User talk:Amatulic

Admin discussion
Hello, just a courtesy notification so you're aware – I've started a discussion on the community portal about promoting more admins where I suggested you as a candidate. In the admin discussion last year you expressed that you were ok with being given admin rights, but if that's not the case anymore, please do let me know here or on the community portal thread. – Sonicwave talk  01:11, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

A question
Look from now on I will try to not add excessive videos to pages if it makes you happy. I am not trying to add lots of wattles videos (nor am I wattles) He has good videos that's all One question though, if I find a good wattles video, do i have to ask if I should post it on the page's talk page? --24.144.29.174 01:25, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you for starting this discussion, and thank you for confirming that you're not Wattles.


 * My main objection to the way you add videos is that they are often added without context. So are many other videos, and that practice shouldn't be propagated by new editors who come in. Tutorial pages shouldn't serve merely as a directory of Youtube videos. It's OK to have a small collection of carefully-curated videos on pages, but when they are added merely for the purpose of attracting views (which many are), that's wrong. That is the impression you were giving me (you came across as having a conflict of interest), and I'm glad to know I was wrong.


 * Ideally, a tutorial shouldn't need videos at all. A description of mechanics, a few graphical illustrations. The tutorials I've written are mostly free of videos: Tutorials/Water-powered boat transportation, Tutorials/Axolotl farming, Tutorials/Zombie villager farming, and Tutorials/Flat survival don't have videos, and don't need them, the text and illustrations are enough. I also wrote Tutorials/Raid farming and Tutorials/Drowned farming, and while the article body of each is video-free, those tutorials have attracted lists of videos at the end.


 * So what I'm saying is, if you want to include a video, please also include a description of any unique mechanics described, or any innovative features. A reader shouldn't have to view the video to know what's in it. The accompanying text should make the reader curious to watch it. Just saying "An efficient farm by Wattles" isn't enough. What's special about it? Is it feasible in Survival mode? How does it work? A tutorial page should be able to stand on its own without Youtube, if possible. While not many videos have adequate descriptions at the moment, that isn't a reason to compound the problem further.


 * The best videos to include aren't ones that describe how to build something, but describe the mechanics of how things work. Have a look at the section Tutorials/Iron golem farming &mdash; those are excellent examples of the kind of videos that a tutorial should have.


 * Here's a "to do" list for ways editors can help out cleaning up the video mess in tutorials.
 * Remove out-of date videos. Particularly a lot of stuff from before 1.19 may not need to be in tutorials anymore, although some things from older versions of Minecraft are still applicable to the latest version.
 * Remove redundant videos. If a tutorial has two or three videos that describe more or less the same thing, then only one is needed. Pick one, describe it, and delete the others. I give preference to shorter videos and videos that explain mechanics, not simply show all the steps in building a structure.
 * As a corollary, if you add a video, can it replace one that's already there? And if so, is the video you're adding an improvement?
 * Add context to videos that remain. Summarize the video in accompanying text.
 * If a graphic or schematic can serve the same purpose, the video isn't needed and can be removed.


 * Sorry for the lengthy reply. I hope you know where I stand. And I hope you create an account and become a regular contributor here. Amatulic (talk) 02:03, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the tips! I will try to use them next time I edit a page!

24.144.29.174 17:25, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Jungle temple
Regardless, it is a question that a lot of people have. – Unsigned comment added by Aceplante (talk • contribs) at 01:01, 5 August 2022 (UTC). Sign comments with

A MCD page that needs fixing
So I have recently began editing the Minecraft Dungeons wiki over the past couple of months, and I noticed that a lot of the pages there look way different then when I last remember them a year ago, and not in a good way either. One of the worst offenders in the category is the Minecraft Dungeons Mob Page. It became a complete mess and looks way different than both the regular mob page and the mob pages for Minecraft Earth and Minecraft Story Mode. This page definitely has to be violating the style guide, but I haven't the time to go and manually fix everything. I trust someone like you will be able to make this page consistent with the other mob pages. James Haydon (talk) 01:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The people working on the MCD pages seem, for the most part, to be unaware of the style guide. I routinely correct capitalization errors, remove icon pollution from prose, fix poor grammar, remove trivia, remove tutorial advice, and so forth.
 * As for the mob pages, while the MCD presentation isn't consistent with the other pages, I cannot see how it violates the style guide, and I am not sure if it's better or worse.
 * If you haven't done so already, bring up your concerns on Minecraft Wiki talk:Style guide. Amatulic (talk) 17:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if it doesn't violate the style guide the page still looks far different from the regular mob pages and definitely for the worse. I wanted to bring it up to you so you could help make it consistent. James Haydon (talk) 17:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That's the problem I'm having: I cannot decide which format is better. That's why I suggested bringing the question to the community. The answer might well be to make the other two mob pages the same as the Minecraft Dungeons page. MCD:Mob started out looking a lot like Mob and MCE:Mob, but then someone evidently thought the presentation could be improved. MCD:Mob is formatted to impart useful information in a way that the old format could not, providing context about subtypes and whether the mob is exclusive to Dungeons. I'm not sure how you could go back to the old format while retaining that information. Amatulic (talk) 23:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well I know the dungeons exclusivity think may be useful, but I still am not a fan of the table format. It's not even centered correctly. I wonder where can I discuss this change so it reaches a wider audience. James Haydon (talk) 00:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The tables shouldn't be centered on the page. They aren't in other articles. The content inside the tables is already centered within the cells, however.
 * The only way I can think of to avoid the use of tables would be a bullet list that collapses the "exclusive" data into a footnote, like this:


 * BlazeSpawnerFace.png Blaze Spawner - Golem
 * CaveSpiderFace (Dungeons).png Cave Spider - Animal


 * ....But then the icons all run together. One of the uses of a table is to separate the icons a bit.
 * Another alternative might be gallery images with captions.
 * I recommend you start a conversation on Minecraft Dungeons talk:Mob, and link to the discussion in Minecraft Wiki talk:Community portal to get a wider audience. Amatulic (talk) 03:13, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Why did you do this?
I just noticed that you just added me to the autopatrol through the justification that I am active and I have experience. While I do try to be active, the problem lies in that I do not have enough experience and I do occasionally make mistakes in my edits. Is there any way that you could remove me from the autopatrol? Drour1234 (talk) 05:19, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * First, have a look at Autopatrolled to understand what this does. Page patrolling is more burdensome here than on the English Wikipedia, so it is in the community's interest to grant the autopatrol right to trusted high-volume users. On Wikipedia, it matters only for new pages. Here on the Minecraft Wiki, it matters for every single edit, which is more of a burden.
 * The purpose of that user right isn't to help you, but to aid page patrollers. I have been patrolling your edits for well over a year, and I am finding that your errors are so rare now that you can be trusted to edit without being manually patrolled. Having your activity always appearing in the unpatrolled edits list makes it harder to locate unconstructive edits and vandalism from those editors who truly haven't earned that right.
 * Everyone makes mistakes occasionally. I do, you do, every administrator here does. The fact is, you're an active editor, you know what you're doing, you're familiar with the rules, you're constructive, and nobody needs to patrol your edits anymore. Your edits still appear in watchlists, and I still look at them, but at least now a page patroller has the option to filter out your activity if they want to see only unpatrolled edits.
 * I can remove it if you insist, but retaining it will be a help to others. Amatulic (talk) 21:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe don't remove it, it was such a task having to go through his contrive logs and patrol all of his edits, especially seeing how active he can be at times. James Haydon (talk) 17:51, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I am Fandom's new Senior Community Manager for Gaming
Hello there! My name is Jieyang and I'm going around saying hi to editors in the community. I joined about two weeks ago but you'll be seeing me around more in the future.

You can learn more about me through my blog. Feel free to drop me a message on Discord as well! Itsjieyang (talk) 18:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

About delete fabricated pages and speculate pages due to negligent rendering of cutscenes, and merge MCD:Tough mob or Elite mob pages.
Hi, I've recently verified a lot of Minecraft Dungeons content and made requests to delete or merge pages, since I heard that you don't own the Minecraft Dungeons game and not in the wiki discord group, So as a player, I'll show you the evidence I've collected. I hope you can make a corresponding judgment to decide these page should be stay or remove.

For the fabricated pages should be delete:

The fact that Elite stray is fabricated is actually something I stumbled upon, when I was working on a mob rendering of Minecraft Dungeons Arcade, I found that the Frosted Fjord level in the game only has a large number of normal skeletons or melee skeletons equipped with armor and weapons, there is no elite stray in the whole level process, there are only a few stray with skeleton texture. For details, you can refer to the gallery of Minecraft Dungeons:Stray and one of the arcade "Frozen Fjord" gameplay video on Youtube.

And End Vindicator and Tough End Vindicator, these two are actually the most questioned and asked to delete pages on their talk page, they only appear for a few seconds in the cutscene, Someone create these page just because they don't have the weapon and there are some white texture on the body model and the wrong button color. Recently, I learned rendering from Director Oakar258. I found out that it was because the cutscene creator forgot to render the alpha channel of the mobs, resulting in the pixels not being transparent. The same mistake can be found on cutscene villager too. For details, you can refer to the gallery of villager and the talk page of end vindicator with many user reactions.

Finally, on the topic of "Armored mobs", I have already mentioned the relevant experiments to you, but I would like to briefly explain to you the history of "Armored mobs" in the past two years.

At first there was no clear idea of mob variant at the time, because in the game files these mobs were named "Variant1" or "Variant2", but those names didn't sound good so no one want to use them.

Regarding name determination, we prefer to use the names in the LOCRES file. The LOCRES file is used to display the text that the player sees in the game. There are 15 official translations of LOCRES files, so the LOCRES file has the highest priority. One example is when Iceologer's file was first discovered, everyone thought its official name was Chillager, because the file was named Chillager, and it was later found in the LOCRES file that its official name was Iceologer.

The strange thing is that even the LOCRES text file does not have the name of "Variant1" or "Variant2", for example, the names of the three vindicators after being enchanted are all "Enchanted Vindicator"

Armored mob was first mentioned in a book called Guide to Minecraft Dungeons: A Handbook for Heroes: "ZOMBIE – Slow and shambling, zombies are easily beaten with melee attacks. Be warned: the armored zombie requires many more hits to take it down."

- Guide to Minecraft Dungeons: A Handbook for Heroes

Unfortunately, this official book was not written by the game developers. So there are plenty of text and image errors, a few examples: the pillagers of the Fiery Forge loading screen are confused as vindicators in book; the vindicator chef and its weapon ladle are confused as illager chef and spatulas. In the early days, some editors moved these pages according to the content of the book, but they were corrected later, but the armored mobs were not corrected back and keep stay there.

After a while, I found an ID log list from the Chinese wiki group and shared it to English wiki: [https://minecraft.fandom.com/wiki/Minecraft_Dungeons_talk:Mob/Archive_2#(News!)_The_List_of_Entity_and_mobs! (News!) The List of Entity and mobs!]

At this time, someone found that there is a type of mob whose ID is "Variant 0" on the list, and questioned the existence of armored mob. I was also one of those who questioned and [https://minecraft.fandom.com/wiki/Minecraft_Dungeons_talk:Mob/Archive_6#Armored_various_mob_page_should_be_move_into_their_original_mob_page. suggested merge them] (though due to my bad grammar and mistyped mob IDs "Various2" and "Various3"). At this point user Drour1234 objected and replied that they belonged to separate mobs, and the enchanted mobs would show "Armored", but it took me a long time to realize it was a lie. The LOCRES file does not have the word "Armored" at all, it is impossible to display the word "Enchanted Armored Vindicator" on the player's screen.

Luckily ,the whole farce was ended by the experiment done by user Minecraforever. We proved that the internal ID parameter of "variant 0" exists, and that the game treats variant0/1/2 as the same mob, not the separate mobs, and they have same parent ID parameter.

I hope the evidence information above can be useful.

This is my first time comment on your talk page. I am also very grateful for your continued maintenance of the wiki and for growing me up, without your teaching I would not be where I am today. Regards and wishes to you Alan (talk) 12:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Here is the conjecture name or fabricated mob page list:


 * Tough Frozen Zombie
 * Tough Husk
 * Tough Frozen Zombie
 * Tough Husk
 * Tough Husk

Alan (talk) 03:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , I have deleted everything from this list that is deletable, including . The items that remain are subjects of merge proposals, so it would be best to leave them for now. Amatulic (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Another made up MCD enchantment
Look like I found another fan made enchantment by PeetaKeeta. It's the enchantment. Once again an armor property confused for an enchantment. James Haydon (talk) 17:56, 22 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Are you also in agreement with deleting the three that Alan mentioned in the section above?
 * If so, it would be nice if someone removed all of the links in other articles linking to those, so I can cleanly delete them. It took me a while to cleaned this up on the last round I deleted. Amatulic (talk) 23:22, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Well I'm pretty sure there is a way you can see what links to a page, so you know which pages have the link to it and remove it from them. Again, that enchantment is utter nonsense and is not referenced anywhere in the game files. James Haydon (talk) 00:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Anybody can see links. See Special:WhatLinksHere. There should be a "what links here" selection under "My Tools". Proposing deletion of any article or image integrated into this wiki would involve some cleanup beforehand. https://minecraft.fandom.com/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Minecraft_Dungeons:Efficiency shows the links for the page you mentioned. There are two templates and four articles that link to it. You can ignore user pages or talk pages.
 * I still need to know if you also agree with deleting the three Alan proposed in the section above. Amatulic (talk) 02:05, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep, I agree with all of them. Rendering errors and item modifiers mistaken for enchantments do not need pages at all. I give you the long awaited green light. James Haydon (talk) 04:03, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand this list is lengthy, but it's also the result of two years of piling up on our wiki, so I had to make it clear. Moreover, my experiments were not challenged by other users. To be honest, personally, I don't really want to merge elite or tough mob pages, except for those three pages that need to delete. Beause I am the one who helped build and fabricate facts, I guessed that the material of the armor mob's armor was gold or diamond, but I had to follow the wiki rules and expose this. Even if they won't be deleted, I'll move their pages to "MobName Variant" instead of "Tough MobName".Alan (talk) 13:28, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with deleting, them; I just want to be sure there's a consensus to do so, rather than one person making the decision. Because I don't know enough about Minecraft Dungeons, I have to rely on multiple other editors to see a consensus. Amatulic (talk) 19:35, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry this has taken so long. Real life intrudes. I have deleted the article and removed all links to it from other articles and templates. I still have to go through the larger list. Amatulic (talk) 23:11, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoever is reading this, please go through the blue links in the list in the section above, select "What links here" from "My Tools" (if you don't have it, then add it), and clean up the pages linking to those names. I want those names to be orphaned before I delete them. Amatulic (talk) 19:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So nice to see you finally take action on this issue. It seems like you got most of the pages deleted, there's only three that still remain: MCD:Melee Tough Mossy Skeleton, MCD:Tough Frozen Zombie, and MCD:Tough Husk. Take care of these please. James Haydon (talk) 21:23, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I wasn't going to delete anything until they were orphaned or converted to redirects. Because that was done, I deleted them. Melee Tough Mossy Skeleton was deleted a while ago but for some reason the link still shows blue. I even purged the cache. Maybe it'll clear up. The other two are the subject of merge proposals. Do you see anything in them that can be merged? If not, let me know and I'll delete them. Amatulic (talk) 22:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I made it so that the Melee Tough Mossy Skeleton page actually displays as a redlink now. It has the template on it, which caused it to display as a blue link even though it was deleted, so no need to purge cache or anything of that sort. About those other two, although their armored variants only spawn in arcade, I believe they could be moved to a different title. A good example of this I've seen is MCD:Mossy Skeleton (Arcade), which distinguishes it from the base mossy skeleton without using the "though" name. I don't think a proposal is needed for those two pages right away as it could just be moved to a different title for the time being, like for the example I just showed you. James Haydon (talk) 23:57, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Done, after doing some redirect cleanup. The new names are MCD:Frozen Zombie (Arcade) and MCD:Husk (Arcade). Amatulic (talk) 01:25, 7 April 2023 (UTC)