Talk:Mods

Added introduction
I added a paragraph in the beginning to explain and summarize this page since it originally jumped right into the mods list, etc without properly defining or explaining what mods are. This intro probably doesn't contain all relevant info and might be biased so feel free to add to it or make it smoother. - Asterick6 04:53, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Version Marking
I'm not sure how to mark mod releases that don't specifically say they work with B1.2_02, for example some same B1.2 or B1.2_01+ does anyone have any ideas? Zman 13:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * How do you mean? If you mean mods that say they're compatible with a version upwards, that's impossible because EVERY version (thus far) of Minecraft breaks mods. Regardless, it's best just to set it to their latest supported (existing) version. In this case, --Gnu32 13:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That answers my question. Thanks. Zman 21:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Alphabetical Order
I put all the mods in alphabetical order, previously there was no visible order except for when they were added. If someone could check my work, that would be nice because I might have missed something. I assume someone will yell at me about the order but eventually we had to pick an order that makes it simple for viewers to find a mod if they know the name of the mod. Also phone books aren't based off of who was in it first -alphabetical is easy and obvious. Comments? Theesexiestman 12:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Languages
Wouldn't it be good to have the mods that translate Minecraft to other languages.

Examples:

French http://www.planetminecraft.com/mod/minecraft-french-patch-15-compatible/

Dutch http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1032&t=263446

German http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=112027

Polish http://www.mcmodcenter.net/infusions/pro_download_panel/download.php?did=104

Many http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=4483823&sid=9465a0032aa67229d08732b0e5da652e

I don't speak these languages so I don't know exactly what is where. Help or suggestions would be nice, like should we just have the other language wikis' deal with it? What about the languages that we haven't converted into?Theesexiestman 03:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to let everyone know, as of at least Release 1.1.0, there is a language selector within the main menu itself. --like2omg 17:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

SimpleMap
Would anyone be able to reupload SimpleMap v0.7? The thread got closed down due to some chaos or something, but the mod was still solid. -Serow 21:04, 10 October 2010 (CDT)
 * No. The person who wrote SimpleMap has requested that no-one makes it available for download. Notch has said that the mod violates his wish that alternative versions of Minecraft are not distributed by anyone else. (Threads on | Minecraft forum and | reddit) DannyF1966 09:15, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Halloween Compatibility
Anyone think it's a good idea to remove all of the non-halloween update compatible mods for clarity? Only add them as they are made halloween compatible. This would be both an incentive for the devs to update, and would prevent any issues for users with incompatible mods before they happen. I just suggest reducing the time for deletion to today instead of a weeks time, as this is when few mods have been updated and when the most users (both old and new) will be looking to mod their game. What do you guys think? --BroCookie 02:47, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Nah, just tag them with Halloween Incompatible GLaDOS 21:51, 31 October 2010 (CDT)


 * That works too ;) --BroCookie 02:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

That said, doing it my way might require a not insignificant amount of editing of the involved pages and templates to get everything categorised properly. I'm not familiar with the current layout and I don't want to volunteer anyone for extra work just to satisfy my ideals on this subject. --XipXoom 22:01, 31 October 2010 (CDT)
 * My personal preference would be to have an 'up to date' tag in a mod template and any mod that doesn't have this at the current version would instead be set to an out of date category. I'm not a fan of deleting something as an incentive to get people to move faster, but I feel you are correct in that there could be confusion with how thing are now.


 * I agree with XipXoom's idea. now, anyone up for mod testing? :D GLaDOS 03:04, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * An out of date category would be good, as there are people who purposefully run out of date versions for whatever reason, and that category would be ideal for them to look for, without impacting general users who are up to date. --BroCookie 03:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Now I see what you're getting at: a part, that says the most recent version of the client it is compatible with, right? GLaDOS 22:12, 31 October 2010 (CDT)


 * Yes, though i suggest only in two sections, "up to date" and "not up to date", as it will get very messy if there is a section for each minecraft update. Obviously keep the latest version its compatible with in the table with each entry. (as is done with mod version now) So people know what version is usable, but without expanding the page massively. --BroCookie 03:17, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * That was what I had in mind. And if the flag doesn't match the recent version its automatically tagged as incompatible until its tested and its page edited.  But as I said, its likely a lot of work to get the templates and all the pages edited properly and I just don't have the wiki-fu knowledge to manage it. It might even be overkill to have it automatic until the list of client mods and editors grows larger. Ultimately I think it will be up to whomever is able and willing to tackle this project first. --XipXoom 03:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Just overhauled the page, added two new columns, Latest Compatible Release, and Requires ModLoader. Should I add templates for the version numbers for the first column? CyborgDragon 19:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I decided to go ahead and add the templates. Page was severely reduced in size, and it's easier to update now. CyborgDragon 17:35, 2 November 2010 (CDT)

Multiplayer compatibility
I imagine many of these mods do not play well with multiplayer. Perhaps it's a good idea to add a column saying Yes/No for SMP compatibility? --Dutchy 00:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I think we should defiantly do this, i know for me personally, i run a small server for friends and i would love to know if mods are SMP compatible. Masteraj 18:53, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Layout
Would it be a good idea, to instead of having a column for the forum links, to make the name column link to the forums. It would save on space. --Azure 22:47, 5 November 2010 (CDT)


 * Having it link to the forums instead of the downloads would be better. Why'd you remove the forum links column instead of the download links column. At the moment I can't do much because my computer died, finally, and my parents' computer sucks. CyborgDragon - It&#39;s dangerous to go alone! Take this. 11:15, 6 November 2010 (CDT)


 * The mod name links to the forums. While there is one forum link, some mods have multiple download links, which is why that column was kept, and the forum column merged with the name column. -- Azure 07:44, 9 November 2010 (CST)


 * It is extremely bad form to link directly to a download off site without the express permission of the author and host. It encourages readers to skip the forum or website links that generally have far more up to date information on the topic than the wiki could provide.  Linking to the forum also makes sure the users are getting the most up to date version.  Finally, linking directly to a file on someone's website potentially keeps readers from visiting said site thereby stealing publicity and potential ad revenue.  They now have to foot the bandwidth cost without getting any of the benefit. --XipXoom 15:59, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Just changed the layout back to the 'old' style with a link to the forum instead of a direct download link. Please don't plainlinks links that go offsite.  The user needs clear indication that a link would take them off the wiki.  If the name column is to gain links, they should point to a wiki article about the mod.  Its unintuitive for that to point offsite.  This was a quick and dirty edit, so I may have made some mistakes with the links.  Proofreaders would earn much love and maybe even cookies.  --XipXoom 16:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Beta Version
Andythebomb 18:27, 20 December 2010 (CST)How should we deal with the change from alpha to beta? Should the alpha mods be removed or should the beta version number have a B in it ala B1.0_01? We should also change the template color for 1.2.6 the green falsely indicates that it is working.
 * I think we should have it marked with B, and have 1.2.6 marked as A1.2.6, and all mods should be removed. I'm back, with a new computer. :D CyborgDragon - It&#39;s dangerous to go alone! Take this. 10:53, 21 December 2010 (CST)
 * Andythebomb 23:16, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Well Beta 1.1 came out and broke all the mods... time o go back through. also renaming the version number for B1.0-1.0.2 to just B1.0 ......Andythebomb 17:51, 22 December 2010 (CST) Ok done i went through all beta and alph1.2.6 mods and updated their version compatibility.
 * I think that the Alpha mods should be put on another page with a link to alpha mods placed at the top of the beta mod page.

What I would prefer though is that all mods that are more than 3 versions old are to be labeled abandoned. Then when they are 4 versions old they are placed on an old mod page. That way this page where people look for current mods, shows up-to-date mods and nearly up-to-date mods. There would be an old mod page for both alpha and beta. Both old mod pages would have separate links at the top of the page. When Minecraft moves past beta then we wait till beta is 4 versions old and then make a full game mod page -or whatever you would like to call it. I think that this would be the best way to make the mods easily accessible for our viewers. Theesexiestman 12:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

singleplayer commands compatibility
hi. i have Minecraft Beta 1.2_02. inside of that table it says that it isnt compatible with this version, but i am using it without any problem. i dont know how to make that green backround in compatibility window, so can someone do it? because singleplayer comands ARE compatible with Beta 1.2_02. (sorry for my bad english)

Whipe?
it feels like the page is a bit... stuffed. i think all mods that aren't Beta compatible should be deleted from this page. it would really clean things up. --Miniguy 13:55, 22 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I don't see the point of listing mods that haven't been ported to newer versions of Minecraft in a long time. --Pulseczar 14:40, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * At the very least, they should be moved to another section, or perhaps sorted by version instead of alphabetically. It's kind of annoying to be reading through the list and finding one I like just to discover it only works with Beta 1.2. Snoozbuster 22:10, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree completely with you it is so hard trying to find a compatible mod Cookiez95 21:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe archiving each pre-existing version on a separate page, then creating a page for the new version might solve the problem. The only problem is that it might be too cumbersome. Or, alternatively, mods could be moved to "Now Defunct Mods" List, after a certain period of inactivity KamiCosmic 15:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * All this is true, but even so some (third party) launchers allow you to play any minecraft version released, like MClauncher.
 * NoAccount 16:39, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

SinglePlayer Commands is for the current version of Minecraft.
It is for 1.2_02 Beta, Therefore the Client Mods thread has to be Updated. –The preceding unsigned comment was added by McRocks (Talk 19:21, 26 January 2011. Please sign your posts with !
 * Will do, cheers for bring it to our attention. --Gnu32 20:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Marking Whether it is safe to Uninstall/Install
So I think a thing that say yes/no for when it is safe to install/uninstall because I think some people(like me) can't tell if it is safe to do that for a mod. But the only thing I think would be a problem is the space that may be needed.Cali 05:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)Cali


 * Is there an easy way to mass test if mods are safe to take out? For installation itself, that's pretty much granted if they're updated for the latest version. --Gnu32 09:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Who changed the colours?
The red and green look rather similar now.. the green was much brighter before. Why did this change?
 * The colors look blatantly different to me. Are you color blind? (serious question) --Pulseczar 12:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Added mods
I think a section should be added for mods that notch merged into the game, like better light and mcregion. Intel iX 19:46, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Client Mods AS Server Mods?
The current wording makes it unclear whether client mods - specifically, mods that add new content and therefore won't work in SMP - can be added to the server directly to include the new blocks/recipes/whathaveyou for all players on that server. If this is impossible, maybe the wording should be changed to clarify that? If it is possible, a short "how to" would be nice, or a link to a forum post that explains how would work also. The server I play on wants to add the bridge controller block but isn't certain if it's possible. Thanks in advance. Gatherer818 23:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Finished/WIP
I think that the page needs to show if a mod has been completed or not. - RocketJumper 16:48, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Fixes?
Hey, do we still need to have the mods in the fixes section? They're all bugfixes that were fixed, and none are compatible/needed in the current version... There could just be some text like No fixes necessary at this current time or something like that. Snoozbuster 22:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Information on removing modded blocks with MCEdit
I think it's important for newcomers and everyone to know that you can remove blocks that are added with mods with MCEdit, and un-corrupt your inventory with INVedit after removing the mod. I added that to Mod Safety. MrPizzaDude 17:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe mention that 1.4_01 automatically removes mod blocks from the world, and that the TooManyItems mod will make them show up as "Unknown" in chests so that opening the chest doesn't crash the game. TehKrush 01:51, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Really? I never knew that. Can I have some proof? MrPizzaDude 15:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You can try it yourself. I'm not your slave, get your own proof. TehKrush 20:22, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I tried it. I have added that to the Mod Safety paragraph.MrPizzaDude 18:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Update 1,5_01
What dose it?

People that have the time I think. I've updated one.Theesexiestman 03:42, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Update Color
Every time the game is updated, every mod on this page is colored as non-compatible until proven otherwise. I would suggest coloring mods that have not yet been confirmed compatible with the new version yellow and coloring them green once it is confirmed. Superfield 18:48, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Compatible OS
I'm seeing some mods on here that are saying they have Windows only requirements. Should there be a column stating if it works for other operating systems like they have in the Mapping and INV edit programs?
 * Hmm... sounds like we also need icons for "emulators" / "code interpreters" like Wine, and Cygwin. That, or do a lot of work while ignoring small screens (like smartphone) with a column for each OS. *sigh* --like2omg 18:06, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Nandoalt's Mods
Can somebody add Nandoalt's mods? Forum Link here. They are all beta 1.5 compatible. --Havvy 02:20, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Done a lot of them, do you want the others added as well?Theesexiestman 03:43, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Hiding "Merged Mods"
Because the Steampunk Mod Pak was wrongfully profiting from other modders work, it was removed from the Minecraft Forums.

Rather than removing the compilation and leave an empty heading, I left the Merged Mods section as-is but made it a comment so it can be used in the future. I would recommend, however, that whomever adds a legit pack to the table start by overwriting the Steampunk Mod Pak entry first.

--KaizenNeko 23:57, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Baby Animals
Can someone put the Baby animals mod into New content? Pokemonfanzo

Mod Marketplace
For the players who rather suck at modding. Make a mod marketplace "approved" by notch and easy to use User:Thadokta
 * Go ahead and get started, Thadokta. We'll all be waiting for your results.--KaizenNeko 23:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Autoupdating
I'm working on a semi-automated tool that updates list of mods based on wiki articles. Obviously, it works only for mods that have their own page here. I'm testing it on my page.

All changes made by it are reviewed by me first. So it will not delete everything from the page, screw up tables, etc. And it haven't even tried to do so (except for some early tests)

I think it's already safe enough to use it on this page. Maybe we shuld make a separate section for it.DiEvAl 21:03, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism?
I can't see if the last edit was vandalism... C ali nou - talk × contribs » 19:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Better Than Wolves
User Pigbear has removed the mod Better Than Wolves twice now and has stated no reason.

Edit: Apparently from his latest revision hes having some sort of dispute with FlowerChild.--Dsc45 07:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've warned him, thanks for bringing it to attention! --Gnu32 07:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Mod after Game section?
There should be a Mod after Game section. If you don't know what I mean, it is stuff like PortalCraft, AssassinCraft, HaloCraft, RuneCraft and stuff? SpaceX14 07:24, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Pseudo Physics
I will be fixing up the mod once i get my own copy of minecraft. Need to buy it. So it will become up to date. Sometime not sure when. As i need to buy a license for the game first. ;) Happy Modding. --Coaster3000 16:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

JnM's Modpack
Almost all of it has mods inside that are not yet compatible with 1.8 (ModOptionsAPI, Millienare, etc.), and the readme even states "[[[ THIS VERSION OF THE JNM MODS WORKS ONLY WITH MINECRAFT VERSION 1.7.3!!! ]]]" in it. 68.190.117.118 00:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Mystic mod?
Wheres the mystic mods on the mod list? this includes mystic stones, ores, and ruins.

fire ball spawner
Is there a mod that allows you to spawn ghast fireballs? if so could someone link it?

1.8.1
Is 1.8.1 not the current version? Why is it marked as not?

The "official" version was the pre-release of 1.9, so that's how the mods were set, even though you'd be set to 1.8.1 by forcing an update. 24.15.95.130 23:07, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Technic Modpack
Do you think that the technic modpack should be allowed to stay on the list seeing as it includes mods that have not granted them permission to put those said mods int the pack? -Sithlordtom2 Yes,there are no longer any mods in the pack which the owners don't have permission for.-Ravenor032 17:24, 13 March 2012 (UTC)Ravenor032

SMP support
Why its still no such information for each mod?

SHOUTOUT TO MOD MAKERS, PREFERABLY THE GUY WHO MADE THE KENSHIRO MOD
Here is a dare.>:D

I dare any mod maker to make a mod for minecraft that is similar to, or exactly like this --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eFKDEd8__o

any of those who accept... have fun! ^_^

Split article into separate pages
This article is getting too large and takes some time loading on certain browsers/devices. I suggest splitting the client mods into a separate page, and the server mods into another. This page can be adapted into an overview page. - Asterick6 07:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC) I DISaggre because if they split it, it would take even longer to load the pages.

How about only keeping the Up to Date mods on the main one with a link to the outdated mods. It would shorten the page and help people find Up to Date mods quicker.

I guess it would be best to do it like the one above me wrote it ! Make more than one Page and make em like : Mods Alpha Beta Since 1.0.0 Up to Date Outdated

Why not split into each of the main subsections, so that if you're JUST looking for new content you go to that page, if you just want a mod that improves some content, go to that page, etc. Just a thought. ~Anonymous User

I'm split both ways. It would be really nice to see a big list of all Minecraft mods, but the page is really big. Maybe split pages into different categories of mods (e.g. Out of date, client mods, mod packs, etc). I honestly don't know what the right idea is, though. Ultramario1998 05:01, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey abcd94948, everybody knoiws your name. Signing with ~Anonymous User does not sense. same like your "this would take more loading time". Whats your problem? I share with Asterick. Splitting would be right. Maybe you can still have a /mods/all site. Or has this wiki to less hard disks for such a variant? NaNdummy 20:41, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

It's not about loading time, it's about being able to find what you're looking for. Generally speaking, 'mod' is understood to mean 'client mod', which is what the page used to be. Anybody looking for a client mod is not going to want a server mod, and certainly not an empty list of custom os. Keeping out of date mods is fine if they are collapsed by default, but almost every visitor to this page is going to want nothing but up to date client mods. Personally, I'd even have the 'mods' page contain all the information, dangers, and instructions on modding, and make a 'list of client mods' page for nothing but a simple clean list.

I know this hasn't been updated in awhile but I haven't seen any updates in planning/play. Considering my experience from modding communities like the Elder Scrolls, Starcraft, and Warcraft, I think the admins need to think about making a mod section similar to the official mod forums supporting those various games/communities. I know everyone is worried about the sheer size and loading size but Minecraft is going to be heavily modded by the community. Also since Mojang is supposed to have "Official" support of the mods, maybe they can help with cleaning up the mod section as well? It should also be the responsibility of the mod creators to provide details and updates. (which they initially do, but alot of times searching for mods I have no idea what versions of minecraft they support, etc. etc.). It could also be a lost cause because of the rapid updates and new features surging out of Mojang recently. ~concerned mincraft player (17FEB2012)

making mods work
my mods wont work even though i placed them in the minecraft bin. ideas?

Yes. Download winrar on windows or stuffit expander on mac and open with them the minecraft.jar. There you have to change some files, which ones should be descripted. Then, comprimize your datas again and call it minecraft.jar. Delete the old minecraft.jar Maybe you dont understand... Im sorry... NaNdummy 19:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you should try to install ModLoader, AudioMod and some of these ... might help you solve your problem ! :)

Mod developing
Im an application developer in cocoa, RB, python and some other ones, but i want to learn java. I found a great website, but how to know what agh.class should be? NaNdummy 19:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Another whipe
I think you all know it is a good time for some cleaning here. i think all mods that are B1.8.1 and older should be removed(archived?) now that 1.0.0 have been released. furthermore, servermods should be split into its own article since they hold no relevance to the average joe. --Miniguy 19:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Removing old mods
So I took some bold initiative, and removed all the old mods and put them under Mods/Outdated. The page was incredably useless with really old mods lingering around. For the API/Loader, Fixes, and Mod Packs sections I just commented out the older mods, as they seem more likely to me to be updated compared to the massive list in the other page. But it might be a good idea to either move everything, or comment everything, for consistency. Mason11987 00:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Your removed a lot of mods that have been updated. Might want to actually check the links to the mods before just removing them from the list of updated mods.


 * I didn't actually remove anything, just moved or commented them out. It's much more useful to readers if the list only includes things that have been confirmed to work with the new version.  SO if you'd like to go back and confirm them and add them that'd be great.  I checked several and none were updated.  I think what I did was useful even if I didn't check a hundred or so links myself. Mason11987 03:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I went back and checked everything that was listed as 1.8.1 last update, only Risugami's mods were actually updated. So when you said I removed " a lot", which ones did you mean, exactly? Mason11987 03:51, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Material Detector for one has been updated.


 * I updated that with the Risugami mods, what else? Mason11987 16:39, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Even if it makes the page more tiddy it's a bit cumbersome to update the list if mods get updated ... imo you should have just "removed" the mods with latest version < B1.8.1 since those from B1.8.1 are most likely those that will be updated in the near future and then the maintainer of this page have to run in circles to find the mods data on some "Outdated"-Page and move them back again ... another thing is that the links to the "Outdated" page are scatterd somewhere in between and not obvioulsy where they sould be ... somewhere on top and easy to find ... 213.164.7.130 18:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * This page is now more or less useless. You removed allot of links to mods that eventually will be updated but now you can not find them and update the table. I only think a mod should be removed if the author actually says that he will not update the mod and in that case it should only be moved to the outdated section. The version column now has no meaning. Previously you could sort on it to get the updated. Please restore the list to its original contents. Stefan B 18:28, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Please use ~ to sign your messages. To see the out of date mods, you can go to Mods/Outdated, this page is linked from the top of the tables containing the mods.  Nothing was removed.  Previously the list had mods that were extremely out of date and wasn't even remotely useful.  Nothing was "removed", only "moved" and organized.  The version column has meaning because if minecraft updates we won't necessarily move all of the 1.0.0 mods off, the move was done because most of those mods are never going to be updated, and temporarily moving them off until they are actually updated will get us a much cleaner list that is more useful to readers.  Also, the jump from Beta to official release really called for a fresh start even though nothing was actually deleted, just moved.  There were also complaints that this page was far too long already and those are a reasonable thing to remove.  Anyone else have some thoughts on this organization scheme? Mason11987 01:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

well,wonderfull job (sarcasm) you deleted almost all mods out there. you should place all of them back except for the ones that the CREATORS of the mode have placed,you should be ashamed of yourself. its not ease to add a mod to this page, and now its just getting harder.you sir are dumb. lordcat33 15:14 26 november 2011 (utc + 1)


 * Yeah, if you could try to commment in a mature way, this conversation would go a lot smoother. Please try acting like an adult and not resort to childish insults.  **Nothing was deleted, it was moved**.  This page isn't created as a service to mod makers, but as a service to players, it wasn't useful to players with so much taking up space.  Please also comment by using ":", or "::" in order to indent properly and make comments easier to read. Mason11987 22:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Have we decided what to do about this? I'd be more than happy to help, seeing as I use this page a lot. L1ght5h0w 20:16, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I went through the list of outdated mods and found a few that have been updated. I have added them to the page. L1ght5h0w 22:00, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

thx. i also come here a lot but im kinda noob in editing. i really use this page a lot. but i do think for the mods that are more than 2 versions old (below 1.7) should be added to that page. lordcat33 13:06, 27 november 2011 (utc + 1)

Reading the previous posts, it sounds like people want the mods from 1.8.1+ to be on the page. I say we put this to a vote. All in favor of keeping 1.8.1 and above mods on the page, please say so. We could also maybe have a separate page for 1.8.1 mods, but that might be a bit too extreme. L1ght5h0w 16:05, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I don't think a vote like this is really the appropriate way to handle this, especially so poorly executed without properly notifying the people who have edited this page. That being said I'm not convinced that your assessment of the desires of players and editors is accurate.  There is already a page for outdated mods, it's not really extreme, it's really easily accessible and makes this page far more useful in my opinion. Mason11987 22:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think you did the right thing, even if there is some temporary inconvenience for the time being. - Degraine 00:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Mason while not trying to be offensive you did move mods that were being updated. For such a "bold" initiative it was more of an effort to take the largest groups of outdated mods and copy and paste the code on a separate page. The only person who seems to be not acting mature is you. Middle clicking 100 links to open in a new tab to quickly check the status of mods isn't that hard and is what you do on wiki's if you feel the burning desire to edit the page. I agree that moving outdated mods to the proper page was the correct choice but tempering such an action with the diligence of when was the mod updated and when was/what is the current version of minecraft out. Openly admitting that you moved stuff cause you felt like it and saw a few outdated ones didn't help you. If your seeking some sort of praise for your work here it is. Just be more thorough next time. Gamelord45 07:40, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

"Developing into a virus"
Ok, does anybody agree with me when I say that the section on "outdated mods turning into a virus" is completely frackin' stupid? At best, it's misleading in the extreme, at worst it's an outright fabrication; and in either case it represents a very tenuous grasp of how software works. You might as well say "You really ought to keep your car fueled up, because if you run out while on the road the demons running the engine will get hungry and eat your soul." Change this. Now.


 * I changed it because I felt the same way. Your "I demand changes" attitude is childish and obnoxious.  Please try to talk like an adult here and stop making demands of others, we are not here to do your bidding.  Mason11987 22:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that someone misunderstands this greatly.

Mods in Multi-Player
If I have single player mods installed, what will happen when I join a server? Will my mods simply cease to function, or will I not be able to join servers that don't use that mod? Liquid Ink 12:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Depending on the mod many things COULD happen:
 * you may not be able to join
 * you may be able to join but trying to use the items/craft them will crash your client
 * you may be able to join but trying to use the items/craft them will crash the server!
 * I'm not *completely* certain the last one happens with the default configuration, but I've seen it happen before with a special server set up and certain mods. In general, if you're playing on a vanilla server, get rid of your mods. Mason11987 13:43, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

am i just blind or in the wrong place?
Is there a link to the forums or some place on this wiki page where someone can ask if there is an exesting mod or (humbly) request a mod to be made? i know adding a section to the page about requests would be disastrous and be out-of-control so could someone add a quick link to a place like this so simi-noobs like me could have better direction and not junk up the wiki page? -thanks Sickma 01:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Sickma

The forums have a whole section for this. --Qwertygiy 14:54, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I edited the "Note to people who add mods here" section.
It seems that there are quite a few New Content mods being added to the Aesthetic and Functional mods section; I moved about 5 of them over. I have changed the notice at the beginning of the list so that it is more clear for people to put their mods in the correct section. --Qwertygiy 14:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Lots of Up to date mods on Outdated mods
Some mods on the outdated mods list say 1.0.0. Some are, but it doesn't say. WHY DID WE HAVE TO MOVE THESE ANYWAY? --Mocha2007 17:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Added AMCO in modpacks
Noticed a distinct lack of AMCO in the list, felt like it deserved to be in there! Nightfighta 04:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Balkonduralpha
I noticed in the last version that balkon's weaponmod was on the list, but not the freerunner's mod. Did that just happen by chance or is there a reason for it? (Both mods are updated.) Shadowslayer 20:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Removed Language Packs
I decided that there were tonnes of language packs out there and there were only a few on the Wiki. I have decided to replace the section with an info section, telling viewers that the 1.1 updated has languages installed in it, and to direct them to a more thorough language pack compilation on the Forums for those with Minecraft 1.0.0 or earlier.

If anyone objects feel free to discuss it here. Goandgoo 08:56, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Cleanup
Please discuss the cleanup here.

I personally would like a collapsible menu for each, massively compressing each section. furthermore, I'd like a collapsible menu for each section ideally I do not know if this is feasible, but we need to sort it out. the entire outdated-in date processes are a farce, and has needed sorting since it was stupidly introduced. --Kizzycocoa 01:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * have to agree on you for part of the argument. The Outdated Mods page gets incredibly confusing and often up to date mods are on this outdated mods page and it is a hassle to move them back to the normal mods page. HOWEVER, most of the mods on that page are 'dead' mods and have not been updated for a significant amount of time. An action plan is needed. Goandgoo 01:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd recommend moving them altogether from the main page, putting them into a subpage, and linking to them from this main page. The rest of the mods should be collapsed cause this page is too big and messy. - Asterick6 02:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I see. I think the outdated mods page should definitely be abolished, and outdated non-working things, removed.
 * HOWEVER, classic is still in play. anything that works with classic can't be removed due to this. so the fixer should be careful in that aspect
 * I also think each mod having it's own page, being linked to by the main mod page, is a much better plan. it greatly reduces the space taken. images as well are unnecessary, however icons of the applications, if they exist, could be shown. but, those are just my thoughts on this. --Kizzycocoa 12:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * So...Mr. Admin, I guess that's it. Seems like a good idea. :D You got some work to do :D Thanks for bringing up this issue btw. I had already noticed these problems a while ago but no one really commented about it or did anything. - Asterick6 20:50, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Update: Actually we DID discuss it here: Talk:Mods...but nothing changed lol. - Asterick6 20:51, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Another idea would be to split the page into one for each mod category, in order to make the page less heavy. We could then turn the main Mods page into a nice portal-like one with big nice links with images for each sub-page. Also, each category article could be organized differently if relevant: for instance, the modpacks page could remain a big table like the current one, except made nicer by adding the logos, while the "functional" mods page could see its table split into further sub-categories to make it more readable.


 * EDIT: Anyway I agree with the idea of deleting all long outdated mods, but I don't think it's really maintainable to require 1 page for each mod. --Jimeowan 11:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree on splitting the page into category subpages; it certainly helped with Programs and editors. A separate page for every mod seems excessive: most would be stubs, except for particularly large or noteworthy mods.


 * To have a consistent rule for removing old mods, I propose taking out anything that falls more than one release version behind. I.e., when 1.2 comes out, assume than any mod that still hasn't been updated for 1.1 is dead. This will avoid deleting and re-adding ones that are actively maintained, but take a week or two to update. -- Orthotope 01:42, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

''':Have the table of contents in the MODS article link to MODs capatible with each version.
 * 0.5 Mods
 * 1.0 Mods
 * 1.1 Mods
 * etc...'''--Luvodicus 12:14, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

@Kizzycocoa you've got to admit that you've posted this message on the top of the mods page for over 2 months now. For the meanwhile, I'll remove the box. Please do something, don't randomly post something that no-one is doing. Goandgoo 09:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Issue adding content
I've been trying to add a reference to my mining mod but for some reason I can't get the page to save. Could someone post this for me or tell me what I did wrong?


 * Miner!
 * style="text-align: left;" | By making these two blocks, you can now mine large (or small) areas. Designed to speed up quarrying.
 * 1.1
 * www.minecraftforum.net/topic/727183-11-thurlins-miner-quarrying-mod-updated/#entry9486430 Forum
 * Thurlin
 * Thurlin
 * Thurlin
 * Thurlin

(Yes I did solve the math problem at the top of the page) (I think its choking on the html link)

Resolved

Fix for the mods page
Just mash em' all together. All you have to do is to change the "is for 1.1" thingy.

Redstone modpack
I think it may be a good idea to get rid of the /french in its description as he is clearly speaking German

Unauthorized mod creation
The Kevin mods were unauthorized edits of other author's existing mods. I know as one of the authors of several of them. Can we get these pulled down?

I agree, too many of Kevin's mods are included in SPC etc.

To KevinTehPro: Your mods are infringing on other people's copyrights. Your Fast Cut and Fast Mine are both included in SPC. Your Blast Proof Glass mod is just an update of mermz's mod mermz's mod. It would have been okay if you had told the mod maker that you were going to update his/her mod. Unfortunately, you just decided to create and "update" the mod without his permission. You did the same thing to ~{DBZ}~ UltimateFusion's craftable cobweb mod. These 4 mods have now been removed from the Wiki. If you object to this decision, please continue this talk section. Goandgoo 00:17, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

What the heck is "Golden Hearts?" doing in the Modpack table?
Am I missing something, or does that category totally not belong there? Qwertygiy 02:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

It was added here. So, right. I'll take it out. —kpreid 02:26, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Smart moving
Anuros 15:45, 4 March 2012 (UTC)there isn't any descripton about the smart moving mod? I saw that it is in the cheeta pack, but not in the mods lists.

About Technic/Yogbox and Magic Launcher
I updated the Technic and Yogbox entries to reflect the need to use the new Technic Launcher to install and play these modpacks. As for the Magic Launcher, shouldn't it be under "Programs and Launchers" due to it being more of a program, as compared to a mod? I use an IP since I'm lazy and don't want to create an account. 116.15.200.180 13:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Split
Split? (by category) Page is too big. Minecraft5025 00:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Mods Page News
Mods Page News 13/3/12

Split Page Situation

Yes, I know lots of you guys have been complaining that the Mods Page is very long. As unofficial curator of this page, I too have been very frustrated by the time it takes for the Mods page to load, especially on slower computers. But change looks like it may be coming in the not too distant future!

Various proposals have been made.
 * 1) Earlier, Kizzycocoa has suggested this: "I personally would like a collapsible menu for each, massively compressing each section. furthermore, I'd like a collapsible menu for each section." Although I believe this would be the best solution, I do not know nor think this is possible to do. I asked him about the situation and he replied: ":I believe Wyn was supposed to add it, but wouldn't until the media wiki update. I will follow it up!"
 * 2) Orthotope has alerted me to a proposal from Minecraft5025 to split the Mods page into smaller subpages (loaders, aesthetic, new content, etc.). Personally, I don't think this is the best solution, but it may be the only solution to fix this mess. Often, I may be looking for a mod, or even leisurely scrolling through the Mods page when I see an interesting mod. If the pages are separated, it may a) be harder to find the mod that you're looking for, b) you may never see that mod that you leisurely saw while scrolling down the page, and most importantly c) it will be harder to track changes, edit and update mods if all of the pages are separate. HOWEVER, if this is the only option possible, I may consider it though, as the Mods page really is too long.

On second thought, Orthotope has suggested to just separate the Aesthetic and New Content Mods into different pages. This is the best solution and is likely to become reality, unless too many people disagree (which is unlikely).

In other news:
 * All Mods on the Outdated Mods Page with versions less than 1.0.0 (ie < Beta1.8.1) have be removed. Mods that are this old are considered 'dead' mods and are unlikely to be updated.

'''Please do not move any mods on this page to the Outdated Mods Page until at least the end of the month. Give the modders time!''' I can clearly see that some modders are taking their time to update theri mods. These mods are NOT dead! Examples include mods from TehKrush and Thebombzen. As a result of this management, I have had to revert several edits from before Gibbl decided to move all of the mods to the Outdated Mods Page.

If you have any queries at all, other proposals, or even disagree with me, please comment below. Please sign your posts with 4 ~'s so I can reference you so I can answer and ask you questions without saying "The person before me said ..."

The Unofficial Mod Page Curator, Goandgoo 07:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Collapsible tables are now possible (as seen on Known Bugs/Version 1.2.3 . This would reduce visible page length, but not the actual size and loading time. Another approach is to split only the aesthetic and new content mods into separate pages; each is longer than the rest of the categories combined. That would reduce the page size and partially address concerns 'a' and 'b'. As for 'c', I don't think it will be significantly harder to keep track of three pages; there will still be the same number of edits. -- Orthotope 09:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I would have to agree with you on that one. Dividing just the Aesthetic and New Content into separate pages would be manageable. I'll just wait to see if anyone has any other suggestion. Goandgoo 09:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


 * So can we bring back Outdated mods page? - Turtle5204


 * Mods/Outdated still exists. -- Orthotope 09:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I think that the solution would be to avoid descriptions for every mod in the table; that's what really makes it long. This, combined with the collapsible tables should work. --V1c96 16:32, 14 March 2012 (UTC)