not related to arthropods. ;) I reverted this edit because it's treating a lighting bug as if it were a feature, but Araxidis re-reverted. I thought the style guide recommended to generally not detail every minor bug in the articles, but I can't find that language anywhere. Am I mistaken? Anomie x (talk) 18:45, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

There are:
I do recall some conversation, long ago (vague, I know, I can't even remember the particular example), where people agreed that if game behavior departs significantly from what the wiki says, so that a player could get confused and misled by reading the wiki, then buggy or not, the wiki should be corrected to reflect what the game is doing. I'm not convinced this grass path thing is one of those examples...
Even then, I think there's always going to be a question of interpretation between editors, whether certain things are bugs or not, and I think that's probably one of those things that just has to be hashed out on talk pages. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 19:13, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
I don't recall any official policy discussion on bugs in the main body, though I remember the specific sectional policies pointed out by Sealbudsman, and I do believe the discussions he was thinking of was either the wolves orange collar or the wither moving when invulnerable, of which I can find no discussion, but the edit summaries seem to agree that both of them are notable since they otherwise made the wiki wrong. We really could use an official policy on this.
As for the specifics of the policy, a good starting place is a bug that changes or blocks an intentional mechanic, in which case it will just need to state the intentional and actual behavior (or mention it crashes) with a bug reference. Minor visual bugs would likely be exempt from this, as that could only really have an effect on decoration.
I am having trouble deciding where to draw the line beyond bugs changing a mechanic though, as some bugs essentially add an unintentional mechanic that was simply accepted as part of the game. A few specific examples of things we covered:
  • Block update detectors and the related piston bugs are widely accepted as features and I recall mention that it would not be intentionally fixed until an actual BUD exists.
  • The bug with slabs above ice being slippery, even though it is not the surface. By extension, there is the additional slowdown with ice below soul sand due to mobs attempting to gain traction on ice without being able to gain speed due to soul sand.
  • The bug with dark oak saplings removing blocks below the tree, which I say shouldn't have been covered if it were not so widely popular (which was due to the fact it could "break" bedrock, but then again so could beds in the same era)
And some we did/do not cover:
  • Mobs attacking through weird block hitboxes, such as block corners and doors. This bug is widely known as expected, but we simply ignore it as a bug
  • The pre-1.9 item elevator design with items moving upwards in blocks, again widely used (mainly in the technical community) but we did not really cover the bug behind it on the item entity page
Between what we did cover, I am currently struggling to come up with how to state the distinction between the two (it is just some feel like bugs, while some feel like Minecraft logic). User:KnightMiner · (t) 04:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Inconsistencies in Boat history[edit]

I have found that in the 1.9 list of changes to boats, some changes can only be found in the boat article, while others can only be found in the articles on the snapshots in which they appeared, while others still are only in the article documenting 1.9. Can you please try your best at smoothing out these inconsistencies by making sure the changes are mentioned in all three kinds of pages? VeenM64 (talk) 19:42, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Doing I created a project in my userspace. The Blobs16px 01:50, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Please make sure that the pages on the individual snapshots of 1.9 are equal to the rest as well. VeenM64 (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Snapshots can be fixed after the project is finished. Since the user page is a project, users besides me can (and are encouraged to) work on it. The Blobs16px 02:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
The snapshots, in my opinion, are just as crucial and important as the rest. I really think you should include them, as there could be changes which are missed entirely because they only appear on the snapshot pages. VeenM64 (talk) 19:43, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I think we agree on that. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 20:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I did a bunch, though it could definitely benefit from more eyes and double checking. One thing continues to bug me. Do boats go faster when you row in the right rhythm, in PE? I'm pretty sure I couldn't make it happen in PC. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 01:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
What do you mean by the right rhythm? The Blobs16px 14:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Before the big boat overhaul, dinnerbone tweeted "Also, you'll be able to make them go much faster by tapping at the right rhythm. Boat races will be a thing!"[1] I personally didn't hear much about it after that, from YouTube or r/minecraft or anywhere, plus the rowing controls never seemed to respond to rhythm, but it persisted in the wiki. So I think it maybe didn't make it into the game? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 15:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
You could test it in creative mode (if you play the PC version) The Blobs16px 15:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, after testing it, I wasn't able to tell if I was really going faster, and I think it never did work, though I was hoping others might double check. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 18:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
You can ask other users to verify it for you on the Minecraft Forums. VeenM64 (talk) 21:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not a forum user, but that is a good idea in general. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 22:26, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
References

New Mojang employee Christian Westman[edit]

It's on the person's twitter (https://twitter.com/westmaaan, and he announces his first day here: https://twitter.com/westmaaan/status/716864352880627712), though does anybody know of a more solid place to cite / look that would confirm this? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 17:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

He does not appear on the Mojang twitter list or website, though since he is followed by a couple Mojang employees I don't doubt he is part of Mojang. Even so, I would personally wait for a linkable source to add an article (basically something that is not self validating, such as a welcome tweet from another employee) –User:KnightMiner · (t) 05:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
I did happen to see this Reddit comment, which led to this tweet. Anomie x (talk) 10:07, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Well that's about as definitive as you could want. Welcome Mr. Westman. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 12:01, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
and also welcome Mr. Carlson. -BDJP (t|c) 12:09, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Good catch, BDJP007301. So I've just now added Olof Carlson and Christian Westman pages, and added them to the Mojang AB and Template:Mojang pages. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 14:25, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Bugs[edit]

There is a discussion about bugs for a certain page. Should pages have a section about bugs? The Blobs16px 17:38, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

That discussion is about the history section, which can allow bugs (see the style guide MCW:FEATURES#History) ... are you raising a discussion on whether we should allow "bug" sections in articles, or something else? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 18:07, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I mean a section called "Bugs", and it would only be about modern bugs (in all the versions). The Blobs16px 02:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
So, you mean, on each page, a current list of bugs in PC, Pocket, Console, etc? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 03:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
What benefit would that serve over the official bug tracker? Copying the list of bugs that still exist would simply be a pain especially when the tracker lists the exact same list (only more up to date), and only listing the "important ones" begs the question of who decides which bugs are important. I think it is much easier and more productive to simply help out on the bug tracker to keep that update to date (such as checking the list of bugs related to an article to see if they still affect the latest version) User:KnightMiner · (t) 04:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

How a block/item is worn in the helmet slot[edit]

I've seen lately, people have been adding pictures of items in helmet slots. They typically get removed because of the MCW:IMAGES rule "Images showcasing usage of specific features for decoration should be avoided."

I agree with the image rule so far as it means to avoid images of features in builds, like an end rod making part of a standing basketball hoop, or a fence gate making part of a chandelier, or a log making part of a rustic cabin. I think that the rule is intended to avoid a profusion of images of people's creative builds, and that it is a good rule for a number of reasons: such as that galleries would grow endlessly, and that imaginative use of blocks shouldn't be constrained by examples one sees in a list, and that these decorative uses are user-imagined rather than being a developer-made part of the item / block.

In contrast, I think that how a block/item is worn in the helmet slot is a first-class feature of the block / item, because the devs put in the time and trouble to position each item in particular ways. And therefore I think that it is not really subject to that rule, that those types of images ought to be allowed in the gallery, and that the rule could be clarified to some extent. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 18:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

When the item can only be put in the head slot with commands, IMO it directly contributes to galleries being full of random mostly-useless images. Anomie x (talk) 18:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Is it a general guideline that we omit things that can only be done with commands? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 18:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC) ... Are things that can only be done with commands more "mostly-useless" than vanilla survival stuff? Or is it that are editors free to decide what features are mostly useless and don't need to be on the wiki? My thing is just, it's in the game, why not document it. Plus it would only be one image per page, max. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 19:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
On the other hand if it's images that are the concern, would it be any better as text in a dedicated section in the body of the page, do you think? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 19:14, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
We don't have a /summon on every mob's page. This seems like the same sort of thing.
If someone wants to make a tutorial page about putting blocks on your head, IMO that would fit in much better than spamming it on random items' galleries. And we should require that the image use the Steve or Alex skin to at least cut down on the temptation for people to show off their skins by "being" the image for random-item-on-head all over the place, same as we require that screenshots don't use custom texture packs. Anomie x (talk) 19:28, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
I agree it would be a good rule in general, that if players (apart from developers) appear in pictures, they should be the Steve or Alex skin, unless it's topically important that it's a specific player (like deadMau5 maybe?), or a specific feature of a skin.
A tutorial page, it makes sense. Putting all that stuff in one place makes sense. I would still think that page would be linked to from somewhere in the fence-gate / end-rod / etc pages? If not the usage section, the trivia section.
By and large, the blocks/items on the head render in a standard way, and I don't think it would be necessary to showcase them all, or to mention them all on their pages. I think it would be fine to show one example of the norm for blocks, say, 'stone', and one for, say, 'flower pot' – and then showcase the exceptions, those that are specially positioned. And it would be those exceptions that would be even worth a mention on the items' and blocks' pages. (In that way it would be kind of like how we already handle /summon, to use your example. When you summon any mob, it's just a normal mob, a behavior not worth mentioning on its page – except the ender dragon, whose /summon behaves unexpectedly.) So the helmet-slot tutorial page would only need to be linked from those oddball blocks and items, those exceptions to the rule.
What do you think. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 20:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 Agree If we don't metion commands outside of the commands page, readers might get confused.
@Anomie x:  Agree Although tutorials are not about the game itself, they are still important because they help people learn how to do complex tasks. The Blobs16px 03:25, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Where do we put Minecraft Program Files?[edit]

I have just found a bunch of files from the different Minecraft program files folders and I was wondering where we list/showcase them on this wiki or even if we don't. Could someone please let me know! - LCSKID (talk) 00:11, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

.minecraft? What files exactly are you talking about? -- Orthotopetalk 00:59, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Ignorance[edit]

I have a feeling that I may just be ignored by other users. I brought up a a merge suggestion and a change to a critical template, but I still get no replies. — user:NickTheRed37 (issues’ wall) 16:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

You're not the only one whose posts get ignored. I recently asked whether someone could upload some new wolf renders because the current ones are quite incorrect and noone replied. I guess that it's quite easy to be ignored on this wiki, because here is way more activity, compared to the 'localized' wikis, so new posts on talk pages could be missed in the recent changes more easily. | violine1101(Talk) 19:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
It's not personal I'm sure : ) As for the Armor merge suggestion, I took note, but I didn't have enough time to read those articles for an immediate opinion, so I didn't comment yet, busy with other things on- and off-wiki. As for Template talk:Message box, that's not on my watchlist, and actually I only really check my watchlist ... sorry! That habit was originally my way of not getting overwhelmed. As for baby wolf renders, I did read that, and do agree they should be updated, but I didn't respond because I don't know how to do a render; I thought a person who could render would respond. I promise it's nothing personal! – Sealbudsman talk/contr 19:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

"Pro" badge[edit]

Does anyone have any css code they've added to their personal page to hide this annoying badge from recent changes and signatures? User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
12:40, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

The following should work, though it may need tweaking in the future if anything is added to the userlinks "::before" element that you wish to keep.
.gamepedia_pro_user::before {
    display: none;
}
User:KnightMiner · (t) 13:31, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, that did the trick. User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
05:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Go to Special:Preferences, section Gadgets, and set the “Hide Gamepedia PRO label” to on. No additional personal CSS is needed. — user:NickTheRed37 (issues’ wall) 14:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I tried that (and am still using it). At first, the pro badges appear, then they disappear. Game widow, can you make it so that the bases don't appear at all for users who have this set? The Blobs16px 01:56, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 Fixed. MajrTalk
Contribs
02:12, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks The Blobs16px 02:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
If you want to hide the badge from others who don't have the preference set, or custom styles, you can put a space inside the link text of your signature, for instance: {{escaped link|User:Sealbudsman| Sealbudsman}}. Of course it only works in your signature, and not anywhere else. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 14:56, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I was more looking for one which would hide the Pro badge from all users, so KnightMiner's code did the trick. User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
05:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Why do we even archive by moving?[edit]

Pros of archiving by moving:

  • Edit history is preserved and fragmented. (Still preserved in copy-archiving, and a fragment may be possible to access by passing parameters to the history page.) Faster access to history in case such as Template:Unsigned placing (but who places this template into archives anyways? and the difference is insignificant).

Cons of archiving by moving:

  • Harder to archive selectively. Must move new topics out of archives.
  • Must perform an edit on the archive, and recreate the talk page.
  • A short but problematic intermediate period when the original talk page is not yet restored after a move-archive.
  • Old talk page history is no longer accessible (edit: correction: no longer accessible on the talk page itself).

Have I missed something crucial? --AttemptToCallNil, previously known as GreenStone (report bug, view backtrace) 15:19, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hmm .. sorry if I messed things up on Nether Wart Block .. I saw some more tenured people than me doing it, and I perceived that it kept archived talk together with those topics' history, and I assumed that was the desired effect. The cons associated with having to make one additional edit to move them, I consider relatively inconsequential; and the decision-making about what to move and what to keep is identical.
I realize that the (recent/current) Nether Wart Block conversation history is now fragmented, so that is something I probably should have avoided until conversations were completed.. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 15:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Minor correction. --AttemptToCallNil, previously known as GreenStone (report bug, view backtrace) 15:48, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
The reason I always do it using moving is just to keep the edit history with the actual code, basically the same reason page moves always are done using the move page feature. I prefer when looking at a discussion via edit history for it to still be on the actual page.
As for the cons, the first one is a case where I simply choose copy/paste moving, and the second and third I see as a minor inconvenience compared to the benefit of moving the page. As for the last one, I think the history is better synced with the page containing the topic than the original page, it keeps the page history neater (as if you leave a redirect when moving, you will always come to a point on the latest telling you where old topics are). –User:KnightMiner · (t) 21:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
I think we should still archive by moving, since the edit history appears in the same page as the discussion. Users who want to find an old discussion can use the search inputbox (this is built into the template) rather than searching each page manually, then look at the edit history of the page. The Blobs16px 03:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

iOS devices hardware performance page[edit]

On the iOS devices hardware performance page should reports for unsupported versions be removed from the section Compatible Devices, or should they be left there to help users playing on older versions of Minecraft Pocket Edition? --JimbobsDiamonds64 (talk) 00:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Need some help with finishing 0.15 revamp templates + possible discussion[edit]

Hi, I think I need some help finishing up loose ends from revamping the 0.15 templates. I've revamped the template for versions of Pocket Edition to suit the 0.15 stuff and moved the realms builds to their own perspective pages. However, I may have broken a page or two in the progress, and I was wondering if some of the community (preferably well-known members and admins) could help fix that. I was sort of speedy on this, so a revert will be fine by me if that whats going to occur. Also, the discussion for this can be settled here, if thats OK. --MarioProtIV (talk) 20:17, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Before this continues, I'm wondering whether the "Realms" builds are actually different to the non-Realms builds. From what it seems like the developers are saying, the 2nd build was released to fix Realms issues in the first build. Hence if this is the case then I think having these Realms and non-Realms builds just adds confusion and they should be merged back together. User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
01:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Strongly agreeing with Goandgoo unless there are other alternatives. -BDJP (t|c) 03:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Hmm. Why not move the Realms builds to the top of the template instead of with 0.15? Sort of like how the April Fools updates are stylized for the PC version. --MarioProtIV (talk) 14:52, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Seeing there were only 2 realms builds and they were used just to test Realms, I'm thinking that it might just be better to mention them on the Pocket Edition Alpha 0.15.0 build 1 page in a section at the bottom to avoid confusion. User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
10:54, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
I have also noticed that you put the names of updates in fine print under the number. Is this really what we want? The Blobs16px 03:10, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
That is what we did on {{Computer versions}}, and it does not look bad IMO. What do you find wrong with it? User:KnightMiner · (t) 13:29, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I wouldn't say anything is wrong with it, it is just an unexpected change (especially for non-editors). The Blobs16px 02:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to A20001017 (talkcontribslogsblock log) for fixing the Pocket Edition Alpha Realms section (and putting it on the update page)! I was really puzzled on how to do that (I need to make the category though still).
A pleasure. :DUser:A20001017Talk 05:36, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Goandgoo (talkcontribslogsblock log): I get that but considering Realms is planned to be added in the full 0.15 release, I think leaving it as it is now may be the best option. --MarioProtIV (talk) 21:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Console Edition versions[edit]

Computer Edition and Pocket Edition have a system where each version has its own page, but Console Edition has a page that includes all of e versions. The system that the Computer and Pocket editions use should also be used for Console Edition. The Blobs16px 02:42, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

MCT:Community portal/Archive 16#Pi Edition and further action
For a summary: find a sane way to name the articles and it would be considered. The pocket edition uses the same versio number name format for all editions, but console has them different, leading to options of:
  • all in the title (looks messy, hard to remember/understand)
  • just one in the title (causes issues for versions not on that console, treats it as more important)
  • every version getting separate articles (leads duplicate information)
User:KnightMiner · (t) 14:18, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Also, see MCW:Admin noticeboard/Archive 24#CEU. -BDJP (t|c) 20:20, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Education Edition exclusives[edit]

We need to decide how and if we should document the Education Edition exclusive features (the chalkboards, camera, portfolio, NPCs etc that can be seen in this post http://education.minecraft.net/announce060916/). Should these get their own pages or should they just be documented on the Education Edition page? User:GoandgooTalk
Contribs
00:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Seeing as the website doesn't go into too nuch detail about them, I'd be fine with them documented on the Education Edition page. -BDJP (t|c) 03:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree with BDJP. If we had an EE user who could pore over the game and document it more fully, that would be another thing, but until then... – Sealbudsman talk/contr 04:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 Agree Normally, Minecraft is not used for education, so putting educational items on the regular pages might be confusing. We should have a page similar to Pocket Edition exclusive features. The Blobs16px 23:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Just wanted to chime in here that there are multiple Minecraft editions with special features. (Also, hi! I'm the Manager, Programs & Community for Minecraft at MS) Windows 10 Edition Beta has features that aren't in any other version. Gear VR has features that aren't in any other version. Education Edition will continue to have features that aren't in any other version. So however you decide, just keep in mind that even as more editions come closer to parity, there will continue to be exclusive features in the various different version so this would affect how you move forward with exclusive features across the franchise. --HelenAngel (talk) 20:25, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello! That is good to keep in mind. I don't think all these editions having exclusive features per se poses so much of a problem. It doesn't come as a surprise, and we can handle it just fine. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 20:47, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Moving structures to Structure Blueprints Project[edit]

Would we be able to move Nether Fortress/Building a Nether Fortress or merge Stronghold Blueprints with Structure Blueprints and also merge Village Blueprints? | AndrewAB (talk) 12:20, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm in favor of it. Do you want to do it? One nitpicky thing I'd say is that it doesn't follow the same layout scheme; Structure Blueprints uses {{BlockGrid}}, and those other pages use {{Grid}}. I'd be in favor of changing that over. But either way I wouldn't oppose it being under the same umbrella of the Structure Blueprints page. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 02:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Cool. I guess I'll go ahead with it. You can help if you like. AndrewAB (talk) 09:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Could you convert it over, I've already moved it to Minecraft_Wiki:Projects/Structure_Blueprints/Nether_Fortress. Thanks in advance! | AndrewAB (talk) 09:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Also, what about the owners of Stronghold Blueprints? Wouldn't i need permission from the user? | AndrewAB (talk) 09:22, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Completed complete village now. Except for {{BlockGrid}} on all pages (will add in Fix List)| AndrewAB (talk) 10:12, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
BTW can you tell me how you convert {{Grid}} to {{BlockGrid}}? I'm interested in finding out. | AndrewAB (talk) 10:45, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
There's not really a way to convert one to the other, except by hand. {{Grid}} is, as you've seen, a bunch of Grid templates separated by line breaks. If you read the example on the {{BlockGrid}} documentation, it shows that the whole grid is enclosed within a single template. As for making that work, first you'd set some parameters like g=grass, s=stone, et cetera, then it's a matter of typing out a 2x2 grid of characters that correspond to those blocks you've defined. You can edit-source one of the layers at Desert Temple to see some examples how it works. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 12:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
I know how it works because i created the Desert Temple structure. I just thought that converting was by a bot or script. | AndrewAB (talk) 14:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Oh I see, yes you did. Oops. No, I don't know of any bot or script. It would be a longer exercise to write the script than to do it by hand though, I would imagine -- and for so few use cases. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 14:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
But it would save more time in the future, not saying someone has to create it. | AndrewAB (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
So what about the owners of Stronghold Blueprints? Wouldn't i need permission from the user? | AndrewAB (talk) 19:07, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
That would be the nice thing to do, I think. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 19:47, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
It would certainly be polite to ask, though most of the people on that project haven't been active in a year or more. Technically no one 'owns' a project or other page outside of their userspace; a consensus of active editors is usually enough to make changes. -- Orthotopetalk 20:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Cool, I'll move it then. Thanks! I'll also leave a comment in Catmat7339's talk page so he knows where his project has disappeared to. | AndrewAB (talk) 20:14, 1 July 2016 (UTC)