Minecraft Wiki talk:Community portal

This is the community's main discussion page. Talk about just anything here!

 Talkpage archives
 * July - Oct 2010
 * Nov - Dec 2010

French translation
Can you add the french language on the wiki ? And others like italian(requested on this page too), etc... I can translate in french.


 * I second that. I was actually looking for a way to translate pages directly here since minecraft.fr isn't really... well, it has many translations and orthographic flaws. Plus, I'd prefer to improve Minepedia directly, and not a somewhat French copy. --Linkyu 18:06, January 04 2010 (UTC)
 * I could translate in french too ! +1! --sindarus 13:08, January 23 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I just found the Translation topic, and it seems we'll have to wait till there's enough Dutch pages for any other languages, am I right ? -- Linkyu 05:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I would like to translate the entire Wiki into Esperanto; through what process would I need to go through to obtain a .eo directory? Jpkoushel 1:11, 13 January 2011 (EST)

So...what is the current policy on translation directories? I have a Spanish one in the works (see my User Page) and I daresay it and a French directory have a better shot at not falling into obscurity like the Dutch wiki. --Miner Key 08:38, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Can we remove references to old versions of the game that aren't in history sections?
In a lot of the articles there are sentences like, "In Survival Test, Indev, Infdev, Alpha, and Beta..." I can understand references to old versions of the game in history sections or in other situations, but there are way too many of these in inappropriate situations.

Just look at the "Fire" article

"Fire is a block that was first seen in Indev." This reference makes sense, and should remain in the article.

"Fire is only available for use in Indev, Infdev, Alpha, and Beta." I feel this sentence should be removed.

I am probably wrong though. I would just like to know why.
 * I'm with you on this one. Every block,item etc should have a history section that explains when the item was introduced in the game and how it behaved differently in the previous versions. The main article text should always be about the item as it is in the current version of the game. --DannyF1966 03:52, 22 December 2010 (CST)
 * I agree. I would consider making an additional field in the infobox template providing the link to the history page where all historical data should be listed. This is one of the great things about building a wiki from the very start of the game, you are able to compile a lot of historical data as the game progresses. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  01:32, 23 December 2010 (CST)
 * I was going to suggest something very similar. It was something that caught my eye on first sight when reading some articles, and this is a definite yes. It isn't really obvious because it is in a form of words but what we are currently doing is as though we are saying, "in versions 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5, this feature works like this". It doesn't work.


 * I have stressed before many times. All these Infdev, Alpha, etc are merely version milestones in Minecraft. What was introduced are likely to be in the final version of the game, so we should put, for example, "From Alpha onwards...". If it only happened during a certain phase, we could write, "During the Indev to Alpha phases..." or something equivalent to the history section.


 * I wanted to change these but I've said to myself that I wouldn't be too involved in this Wiki any more. Seeing that I'm particularly free today, I will attempt to improve these articles, Alpha and Beta, however. :P --Scykei 04:02, 26 December 2010 (CST)


 * Why not just state something like, "as of the current version..." instead of putting a specific figure in there? That way, each update wouldn't necessitate a massive amount of minor edits to swap all the Alphas/Betas/whatevers on each page throughout the wiki. An alternate solution is to create a template containing the current version, and then implement that into each page (eg. as of ..."). - Bomb Bloke (Talk/Contribs) 04:14, 26 December 2010 (CST)


 * That would be even better. If only someone could spend the time to dig out all of these in the changelog... But we need to put what development phase too. Like Alpha 1.2.0 or beta 1.0 onwards. --Scykei 05:01, 26 December 2010 (CST)

Maybe we should split the wiki into different sections (based on version). so if you want to look up stuff on classic, you can look at only classic and not indev, survival test, infdev, beta and alpha. just a thought. MoonBeans 13:47, 26 December 2010 (CST)
 * Given that Survival Test, Indev, Infdev, and Alpha are no longer publicly accessible (at least officially), we should probably either minimize that info somehow (perhaps in a collapsed section?) or even remove some of the information that is specifically about them. (If anyone is curious, they can always access the page-history).
 * Also, classic will be phased out eventually (Notch plans to create a better "demo" option (http://twitter.com/notch/status/18801312527294465)), so even that info will soon be irrelevant for current players (albeit, interesting as an historical datapoint).
 * So, presuming that this Wiki is primarily intended to support current players of the game, and restrict (but not forbid) information about the previous parts of the game's development process, how should we structure the no-longer-pertinent info, such as all the pre-beta info in Lava? -- Ephemeris 21:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I would recommend moving the historic data to subpages, and then have a "Historic data" section at the bottom of the page, linking to them for those people interested in reading about how the game has changed. Relying on the page histories is inefficient and will become problematic as time goes by. I will see that subpages get enabled on all namespaces tomorrow. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  04:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Almost at the cake!
The 26th is the one to watch, but almost there...

http://www.indiedb.com/events/2010-indie-of-the-year-awards/winners

Congratulations on the editor's choice, Notch! -- Ephemeris 08:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

I KNOW HOW TO MAKE SUGAR NOW!!!!!! Just take the reed and put it in de 2x2 box. Just one of it. Then you get one sugar ;)             BUT WHATS THE CAKE CRAFTING RECIEPE?? =(

[How do you make paper now?]--Ryushi 09:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Paper is made the same way, this discussion seems a little trivial on the main page however. -St. Fenix (User•Talk) 16:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Minecraft Rulesets
Can we have a page on Rulesets? What I mean by 'ruleset' is a set of goals and/or rules for the game that a player adheres to within the Minecraft sandbox. An example of a ruleset is Spleef. Someone on the Minecraft forums recently posted a ruleset that they thought of, called 'Totemquest'. I spent about 3 hours making a page on Minepedia for it, and it was almost immediately deleted after creation. (Lucky for me I had it backed up, huh?) I think rulesets are very interesting, especially considering Minecraft doesn't really have any goals for the player currently, and players have to come up with their own goals. Being able to easily share good rulesets with other players makes the game more interesting to people, as it opens up new ways of playing that some people have not thought of. My Totemquest article is on my user page, if you'd like a preview. Is there anywhere that it would be permissible to add it to Minepedia? Is anyone else interested in a Rulesets page? --Pulseczar 06:50, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * An intriguing idea, but I'm not sure that "ruleset" is the best name for the general concept. Too close to the nethack "conduct" restrictions. If we can come up with a clearer title, then I'd support making it a tutorial subpage, with a collection of these "user-made goals". -- Ephemeris 19:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We could always just pick a term and then later change the term to something else that we like better. I just don't know of a better term than 'ruleset' at this time. The term 'ruleset' is used from time to time in this way. When I search for gameplay "ruleset" in Google, I get 314,000 results. However, dictionary.com does not know the word. Wikipedia sort of recognizes it. The term 'sub-game' might also be good. I don't really care what term is used. I'd just like pages that detail these 'sub-games/conducts/rulesets'. I'd love to see a huge collection of these (quality ones). I also don't think it fits under Tutorials because it doesn't teach anything. A tutorial is something which tutors. I would just put it under Gameplay, but again, I'd just be happy to see it on Minepedia, period. --Pulseczar 03:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the idea of a ruleset is perfect for those seeking a game to play with minecraft that is shorter or has a clear ending. Something like totemquest defines a set of rules that clearly describe winning or losing conditions.  If the term "ruleset" is the reason this can't be done, let it be known as "minecraft rules" or something like that.  Define the category as "games that can be played within minecraft to make it more interesting" and let people's imaginations run wild... after all, letting people use their imagination is the purpose of Minecraft.. isn't it?Darunada 07:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The big problem with these rulesets is that anyone can make them, and at the end of the day you have a crapload of them, all a tiny bit different. Its pretty much the same reason why we don't allow pages on in-games either; they're too spam-sensitive. I guess its similar to Wikipedia's "Wikipedia is not for things made up one day" rule.--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  16:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't have to be all or nothing. You could allow a Rulesets page (or whatever you want to call it) that only includes some rulesets -- the best rulesets. How would you determine what the best ones are? Well, it would be done mostly democratically -- the way things are done on Wikipedia. If someone took ruleset X, and just slightly changed it to create ruleset Y, then ruleset Y could be discarded. If that variation happened to be very popular, then maybe X would get modified, or that variation would be listed on X's page. Thank you for responding and explaining why this rule exists. I can see its usefulness but I think it's heavy-handed. I think the administration on this wiki is very heavy-handed. --Pulseczar 17:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Minecraft Conduct
In Nethack, there are various "conduct" achievements that one can voluntarily follow (and which can be combined). See http://nethackwiki.com/wiki/Conduct for details

Translated into Minecraft, these might become something like this:
 * Pacifist - no attacking any mobs. Only running away from mobs, and trapping or barricading mobs, is allowed.
 * Corrupted Pacifist - allowed to build dark-room mobspawning harvester. allowed to lure animals into cactus/lava/water
 * Vegetarian - no harvesting of pigs, zombiepigmen, or fish. Only bread, apples, and soup may be eaten.
 * Vegan - if eggs or milk become edible or craftable, then eating these items is also not allowed
 * Breatharian - no eating of any kind. Avoid all damage!
 * Single life - after death, delete the world. No resurrection.
 * Hydrophobe - no crossing or collecting or altering of water. Blocks must be placed at least 1 space away from any visible water.[Do boats count? --Ryushi 09:28, 14 January 2011 (UTC)}

I think a page (or section) collecting these, would be interesting. -- Ephemeris 19:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Those are cool rules or conducts to follow (Pacifist would be funny to try), but none of them provide goals. When I say 'ruleset', I'm talking about things which either contain new rules, goals, or both. Also, with Totemquest and Spleef, the game guidelines are much more sophisticated than a simple "don't eat meat". Think of rulesets as card games. Each card game is a ruleset. You've got cards (Minecraft) that you can play with in a variety of ways. A card game details out a way to play with the cards (Minecraft) that gives a goal and a set of rules. A Minecraft ruleset details out a way to play Minecraft that involves a goal and guidelines you must follow in achieving the goal. It's not just an Achievement (not that there's anything wrong with simple rules), but an entire [sub]game. An Achievement in the card game Solitaire would be a small change to the game that gives some level of added challenge, but does not change the core of the game. It's just a harder goal. A ruleset is the game. An Achievement is a small change to the game -- to the ruleset. --Pulseczar 03:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I guess admins don't read this talk page... --Pulseczar 13:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, yes we do. Just because we don't reply to everything (for which this page isn't even meant for) doesn't mean we don't read it.--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  16:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Merge pages about dyes
Having separate pages for each dye seems rather unnecessary to me, especially when you consider the short length of these pages and how little information there is to tell about them. Should we just make one big "Dyes" page that lists all available dyes along with recipes?--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 21:45, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I would support this move, as one of the people keeping an eye on the Wool Page. -St. Fenix (User•Talk) 16:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I concur. --Gnu32 09:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Seconding this, as I standardized the pages (somewhat), they started to all seem like repetitive stubs. I'm up for doing the grunt work if there's an authoritative consensus. --Miner Key 19:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Version Observations

 * All of these have been proven on the wool, sheep, and dye pages. -St. Fenix (User•Talk) 16:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

WHATS HAPPENED TO THE RAIL?!!!
In order for me to explore the beauty of the World... of Minecraft, I have built one of the longest railroads across many rivers and through many mountains. At the same time building monuments to show off what is possible to achieve, such as a 15 block wide and 184 block long suspension bridge holding 3 spaced... well i could go on but the railway will have to go on hold because of a glitch!!! Placement of track is now impossible! Something to do with the placement of corners with new pieces are not connecting. Please i beg you Notch, the cake wasn't a lie, neither is this!

Thanks.

Oh and if you guys are interested i can show you some pics of my designs. :) –The preceding unsigned comment was added by AnnoyingGuy (Talk 10:33, 14 January 2011. Please sign your posts with   !
 * It was a bug and should have been fixed in 1.2_01 --DannyF1966 15:49, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Block template

 * moved from User talk:Kizzycocoa

Why did you edit all the images out of Template: Blocks? Drenay 02:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * there is a summary for a reason............... --Kizzycocoa 08:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi. I'm wondering if you could point me (us) towards the discussion, if it is online, and if it is offline, could you summarize what you're allowed to pass on, or start a discussion about it at the community portal? I'm sure many editors are, like myself, curious as to what exactly you meant by "Curse have asked for this to happen. We are seeking alternatives right now." (Where was this requested? Why? Which alternatives? Can we participate? etc.) An open community is a happy community :) Much thanks! -- Ephemeris 11:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ah, no problem. It was on IRC, but, let me sum it up. It used 70 images. It was stressing the server. I fear the others will do so shortly. There has been a solution put forward, but it would be hard to implement. something to do with CSS stuff, I don't know. but the CSS thing can only be edited by admins.--Kizzycocoa 13:55, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It's called CSS sprites, right? The client would load only one "big" image and then display parts of this one image, like Minecraft does. If you want, I can help you with that, I've some experiences with HTML and CSS. --Barracuda 14:02, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I am asking right now.....................
 * He says you can in your userspace, but I am unsure if you can, like, permission wise. I'm just confirming.........


 * ok, he says you can do user CSS. so, go for it! I'll make the sheet for you ^^--Kizzycocoa 14:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Good, so now I can create a new user style sheet like, for example, User:Barracuda/sprite.css and you can include it in all pages? --Barracuda 14:55, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * create it, and we'll check if it's suitable with Curse, then somehow(?) integrate it into the template? By the way, the sheet:
 * [[File:BlockCSS.png]]
 * --Kizzycocoa 15:00, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I can use this image, but it requires a few edits to make sure that block additions won't mess up existing block sprites. --Barracuda 15:08, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * such as? they're aware updating it will take a day or two, and for the wiki's sake, I've accepted that, so, if it's that, it's been discussed ^^--Kizzycocoa 15:10, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it's not that ^^ It's just that you put images in rows that are directly related to the blocks template, but these sprites could be used everywhere else where 16x16 icons are used, like in Data Values or Template:Items or Wool Dyes, for example. Maybe it's better to use the original sprite images such as terrain.png and items.png and create a special image for icons that don't exist in the official sprites. This will ease updates a lot and makes sure that the sprite coordinates won't change after updates. --Barracuda 15:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * idk, I mean, look at grass and leaves. Grey. it could also happen with wool and the like. in either case, we have some options at this point.


 * I'd suggest I resize the image to a full square, and that leaves space. lets face it, we cannot rely on Notch to keep terrain.png as it is, but with this, we can add to it knowing we aren't messing it up.


 * I think, for now, it should stay as that image. If needs call for it, we can simply go back to the pngs, but I'm just thinking update-wise.


 * lets face it, we're going to be updating a file and editing this "CSS" either way. why not do so with an image we have absolute full control of?--Kizzycocoa 15:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah right, I forgot the procedural colored/generated blocks... Well then, I'll create a 256x256 image based on the terrain.png and make some changes, same for items.png (compass and clock). --Barracuda 16:02, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, I've created a sprite test page here: User:Barracuda/Sprite Test. It uses Template:Sprite and my user stylesheet User:Barracuda/vector.css. Therefore, it currently works for me only, but will work for everyone else if you copy the content of my stylesheet into MediaWiki:Common.css or by creating a link into the page header. --Barracuda 18:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ok, it works perfectly!!!!!! I'm going to pass this to an admin to implement ^^--Kizzycocoa 12:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ok, it will be implemented, but I fear that is for only one image (blockCSS.png). is there a way to specify the file in the – 's?--Kizzycocoa 12:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It can be used for more images, of course. I was just waiting for your opinion before implementing more :)
 * I've done a sheet for the item icons and maybe I can create one for the isometric block renderings, too, but they need a larger size than 16x16, maybe 24x24. Should be possible, though. --Barracuda 14:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Have a look at Template:Sprite/test. I've done it without using background images, so no stylesheet addition is required. Shall we merge it into Template:Sprite? -- Eric304 14:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Good work! I tried that method, too, but the div elements didn't behave like images do, so I tried other methods. When I discovered the inline-block display property, I forgot to test it with that method again. Seems to work like a charm, so your solution is preferable, of course. --Barracuda 15:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Merged! Now I just need someone to fill out the name -> id mapping in Template:Sprite... -- Eric304 16:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * uh, we do need it for a few more things, such as mobs, enviroment etc.
 * if it's possible, can't you specify it for a fixed image-size, and let us choose the file in the – 's? --Kizzycocoa 16:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It's possible in Template:Sprite now. The templates Template:BlockSprite and Template:ItemSprite are necessary, because of the name -> id mapping. --Barracuda 05:11, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Unaware of this discussion, I edited the templates that use Navbox, cleaning up the CSS and wiki markup. I believe I didn’t do anything impeding the Sprite progress (great idea, by the way!). Finishing my edits, I asked WedTM to merge into MediaWiki:Common.css the styles from my vector.css, which define a standard Navbox layout (similar to that of Wikipedia, just with gray colors).
 * Ok, so, we got blocks and items, but we still need Template:Environment and Template:Mobs to be updated. can someone do that?--Kizzycocoa 13:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Done! --Barracuda 16:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

favicon
Minepedia is missing a favicon. I made this one :

Could some admin put it in place (if you agree to it)? – Scaler (t) 11:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I just made the same suggestion. somehow i missed your topic here (too early in the morning for me) Kytti khat 20:09, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I would like to propose a wiki favicon be added and have uploaded a suggested on which (both in and in  format) which is a scaled down version of the wiki logo. Although their appears to be an existing one in place ( & ) in place, this wiki software version either doesn't show them or my browsers (chrome/firefox) refuse to show them for some reason.

Reasons for including one include ease of visual viewers locating this wiki in both their browsing tabs as well as in their bookmarks. In addition a favicon would add a bit more character to this fine wiki. kytti khat 20:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I have added a favicon, it simply takes a while for it to show up. -- Wynthyst  talk  23:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * thanks Wynthyst =) Kytti khat 00:03, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Add math tags please!
$$a + b \over c + d \over e$$

As you can see, this is not working!

Math tags would be useful on the page about Item durability, where an equation is given.

Thanks, Deathgleaner 20:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Admin list
I think there should be a page that lists the admins and bcrats (and ideally their level of activity) so that users don't have to blindly strike out to find who can do bans or other tasks. --JonTheMon 22:34, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Special:ListUsers&group=sysop – ultradude25  ( T at 09:20, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe Jon is talking about a dedicated page, not just a Special page reference. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  11:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * that could be seen as a vanity page, and as such, against the rules :S --Kizzycocoa 12:08, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Publicising the fact you're an admin is an act of vanity now? --DannyF1966 13:25, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it's the kind of thing that the Minecraft Wiki namespace is for. I'm not talking about something in the mainspace. Minecraft Wiki:List of administrators-- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  13:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * In addition, the establishment of an Admin noticeboard, where members of the community could post items that specifically require administrative attention (other than deletions) might be a good idea as well. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  14:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see why not. Watching a category doesn't seem to make it show up on my watchlist when something is added like I expected, so the pages for deletion category and the like seems rather useless to me. – ultradude25  ( T at 15:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * An administrator's noticeboard doesn't sound bad to me. Gives us a better overview of the readers and editors' needs, too.--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  15:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Done Minecraft Wiki:Admin noticeboard -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  16:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Polish translation
Hi there! Polish center of Minecraft would like to conduct translation of the whole Minepedia to polish language. We are already trying to do this on our own, but it's hard to make it look as good as the original. Is it possible to receive exact copy of the original site, so we can just translate the text? Please let me know at gobelek@badi.pl Thanks!

Standard article layout for easy reading
Hi,

I have left a comment about the Decoration article, which went unvoiced. Let me cite that first: How come this article is labelled Creative in the title, and Flower redirects here? I wanted to find information about whether flowers could be spread (grown en masse) so that we could massively produce dye combinations. And what I find here is an article labelled with a game mode (not what I'm playing), and more surprising, the article first talks about Creative, then Survival Test, then Infdev, Indev, Alpha, Beta, and FINALLY, in the last paragraph of the article, information about the latest version. I mean, really, shouldn't information about the latest version go first? Also, why is the article labelled Decoration? Flowers may be decoration, usage of flowers to create dyes may still be decoration, coloring dyes may be decoration, but in this case, why does this article mention Saplings?

I have looked through several Block articles and found out that often none of them share the same presentation layout. Therefore, I'd like to invoice that:

Log with modified layout Leaves with modified layout

I have created two pages to explain my point of view.

When you get to read an article on this Wiki, you are often faced with statements that are about an older version of Minecraft. This is confusing. It's especially confusing when these information come before information about newer versions.

When you read an article about an item in the game, you want to know "What's this currently" and "What have changed", and "What it used to be".

"What's this" is more about the actual facts about the item in order of importance. The function, the craft, and the behaviour come first. Then come details about the textures for example.

"What have changed" is about minor changes. For example, you want to know that Log now come in three different kinds. Because it's fresh new and it doesn't involves great behaviour change. It comes in a list of changes.

"What it used to be" is more about historical data, in the Indev and all. You put that in the end since you'd read it when you want to know more about it. When you're in Minecraft, you often open the Wiki to find out critical information, and you don't want to be bothered by what it used to be in the main subject of the article (which is currently the case for many articles). The only information would be the birth of the item, which is quite notable.

Well that's my sole point of view. You could just go and compare:

Log with modified layout

Leaves with modified layout

Log

Leaves

Since it would be a community decision, I've just put a voice in. I obviously can't go and change everything, it has to be a community impulse if the community thinks it's right.

Thanks for reading.--Ha3 20:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This is where you (the MCW Community) might want to start developing some formatting guidelines. They don't have to be strict rules, but something that will provide for basically uniform article layouts. Users would benefit by uniformity. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  23:56, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Considering that Minecraft is still a work in progress, problems like this seem entirely natural. Hopefully others might care enough to agree and take notice. Regardless, definitely feel free to update the ones you feel would value the most from it, granted no one has limitless hours in which to dedicate their individual time to such things. The nature of new wikis, from my experience, often include style issues. Personally I believe "style nazis" can deter new editors unlike any other (although grammar nazis are most welcome in my opinion seeing as not everyone has the best of grammar).


 * From what i have seen, setting a good example seems more likely to inspire other editors than simply noting issues. The gaming wiki that I have contributed the most to has over 16,000 articles and a very large editor base. As such keeping consistent style can be daunting at best and is oft lost with the influxes of ambitious new editors. As they say actions speak louder than words. Kytti khat 00:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well that's why I'm talking about basic guidelines, not necessarily set-in-stone rules. If there is a group of users interested in it, I would suggest developing a guideline proposal at Minecraft Wiki:Article formatting. Decide what main types of articles have been developed (those that have the same type of sections) and then decide standard section headers, image placements, etc. While I don't expect anyone to become "style nazis" having a basic article layout available that a new user can simply copy/paste and fill in with information can sometimes make it easier for them, than just having them randomly type information on a page. It would at least provide a basic structure for them to start with. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  00:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, this wiki still have about 300 articles, should we wait until Mojang release an update which will include a hundred new items at once? Any "Let's get started!" cheer move to get an infancy of layout drafts for proposal? I'm not a regular editor on this wiki, not even a beginner, so it there could be a decent number of people who could manifest over this? (however the layout will be very biased over a few thoughts)--Ha3 13:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * getting started sooner is always better, and i agree with. I think a logical round up of articles are those with navigation templates, such as Blocks, Items, Mobs, and possibly Environment. Should we perhaps move this discussion over to Minecraft Wiki talk:Article formatting?  This is rather new and refreshing to me to be part of such a newer wiki =) Kytti khat 16:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It's best to keep the discussion here I think. I agree that we need a set of style guidelines though, quite surprised there wern't any. I linked a user to Wikipedia's style guidelines before but I think we can work together to come up with our own manual of style. For instance, in some article cleanups I've been doing I've reformatted "Behavior" sections so they're sub-sectioned per version (Classic, Alpha, Beta, etc) and other little things. --Gnu32 16:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Search Improvements
In order to fix the problems encountered with various typos or cap issues with the search (to avoid having to make redirect pages) I'm now proposing to get this installed for the wiki (which'd provide search suggestions for common typos and capping problems): http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:OpenSearchXml IKJames 04:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I actually think MWSearch with Lucene-search would be more useful than something that only seems to generate XML... Lucene mentions the "did you mean" on the page. Moo 04:28, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If that'd work better then I'm all for it. IKJames 20:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Combining block pages
I'd like to propose several mergers of pages that I feel are redundant. For example: Iron (disambiguation) Seems really necessary, to me, to have to have three pages for what is essentially a single material in different forms. All three articles are essentially stubs, and with some clever re-working, I feel there could, and should, easily just be one page for "Iron" that talks about all its incarnations.

I'm willing, but I don't want to do something this time-consuming and find that people don't like it, so please speak up. This will apply to, I think, all minable ores.

Immelmann 04:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The only thing I see is that 2 of them are categorized as blocks, while one of them is categorized as an item. I'm not sure exactly what the differences are between the two that are blocks and could possibly agree that those two pages could be merged, however when you are talking about differently categorized stuff, it's generally best to keep them separated to avoid confusion. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  05:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The difference between Iron (Block) and Iron (Ore) are still substantial enough to warrant their own pages I believe (one functions as a mineable resource and another is purely for decoration + storage purposes). Although playing devils advocate, considering both the Iron (Ingot) and Iron block pages don't really have much to write about, combining them would make them fill out more and in the meantime the Template:Blocks and Template:Items templates can still link to these individually via anchor tags. Myself, I vote for keeping them separate. --Gnu32 07:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, okay. If you guys say so! Immelmann 21:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Mod: namespace / Third party content
I think there should be a Mod: namespace created to support articles for client mods, as this will allow a clear division between official and unofficial content. It would be useful in that there are some client mods which are popular and do provide some very good content which could do with documenting. One example is Grappling hook, which I marked for deletion because I don't feel it warrants its own article (although in retrospect, I probably should undo that and wait for consensus on this idea). Under the Mod: namespace, it could probably go under Mod:303/Grappling hook or even Mod:Grappling hook and they'll have their own templates like Template:Items but for third party content. Good idea?

Also, I'm curious what the general stance is on third party content. We could probably do more to support it and the rules seem to show a stance against it, but understandably there are two issues with third party content in general:
 * A lot of it is mediocre, bordering on useless
 * Mojang and the Minecraft sites can't and won't (and shouldn't) provide support on third-party content

Another little idea I had was to create a navbox like Template:Minecraft but for third party content, linking all articles related like Client mods. Should I do this? --Gnu32 10:08, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * MCWiki's stance towards third-party content is pretty much a grey zone; We don't really like it, but due to the community stance we still allow it, we just don't provide any support at all. I'm going to take your Mod subspace in serious consideration as it seems to be an easy solution to a fairly large problem. A navbox for mods seems unnecessary to me; I prefer to have the wiki as "core" as possible.--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  16:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair does. I can understand topics on modded content can become unwieldy. I figure if we can get some editors to commit themselves to maintaining third party content content to wiki-standards, we can win your confidence :P I'd be happy to do this. I can also make a sample navbox in my user space if you'd like. --Gnu32 16:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * While we are open to considering adding new namespaces, the role of those namespaces has to be seriously considered. Currently there are only 3 pages concerning Mods. I don't believe this is enough to warrant a namespace. I also don't want to see a namespace being used to separate data that could more easily be done in other ways. We fixed the subpage issue today, so all namespaces now have subpaging enabled, so I think that between that and use of categorization should be enough to handle this specific issue. As for the question should these be documented on the wiki or not? I think that needs to be considered on a basis of general community acceptance. If it's a mod that's been accepted by the overall community and is widely used in the game, it probably deserves it's own article (a subpage of Mods). If it's a mod that just has a niche use in the community, then having it mentioned on the Mods page is probably enough without it's own article. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png|19px ]] talk  00:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

new mode: zombies!!
i got this idea about a new mode called "zombies!!". its kinda like the survival mode, but with a lot more zombies. when you start the game, you get ten days to find a place to build a base, and build it. when the tenth night come, zombies will spawn and attack you. they can break simple bricks as sand and dirt, and maybe use long time on destroying wood or planks. also that players have an oppertunity to repair stuff, as long as they have the required material. when day comes you will have less time to gather items you need to survive, but enought to get some. this will keep on for how many waves you can make it to (with a counter) and maybe add some upgrades or extra items for special wave, kinda like every tenth you get one item. fifth, tenth, fifteenth, and so on might have some bosses. you get the point. so what do you guys think? just pop in with suggestions if you like! :) –The preceding unsigned comment was added by Morgan32 (Talk 16:44, 28 January 2011. Please sign your posts with !


 * Haha, welcome to the Wiki, Morgan. Unfortunately this isn't the place to suggest new features and game modes for Minecraft, as this is a discussion page for the wiki community for wiki-related matters. Your best option would be to make your suggestion over at the minecraft forums. Most likely your idea or some variant of it has already been suggested, so make sure you search for a similar topic. Otherwise, do not hesitate to use it as an outlet for discussion as long as you follow the rules. Cheers, --Gnu32 16:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

thanks :) and okay i didnt notice it was just discussion :) ill check trough the forums now :)