Minecraft Wiki talk:Projects/Raw and cooked food

Has this actually been discussed?
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. –Majr ᐸ Talk Contribs 05:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * It appears at MCT:Community portal/Archive 19. 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.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 . Because of this, I would support "Chicken (food)" over "Chicken meat".
 * Violine1101@undefined The meat pages share most of the content in the Obtaining, Advancements and History sections. The BlobsPaper.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.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. –Majr ᐸ Talk Contribs 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.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)

Conclusion
Well? What are we going to do? Are we going to merge these articles? – Nixinova   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 (t • c • p) 19:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)