Minecraft Wiki talk:Community portal

This is the community's main discussion page.

Talk about anything wiki-related here!

Sign your posts with ~ and always add new posts at the very bottom after previous sections.

Deleting pages
Arrragh! Why was the What to do when you're bored page deleted? Sure, it may not be a proper tutorial but everyone will regret that when an epidemic of Builder's Block comes out! CycloneChilli 18:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

how you post pictures
the title tells it all.... –Preceding unsigned comment was added by XXminerXx (Talk&#124;Contribs) 23:40, 4 June 2012‎. Please sign your posts with


 * 'Upload file', under 'Toolbox' in the left sidebar. -- Orthotope 01:20, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Tagging bugs as "Vote for removal"
Tkain47 proposed to tag bugs bugs as "Vote for removal" Also, why don't we make the "Not a bug, Candidate for removal" the color red? [R] It just looks a bit more of a "Candidate For Deletion." I second that. --Kumasasa 18:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

(Hey, i didn't make the idea, just added a new design! --Tkain47 18:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC))
 * That's exactly what I wanted to say ;-) --Kumasasa 18:45, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

this is kinda extreme why not just get the ip banned and get the bad stuff they posted removed
 * Why would you do that? There would be no reason to ban the person. Also, please sign your posts and don't use the white box. return_0 22:34, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Fire resistance
It would be nice if an EXPIERIENCED user added the fire resistance to all the entity pages. I'm talking about if it gets destoyed and how long it burns e.g. Netherrack Fire resistance:  no, ∞

thank you 216.157.201.188 19:06, 11 June 2012 (UTC)Random Zelda Fan


 * The duration of fire is random and independent of what block is burning (netherrack being a special-case exception). As for the flammability of blocks, I'd support adding it to Template:Block; see the discussion at Template_talk:Block. -- Orthotope 09:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

It gets to laggy and makes people freeze sometimes. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by WaffleGeek7 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 02:37, 18 June 2012‎ (UTC). Please sign your posts with
 * You mean fire? If that's what you mean, it's probably your computer. Sign your posts. return_0 22:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Known bugs and subpages rename
Copied from Ultradude25's talk page:

I have a suggestion for the known bugs articles. Right now, we are creating a new page directly at "known bugs/development versions/xxxx" or "known bugs/1.2.5", etc. The known bugs page right now is useless and people continue to add comments to the talk page. How about making the Known bugs page the current bug recording page for the current official release version, and then when a new official version is release, move the old version to the specific version that is was for. Example: Right now it is 1.2.5 so the "Known bugs" article is used for recording the 1.2.5 bugs. When 1.3 is released, we move "Known bugs" to "Known bugs/Version 1.2.5" without redirect and create a new page for 1.3 at "Known bugs" again. This way, we can ensure that all relevant comments made in the talk page stays with the version at that time, and we can automatically archive all talk page comments made to the known bugs page with the version it was for.

The other suggestion is for "Known bugs" to be renamed to "Issues", which is a more general and accurate term for the content. There has already been a discussion at Talk:Known bugs, but the proposal will need more admin approval and an admin to carry out the proposal. - Asterick6 (talk) 01:29, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, I think the snapshot releases should be titled "Snapshot xxwxx" instead of "Version xxwxx"? How about titling it "snapshot" for future releases (and also renaming the existing ones)? - Asterick6 (talk) 01:29, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. -- Orthotope 03:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I would definitely back these ideas. Cultist O 05:30, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I support that. --Kumasasa 06:30, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Reviewing the quality of tutorials on the wiki
After noticing a growing amount of non-tutorials on the wiki, we've decided to review them and delete those that do not fit on the wiki and serve more purpose on the forums. For example, lists of things you can do in Minecraft and garbage instructions ("build a lot of houses" for a tutorial on building a city for example) shouldn't be considered tutorials at all and are very low in quality compared to the rest of the content our wiki hosts.

You can find the tagged tutorials, as well as other pages that are pending deletion, in this category.

Feel free to add your (logical) input on what we should keep and what we shouldn't allow. --Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  19:00, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * While losing the current Advanced Construction page is no great loss, I did produce what I think is a good braindump of what an Advanced Construction article should contain. This is currently on the Advanced Construction talk page, so it'll disappear when the main page is removed. (I've also rescued a scratch copy and stored it in my user pages.) Feedback on that list would be appreciated. I do think it would be nice to have a good-quality 'Advanced Construction' guide, and I hope my skeleton list covers the areas we ought to document. I just don't feel like writing all that myself... --Simons Mith 20:07, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Why dont you just give those tutorials their own page? Dont get rid of them, i also rely on them to build nice homes. Chinchillatiger 19:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Whoever tagged the articles for deletion should probably notify the article creators as well (out of common courtesy/policy if there is one). - Asterick6 (talk) 21:28, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I think tutorials should be deleted if they aren't written in an adequate quality, but please elaborate on what type of content should be deleted. Garbage instructions such as "build a lot of houses" doesn't quite fit all tutorial content.
 * Also, I think there needs to be an official style guide/policy on what and what shouldn't be included. If we don't have one, the quality of the wiki will continue to deteriorate. Hower64 has created a style guide at Minecraft Wiki:Projects/Style Guide, and I hope some of the admins of this wiki and other language wikis can contribute to it and establish a policy/guideline instead of using vague guidelines that are undocumented. - Asterick6 (talk) 22:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

C&P relevant comments and context from sleep-deprived Kizzycocoa's page:

The tutorial of the list of things to do to your shelter
 * I find this page very useful Grovyle4life 17:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see any changes in the rules that this page violates. Plus the page has been here for a long time, and its incredibly useful. Can you expand on this for me? :3 Funky3000 21:39, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Lists of challenges, activities and things to do in Minecraft that are creative-based, rather than practical, are to be removed.
 * The Userspace is where these articles belong. --Kizzycocoa 21:42, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that many of the pages you've tagged aren't Tutorials, but I'm not convinced userspace is the right place for them either. Take some examples, and my opinions on them:
 * Advanced Construction: not a well-written page, certainly worth redoing from scratch. I did have a stab at defining what ought to go on an 'advanced construcion page' on the talk page. If what I outlined was done, I think we would have a legit, good-quality advanced contruction page. Conclusion - keep, but redo, basically from scratch?
 * Things to do to...: Several of these. They are all basically lists of gameplay suggestions ('activities' as you put it) - make a ballroom, make an armory, make a bowling alley, whatever. If a player is feeling bored or uninspired, that kind of list might fire their imagination a bit. But, you're right, they're not 'tutorials'. So what are they? 'Gameplay guides?' 'Sources of inspiration'? Even the deleted and not very lamented playing styles page (all 'challenges' in your terminology) kind of fits under this heading, it just got overlong and over-silly. But I think the wiki actually is a better place to keep this material than, say the forums. Conclusion: Create a new category, and move the better articles into it?
 * The Furniture guide is another good example. Even though individual pieces of furniture are trivial, a guide showcasing a variety of ways to make chairs, shelves, sofas, etc. would be useful, because it would teach people how to use minecraft blocks such as slabs, gates, upsidedown stairs etc. in creative ways - certainly a legit objective for the wiki. This is also something a lot of people are interested in, and would expect to find in the Wiki. Unfortunately almost all Minecraft furniture is purposeless rather than practical, so AFAICS furniture tutorials would fall foul of the new rules. I think that's a fault with the updated rules. Conclusion: New rules are a little too tight - relax/refine them?--Simons Mith 22:26, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Any and all pages in the Userspace, provided they do not break general user conduct rules, can exist.
 * cars? sure. rabbits? why not. gold golem? be our guest.
 * Regarding the other pages, it is being discussed in the community portal. I'd advise you add these thoughts to that page, so to allow the entire community to respond to this as, quite honestly, I'm tired, it's 11PM, I'm about to go to bed, and as I was browsing the tutorials, I myself got confused on what I should or shouldn't tag to delete. --Kizzycocoa 22:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, copying comments. I think you've caught all the least suitable 'tutorial' articles that ought to be reviewed/moved/culled. --Simons Mith 23:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Well one problem is the tutorial creators are pretty young, so the writing quality isn't exactly professional/encyclopedic. The articles could be moved to the creators' userspace or deleted, but we could improve them first if the content isn't a "duplicate" or derivative of other tutorials. Also, Simon I don't think creating a new category for these types of pages is a good idea. That just groups poor quality content together; the goal should be to improve them. I already started minor cleanup on some of the pages, but haven't rewritten much yet. - Asterick6 (talk) 00:21, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * 'creators are pretty young' - oh yes, and further, English may not even be their first language.
 * 'moved to userspace/deleted' - it would also be hard to tell whose userspace to choose for many flagged articles
 * 'improve them first' - my concern is that even if improved, these articles could still be at risk of falling foul of the new rule 23. I should stress that like you I do think these articles should be kept and improved. So giving them a stay of execution until they have been rewritten and then deciding if further action is needed seems reasonable.
 * 'new category' - After your reply I checked the relative numbers of articles in different categories, but I found that the Tutorials category as-is isn't disproportionately large. So I temporarily withdraw my suggestion of giving them their own non-tutorial category.
 * 'Simon' - 'ere, how'd you guess my real name?? --User:Simons Mith –The preceding undated comment was added on 22:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * If we move the pages, they will be moved to the article creators userspaces, or to whoever wishes to have a copy/draft. (And Simons Mith is pretty much Simon Smith. Not too hard to guess, but anyways this is off-topic and it doesn't matter). - Asterick6 (talk) 04:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I do not think that we should allow bad articles because of the author's young age - By that argument I might as well get a 7-year old cousin to write a "tutorial" about buckets and then keep it because he's so young. As for figuring out the userspace, we can easily check that using the history page and I don't see much good in improving a tutorial that isn't a tutorial at all. You'd have to rewrite it entirely, which often turns out to be impossible because the title alone is more about ideas and not about actually doing something. (For example, "things to do in your shelter") Adding a category for these articles is also something we can't do because the wiki's goal is to help the Minecraft player and document the game, not to give ideas. If the player requires ideas for his map, then he might as well just do a google image search on any subject (japanese buildings, big wonders of the earth, funny houses) or just look up the forums. The reason we're bringing this up is because we feel that the articles do not contribute to the wiki and simply do not belong here.--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  11:21, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, please keep LIST OF THINGS TO DO TO YOUR SHELTER because it is a survival tutorial which I heavily depend on to build up a base. And if you are going to get rid of these tutorials, then get rid of useless ones like AUTOMATIC DOOR or CREATING MINECRAFT VIDEOS! CycloneChilli 20:19, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I definitely agree with CycloneChilli. The "Things to do to your Shelter" is actually very helpful and IS practical, as it helps you to make a more efficient shelter and gives info on how to make each of the rooms listed, not just like "Build alot of houses" on a Building a City tutorial. It also provides the basics to starting off your shelter.

P.S. I think that the Tutorial/Colonizing isnt actually a tutorial, more of something you CAN do. JeterNYY 18:32, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Archive
Then I'll make an archive of the tutorial threads. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by AntiVandalismSuperstar (Talk&#124;Contribs) 11:03, 25 June 2012‎ (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Warning notices for unconstructive edits
Here are comments copied from the admin noticeboard: I can't help but notice that no one has addressed the users making these edits directly. The best way to teach people how to use and edit the wiki properly is to TALK to them. Go to their user talk pages and have a discussion with them, or go to the talk page associated to the disputed edits and TALK about it. I see a lot of requests for protection of pages, but zero attempt to educate and inform users. Page protection should be an absolute LAST RESORT, not a first line of defense. -- Wynthyst  talk  05:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess could import some message templates from WP to use; that way it might be faster to edit/inform editors. - Asterick6 (talk) 08:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Update: They are at template:uwd and template:uwv. - Asterick6 (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

So I've created these three template messages: uwv, uwd, and uwt (shortcut links to the templates meaning "user warning vandalism", "user warning delete", and "user warning test", respectively). To anyone who reverts/undos unconstructive edits, please also post a message/notice on the editor's talk page to inform/educate them. You can create a new section with the month and year as the title (example: June 2012), and make sure to follow the template documentations and substitute the templates. Also, feel free to create/import new template notices. Thanks - Asterick6 (talk) 06:36, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

HEADS UP TO ALL ADMINS!
The Mods page is currently broken badly, it gives an error in some language which I can't recognize (Russian, maybe?) and it needs fixing fast because lots of people need to use that page. Thanks in advance to anyone who can fix it, SuggestedBowl 09:48, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Split the "Current bugs" page into two
What i have been noticing is that there are More then enough annoyances on the page, So i am thinking we should split it into two, annoyances and Bugs, thank u for your time sincerely, -Sirmentio

Strange multi-IP spammers
I've noticed some strange multi-IP spammers that create talk pages with odd text that seems copied from elsewhere, and the comment is just a random name. Examples: And the list goes on. What is the purpose of this?  LB ( T 05:35, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * User_talk:Return_0
 * User_talk:Pastmidnight14
 * User_talk:Joey326
 * User_talk:Console
 * User_talk:92.238.191.252
 * User_talk:218.186.15.10
 * User_talk:74.134.89.110
 * User_talk:69.120.32.102
 * User_talk:121.45.119.121
 * User_talk:2.25.115.147
 * User_talk:Roboboo
 * User_talk:86.171.98.153
 * User_talk:24.178.85.164
 * User_talk:Me,_of_Course


 * I can only assume they are sleeper pages. Bots create talk pages with plausible content, which would be likely looked over when people are looking through the new pages list. Then eventually the page will have spam links placed on it, which could only be noticed by seeing the edit in recent changes, which is less likely to be noticed than if the page showed up on the new pages list. –ultradude25 (T&#124;C) at 01:10, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * What?! I'm not a spambot! I think some random people were spamming my page. This is a problem that needs to be addressed. My heart (see, bots don't have hearts :)! ) skipped a beat when I read my username in this list. Please do something about it! return_0 01:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Multiplayer GUI
Hello, I was just wondering if there was a page for the multiplayer GUI, because I can't figure out what all the buttons did. Please leave a link in the reply. If there isn't one, please make one. Any help is appreciated!

216.157.201.188 20:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)Random Zelda Fan

Update with the Update
I believe that the installing snapshots page needs updating, as long as the person reading is installing a new snaphot. Meaning, leave what is there,there, just say 4 the newer versions just 2 place the folder in bin.

And just a question, but if u were 2 have a mod, move it 2 a .zip file, name the .zip file minecraft.jar, and place the folder in bin. would that work?

216.157.201.188 01:58, 27 July 2012 (UTC)the darkknight

Tree redirs pls
Can someone please add redirects from "Oak tree" to Tree and the same for the other tree types? Cheers. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.104.0.64 (Talk) 16:23, 27 July 2012‎ (UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * Done (it looks like spruce and jungle were already done actually.) In the future please sign your posts with four tildes (~) Cultist O 02:30, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Subdomain
What number of voices we translate for obtain the subdomain "it.minecraftwiki.net"?
 * You won't get a subdomain at least until you have translated the main page Minecraft Wiki/it. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  15:11, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

page creation
hello im the guy that posted the yeti mob idea on the mob discussion page and alot of people want to see images and a talk page for new ideas. so how would i show them a image of a skin of a yeti that i created and how do you create a page.92.18.255.246 11:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry but the Minecraft Wiki is not a place for discussing new game ideas. The purpose of talk pages are to discuss changes to articles and suggestions on how to improve the articles. If you'd just like to casually swap ideas you have about the game you might find the Minecraft Forums a better platform. Hower64 12:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Should 1.3.1 be considered a major update?
You know the Halloween Update, the Adventure Update, and the Seecret Updates, and how they're all considered major updates? Well should the 1.3.1 update be considered a major update? It brought in many interesting and very new features minecraft never had prior to it. I was thinking we should add a new page that completely overviews the new things in 1.3.1 (or is there already a page like that?) and put it alongside with the famous 3 major updates. Any ideas or suggestions/feedback? MarshMellowMan111 20:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * We should make pages on all major content updates. 1.2, 1.3, and a few others are all large enough to garner their own pages outlining what they added, information on the updates themselves and marketing (like videos and contests) made to promote them. Hower64 23:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, We need to see which updates on the version history page are worthy enough for their own pages, and also to be qualified as "major" they need to have brought a lot unique new content into the game. I would love to put 1.3.1 in the making of it's own page (I still don't know if there is already a page that summarizes 1.3.1) alongside with the other major updates, but I don't know I have the position to start, can I go ahead and start making the page, and everyone would be okay with it? MarshMellowMan111 15:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I have created the new 1.3 Update page and added it to the Minecraft category, but now I need to know how to make the link that leads to the 1.3 Update page on the "Minecraft" links box thingy that's at the end of all pages that are in the Minecraft category, on the Major Updates section beside Seecret Friday Updates, Halloween Update, Adventure Update links, if anyone knows what I mean, any help? MarshMellowMan111 02:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Editing Wiki Pages
Hey everyone, Sort of new to helping with Wiki's. I worked on the Terraria wiki a bit, but never deleted anything, usually just added to pages. I'm curious, when something is not up to date, is it ok to simply delete sections, or is there some preferred way to go about this? Specifically, http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Tutorials/Yogbox-Contents_and_How_to_Use_Them. At the bottom of the post it specifies "THIS PAGE IS NOT CURRENTLY COMPLETE!!! PLEASE DO NOT EDIT MORE!!!! lol :D" But I do not believe it's been updated in a long time as not all these mods are still even part of YogBox. I would like to add to it and update it. But will need advice on how to proceed? Thanks very much. MassNERDerer 11:57, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The page you mentioned and the wiki in general always needs editors. It would be great if you could help out. You can jump straight into editing any page without needing to ask anyone as long as you're familiar with the rules and such. You can go ahead and delete any outdated information and update them if you wish. Hower64 12:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. I'm sorry it's taken so long to get back on here. I love YogBox and since I use the wiki so much, would be nice to give back a bit. Is this the best pace for simple, general questions, or should I go elsewhere? MassNERDerer 14:44, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Questions are better answered on the forums or in the IRC. Both links are in the menu on the left side under "Minecraft". -- Kanegasi  ☺  C  14:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I meant questions related to the wiki specifically, but thanks :-). Similar to this topic, I created a new post at the bottom of this page. More specific with specific goals in mind for the Mod Pages. It's been over a week and still no reply though? MassNERDerer 14:29, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Need help of a native english speaker
Hello, a moment ago I created a page from the wish list - how to update and roll back Minecraft etc.

The page is named: Minecraft Laucher/Update Minecraft Could any native english speaker please review it and change what's wrong? Thanks ;)

Also, a link to this page on the Minecraft Launcher page or somewhere else can be helpful :)

Thanks VERY much, MinecraftMuffin 16:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I have fixed simplified much of the grammar for you. It was pretty good though. I would like to explain the difference between its and it's however (something even most native English speakers struggle with.) "It's" means "It is", you have dropped the second i and the space, and to show this you use an apostrophe. Its is the possessive, many people think that because you make "Robert" possessive by saying "Robert's" the same should be done for "it", but it is actually an independent pronoun (just as her becomes hers, you would not use her's.) Cultist O 03:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You've hit the nail on the head. return_0 16:56, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

New logos
We've been running with the current logo since 2009 and because it no longer really fits with the current wiki skin (completely different style) I'd like to propose a change. Me and Ultradude have been working on these two logos:

Wiki-logo that goes above the navigation bar:

Logo that goes on the main page, replacing the bold text we currently have there:

An example of the big logo in place can be seen here.

Both logos are based on the logos used in Pocket Edition. The small logo is based on this logo, while the large logo is a modified version of [[media:McPeLogo.svg|this logo]]. Because we couldn't manage to find a clean version of the small logo we had to render ourselves a block that was similar.

Please give us all your input, comments, etc. etc. let us hear what you think of it.--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  13:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I like the main logo, although the navigation bar logo seems a bit odd to me. I think the grass overhang should be reduced a little bit. Maybe change the angle from isometric, but that isn't really a problem. --MegaScience 13:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I like the first logo, but the second is slightly too big for me. -- Itouchmasterpro 14:12, 22 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Please note that the second logo can be resized to whatever size we want, it's vectorized :)--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  14:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I like both logos, but I think the block one needs to emphasize the sides more than the top.
 * In the MC:PE logo, you can see they too focus more on the side of the block, by tilting the block "backward". isometric seems a little odd with this block.
 * the second seems great for banners. I think both should be used, depending on context. --Kizzycocoa 14:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * However, this is a very good idea, I agree! :-) Itouchmasterpro 16:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello! My opinion: The navigation bar logo is nice, but the grass should be reduced. And I love the second one, but it would be perfect a bit smaller. Good luck! Kingpowl~  es. Wiki Admin  18:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I agree with Kizzycocoa :D Kingpowl~  es. Wiki Admin  18:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Both new logos are appealing, I second the opinions about the grass overhang and the render angle. A few days ago the new block logo was already in place and I found the dirt block has too less contrast against the dirt background above the navigation bar. --Kumasasa 20:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Well the block has an outline around it, so it shouldn't blend with the background.
 * I've modified the angle, is it any better this way? –ultradude25 (T&#124;C) at 09:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

So, any more comments or shall we finalize and add this? –ultradude25 (T&#124;C) at 08:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The size is perfect! Itouchmasterpro 08:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, both logos are perfect :D Kingpowl~  es. Wiki Admin  (talk) 20:10, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * With the new angle, the logo looks perfect now! the block itself seems a little dark, but otherwise, perfect!!! :D --Kizzycocoa 12:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me, when will be the new logos approved? Kingpowl~ ''' es. Wiki Admin ''' (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The main page logo we're going to wait a bit longer for any extra feedback, the wiki logo will either be never or not soon, because of some curse thing. –ultradude25 ᐸ Talk Contribs at 22:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay D: Kingpowl~  es. Wiki Admin  (talk) 11:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

MONSTER SPAWNING BEHAVIOR IN 1.3 AND LATER
I also posted this on minecraft forums, no respond from there yet.

Since the release of 1.3.1, mobs spawning behavior has changed a lot, mobs in general have changed a lot. My entities count has also changed a lot. Now I've tried and tried and tried to find answers through wiki, patch notes and other helpful sites, but in vain. So here is how it goes:

The other day, I decided to make a Dark Room Monster Grinder. I built a really good design (based on Ethos), but with some tweaks. In 1.2.5, this would've worked perfectly. But, as of 1.3.1, monsters that are 32 or more blocks away from the player, will not move around, so they will never fall into the water streams. That's when I dug into the problem: I need to find a new way to make a working Dark Room grinder. But before I got into making new ones, I also noticed that monster FOR SURE did not spawn as much in the Dark Room grinders as in pre-1.3.1. Now, you are lucky if you can even get 10 monsters in a HUGE Dark Room building (with several dark layers, that all used to work back in 1.2.5). And yes, I was always over 32 blocks away from the grinder, but within 128 blocks from it. No dark spots except for the layers in the grinder (there isn't many blocks to spawn on 142 blocks up in the air), and I also had one on ground level, but it did not either produce more than max 10 entities in the whole trap.

Now, what happened between 1.2.5 and 1.3.1/2, except for that monsters only stand still if they are 32 or more blocks away from the player? I also found on wiki that they have a 1/800 chance of disappearing if they are more than 32 blocks away from the player. Then why does it seem to me that they only disappear when they are in a trap, but not if they are, lets say, spawned on surface level without being within a few walls? Just seems so weird.

From the Wiki: "Mob caps are directly proportional to the total number of chunks eligible for spawning. To calculate the cap, the spawning area is expanded by one chunk in every direction, so that it is 17x17 chunks in size, and then the total number of chunks is plugged into the following formula:"

"In single player mode, the chunk count is 17x17 = 289, and the caps work out to: Hostile = 79 Passive = 16 Water = 5 ~ That means, that in my test world RIGHT NOW, there should constantly be spawning lots of mobs, considering the spawn rate is 1 tick (1/20th of a second) for a monster to spawn. Yet, however, up in the air, where I am now, there is only 1 entity in my grinder, and 20 entities in total (which I don't understand since I and that monster should be the only entities). There should be spawning way more monsters, but they don't. Why? Also, this is during the day. During night, I still have 1-2 entities in the grinder, but the total entity rate goes crazy. Switches between 30-60 really fast, for no apparent reason at all. Nothing got added, nothing changed, nothing! Yet it goes that high up. WHY? It makes no sense.

So, what happened with the hostile mob spawning? There is no info about it anywhere, and the only thing that is clear is that since 1.3.1 monsters do not walk around if they are 32 blocks away. I am pretty sure I am not the only one with this problem. I've tried solutions like adding antennas, going up in the air, building bigger traps and so forth. Nothing seems to help! Why is this? This has ruined many traps, and is ruining even the last traps from being efficient.

Now please, can someone (preferably a staff member / developer or someone who can read the game codes) explain to me what has happened in between 1.2.5 and 1.3.1? It just doesn't make any sense what so ever!

If this is in the wrong forum, please move it and send me a PM where it has gone.

Sincerely, Will

Minecraft Forums: http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/1457946-monster-spawning-behavior-in-13-and-later/

Edit:

I just learned that mobs, after spawning over 32 blocks away, they can STILL move for 5 seconds, which is why the traps still has a few mobs falling down. Like 19/20 stand still though when they spawn. The real problem is still though the fact that monsters do not spawn fast enough.

WillFromFInland 09:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Mac Book Controlls
Im on a Mackbook Pro with OS, and I having trouble with the Function Keys. How do I use F1-F12 to use in mine craft with out triggering the Mac book controls. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Chris hosea (Talk&#124;Contribs) 22:21, 2 September 2012 (UTC). Please sign your posts with
 * Hold Fn and then press the desired function key. And please sign your comments. return_0 23:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Prevent Griefing
May i start the page? I can start it, but i'll need help if i do. Creepergoboom64 03:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)Creepergoboom64


 * Do we need a second page for that? Is it something that can't be added to the Griefing article? -- Orthotope 03:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * (No offense,) Okay, this is the second time this has happened! If it can be added to to greifing articale, why is it here? It's misleading me! I want to help on this wiki, besides post pictures, i tried to contact Unknown blake, he did not respond. What am i supposed to do? Creepergoboom64 04:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)Creepergoboom64


 * In general, I prefer to not have unnecessary duplication of articles. However, if there's material that wouldn't fit on the Griefing page (e.g., for neutral point of view reasons, which have been an issue there in the past), a separate tutorial page would make sense. -- Orthotope 04:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The suggested page "a guide on how to prevent griefing" was added by some anonymous user. Like Orthotope said, this should be part of the Griefing article. I'm going to remove it from the list. --timrem 04:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Timrem. I really think that it should have been done earlier. But i still need a good suggestion for what to do. (BTW, Thanks for responding so soon!) Creepergoboom64 04:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)Creepergoboom64


 * Depends what sorts of things you want to do. There's always cleanup that needs doing - Category:Cleanup is a good place to start. You could go through the 'bugs' sections of articles and remove any that no longer exist in the latest release or snapshot versions. Talk pages can also be cleaned up, signing unsigned comments and adjusting formatting so it reads well. Personally, I'd like to see video tutorials (e.g., Tutorials/Piston Uses turned into written descriptions and screenshots/diagrams, but that's just my preference, and not as important. -- Orthotope 05:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, i really don't care, as long as it doesn't involve redstone. I can't read javascript, can't decode it, but i can do certain things as long it is in Minecraft. But i can clean up pages if you want.EDIT: I could start on cleaning up the bed page. Creepergoboom64 17:23, 5 September 2012 (UTC)Creepergoboom64


 * Btw, don't confuse Java with Javascript. The two are completely different from each other. --M0rphzone 04:58, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Mod Pages
It's been about a month since I decided to start trying to help with the wiki a bit. I really enjoy the mods in Minecraft and it's clear a lot of people have questions about them. I myself often turn to the wiki for help. I would like to start with the Mod Compilation YogBox. As it's one I know a lot about. My issue right now is where to put the page. The only YogBox page currently is the following: http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Tutorials/Yogbox-Contents_and_How_to_Use_Them and it is horribly out dated. Also, this page is not actually linked anywhere, it can only be found be search. So here's my three part question. Should we not have some links for the Mod Packs on the Mod Pages? (http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Mods#Mod_packs) Then they can see the mod packs and go straight to the yogbox information/guide. Also, could we not then also add a new section in the tutorials page for Mods/Mod Packs? I would get started right away if you all agree. Thanks a lot for taking the time to make this wiki great. I hope I can do my part as well. Hope to hear back very soon :-) MassNERDerer 15:04, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * (since you requested I comment ;) ) Keeping in mind that both the Tutorials and Mods pages are well outside my normal purview here, generally pages which document mods are supposed to be subpages of Mods (e.g. "Mods/Yogbox"), though I don't know about mod-related tutorials - in theory they'd best be created as subpages of Tutorials, but as I said before, I don't have much experience there, so I don't really know what's going on or how it's *supposed* to work. More generally, though, if you're interested in editing in a particular area on the wiki, I would say just to jump straight in! If you wait around for confirmation and guidance, you may end up waiting forever. ;) Just pay attention to any comments left for you in response to your edits (whether on the talk page of one of the pages you edited, your own talk page, or in edit summaries on one of the pages you edited), and if someone undoes one of your edits without comment or with an unclear edit summary, ask them to clarify/explain themselves instead of just undoing their edit (since that way lies edit wars, page protection, and blocks). Good luck! 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 19:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot. Just messages any admin to get some guidance, but you make a good point. May as well just get to it! I tried to ask questions first because I wanted to help, not cause more work. And thought if I did something wrong, just causes more for others to edit. But I'll get to it this week. Thanks again. MassNERDerer 10:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Huge Curse sidebar squishing text
It's come up again, but why the hell is the sidebar so wide? It's bad enough with half the screen available for displaying article content, but when you do something like this, we only have 1/6 to 1/3 of the entire screen to view actual article content. Wth, Curse? We don't all have 2560×1440 HD monitors. Curse, can you please make the sidebar more narrow and also with smaller-sized text by breaking the titles and sentences into 2 to 3 more lines, so that the article text doesn't get squished to the abomination of a format that is has now? People come to the Minecraft Wiki to read the articles, not to look at the sidebar. Seriously, which one do you think has more priority? And here is a screenshot so maybe you'll actually take wiki members seriously. --M0rphzone 00:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

And for the bigger question, is it really necessary to have this sidebar show up in every single page? You already know that this sidebar obscures screenshots and screws the formatting, but you guys make the issues even worse by making it bigger? We're already getting screwed over, and you screw us even more? Why don't you just put this on the main page where everyone will see it, instead of on every single page in the wiki? I know I'm not the first or the last to voice their opinion on this, but will you actually listen to the suggestions from the consumers? --M0rphzone 00:27, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

And here are some quotes from previous comments on the issue where Curse just ignored the issue altogether:

I strongly object this bar. it would just make things clunky. besides, who is going to look at Notch's blog/twitter/news all the time? we BARELY update the news as-is already, and Notch only posts in short bursts. I think for the sake of ten minutes, for what is usually idle chatter from notch, we can sacrifice these to the main page, if they're even needed. or, the left sidebar. that would be acceptable as well. but right? that's too claustrophobic, and the chances it's useful to someone, if it were put on the main page (which in my opinion is more likely to happen due to functionality) is next to zero.--Kizzycocoa 16:28, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Using 1920x1080 at home on my desktop, and the bar would use 17.5% of my screen. On my laptop however, which runs at 1366x768, the bar would take up to 24.5%, which doesn't leave much space left for the content and the main bar. Now, on 1280x1024, which is a resolution used by a lot of schools (remember, a lot of crafters are teenagers) and people who use 4:3 monitors the bar would take a full 25%. Considering this is most likely the most used resolution, adding a bar that takes 25% of the screen space is just insane and a really bad choice of design. Besides that, as Kizzycocoa mentioned, Notch's twitter is mainly casual and doesn't have that much Minecraft in it at all. We're better off making a list on twitter with all the Mojang guys in it, and then using that feed instead. As for the location, how would it look like if the left bar got enlarged by about 30 pixels, and then a twitter box under the navigation controls? It reaches all users and shouldn't cripple the size of the content.--Quatroking - MCWiki Administrator 16:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I find this sidebar to be a nuisance, because since my computer is without a widescreen monitor, the sidebar gets compressed onto the pages and as such severely interferes with the content, making it look absolutely horrible and awkward to read. What's more, when I look at pictures, the sidebar ends up covering most of the image and I have to click on the picture just to see the whole thing, and I shouldn't have to do that. If this is a feature intended to stay, I suggest it be implemented better, with those who have smaller monitors in mind. Not everyone has a 1920x1080 monitor or larger, and with it as it is now, I find it to be severely intrusive and poorly integrated. If anything, this sort of thing should be on the front page or at the bottom of the pages, or just not used at all. DMagnus 19:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, so I KNOW you people are reading this. stop this idiocity. we do NOT want it. can't you guys understand that? this is a collaborative effort. a community effort. and the community is saying your sidebar is BAD. and yet, you go against it with this insane, ugly, space-eating, useless, and even BROKEN (the twitter feed is a blog feed) sidebar? like I said, I know you've seen this. until I posted, everything was good. So, as a User, and a person with my own thoughts on this, I wish to say: stop being selfish with this side bar. We are the community. We know what we like, what will look good and what will not. And we do not want this wiki ruined by higher-ups who SECRETLY and WITHOUT WARNING AND DISCUSSION ruin the wiki with an space-guzzling sidebar that can easily be put in the left bar or main page, with a link to Minecraft WHICH IS IN THE LEFT SIDEBAR ALREADY, and a twitter feed that DOESN'T WORK, and is FULL OF PERSONAL TWEETS, HARDLY EVER CONTRIBUTING TO MINECRAFT. I am also saying, I am saying this as a user. I have fallen out of administration for much lesser issues due to liking the wiki and wanting to improve it. If I were demoted due to having a voice, I know I have be taken away from the team with the best intentions of the wiki in my mind and intentional. Which is more than you can say on the matter.--Kizzycocoa 20:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Seriously, how many times do we have to say it? The side bar sucks the way it is now.

I see an oddity here: Always so chatty and opinion rich curse staff *coughwynthystcough* is not giving any response in this issue, whereas every single even slightly noobish question about building a basic shelter gets answered in couple of seconds. Seems that curse is not willing to remove the bar. Why not? Are they, like, getting cash out of keeping it up? | TheKax | Talk 07:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

So are you going to do something about this Curse? (pun intended) because it sure looks like you don't give a shit about the community. Is money so important that you'll screw your consumers over?

And yes, I know you can remove the side bar using CSS customization, but this doesn't solve the problem. Many editors are IPs who might also have been annoyed by this issue, but haven't said anything about it. Ok, rant over.

Suggestions for improvement
Apparently, Curse doesn't care unless they see more people voicing their opinions on the issues: I believe Curse has no intentions of ever removing the sidebar, unless traffic on them stops, or unless enough people complain. and we're talking likely hundreds needed to sway them. this does not mean stop arguing for it's removal. I encourage further criticism of the sidebar. that way, there is still hope they'll act on the issue.

the incredibly ugly space-eating issue that should never have happened without wiki community criticism being accepted.--Kizzycocoa 18:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

So please comment on this if you use the wiki, even if only a few times a month.


 * If Curse really can't remove the sidebar from all pages except the main page, I suggest making the sidebar about 2/3 to 1/2 the size it currently is now, and making the text size 1 level smaller. --M0rphzone 00:45, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree that there is absolutely no reason to have it display on every page. Its content belongs on the main page, so it should be put it there and give everyone back the screen space for article content everywhere else. -- Orthotope 00:50, 28 September 2012 (UTC)