The Gamepedia and Fandom account systems have now been merged. If your username is incorrect, you have accounts on both platforms that weren't merged, or you have trouble signing in, please submit a support ticket.

Minecraft Wiki talk:Projects/Raw and cooked food

From Minecraft Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Has this actually been discussed?[edit]

Merging pages in general can easily create a mess (just look at the fish page, the infobox takes up the whole height of the screen), and require more maintenance and workarounds (such as if a fish mob were ever implemented, we would have to either give it a dumb name like "Fish (mob)", or move the fish page somewhere else, probably equally as dumb, and break all existing links), without any obvious benefit, which is why I'm almost always against merging pages.

"The pages Chicken and Rabbit already exist and refer to mobs. The items will be called "Rabbit meat" and "Chicken meat", with a dablink on the mob pages." especially concerns me, as now we're just making up page names, which will be inconsistent with the other pages. These would probably end up being named "Rabbit (meat)" and "Chicken (meat)", and now we've purposely created more ugly parenthesised page names...

As usual, I see no value added to the reader by merging the pages. If I want to know about raw chicken, then that's exactly what I type into the search. If I then want to know about cooked chicken, I click on one of the many links on the raw chicken page. If I wanted to compare stats, I would go to a page summarising the overall subject, such as food, which is also linked on all the food pages. MajrTalk
05:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

It appears at MCT:Community portal/Archive 19#Raw and cooked food. I created the project because the project was left unfinished.
As far as naming, the pages would use {{conjecture}}, and the raw and cooked pages would redirect. The BlobsPaper JE2 BE2.png 15:05, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
But what's the advantage of merging everything together? Less small, readable pages but more enormous, unclear pages, just to save some time maintaining those? I never understood why everything on the English wiki has to be merged. (I'm exaggerating of course, but you get the point)
Also {{conjecture}} wouldn't work. The names "Cooked Chicken" and "Raw Chicken" are official already. | violine1101(Talk) 15:35, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
It turns out that using parentheses for what would otherwise have the same already exists for Snow and Snow (layer). Links usually use [[Snow (layer)|snow]]. Because of this, I would support "Chicken (food)" over "Chicken meat".
@Violine1101: The meat pages share most of the content in the Obtaining, Advancements and History sections. The BlobsPaper JE2 BE2.png 14:32, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
... but why merge them, even if they have some of the content shared? It just makes everything more messy. They're seperate items with different properties, and seperate items should have seperate pages after all.
And the problem with the parentheses is not that it is something new, it is about making new names up. Chicken meat is not called "Chicken" in the game. It's called "Raw Chicken" and "Cooked Chicken", respectively. Also, "A chicken drops chicken on death" sounds stupid. | violine1101(Talk) 15:08, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
There is also no item called "fish", but we still merged the pages. The BlobsPaper JE2 BE2.png 15:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Snow (layer) is because there are two items with the same name. It is absolutely an unwanted page name, but we have no choice. In this case, we're purposely making an unwanted page name, when perfectly good individual in-game names exist. You have yet to give a benefit for merging.
The merging of fish was the result of agreement from three users. I still think fish should never have been merged. MajrTalk
01:09, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
You can go ahead and revert it if it so bothers you. But I still think it's better if we keep it all together. :) VeenM64 (talk) 01:28, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Why did you create a separate project? Is a discussion on the community portal not enough to satisfy your wishes? — NickTheRed37 (talk) 16:45, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Who are you asking? I didn't create any project. VeenM64 (talk) 05:41, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
That question has been addressed to everyone participating in this discussion. Sorry, I didn’t outdent my message. — NickTheRed37 (talk | RU) 09:46, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
I did create a discussion, but it was abandoned. Eventually, it was archived, meaning that no more comments could be added. The BlobsPaper JE2 BE2.png 03:11, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
You could open a new topic on the community portal. — BabylonAS (talk | ru.Wiki Admin) (fka NickTheRed37) 07:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


Well? What are we going to do? Are we going to merge these articles? – Nixinova Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png Grid Map.png 04:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

I notice a problem with {{crafting usage}} on these pages. If a raw and cooked version of an item is described by the same page, and only one of them has a crafting usage, this has to be explicitly stated in both the page section and the template call, so as to not make any confusion as to which version the crafting usage applies for. Currently your rabbit page doesn't do this, as reflected by the individual separate articles I guess, which results in an empty crafting usage maintenance issue, because there is no usage of just "rabbit", but there is for "cooked rabbit" (rabbit stew). This can be easily fixed, as the above template accepts a custom string it should look for. So far as the discussion, I was about to vote against, however that was before I found out the template does support fixing this problem, and that was all my opinion was based on. – Jack McKalling (tcp) 19:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

The future of the project[edit]

There doesn't have to be any consensus that has been made that we should merge these pages. Quite a bit of the community seems to oppose it, and quite a bit of the community seems to support it. The project was created over a year ago, and so were most of the subpages. Also, Violine1101 removed all of the merge templates on the food page that were sitting there for years. So, what's to be done about the project now?-- Madminecrafter12Orange Glazed Terracotta.pngTalk to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 12:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

I think we should just close the project as "won't be done". --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 13:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
How about:
This project is currently closed and will not take action.
There has not been a consensus that raw and cooked foods should be merged together. If you still think that they should be merged, open a new discussion, and if the outcome is to merge, this project may be reopened again.
?-- Madminecrafter12Orange Glazed Terracotta.pngTalk to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 13:10, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Bumping this, anyone want to comment?-- Madminecrafter12Orange Glazed Terracotta.pngTalk to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 14:31, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Can I open this project?[edit]

Hello. I am xrup and i edit/make pages in minecraft wiki and I would like to reopen this project because I think it's a very interesting idea. Also, there are many articles that I could use here (salmoon, cod) Xrup (talk) 23:04, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

sure –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Minecraft loot (talkcontribs) at 2:27, 24 March 2020 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

This project was for many years, but there hasn't been a consensus that foods should be merged; in fact, many people have opposed it. Also, for a specific example, there was a discussion (although for some reason I can't seem to find it) to split the Fish pages into their raw and cooked variants which received nearly unanimous support IIRC. I appreciate that you're interested in contributing to this project, but I think it's pretty clear that the community as a whole, at this time, would support keeping raw and cooked food separate.--Madminecrafter12 (Talk to me | View what I've done) 13:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

ok, thank you for your reply