Talk:Ocelot

Healing
Is there an easy way to heal a tamed ocelot, or so you need splash potion of healing?71.35.109.25 21:24, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Nope, a potion is required. – KnightMiner  (t·c) 21:31, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Split Cat away
The result of the discussion was do not split.

This was already discussed, but damn bureaucracy is ruining everything, and I have to repair all of that. I would like to have Cat be separate from Ocelot, if it would be confirmed that we have cats instead of just merely tamed ocelots. &mdash; NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 12:07, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Not sure what you're asking to be confirmed here. In the code, cats and ocelots are done in the same way as tamed and wild wolves: one class with a "tamed" flag. It's even possible with summon commands to have untamed ocelots with cat skins or tamed cats with the ocelot skin, although the size will still reflect the tameness (tamed are smaller, 80% of the size of untamed). Anomie x (talk) 14:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

"I think people are getting too caught up in orangising pages based on data values (which most people are not going to even know exist), rather than what is actually useful for a reader. Cobblestone Wall and Mossy Cobblestone Wall for instance are the same page, but Cobblestone and Moss Stone are separate pages. Why? Data values."

- Majr


 * —  Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 15:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Even ignoring data values, what worthwhile difference is there between cats and ocelots, other than the fact one follows the player and sits? (before using that quote out of context, always ask if there are other reasons the articles are merged besides data values. Data values just happen to be the same in the case of most same features)
 * Also, if people disagree, bureaucracy is not to be blamed, the problem is there is not enough support. – KnightMiner  t/c 17:31, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * . Only differences are size and behavior (cats can sit and follow the player). – LauraFi -  talk  21:08, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * And what's their value overall? HUH? Even if they share some of the behavior, it doesn't necessarily mean that they should be on the same article. A normal player will consider them different, thus they are different. &mdash; Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 07:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Cats, for example, are called cats in-game, not (tamed) ocelots. This means that they are considered different. Or should we merge Wither Skeleton with Skeleton? &mdash; Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 07:30, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Cats and ocelots are far too similar to require breaking into two pages. Yes they are slightly different but in the end you will likely have a lot of duplication of content between the two. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 09:48, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Open your eyes. Dand0, GreenStone? &mdash; Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 10:19, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Um ok then? Instead of addressing my concern, you respond with ad hominem. What would you like me to open my eyes to? –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 11:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Some key comments from the merge proposal from three years ago:


 * "Ocelots and cats have the same ID, are implemented by the same class, and use the same model, only resized and retextured."

- mgr


 * "They share the same Network/Savegame IDs, health, and experience. They have similar behavior. You could section off Wild and Tamed phases with headers, but totally separate articles for what is essentially and literally the same mob is well... dumb."

- MegaScience


 * "Cats are actually the same mob as Ocelots. They have the same savegame ID, as well as the same network ID. The only differences are the behavior and skin. They are, actually the same species. Feeding a Ocelot fish would not alter its DNA, were this real, nor does it alter anything but a few features in Minecraft. Not merging them would be like giving charged creepers a page of their own."

- JamesTheAwesomeDude


 * "I think merging makes sense, they are essentially the same mob. Behavior makes no difference. If it did, shouldn't we have 2 wolf pages? Wild Wolves are neutral, don't follow you, and you can't make them sit. Tamed Wolves are passive, follow the player, can sit, can attack mobs other then just sheep, etc."

- Golbolco


 * BDJP (t 10:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Wait for my Russian friends then. On that wiki is an inverse situation: two good and old discussion topics about merging failed, and since then most still oppose. Hopefully they can give better arguments for splitting than me. Hail HYDRA! &mdash; Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37</b> (talk&#124;contributions) 10:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Meh: I could see a split, besides the taming and history sections there wouldn't really be more duplication than we have between completely different mobs. It's also fine with me combined how it is. But seriously, NickTheRed37, your behavior here isn't helping anything: "Open your eyes", "Wait for my friends from a different-language wiki", etc.? Anomie x (talk) 12:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't see any arguments here that weren't made in the last discussion, where the consensus was to merge the two. If the Russian wiki wants to do things differently, that's fine, but don't come here and try to force us to do the same thing. -- Orthotopetalk 15:14, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Everyone else has made any content-related arguments against splitting that I might want to, so I will instead comment on the proposal itself. It sounds like this was spurred by the Russian wiki's decision not to merge their articles on ocelots and cats, which as Orthotope said is fine. If that's the consensus there, then so be it. But we are not the Russian wiki, and while their decisions may be used to inform discussions here, at the end of the day we can and may decide to do things differently. To trot out a rather tired example, this is exactly the same way Wikipedia works: any given language version of Wikipedia may choose to adopt some practice from another language version, or they may choose to do things differently; as long as there's consensus one way or another, no one can tell them they're wrong for having made that decision. And the fact that we have one article for both ocelots and cats here is the result of a consensus, not of bureaucracy, as can be seen above. Speaking more generally, I would like to know exactly how "bureaucracy is ruining everything", too. All things considered, there really isn't much bureaucracy here (definitely nowhere near the level Wikipedia has), so I want to know how exactly it is nonetheless hurting the wiki. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 08:36, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Reboot
"В текстовых файлах игры есть два отдельных названия: кошка и оцелот — что подразумевает их существенное различие. Волк в текстовых файлах имеет одно название и для дикого, и для прирученного состояний."

- HEKP0H on Russian wiki

Translation: "In game’s text files there are two separate names: cat and ocelot — what alludes to their significant differences. Wolf in text files has a single name for both wild and tamed states."

—  NickTheRed37</b> (talk&#124;contributions) 17:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Horses and donkey's have different names, as do the variants of sandstone and stone bricks and the chest/large chest GUI title.
 * Also, I doubt anyone above is going to change their mind because they have different names as the primary argument against splitting was behavior/other similarities. – KnightMiner  t/c 17:48, 9 May 2015 (UTC)


 * per quotes from closed discussions. BDJP (t 17:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Sandstone, stone brick and chest variants share a common part and thus they don’t count. —  Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37</b> (talk&#124;contributions) 18:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)