Minecraft Wiki talk:Style guide/Features

From Minecraft Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Packed galleries?[edit]

The style guide for features articles specifies (or at least implies) using the plain gallery tag. Are there any objections to allowing (or even changing to) "packed" galleries? Compare these:

Plain gallery
Packed gallery

munin · Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Stone Pickaxe.png · 18:11, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

 Neutral. I like the fact that the packed galleries make it easier to view the images, but they do appear a little bit messier due to the inconsistent widths. I would agree to testing it on a few articles and seeing how people like it from there. KnightMiner · (t) 21:48, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 Oppose. The inconsistent widths look very unprofessional to me, and I don't see any improvement to viewing the images. —Fenhl 12:16, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Video notes[edit]

I propose stating in the guide that {{video note}} should be above the video itself. As far as I can tell, this is how it is currently done in most articles, and it should be specified here for consistency. —Fenhl 12:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

 Agree. KnightMiner · (t) 14:17, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 Done. —Fenhl 15:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Double space[edit]

What is the intended meaning of “After references (double space) wil be […]”? Does it mean that there should be two newlines in the wikitext after the References section, generating a regular paragraph break? Or three newlines, generating a double paragraph break? In any case, I think this should be clarified, because this is currently very inconsistent among different articles. —Fenhl 12:23, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, you use two empty lines after the references (or three newlines, double paragraph break), as to generate a visible line before the navbox, basically like used at the end this page. I am not sure if that was the original intention, but I do believe it looks better having that empty space before the navboxes start KnightMiner · (t) 14:17, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Personally I find it unusual and have “corrected” it in the past because most other wikis I read tend to use a single paragraph break here. —Fenhl 14:21, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
As did I. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 16:08, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Can we change the style guide to remove the double space guideline? It is confusing, and if intended as you describe creates an arbitrary layout rule that I personally always forget, has no precedence that I know of in other wikis, is often mistaken by editors as a typo, and only helps readability in minor ways. If we don't remove it, it should definitely be reworded. —Fenhl 19:50, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 Support Remove the double-space guideline. I think this was originally intended to separate article content from meta-content (language links, categories, etc.). —munin · Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Stone Pickaxe.png · 15:01, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 Agree I like the double spaces as I mentioned above (assuming that is what it means) but I really don't see the point of enforcing something so minor as this, especially since so many editors here seem to find it as an error in articles (especially those who first started on another wiki). KnightMiner · (t) 16:52, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 Done. —Fenhl 18:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

History section[edit]

The history section in this page does not mention what belongs in the section. –LauraFi - talk 01:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, I had the same idea... Have you been borrowing things from my to do list?
In any case, since I had that idea the only thing I thought of is stating that bugs are not history, though with exceptions if it lasts more than a couple versions and causes something on the wiki to otherwise be wrong (such as the wolves orange collar or a mob failing to attack the player properly). Also stating that changes reverted after a single version are subject to be removed unless a source is provided that it was an intended change. KnightMiner · (t) 20:07, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 Agree. –LauraFi - talk 05:35, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Update for advancements[edit]

Should we add the section "Advancements" or have information about advancements combined with the "Achievements" section and rename that section to "Achievements/Advancements"? Currently, this page mentions nothing about advancements on articles. I know that they function similar to achievements, but I still think the page should at least mention them.--Madminecrafter12 (talk) 16:52, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

 AgreedDelboyDylan (talk|contribs) 17:19, 14 January 2018 (UTC)