User talk:Munin295

Redstone sidebar
Ever thought of a sidebar for redstone circuit articles? Something like what's on the right? -- Hower64 08:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * For the circuit articles something like this could be useful, but I'd be reluctant to add another sidebar to pages that already have a Block or Item sidebar (especially for users that don't have the Curse sidebar turned off) -- I'm not sure if you were suggesting those have it too. If it's going to be primarily for circuit pages, I'd put that list at the top. And I wouldn't just list blocks with the word redstone in their name, I'd list all redstone components (maybe just as icons?).
 * I had been thinking of creating a Projects/Redstone to act as a space to discuss issues that cross multiple pages and was wondering if it would make sense to create a "This article falls within the scope of the Redstone project" message box, but this could be more useful. Maybe this on circuit pages (from a template for consolidated updating?), and a small message box on block and item pages?
 * ... Why ... is the icon for redstone circuits ... green? oO
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 10:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * We could have a navbox for block and item pages and use the sidebar for everything else. Change both as much as you see fit; I just threw in a bunch of redstone related articles in no particular order. As for the circuitry icon...if you think you have a better icon you can replace it. -- Hower64 00:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * So do you think it should be implemented now...? -- Hower64 02:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry if I haven't been jumping on this. I've been holding off tackling the other circuit pages right now because I wanted to finish my Schematic sprites and templates, and many of the circuits will need re-testing after 1.5.
 * All of the redstone component pages already have a linkbox at the bottom (Blocks), with all the redstone components already grouped in one place, so I don't think it's necessary on those pages (and they all have a link to Redstone Circuits on the left). How about something small like this for the top-right of the circuit pages? It only lists the primary circuit articles (and BUDs, for now -- we'll see what 1.5 does to them), using the same terms I've finalized on in the main article (which I hope to propagate to the other articles eventually), and a link to the redstone tutorials. Call it Redstone navbox?
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 05:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Both templates were made comprehensive because I figured a central location for all articles redstone would be useful for navigation and exposing the articles which are not linked to very often and might be overlooked by readers. The sidebar was intended to be large and prominent, since circuit articles don't have infoboxes taking up the right margin and because it makes all the circuit articles look nice and organised. As for the navbox, although Blocks is only missing redstone dust, it doesn't have the circuitry pages listed and is so massive and general, a redstone navbox seemed useful as well. -- Hower64 07:13, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Including the (currently seven) 1.5 additions, there's now over two dozen redstone component blocks. Circuit pages don't have info boxes, but they do tend to have very short introductions and then dive right into image (and table)-intensive discussions, and a tall navbox could start to push those around (with all the components, it would be twice as tall as the example on the right). So if we're going to include all the components, I think a navbox at the bottom of the article would be better (and consistent with the intention for block articles):
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 08:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Here's an exhaustive version of the vertical form, as about as compact as it can get:
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 21:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Makes sense. I think we should implement your navbox then. -- Hower64 02:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've created Redstone navbox (with 1.5 components commented out for the time being). For now, I've just added it to the circuit pages. Maybe it'll get some comments from others before it's added to lots of other pages. (That's the intention, right? Add the navbox to all pages it links to?)
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 03:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * To keep consistency, it would make more sense to call it Redstone. -- Hower64 03:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Moved. &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 03:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm all for adding that to every page it's linked to, for consistency with this type of nav template, but due to it's small size, I suggest adding it on top of both the block and item templates, depending on which one or both is on that page. Previewing the template on the repeater page, for instance, the block and item templates sort of hide the redstone template at the bottom when I originally was aiming for template alpha sort. 04:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * -- Hower64 05:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Are you a redstone pro?
Just wondering... you have redstone all over your talk page. - Creepers explode, don&#39;tcha know? 18:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Welcome back! : )
 * Nope, I'm just interested in it. I have a pretty good understanding of how redstone works, but I don't have the time (or the patience) to develop complicated builds (well, I do a few), so for now I'm primarily working on improving its documentation.
 * Right now I'm working on a new sprite template that will allow users to create circuit (and, hopefully, mechanism) schematics without having to upload images. Then I plan to tackle the rest of the redstone circuit articles.
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 19:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh. I was thinking about asking you later if you could help with my project, which I haven't got up yet. - Creepers explode, don&#39;tcha know? 20:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd be happy to try to answer questions, so feel free to ask anything. If I can't help you, you might try the forums.
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 21:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You're awesome. I'll let you know if something comes up, cuz I got my prob fixed. (Silly repeater!) - Creepers explode, don&#39;tcha know? 22:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

thanks
thanks for your help. can you check if i did it right please http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Tutorials/Furniture#Water_Spigot i hope to add more soon if i can. Cody 1 9 9 3 03:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again. Okay : )
 * Good job, you took the first step which can be scary! Here's some ways to improve it:
 * Your instructions don't mention the chiseled stone block on top of the cobblestone wall. I'd add that so your instructions match your illustrations.
 * The image link has some brackets and tags which shouldn't be visible.
 * The method I showed you earlier was for images uploaded to the wiki server. For images hosted on another server (like imgur), the easiest thing to do is to just write out the link without brackets or anything, and the wiki will convert that to a link (with a funny arrow showing that it's an external link), like this: http://i.imgur.com/a7lKEKd.png
 * If you want, you can give the link a title by putting the link and the title in single brackets, like this:  turns into Water Spigot
 * Don't sign article contributions, only talk posts. Some articles have hundreds of edits and we wouldn't want usernames attached to every edit. But your username is recorded in the article's history (link at the top of the page), so your contribution is remembered that way.
 * You can choose to try those improvements, or you can leave it and maybe someone else will come along someday and add to it. Yay, wikis!
 * P.S. I moved this down into its own topic. When you want to start a new topic on a talk page, use the Add Topic tab at the top of the page.
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 03:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * -Done-
 * thanks for your help


 * No prob!
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 04:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

redstone block
Why did you remove my contribution in the redstone block article? this IS a bug and i was not submitting it to the wiki to get attention. as you could clearly see in my photo, NO pistons were extended, and that deems your primary argument invalid. please don't take others things down for no good reason, im just here to help, not to be removed.


 * Check your talk page. I explained it there.
 * tl;dr: bugs should be submitted to mojang.atlassian.net, not to the wiki.
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 00:22, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hopper's 'Testing with Comparators'
I agree on being useful in that section. However, what's described there is false.

I understand that it's the comparator which does the job of actually computing the output signal from the container content. That's logical. So, whatever the case, a link to the Redstone Comparator article is the best thing to have.

Finally, have you tried to apply 'intel' given in that section? The calculus doesn't work at all. You deleted my input as 'speculation' and you were right. However what I replaced was also speculation, the proof is it's made of absolutely dumb statements.

69.9.123.59 05:27, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've fixed the math. Thanks!
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 08:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * What is written is still not right (euphemism).


 * Depending on the maximum amount of the item you use, the power output will vary differently.
 * For example, 1 egg counts for 4 dirt block (since max amount of eggs per stack is 16 and max amount of dirt blocks is 64, 4 times more).
 * Same thinking process about non stackable item (ie max mount par stack is 1), which count for 64 dirt blocks or 16 eggs.


 * Could you remove all false maths assumptions (ie speculations) from the Hooper page and replace them with a link to the Redstone Comparator, which is the component repsonsible for the maths?
 * 69.9.123.59 20:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, what's written is correct (I believe) for most stackable items, and useful, so it shouldn't be removed (and the comparator link is already there if anyone wants additional details). A parenthetical aside about non-stackable and 16-stackable items might be justified, but I think most people will understand it as is (the goal isn't precision, but understanding).
 * Assumptions, speculations, and imprecision are three different things. Right now, it's just not going into all the details about stacks (imprecision), which is fine since the full details are linked to.
 * Unless you think there is something actually incorrect, not just imprecise?
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 21:30, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, you changed it yourself. The single item thing is important so I put that back in.
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 21:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Yup I did it right after. It was no big change so I couls do it myself and you still could modify it afterwards.
 * OK some things seem important to you... I won't fight it even if it seems unnecessary to me, everything must be explained directly where the maths belong, on the comparator page.
 * Anyway, let's agree on that compromise. There is no wrong info anymore at least.
 * 69.9.123.59 12:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Schematic work... sandbox?
I do know the pages can't go live until the CSS is accepted. Even so, it occurs to me that you might want to make this a Sandbox project, so anyone who wants can plug in the CSS and work on it. That's a lot of circuits!

I'd appreciate it if you'd look at my work at User:Mental_Mouse/Sandbox/Logic Circuits, as I have a couple of questions about presentation. Do you think that 24-pixel size is appropriate for this? Also, I've mostly been including input levers where they were in the original, but would you say those are still needed?

I note that the contents of the image I'm converting are partly obsolete, as many of those circuits have been superseded by redstone gates and other new elements. Still, it's worth getting them into separate objects so they can be reorganized and individually tweaked. --Mental Mouse 15:23, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I've got it in my watchlist already. : )
 * I've asked ultradude25 to put the CSS into the wiki's style sheet. If he's willing, that will make it easier for anyone to test it, or for people to just start using the template in articles.
 * I'm seeing some visual artifacts at the 24px size (a little bit of a neighboring sprite sometimes bleeds into the visual area). That's why I chose 32px as the default size (16px was too small). (EDIT: Ignore that, I was using browser magnification and that was screwing it up.)
 * I think it's good to include the levers.
 * There are tons of obsolete circuits (seriously, 2011 circuits). I don't think it's necessary to list every possible circuit in the articles (especially ones that are topologically identical, unless they have other features to differentiate them: 1-wide, flat, etc.), just ones people might actually use. Because of the wiki's history, circuits not updated aren't lost, so feel free to use your judgement in choosing which circuits to update.
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 15:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * So, Ultradude put the CSS into the Wiki... should I remove it from my own common.css? Also, did you ever fix the text-flow issue?  For that matter, once I finish Logic Gates, should I take it live?  --Mental Mouse 21:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I've commented out the CSS from my own common.css (effectively deleting it), and it's working.
 * I'll try to find time to look at the float/clear issue tonight. Exhelah had me hopping today with his edits (he's mostly concentrating on screenshots, I think) and I need to get back to other things.
 * I wanted to do an RFC first, but I know a few admins have looked at Schematic already, so it's probably okay to use it in articles. Schematic depends on precise CSS and I haven't had a chance to look at it in different browsers, on different platforms, with different fonts and font sizes, etc. But it's a wiki, not a commercial website, so maybe we just start using it and see if anyone complains about problems.
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 22:32, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Umm... that could be a bit hasty. We should probably at least have people test it on various browsers before we go live.  (For the record, I'm using Firefox on Linux.)  I'll put a note in the community portal, if the wiki holds up.  (My last update to XOR was stalled for hours by blank screens and "Server Capacity Exceeded" errors.)  It'll point people to the docs, your Transmission page, and my Logic page.  --Mental Mouse 00:59, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Whoops, yep. I'm on a mac and it looks fine in Firefox and Safari, but it's messed up in Chrome (it looks like the image isn't scaling properly). &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 01:24, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, no, I'm wrong. It's fine on Chrome/mac, my chrome browser just had an old version of the sprite sheet cached. Whew! &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 01:31, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I've implemented the "text-flow" behavior: when floated to the left or right (the default for a captioned schematic), additional schematics will line up side-by-side rather than being forced below. This will allow multi-layer schematics on a single row, or galleries. If you want to force a schematic below other floated elements, use the  parameter. &mdash;Munin295 &middot;  &middot; 02:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool, and thanks! Once I've finished with the first pass of Logic Circuits, I'll see how to best arrange the circuits for looks.


 * BTW, it occurs to me that we may eventually want a BR-u sprite. Possibly a ts-u one as well, but that goes back to the conflict with "darker".  However, it's probably better to consider redstone blocks as implicitly mobile, rather than try mixing the redstone and diamond textures. ;-) --Mental Mouse 10:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Double Redirects
Just wanted to let you know that there are a few double redirects on your userspace. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs Edit count 09:39, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I've fixed them and I'll try to use that special page when I do mass moves. &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 14:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Videos in advanced redstone pages
Technically, all these circuit pages should be counted as tutorials, even though they are not subpages of tutorials, due to the tutorial-like nature of explaining how to create these circuits. That's just my opinion, though. 17:08, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I could live with the idea of the circuit articles being considered as, or even moved to, Tutorials -- but I hate the idea of them being overrun by self-promoting videos the way the mechanism tutorials have been.
 * The tutorials exception in the video policy is written in a way that it basically says "no rules for tutorials!" -- I'd like to see that tightened up in some way, but I'm not sure how since some videos can be helpful. As a start, I'd say a video should only be allowed on a tutorial after a full write-up (screenshots, schematics, and discussion) -- if someone's willing to go that far to promote their own video, that probably turns it into a worthwhile contribution to the wiki.
 * The "no self-promotion" rule can also be difficult. Noticing something that could be better explained in a video and then creating a video to explain it that follows the rules seems like a perfectly legitimate and useful thing to do. Differentiating that from people just adding their video to related content to promote their channel can be an extremely subjective judgement call which risks edit wars or discouraging someone who might have been a good contributor.
 * Mental Mouse and I have started adding references for some circuits though (earliest known publication). Many of those refs are videos, but a text link in the references section about a specific circuit fact won't encourage people to add their own videos as much (I hope).
 * &mdash;Munin295 &middot; Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Stone_Pickaxe.png &middot; 18:38, 12 May 2013 (UTC)