Template talk:License

Category
As this template really is not a notice template, can the parameter be set to disable it?

Otherwise if these are notice templates, it would make more sense for license templates to be a subcategory, and thus disable the cat in favor of the subcat.

– KnightMiner  (t·c) 16:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Should sprite files have the Mojang licensing?
So, I am the creator of DungeonsLevelCSS.png (for the Minecraft Dungeons Wiki, also by me) and recently got a notification that it got the Mojang copyright. I saw BiomeCSS.png also got it. I feel both should have gotten the No Copyright licensing, the Simple Geometry licensing, or an exclusive one for sprites, because:

a) The files are not by Mojang, b) They are not copyrighted, and c) The only reason they exist are for Template:DungeonsLevelSprite and Template:BiomeSprite respectively.

I don't know what to do in this case, so what licensing should the files get? --AwesomeNinja886 (talk) ( Contributions) ( My favorite mob) ( Minecraft: Dungeons Wiki project) 18:24, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Restructure the template to avoid Crusher modifying its max-width on page load
Currently, the template is a table (with non-tabular content) and has a max-width property specified. Crusher (the custom extension that regulates table widths) modifies this table so that its max-width is set to 100%. This runs on page load and causes at least a horizontal jump.

Admittedly, the Crusher script fails on file pages due to a quirk I can't really say is intentional or not. That means there are few pages affected by the jump, but the issue still remains.

Perhaps this could be changed to either a percentage width, or restructured into a non-table format? --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 22:11, 4 February 2020 (UTC)