Talk:Non-renewable resource/Archive 1

A list of non-renewable resources seems like a good idea. What's the reason this page was deleted? Too little content? Then maybe add list to the Renewable Resources? HYBRID-BEING 19:26, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Unrenewable Resources. Long and short, if it's not one thing, it's the other, no need to state both (especially since Nonrenewable is the default). --JonTheMon 19:31, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what the original reason was, but the reason as I see it is that such a great amount of resources are non-renewable that the page would be huge. More importantly, the information contained on the page would not help the users in any way.  Knowing that there are ways to produce resources infinitely is helpful.  There is no need to clarify the opposite, as it is assumed that any resource not on the Renewable Resources page will be non-renewable.  Verhalthur (talk)(contribs) 19:32, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Of cource if oil is unrenewable then we got not to talk about it anywhere )))))) it's the "iron logic" )))) You should be ashamed --Dima Shum 19:44, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * .....wut? Please give any reasoning in a clear, grammatically-correct manner. --JonTheMon 20:12, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Not to mention that there is no such block as oil. Verhalthur (talk)(contribs) 20:14, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You are playing too much in Minecraft. Wellcome to real world =) In real world there are renewable and nonrenewable resources(such as oil)--Dima Shum 20:56, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps he refers to Wikipedia having both Renewable and Non-renewable resources pages.
 * But are there really a lot of non-renewable resources? Dirt, sand, sandstone, gravel, clay, mossy cobblestone and stone brick, iron, redstone, lapis lazuli, diamond, lava, glowstone, netherrack, soul sand. I think it'll be nice to have a complete table of non-renewable resources and products made from them just to see what things player is unable to craft w/o more exploring. HYBRID-BEING 21:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Maybe we should merge it with "Renewable Resources" and rename it "Resource renewability" or something? --Flajuram 21:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I like it. I will move the hole article now. The main thing is how exactly to name the article? Maybe just "Resources"? --Dima Shum 22:06, 7 October 2011 (UTC)