Minecraft Wiki talk:Community portal/Archive 1

'''Archived content from the - Do not edit this page! '''

new monster
i when playing the game i found even on peaceful a monster. i gues its the new monster the said there is gonna be. its a blob like thing .if you kill a big one it separates into smaller easier to kill ones.very annoying!!!
 * That would be a . Notch accidentally made them spawn on peaceful.  That will later be corrected :D - 22:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

"subject to change" template?
should this be made? case and point, bookshelves may have writeable books in future. boats may be towed together. apples may be cooked in future etc. etc. thoughts? -- 22:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the problem is that there's too much that's "subject to change", since the game is still in alpha. Even torches (if you ask me, the most essential item in the game) are likely to change in the future, so we'd be slapping this tag on every other article. I vote we don't introduce such a template. 12:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I'd say this can apply to about 80% of the articles here. -- 19:42, 28 October 2010 (CDT)

Alot of recent additions gone missing?
I noticed a lot of discussions and such have gone missing, and a lot of things, such as the big giant page this Wiki had detailing every block has been split up into individual pages for each block. A good example is when you Google "minecraft wiki Talk:TNT". Here's the first result:


 * Talk:TNT - Minepedia - The Minecraft Wiki!
 * 12 Aug 2010 ... I just noticed the part of this page where it claims that the blast radius of TNT is 5x5x5 when put at the center. ...
 * www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Talk:TNT -

[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:g1jtqTfBvd4J:www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Talk:TNT+minecraft+wiki+Talk:TNT&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca Here's the cached version of the page. Note the IP address. When you check it's contribs...]

Nothing at all....

Did I miss something? 17:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * A lot of spamming and trolling happened on the wiki recently, and SOMETHING happened that reverted a good chunk of the wiki back to what it was on July 30/August 1. Most of the changes that have happened to pages since then are gone, although some things have been fixed. -- 17:35, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there any chance that admins will be able to get these changes and additions back? I'd like to point out the Redstone circuits page, where a lot of work has been lost. -- 18:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Just Google search the page, look at the cached version, copy and paste, done. Here's the cached version. Alot more stuff seems to be on the cached version from Google, than on the current page. It'd take alot of copy/paste work to fix the current page and make it look like that cached version. 18:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not as simple as that. There were lots of diagrams for the designs of every gate. The cached page doesn't contain these diagrams, and they are the things that matter the most. -- 20:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Notch Time
someone NEEDS to make this page. is it ok to do so?-- 03:33, 20 August 2010 (PDT)


 * What is notch time?


 * http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Valve_Time
 * but, for notch.
 * for example, SMP was promised to have been released months ago. there are some more, but idk most of them.
 * it would mainly be a joke, pointing out errors in his releases as with VALVe, while being informative. if you get what I mean.-- 05:34, 26 August 2010 (PDT)


 * I say go for it, itd worth some lols.
 * If its mainly going to be a joke, then I don't see a reason to make a page like it. It wouldn't be related enough. However, I think you could add it to the article just fine in a new paragraph.-- 16:13, 26 August 2010 (PDT)
 * well, that page is a joke there. and it's in a "SERIOUS BUISINESS" forum. trust me, some of those guys are pure nazi's of the internet. not all, but some of the "professionals" who have done maps for source since they were 2.
 * still, another paragraph is fine I guess. :) -- 16:28, 26 August 2010 (PDT)

Game Mode Work
Im going to move the current "" article to "Survival Mode Test" and leave Survival as an article referring to Alpha for the time being and talking about Indev, Infdev and SMT. Anyone have suggestions/complaints?
 * 2 words.
 * "Disambiguation page" :3-- 13:54, 26 August 2010 (PDT)


 * Wouldnt it be easier to just separate SMT and use the title notch gave it in old version updates though?
 * yes, but, would it be the right thing to do?-- 16:26, 26 August 2010 (PDT)
 * Why not?
 * because survival is the name for the old one. SMP is a misnomer, as Survival Test was meant to have multiplayer, but it's been delayed all the way until infdev, so both have HUGE differences. I personally think it couldn't hurt to add a disambiguation page.-- 16:32, 26 August 2010 (PDT)
 * Where was survival made the name for the old one?
 * when notch decided to call SP tests of survival "survival mode test", and made it free.-- 16:36, 26 August 2010 (PDT)
 * Ok
 * Woah, what happened there?
 * I mean, "when he decided to call the first SP survival mode (with mobs in)".-- 16:55, 26 August 2010 (PDT)


 * Just checked Minecraft.net's stats page. "Survival mode test" is one of the sections.

ALL THE IMAGES ARE BROKEN
They show thumbnails, but you can't view the original image which is a HUGE ASS PROBLEM considering this website contains many guides in the form of images ( for any reason at all??? this is a frickin wiki after all, why would you need to put your text in an image? :/ ) and the text is unreadable in pretty much all of these cases.

Might want to fix the huge gaping hole in your website...


 * Whats been going on with these problems on the wiki letely?
 * We had a few server transfers (yes, we're that good) and it looks like some files didn't make it. I've been yelling at our sysadmins for a day now, lets hope they respond real soon.-- 02:30, 6 September 2010 (CDT)

Removing the square bg on item pictures
I just did it to the bread picture without realizing pretty much all item pictures had this. Is there any reason to keep them or should i go ahead and remove the backgrounds? (imo the bg makes the pictures look odd)
 * we cannot. the animated ones mean they have to be one image, or else the crafting grid/output gets out of sync. so, might at well make them all the same for consistency.-- 03:14, 11 September 2010 (CDT)


 * So I should remove it then?
 * uh, no, as the animations will get out of sync if they're split up :S -- 15:56, 11 September 2010 (CDT)


 * But all the animations are now in one image with the crafting recipe and output. As far as i can tell, none of these pictures with the backgrounds are on any pages with animations.
 * check . more specifically, the door recipe. there are animated images.-- 16:04, 11 September 2010 (CDT)


 * I know, but none of those use the "separate image for input and output" anymore. None of these single items are needed for any animations anymore or even are animated.
 * link?-- 16:17, 11 September 2010 (CDT)


 * is the only other place the food pictures are used, no animations needed there. There arent any pictures for tool items that i know of, except for flint and steel which is needed for no animations. Theres no animations for weapons. And on and on. I dont see what i should be linking to as these animations arent anywhere i can find.
 * wait, what are we even talking about anymore? we've moved from a border removal to apple icons. what's the exact image and problem? x.x-- 16:40, 11 September 2010 (CDT)
 * actually, I think those are good. like inventory boxes. try to ask quatro or someone to confirm, but I think they're styled that way.....-- 16:41, 11 September 2010 (CDT)


 * lol ok

Items
To further continue my rants on this talk page, we need to get some kind of consistency for the articles pertaining to items. I see that Shovels, axes etc. redirected to another page (one with hardly any info on them too). Now, since tools have their own page and each tool redirects to the respective section under it, why does each food item have its own page? Why are bow and arrow condensed to one page while Sword apparently has no mention anywhere? What im getting at is, we just need to determine whether to have each item as its own article, or condense each to a broad category article and have each item redirect to the category article.
 * personally, we just flow with it. if someone has enough trivia or information about something, we allow the article to be created. it's simply the way that's worked best, a community-driven wikia.-- 03:20, 11 September 2010 (CDT)

Classic/Creative and Full/Alpha?
The Minecraft info on this page only explains Classic - it needs to explain Alpha and also tell readers that they are essentially different games. 19:03, 15 September 2010 (CDT)


 * How many articles have you looked at? Ive edited lots of articles to include Alpha info.

Thumbnails Missing!
Most of the image thumbnails are missing, making it impossible to read some articles. Any idea why? And when will this be fixed? -- 15:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * its probably some server issues again considering the wiki was down for a while about 2 days ago

Should block names be capitalized?
Do we craft with Stone, or with stone? I guess the best solution is to capitalize links and leave everything else lowercase, but I wanted to at  least have a guideline about this... Right now it seems to be split  50/50 and it looks kind of bad in some places. 07:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I think we should capitalize everything. I know im guilty for that 50/50 stuff, I dont really notice my inconsistencies when Im writing that stuff.


 * My personal opinion is that block names should be capitalized when talking about the actual block, whereas not capitalized when talking about a generic sort of object. For an example: "Many players build stairs using combinations of Stairs and other blocks." As an addendum to this, water and lava should only be capitalized when talking about the actual cube of water or lava in question (or when talking about Water Source/Spring blocks). So, "You can use a Boat to travel quickly on water rather than swimming."  06:24, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


 * That makes sense, since blocks would be proper nouns and the generic objects are common nouns. Deal. 06:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that capitalizing the first letter is a good idea. It makes it look more professional. November 24, 2010

Translation
Since the community is wide and the game is getting famous i'd like to include, in this wiki, the translation plugin in order to localize the wiki for new users. I can make Italian translation.

Isometric Renders
What do you guys think of the new isometric renders I did for all the normal sized block pages using ? I'm aware that they're a bit bright, but it was my first try at blender and I just wanted to see how they fit in. I also couldn't decide if isometric or perspective rendering looked better, here's a comparison. -- 21:44, 19 October 2010 (CDT)
 * I like isometric much better than the old versions. Yes, some of them are a bit eyeburning, but thats nothing a quick image edit shouldnt be able to fix.
 * Isometric would look a lot better imo. -- 04:07, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you going to get the rest of the pictures sometime?:
 * As soon as I mange to model and UV map the other block sizes. It's surprisingly hard to get it to line up to Minecraft size. -- 05:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally I think having a slight perspective on the render looks better. Not as much as the original images though, they just looked distorted! 05:15, 21 October 2010 (CDT)
 * Alright I've redone them all with better lighting, plus I've done the field block which is the first different sized block. -- 11:50, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

"Environment" category?
This idea occurred to me after I put a lot of pages into the "Mechanics" category and in doing so, took Light out of that category (because it's not mechanical). That particular change was undone as it left the Light page uncategorised, so I suggested on the talk page for Light that we create a new category called Environment for things like Day/night, light, blocks, sun, moon, fluids, plants and so on. The suggestion wasn't picked up on over there, so I thought I'd suggest it here as well. 15:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I dont see why not.


 * That sounds better. 21:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've created the Enviroment category page and linked some things to it, I don't want to go overboard by linking all the individual plants and blocks etc, I think just linking the relevant category pages should suffice. 21:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * We could add the blocks that occur naturally, actually.
 * Phew! Done, I think! 21:47, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I see this being potentially being used for Biomes, as well.-- 17:42, 21 October 2010 (CDT)

Image for deletion
I think we need to delete. There is. 13:07, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Separating some articles
Some articles like s,, and ought to be separated. They are all separate things. Apples and Mushrooms, i could understand if they don't get separated, but Mobs? They're all their own different thing, and it just makes sense (to me anyway) for them to all be their own article.


 * I agree, especially if we can expand the articles. " 01:29, 25 October 2010 (UTC)"


 * I don't think the apple or mushroom pages need to be separated. If we split them, then the pages would be stubs anyway. But I think each mob should have its own page. The mobs page should just list the mobs and give a summary of each one (and talk about the future mobs). 16:59, 27 October 2010 (CDT)

American or European?
This is an issue I've come across several times. When it comes to words like colour armour ambience etc. I do not know whether or not to do the American or European spelling. I know the American spelling is only used in one country but if most of this site's traffic comes from there then it makes sense to use the Americanized spelling. When this is done could an Admin make a note somewhere so it is clear what spelling the site will use so there are no arguments in the future? -- 01:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * UPDATE:After doing some research I have found that the United States makes up 46.5% of this sites traffic. United Kingdom comes in second with 8.7% It's looking like the Americanized spelling might be the one to go with looking at the massive gap. -- 01:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you forgetting about all the other countries that use UK spelling? 01:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The total amount of the next top 10 is less than 40%. The rest of the % accounts for negligible info and errors. I'm not trying to be biased either way. Just trying to sort this out. -- 20:46, 17 October 2010 (CDT)


 * If its american or not, I dont care really. I say we just pick whatever has more country traffic from. If we cant just use Sweden's or something idk


 * I think that European spelling looks a lot better - most words have more letters in them..


 * Wikipedia doesn't care as long as the entire page is either American or European. 17:39, 18 October 2010 (CDT)

I vote for English.

And if not that, then I vote for lolspeak. with AT LEAST one cat per-page-- 12:37, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Favicon
I noticed this site doesn't have that little 16x16px icon that goes in your tab. I made the Minepedia logo the right size and coverted it to ICO format. Whoever knows where to put it, you can get it here. 13:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * According to these official W3C site icon instructions since the minepedia wiki already has a  in the head if each page all that's needed it to save it as favicon.ico in the / directory of the website   06:14, 28 October 2010 (CDT)
 * Actually that doesn't make any difference. It will always look for the favicon in the root directory, you only tell it where to find one if you want it somewhere else. It's actually useless being there, it's more just a backup in-case anyone uses en.minecraftwiki.net or the other language variations. -- 22:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Wherever it goes, I don't have the permissions to upload ICO files anywhere, never mind the site root - one of the big-time admins will have to do it. I'll try a PNG first. 17:33, 29 October 2010 (CDT)
 * Ack, I don't know. PNG version on wiki here now. 17:46, 29 October 2010 (CDT)
 * I will not rest so easily JaffaCake! I designed this Favicon a few weeks ago, I wish to contribute my design! I just request a chance for it to be reviewed also for consideration, for this means a great deal to me! I apologise I cannot provide an ICO format though, the PNG is utilising Alpha Transparency though so it should convert across nicely if anyone has conversion software. Arigato Gozaimashita! (/Battlemode off) Edit: Never mind, JaffaCake's looks better, I have lost the war. I place my sword down. I submit. 22:50, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well that was a quick battle *phew*. Anyway, I still don't know where/how to put the icon so the site uses it, and the PNG one I uploaded here seems to have vanished/been deleted. Still got the remotely-hosted ICO. 13:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I want a favicon! I think something Minecraft-related would look so much better than my browser's default icon.  Anyone else who feels the same, sign here:


 * - 12:13, 14 November 2010 (CST)


 * There is no way for you to put the favicon in the root directory without having FTP access. I honestly don't care if the site gets a favicon, as I have a greasemonkey script that allows me to give any site any favicon, even if it doesn't already have one. – ( at 19:51, 14 November 2010 (CST)


 * Ah, the old "I don't care about your problems because they don't affect me" attitude that's promoted love, peace and harmony the world over for thousands of years.... look, if FTP access is required to upload a favicon then surely someone, somewhere, associated with the wiki, or with the host, would have those rights? -- 14:34, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

FINAL IMAGE WARNING-PLEASE READ
I will remind you all one last time. at halloween, I will be removing all images that are unused. this may or may not include newly uploaded images. please find homes for any usable images before tomorrow morning, likely 9AM-12AM GMT. thanks for your co-operation.-- 17:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * this has now been done-- 20:14, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Error: Nether Zombie Pigmen
They are NOT peaceful!! I can't tell you how many times i was mauled by a hoard of them. -- 23:59, 30 October 2010 (CDT)
 * They are because of the fact that they appear on Peaceful mode. They will only attack you if you attack them first. The only exception is small slimes, I think. -- 22:33, 31 October 2010 (CDT)


 * They often attack me for no reason. I never do anything to harm them, but i think they may just not like the player getting close.
 * Wrong, you must've accidentally hit one at some stage and now they're hostile to you. I've personally spent about half an hour pushing one into a lit up area to take a screenshot of it for the mobs page. -- ( 04:54, 2 November 2010 (UTC)


 * You may think so, but no. I remember, i was tunneling around and hit a little cave with a bunch of pigmen around my first time in nexus or whatever its called now. They were idling around, so i start digging my way to the floor and they suddenly come at me. It seems im the only one who they go for for no reason.


 * I've found that they do sometimes attack if I bump into them while holding the sword. That only happened a few times, though, so it might be something else. In any case, I'll go up to one with no tool and it's fine. Maybe there's something else that is setting them off? 18:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Brittle gold clarification
You should clarify that you can't make anything out of "Brittle Gold" other than blocks of it. I thought you could make torches out of it.-- 05:00, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Old
You know, you should probably remove this page from the sidebar if you're not going to have anything here, same with ... -- 09:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Should it just redirect to the Special Pages page? 19:34, 17 October 2010 (CDT)
 * having the special pages under community portal doesn't make much sense. The community portal should be where people go to comment on the wiki as a whole instead of the main page talk. The main page talk should be for talking about the main page itself.
 * No one uses this page, though (there's nothing here). D: 17:41, 18 October 2010 (CDT)
 * Well thats what its supposed to be used for.
 * If that's the case, I'm going to add a note to the main page talk and one here. -- 02:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)