Talk:Legacy Console Edition version history/Archive 2

By Version Number or by Title Update?
I think this decision needs to be more fully discussed, as there will be other templates that rely on the naming convention being as it was. I have reverted the change for now and opened discussion about it here. My personal preference is to go with the TU nomenclature as well, but I don't fully understand the ramifications of such a change either. I know for a fact that such a change would affect the HESI template I have been working on, if it were widely in use. I'm concerned that there may be other templates out there that such a radical change could affect also. &mdash; Augur &#x2710; &#x2315; 06:32, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, this page uses the  template extensively, providing links both by version number and by Title Update number. The HESI template I've been making links to Xbox version history entries by TU number already. I'll go through the What Links Here list to see if anything else relies on the section headings being as they were, and if I can't find anything, I'll revert my own revert, restoring CRRaysHead90's edit. &mdash; Augur &#x2710; &#x2315;  07:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Why does it matter other than what the developmental company refers to the version as? CRRaysHead90 22:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * What the development company calls something is not as important on a wiki like the MinecraftWiki as what other templates and dependencies on the wiki may be expecting to see. If you make a small change like this on a wiki, it can have huge ramifications elsewhere on the wiki. I haven't checked all the inbound links yet, but if someone else can confirm that this change will not affect any other template then I don't see why we can't make this change as has been suggested. For future reference CRRaysHead90, it is best to bring such changes to the talk page first, if they might affect something else. As it says on the Help:Contents page, "If you're unsure about something to add, use the talk page. This is recommended especially when adding out-of-site links or bigger changes on pages." Changing the names of all the section headings would be considered a "bigger change".


 * As I mentioned above, I happen to agree with you about the Title Update (TU) number being used. I just don't want this change to break something else. &mdash; Augur &#x2710; &#x2315; 19:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * How can you be the official Minecraft Wiki and not care what the developer states? CRRaysHead90 04:02, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Tell you what, if you want to revert my revert before I have gotten around to checking all the inbound links to this page, you go for it. I can't stop you. I'm just another editor here, just like you. I have no authority on the Minecraft Wiki. But if you break something by doing so, you should be responsible for fixing whatever you broke. Understand? &mdash; Augur &#x2710; &#x2315; 17:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Title Update 13 now out
Tilte Update 13 is now out. Somebody should update the wiki with Title Update 13's changes and make it the most recent version, because currently the latest version on the Wiki Homepage is TU12, when it should be TU13. --KamranMackey (talk) 18:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

correction
Under TU7 the first "notable bug" is "some players unable to sleep in beds". this actually turned out to be a different bug, namely that "cannot sleep in bed because monsters are near" had just been introduced to the xbox version but the error message wasn't displaying. people just thought the bed was broken but it was actually refusing their attempts for legitimate reasons and just failing to tell them so.

Fixed. The Handfish (talk) 16:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

TU14 Added
I added TU14, feel free to clean it up/add sources.

The Handfish (talk) 16:45, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Hope for an update!
I know that I am not the only one that hopes that one day the PS3 edition will have 100% of the features in PC. I wonder if Mojang believes the same. Until then, just keep playing both and having as much fun as always! “Happiness can be found, even in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.” - Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore (talk) 22:48, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

TU19 Questions?
Has the Book and Quill been implemented yet, if not will it ever be? Also how about the command block? -- 212.159.114.107 18:14, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Both of these things are not in Console Edition yet. I did not read about when the book and quill will appear, but I'm sure that at some point it will be. --<b style=font-family:sans-serif;color:purple>Naista2002</b> &#124; talk » contribs 18:26, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Here's a question. How are skeleton horse and zombie horse in the console edition if console edition doesn't have commands? Even in the PC version you can't get them without using commands. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by WildBluntHickok (talk • contribs) at 21:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * For similarity with PC, maybe. You may still be able to get them using map editors. --<b style=font-family:sans-serif;color:purple>Naista2002</b> &#124; talk » contribs 14:32, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

PlayStation Vita 1.02a & 1.02b
What's the differentce between PSVita versions 1.02a and 1.02b? lol | violine1101(Talk) 13:09, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell, nothing. Someone duplicated the version, including the reference. (which only states existence of a single 1.02 version) – KnightMiner  (t·c) 14:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 1.02b was added as duplicate 1.02 by @ on 26 December 2014 - whyever. I think it's okay if I remove 1.02b and rename 1.02a to 1.02. | violine1101(Talk) 14:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC) Edited 14:17, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, where did CU2/1.01 go? I'm just translating this page into German and I'm somewhat confused, if you wonder. | violine1101(Talk) 18:38, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Has nobody an idea? | violine1101(Talk) 17:45, 21 February 2015 (UTC)


 * All I can tell is there is a 1.0.1 before PS4 1.00, meaning PS4's first version may have been 1.00, then they skipped to the same as the PS3's version. – KnightMiner  (t·c) 18:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmm, but there is a version called CU3/1.02. The next PS4 version is 1.10. So as far as I know, the version numbers of the PS4 version (and the PSVita version's too, but that itsn't affected by that gap between 1.00 and 1.02) were adapted to the PS3 version numbers on 3rd of december. But well... there still is that gap between CU1 and CU3 on the Xbox One version. The official changelogs also don't list any 1.01 or CU2 version... weird. | violine1101(Talk) 22:57, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

New layout
It looks good in my opinion. Keeping all the PS versions in one column makes sense, as it keeps the colmns down to three, and I think it would go well with the TOC design from the german wiki. – KnightMiner  t/c 17:51, 15 May 2015 (UTC) Anyway, whatever the width of the 1-5 "Version and date" columns is, the addition summary column still is readable. I think I'll implement the new layout to the 2014-2012 tables tomorrow if noone complains about the new layout. | violine1101(Talk) 19:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I wasn't too sure about implementing this because as said here, "the fact that close to half of the width is taken up just by the version/date information is way too obtrusive". I had tried out setting the width of the "Version and date" column to a percentage like 10% in preview mode but in that case there would be wasted space on bigger displays. I implemented the new layout for 2015 only because the table would need five "Version and date" columns again for the year 2014 which indeed is taking up about a third of the monitor when using a 4:3 (1280&times;1024) display. To prevent that, on the German wiki we shortened the date (for example "January" to "Jan"). I just read the style guide and it says that numeric dates are allowed if needed. I would use the format "YYYY-MM-DD" because there will be one table for each year (It doesn't make much sense if there were five columns back in 2012). I'm however not sure about that.
 * In my honest opinion, I personally don't like it. I don't think I can explain it in words at the moment... BDJP (t 19:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Could you at least try to describe what you don't like about the new layout please? It would be good if we could find a consensus. | violine1101(Talk) 14:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I think this is a pretty good solution - 3 columns is not too wide. Only problem is how to keep it 3 columns for 2014? There are versions where all of the editions are different. –<b style=color:#282>Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 07:45, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * On the German page, the 2014 table uses five columns. However, the dates had to be shortened, which actually is against our style guide, but the admins were okay with it. Another soultion would be to split the playstation column into three pseudo sub-rows such as this:


 * Also, dates get more confusing as they are split up to North America and Europe here. I suggest to always take the earlier date or it would just lead to overfilled columns which noone really wants to read.
 * Another possibility to display the versions would be such as this:


 * Well, this doesn't really look well as the different os sprites have different sizes. | violine1101(Talk) 17:33, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * There is never more then three update numbers and cases with multiple release dates are few (I think I counted three cases), so I think the three column approach should work fine and we just display the different release dates in separate lines, like so:


 * – KnightMiner  t/c 02:10, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I think that looks pretty good, although until I can see the table converted, many of the entries are pretty complicated with only 1 version (only for PSVita etc). Until 2014 is converted I'm unsure whether it will all fit this mould. –<b style=color:#282>Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 11:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@: The rowspan at PS version 1.15 was intended as 1.15 contains all features of TU22 and TU23. @: Thanks for implementing the table. I think it looks fine now. I had forgotten about this discussion as I have often been absent the last three weeks. | violine1101(Talk) 16:28, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Splitting into separate pages for each update?
As the Pocket Edition, Pi Edition, and the regular editions all have their updates split into separate pages, should the Console Edition follow this too? Or is it simply too difficult because of the variations of platform/version labeling on each platform? --MarioProtIV (talk) 21:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That has already been discussed here. It isn't too complex, but how would you name an article? The console edition versions don't have equal or similar version numbers, so it would be way more confusing than it is now. | violine1101(Talk) 21:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The pages could be named Console Edition TU /CU /PS . If one update is only for one or two platforms, just make the title Console Edition CU /PS  or Console Edition PS . An example title would be Console Edition TU25/CU14/PS 1.17. --MarioProtIV (talk) 21:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Who would find such a page? Noone searches for "Console Edition CU1/PS4 1.00/PS Vita 1.00" or "Console Edition CU3/PS4 1.02" (or even "Console Edition TU42/CU8/PS3 1.28/PS4 1.23/PS Vita 1.22" - this version doesn't exist but such a title is theoretically possible according your system). I think it isn't worth the effort. Also, a table is way more clear to read. | violine1101(Talk) 21:52, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * To make it easer to search for the page you could have the title of the page still be Console Edition TU /CU /PS  but have a redirect for each version number. TU , CU , and PS version. Wolffillms (talk) 23:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That's a good idea, but the only issue would be it would take a LONG time creating redirects for every single Console versions (there's like 60 versions), plus there is the concern of broken redirects. --MarioProtIV (talk) 00:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with Violine1101 on the titles, absolutely no combined all versions into one title. That would not only making linking them harder, but would look terrible.
 * I would personally love to split the article for consistancy, but until that and the other difficulties are resolved, it is perfectly fine as one article. – KnightMiner  t/c 22:00, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Is Wolffilms' suggestion of creating redirects really as daunting as MarioProtIV suggests? Creating 60 redirects doesn't seem like that big of a job. – Sealbudsman <span style="transform: rotate(-12deg); display: inline-block; top: -2px; position: relative;">talk/contr 20:48, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I suggest to create pages gradually. GRAND RADION (talk) 10:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Simplifying
@: I don't see any inconsistence with the style guide regarding this edit. Why exactly did you revert it? | violine1101(Talk) 14:29, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Not Fair
It’s not fair. I like Console updates the best, but there aren’t even Update Pages for them, like PC, Pocket, and Pi. I already tried to make a page for an update, but it didn’t let me. So, can someone please make some for Console? and besides, why keep them all here only? (Pika Party) 98.216.47.99 21:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It just would be way too complicated to use the same layout for the console edition. See topic above. | violine1101(Talk) 21:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay. I guess... but why Pi edition if it only has two updates? (Pika Party) 98.216.47.99 21:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Because it does not have that problem. – KnightMiner  t/c 23:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Fine... (Pika Party) 98.216.47.99 23:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Greek Mythology Excluded with 360?
It says on this page that the Greek Mythology Mash-up Pack is excluded with Xbox 360, but when I downloaded the update (TU27), it was there. Is this an error, or am I just misunderstanding? (Pika Party) 98.216.47.99 22:00, 29 July 2015 (UTC)


 * It might have previously been unavailable, or just misinformation. I corrected it – KnightMiner  t/c 23:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay, great. Hope there are no more errors. (Pika Party) 98.216.47.99 00:45, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Errors
Whenever you click TU5 in the contents section, it goes to TU15. This needs to be fixed. -|Pika Party|- 98.216.47.99 20:25, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

TU15, However, has no link when clicked. -|Pika Party|- 98.216.47.99 20:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Ugh! Same with CU11 and CU12. -|Pika Party|- 98.216.47.99 20:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Fixed by . – KnightMiner  t/c 23:27, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

1.07x2 > 1.07xx?
What is with the ? and 1.07 for the PS3? It should work like 1.07 #1 is 1.07, and 1.07 #2, the ? should be 1.08, pushing everything up making the latest update 1.19. Shouldn't it work like that? -|Pika Party|- 98.216.47.99 18:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

TU31
I have a question - why is TU31 / 1.22 in the version history when it isnt out yet?

--Frodomar (talk) 15:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * It was added by . – LauraFi -  talk  15:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The issue is there is a bit of confusion on if it was actually released, as a lot of wiki members don't play Console thus cannot test it, and most of us don't want to remove it as the one who added it likely had a a source it was released. – KnightMiner  t/c 16:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Just for clarity the update has not been released - it is currently still in cert testing as off Monday 14th December 2015 - 5pm GMT (4JSteve (talk) 17:00, 14 December 2015 (UTC))

, where can we check if the update is out already? I used to take the tweets of the 4JStudios twitter account which link to the changelogs as "source" for the release. | violine1101(Talk) 17:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I did not notice that it has not been released yet – as KnightMiner supposed, I do not own any of the Console Editions but I maintain the Console Edition version history pages on both the German and the English wiki since noone else cares about them (well, there were some who contributed a bit, but it got very messy over time as you can see in the history of the page).


 * I was trying to figure this out yesterday, but the XBox Marketplace website is rather unhelpful, as it doesn't seem to list version information anywhere. If there was a page that shows the current released version, that would be quite useful. -- Orthotopetalk 19:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * , please provide a proper source (tweet, blog post or similar) instead of using pure assumptions as "source". It seems like the update has not been released yet but is being tested, as 4JSteve stated above. However, "testing" is not "released". | violine1101(Talk) 18:07, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Patch 1
Patch 1 isn't equivalent to TU30, cause the sponge texture in the Wii U edition is the old texture. Wii U Patch 1 should be equivalent to TU27, because the sponge texture is old but there is Acacia wood and Dark oak wood in the creative inventory. Fix? -|Pika Party|- 98.216.47.99 16:48, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Please provide a reliable source saying that it is equivalent to TU27. -BDJP (t 17:24, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Actually, I am mistaken. The Halloween Mash-up pack is in the Wii U Edition. I don't think it's equivalent to any update. I have Minecraft Wii U, but the sponge uses it's old texture. However, the Halloween mash-up pack is included in the Wii U edition. I don't know... -|Pika Party|- 98.216.47.99 17:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I think when they say it's equivalent to TU30, they don't mean it's exactly equivalent. Like when they say a console or pocket edition update is equivalent to PC 1.8.8. – Sealbudsman <span style="transform: rotate(-16deg); display: inline-block; top: -1px; position: relative;">talk/contr 18:28, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Patch 3 History
Patch 3 is out now. How come it's not written in the history? I've added a few, but some pages that need Patch 3 in the history will not allow me to edit them. Could someone help add? -|Pika Party|- 98.216.47.99 14:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC )
 * The history sections of articles you mean? There may just not be that many active contributors who also have the Wii U, or who are dedicated to updating it. You'll find that sometimes with Pocket and Console.  Their community presence here is smaller, I think, so they are valuable help when they can contribute.
 * Anyway thanks for getting started on that – out of curiosity, which pages are they, you can't edit? If I had to guess, if you log in, I'll bet you can edit those pages.  Very few pages are locked entirely, but it's common to see pages locked down so only logged-in users can edit, due to frequent anonymous vandalism. As a logged-in user myself, I haven't run into any issues. – Sealbudsman <span style="transform: rotate(-16deg); display: inline-block; top: -1px; position: relative;">talk/contr 16:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Patch 5 is out
The Wii U Patch 5 update is out already. I have been playing the Wii U edition and then it said that the new Super Mario Mash-up was released. Also the change that only let's the player change view when they're standing still was also removed. I've also had the achievements update for Wii U (Which was Patch 4) Before this update. -|Pika Party|- 76.118.102.155 13:12, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * If it was, then 4J Studios would've posted it on the Minecraft fourms. -BDJP (t 16:19, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * That's really odd. I've gotten 4 software updates (which means five versions) for Minecraft Wii U. -|Pika Party|- 76.118.102.155 13:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

MineCraft PlayStation Four Edition Version 1.29 Patch!
Hi, I just thought that I would point v1.29 for MCPS4E is now out if anybody wanted to add it into the article, though I don't know what it changed in game, does anybody here have any clues to the patch and it's details? 86.179.23.168 21:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Nintendo Switch
Nintendo Switch edition has been released. Someone should add it to the consoles. Kivitoe (talk) 16:42, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * . I'm not sure whether it's really equivalent to TU52/CU42/1.47/1.48/Patch 21 though as I don't own it. | violine1101(Talk) 12:27, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , you just added that Switch Patch 1 was equivalent to Patch 15 because the Glide minigame does not exist in the Switch Edition yet. The version which introduced the Glide minigame was Patch 20 however. Can we say Switch Edition Patch 1 is equivalent to Wii U Edition Patch 19? There have only been bug fixes between Patch 15 and Patch 19 (and a few additions in Patch 17). | violine1101(Talk) 10:25, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Patch 2 has been released. Here's the official patch notes: http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-switch-edition/mcswitch-recent-upcoming-updates/2822437-minecraft-switch-edition-patch-change-logs Tininfinite8 (talk) 15:05, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Organizing this page
On the German wiki, there have been two proposals to change or even replace this huge table: So, what do you think? Should the table be left what it is now, be changed to a new layout or should it be completely replaced by seperate pages? | violine1101(Talk) 10:12, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Use this table layout instead.
 * 2) Split up the versions. The problem with this is that the page titles are very complicated. I've got a solution for that though: We could name the pages something like "Console Edition June 27, 2017" (first release date of a version). If two versions are released at the same day (which doesn't happen very often), both can be documented on the same page as the second one usually only contains bug fixes.


 * To be perfectly honest, I don't really know that I like either solution. I don't think splitting console versions arbitrarily by date is really the best idea, and I don't really know putting the versions in the header is the best idea from a browsing standpoint either. The width of the 5 columns is definitely a problem, however, and I've tried to reduce the width to 50 pixels and it is slightly better but really only a temporary solution.


 * We also need to keep in mind that it seems like the 4J Studios Console Edition is going to be phased out for the Xbox One and Nintendo Switch, and may eventually stop development altogether down the track. This could still be a while off, but it's one of the reasons I'm also hesitant to create separate pages for each version. –<b style=color:#282>Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 12:17, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * There's also another table layout proposal above the one I linked, what do you think of that? | violine1101(Talk) 12:34, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I am more in favour of the first proposal with the versions listed down the side. We should see what others think as well. –<b style=color:#282>Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 10:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree with "roughly" to create a page split. However, the name of the page should be changed.


 * I want to do like this:


 * Xbox TU1 - Xbox 360 Edition TU1
 * Xbone CU1 - Xbox One Edition CU1
 * PS3 1.00 - PlayStation 3 Edition 1.00
 * PSV 1.00 - PlayStation Vita Edition 1.00
 * PS4 1.00 - PlayStation 4 Edition 1.00
 * Wiiu Patch 1 - Wii U Edition Patch 1
 * Nswitch Patch 1 - Nintendo Switch Edition Patch 1


 * And I created some tests for this: Console Edition versions and Xbox 360 Edition TU1--Beans1512 (talk) 12:28, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, splitting up the seperate consoles creates a lot of duplicate content and means way more work is required. | violine1101(Talk) 12:34, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * We may be able to respond by project. However, the work of the project overlaps the work of rename.--Beans1512 (talk) 12:39, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I have been thinking about this, and think that the best way to do this would be just to call it "Console Edition Update 1", and then going forward in chronological order, not caring about which version it corresponds to. – Nixinova Grid_Book_and_Quill.png Grid_Diamond_Pickaxe.png Grid_Map.png 19:59, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree with that. That work will be lighter. (Correct. I still agree with the creation of the page.) --Beans1512 (talk) 00:44, 2 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I think you guys are missing the whole point of the reason why we haven't previously split up the pages before. Firstly, there's no point splitting it up into each platform having its own version page as essentially many of the updates are the same across multiple platforms, yet there are still some version differences between them. Using a naming system which incorporates all the different platforms is messy and impractical. Secondly, using a naming system like Console Edition Update 1 is useless to any reader and is completely arbitrary. There's no reason why we should be making up version numbers for this edition. –<b style=color:#282>Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 10:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Goandgoo@undefined Why do you think putting the version in the header is a bad idea from a browser standpoint? I don't quite get this, as I see it what we have now is bad from a browser standpoint. Especially on mobile or with small windows sizes one has this huge bar on the left that is just taking up space which could very well be used for actual content. Putting the versions in the header would only change their position, now they are in the middle of each row, then they'd be on top. Being in the middle doesn't make it any more visible or easier to access, it only takes up space we shouldn't be wasting like this. Despite that I'm all in for separating the content into different pages structured by release date. It's the only thing each version on every console has in common and a reader can relate to. It may not be the most elegant solution, but it's better than anything else. And this split really needs to happen, the current page is nowhere nearly as user friendly as the version history of java and bedrock. Fusseel (talk) 13:49, 6 July 2017 (UTC)


 * That's because with the versions in the header, the table is broken up into header, content, header, content etc which really doesn't make sense from a usability standpoint. At the moment, a user can just scroll down and see the versions on the left side bar, but if you put all the versions in the header it becomes very disjointed.
 * We also have to remember that the Console Edition is likely being phased out anyway - I understand that the existing versions will continue to get updates but ultimately future platforms will likely get the Bedrock Edition. Hence I don't see a need to create separate pages for these versions anyway.  –<b style=color:#282>Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 07:30, 7 July 2017 (UTC)