Talk:Stained Clay

Crafting recipe
Does 8 hardened clay make 1 stained or 8, or is the recipe wrong? (Output is currently a question mark.) hotdogPi--t--c--QUIZ! 19:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC) Do not click!

Should this be merged with the Hardened Clay article?
Seems kind of redundant to have two separate pages for what are essentially the same blocks. Shouldn't it be part of the Hardened Clay page, or perhaps the Dyeing page? E-102 Gamma 22:45, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be better collected together with the main Hardened clay page. 82.69.54.207 00:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * - It makes more sense. We could do something like the wool page. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs Edit count 01:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * - This page should be merged with Hardened Clay page. Itouchmasterpro 05:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep, Merge this page with hardened clay. --007a83 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 00:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * - They are really different blocks, as they have different id's. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Screenbones (talk • contribs) at 06:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Separated from the "Hardened Clay" page.
If cobblestone and moss stone aren't merged, and dirt and grass blocks are not merges, why are Hardened Clay and Stained Clay merged? They are separated in the block list, and they have different id's in-game. That's why I separated them. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Screenbones (talk • contribs) at 06:52, 26 June 2014 (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Proposed change in "Usage" paragraph.

 * QUOTE: The Article Currently**

Usage

Stained clay has the same blast resistance as most other stone blocks, which is significantly higher than the block of clay before being smelted. A block of stained clay when one meter away from an explosion will protect any blocks behind it, though it will be destroyed in the process.


 * END QUOTE**

Note bold.

My question is ... what? Creeper? TNT? Ghast? They're all different powers and strengths. See: Explosion for more and better detail about explosion power.

Anyway.


 * BEGIN PROPOSED CHANGE**

Usage

Stained clay has the same blast resistance as most other stone blocks, which is significantly higher than the block of clay before being smelted. A block of stained clay when one meter away from an explosion stronger than TNT but weaker than Charged Creeper will protect any blocks behind it, though it will be destroyed in the process.


 * END PROPOSED CHANGE** –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Bluedrache (talk • contribs) at 17:21, 21 November 2014 (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Merge back
The split of the Hardened Clay article by Screenbones 1 year ago was made unilaterally, against consensus, and with no applicable arguments (data values don't really matter for players, as does location in Creative mode inventory). I propose re-merging the articles. —  NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 09:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The pages were separated by Screenbones, then reverted. See Special:Diff/662053 and Special:Diff/662126. Later they were separated again by Goandgoo. . – LauraFi  -  talk  12:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Under what consensus Goandgoo re-split them? —  Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 12:42, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know. – LauraFi -  talk  12:52, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Well then, so we have to search it... —  Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 12:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't find any in article talk pages and Minecraft Wiki talk pages. In a discussion about this with GreenStone on IRC, he concluded that no consensus to re-split articles was ever made. —  Grid Command Block.png NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 13:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Apologies, back then the wiki did not have this merge/split process as established. I must have seen the earlier split and wanted to finish the split (or something like that - looking at those edits I can't remember). Funnily enough though, in the topic above, I give my opinion that the pages should be merged. That is my current decision -  –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 00:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

My opinion is that stained clay is the same hardened clay, just recolored (by dyes or otherwise). —  NickTheRed37 (talk&#124;contributions) 13:51, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 71.212.10.80 16:49, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Honestly, it should be that clay and hardened clay should be merged while stained clay is separated. 98.182.58.147 14:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you please explain why should it be that way? — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I the anon's proposal (clay and hardened clay are too different IMO) and  with merging Stained Clay and Hardened Clay. --GreenStone (talk) 14:40, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Just an argument against merging: The reader will probably be confused if they finds stained clay and hardened clay on the same page. Their textures are not as different enough to merge the two pages. Also, how do you want to name the page? And why do you want to merge all pages? Are the next pages you want to merge wood and wood planks just because they're both wooden? | violine1101(Talk) 16:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * is speculation. You can't read readers' minds. : you reduce the list of merge/split choice criteria to textures? What about obtaining and usage similarities?   Hardened Clay. Stained clay is essentially stained hardened clay, and this is stated in the article.   Are you talking to NickTheRed37? You might want to specify that explicitly. --GreenStone (talk) 16:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to say that the merging could create confusion because hardened clay and stained (hardened) clay aren't the same blocks although the both blocks are very similar. I doubt it would be reasonable for most readers so a merge would potentially be counterproductive. Also, in my last sentence, I didn't talk to anybody. It's a general question: Why have pages to be merged? In some cases, I can understand why they were merged but I don't think it's always reasonable to merge pages. I hyperbolized a bit saying that wood and wood planks could be merged, but I generally said what I wanted to say - I'm in this discussion although I don't really feel confident about this merge suggestion. Also I'm sorry for my previous post which was a bit rude. | violine1101(Talk) 22:13, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Clay and hardened clay are mined differently and are used differently. 71.212.10.80 22:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The pages could easily be merged under the hardened clay title, as both have the same usage and similar obtaining (both generate in mesas, one can be crafted, the other smelted), similar to the case of wool. They also both have just about the same usage, which is a colored durable building block. – KnightMiner  t/c 19:15, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * . – LauraFi -  talk  19:38, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * too. – Sealbudsman (Aaron) SealbudsmanFace.png t/c 01:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I also . BDJP (t 02:27, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Let's wait Majr, Orthotope and Dinoguy1000. &mdash; Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 06:16, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

"[09:29] (@GreenStone) Hm, stop. By the same criteria we can merge glass and stained glass, and also glass pane and stained glass pane."

- GreenStone on #ruminecraftwiki IRC channel

&mdash; Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 06:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * a merge of Hardened Clay and Stained Clay. And while I'm here, I would like to note that while it is good to feel out the possibility of merging similar cases (I wholeheartedly support any proposal to merge the glass types as mentioned in GreenStone's IRC comment above), this discussion is ultimately specifically about merging these two pages, and not about merging any others, so it's inappropriate to propose unrelated merges here (speaking specifically to the anon who proposed instead merging Clay and Hardened Clay). 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 09:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * purely on the basis that there would be 17 inv images in the infobox and it would look awful. :( –Majr ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs 08:57, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This is a limitation in the infobox module, and it can be fixed by implementing separators, which is a simple thing. &mdash; Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:02, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It is a limitation in the fact that 17 can't be evenly split. –Majr ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs 08:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Then... maybe implement half-shift? But we shouldn't discuss the module, we should discuss articles. &mdash; Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Nick, it seems as if most people are agreeing to the concept behind the merge, but this technical issue with the infobox can't simply be discounted - it is quite a major issue which needs consideration. –Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 08:58, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Let's move to Module talk:Infobox for a while then. &mdash; Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:02, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, it's not that bad. &mdash; Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks alright in mobile, but on PC it has 2 rows of 8 and 1 row of 1 on the bottom. My opinion is ideally that 1 row of 1 would be on top, and normal hard clay would be there, and stained clay would be the 16 below. – Sealbudsman (Aaron) SealbudsmanFace.png t/c 12:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I am the anon who said that clay and hardened clay should be merged. I said that to show how biased you are. You have mixed opinions about stained and hardened clay. But you all oppose merging hardened clay and regular clay. Both merges are practically the same. For that matter, you want to merge stained clay and hardened clay. That is like my suggestion. For that matter, that is like merging cactus and lapis lazuli ore. Both you smelt to get a dye. That is obviously totally wrong. Same thing for Hardened and stained. 70.184.8.105 16:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Did you even read any of the arguments for merging before commenting? It seems not as you are refuting a point that was not made.
 * Cactus and lapis lazuli ore have completely different properties and usage, and the same is true of clay and hardened clay (note that one is soft, and the other hard. One drops clay balls, the other itself. One is found in lakes, the other in mesas, etc.). Hardened clay and stained clay on the other hand have identical properties and only a slight difference in recipe. It would more accurately be described as merging white wool with the other colors. We are not merging because of names, nor a single property, we are merging because of many properties. – KnightMiner  t/c 00:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay fine. Same anon btw but made an account. You are right. Keeping these split is like splitting Tate and Liza on bulbapedia to a Tate page and a Liza page. It's stupid. I see your point. But still there should be different sections and the crafting recipe will have recipes for 2 different blocks and what will the page name be? And also, what will become of the talk page for a Hardened clay? If these can be fixed after merge then merge. But if not , keep them split. But before we do , we need to fix what I say. #Justmadeaccount t  Boorider7 (talk) 14:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The talk pages can be merged, like the article itself (which will be after all named Hardened Clay, since, including but not limited to, stained clay is the same hardened clay, just colored). Blocks are too similar to warrant a separate section for stained clay. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that a few sections are needed, but only in the obtaining section, as their usage is just about identical. Rather then use a "stained clay" and a "hardened clay" section though, it would make a little more sense to have the sections "smelting" which would state "hardened clay can be smelted from clay", "crafting" which would states "hardened clay can be stained", and "natural generation" which would state which types can be found in mesas. See grass or stone bricks for a similar example of a multi-block obtaining section.
 * As for the title, it is also worth noting that stained clay is referenced as "stained hardened clay" in the code (including its ID name), so "stained clay" is still effectively "hardened clay" – KnightMiner  t/c 00:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Looks like it is prominent that people think the articles should be merged. Can someone summarize this discussion? (Me doing this is questionable due to my fallen reputation.) &mdash; Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I think we first need to decide how we are displaying 17 blocks in the infobox. –Goandgoo</b> ᐸ <small style="display:inline-block;line-height:1em;vertical-align:-0.4em">Talk Contribs 10:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Goandgoo? It's easy to show 17 blocks in the infobox, just the same way we've shown 16. AwesomeMan31415926 (profile|contribs) 13:14, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * He means showing it and still having it look nice. See Majr's comment above. – KnightMiner  t/c 14:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * How about something like: Sealbudsman_Hardened_Clay_17.png, which you could implement in infobox by making it so that  (hyphen) gives something like a line break in the inv-image section?  – Sealbudsman (Aaron) SealbudsmanFace.png T/C 15:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * My comment was really just a jab amongst the more serious discussion (if the emote didn't make that obvious), and as an excuse to oppose as I don't like merging. It really isn't a reason to not merge it, it just won't look all nice and even. –Majr ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs 16:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)