Minecraft Wiki talk:Issues/Classifying bugs

Feedback
This information is definitely very useful. I will link it from the new template when I swap it out for the old. I have a few improvements:
 * Great job classifying the bugs in "A Basic Definition". Could you be a bit more explicit in what submitters should and should not submit as a bug? I assume 1. and 2. would make valid bug reports but 3. and 4. would be cause for controversy if they were submitted as a bug report. Other readers may find this less clear though.
 * My point was that users won't always be able to tell, so there will inevitably be cases where one person thinks a problem is an omission (case 2, therefore legitimate), while others will think it's case 3 or 4.--Simons Mith 22:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Under "Severe Bugs", you say that a severe bug could be something that caused unexpected instant death. There are a lot of bogus severe bugs that run with the "I died suddenly! Very annoyed" theme that could have been anything and aren't reproducible. I think you just need to stress that those kind of bugs definitely need to be reproducible (I would say most bug reports should talk about something that happens quite regularly, but doesn't necessarily have to be reproducible).
 * I like your definition on annoyance. But what would you say about an annoyance submission like "There's a "2" in sandstone that I can't unsee". Is that a valid annoyance? There's enough of that level of annoyances in the game to completely clutter a bugs list.
 * Trivial as it is, I mostly feel it counts as a legitimate annoyance, if it spoils the player's experience. The workaround for something like that would be for him to alter the graphics himself. (Alternatively, one might view it as a bug in the player!) Addendum: It's also nothing compared to what I can see in the side of the piston block :-)--Simons Mith 22:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you want to keep this page under your user page, or do you think it should be under the "Known Bugs" section of the wiki? I'm fine with either, just not sure what makes more wiki sense.
 * Once done, it should be moved into the main wiki. I think I will split out the feature request bit into its own section and rewrite it.--Simons Mith 22:34, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

--Mattrition 09:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Official Page?
Hey, so this bit of information is great and I'm linking a lot of people to it. If you have decided to move it could you do so / tell me where the "official" page is and I'll link that instead --Mattrition 14:08, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

New Section on Changing Bug Classifications
One minor problem with the current bug tracking system is users incorrectly classifying (or re-classifying) bugs and annoyances. There's been a big spate of it with this weekly because the new features have attracted much more attention that usual. A new section on altering others' bug classifications has been added in response to this.--Simons Mith 22:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Feature Requests
I have an unfinished article on feature requests. Where should feature requests be sent? I believe it's the forums, not the wiki, and I'm not registed on the forums. I believe twitter is also used, and reddit, and Get satisfaction. Can anyone provide links and info about how Mojang uses (or used to use) these resources would be helpful. I can then incorporate that into my feature requests article.--Simons Mith 22:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, feature requests have no place on this wiki. Mojang have always suggested contacting them by twitter. I expect they like it because players are forced to give a very brief synopsis of their idea and they have huge control over what they read and don't read. However, there's so many people contacting some of the staff that your own idea will have low visibility and will likely get lost in the junk. An "alright" test of how popular your idea might be would be to submit it to reddit. Sometimes, if its a decent idea and you are lucky with timing, it will become visible on the front page. Certain Mojang staff read reddit regularly so they are likely to see it if this happens.


 * I have no experience with the forums, and Mojang are no longer affiliated with their Get Satisfaction page, meaning they don't use it anymore. --Mattrition 12:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Great job!
I've been on hiatus from the Wiki for the past few months. And I have to say, as I return now, that the issue lists are really doing great. This page in particular is really well written, clear, and concise. I remember struggling with writing something like this in the past, and all of my attempts to explain the nuances of issue classification wound up dense and convoluted. So in short, great job! I can think of only one complaint about this page, and that's its title. The page explains how to classify both bugs and annoyances, so it should be named Classifying issues (or perhaps Issue classification, to make it clear that it's about how-to-classify-issues, not problems-we-have-with-classifying-stuff) rather than Classifying bugs. Thoughts? &mdash;Immute [talk] 20:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

What to do with
What is to be done with this page? By the current standards, it would belong at Help:Classifying bugs, though in any case, I assume this page will be kept as an archive like the other pages? – KnightMiner  t/c 02:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I think the page might make more sense at "Issues/Classifying bugs"; it feels a bit out of place with the other Help: pages since it refers to an outdated wiki feature rather than general help with wiki editing. – Sonicwave talk  20:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * moving. The help namespace is for pages that solely help users with editing the Minecraft Wiki; this page does not fall under that and thus shouldn't be in such a namespace. It makes a lot more sense to have this in mainspace, imo.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 02:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)