Talk:Mojang Studios/Archive 1

how many people
4 or 6 people? :S Matti-Koopa 07:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

deadmau5
wait, Deadmau5 might be helping? He's Canadian, that doesn't seem right.....although, I guess the internet would make long-distance collaborations possible. Anyone confirm that Deadmau5 might be involved?--K Wall 24 21:25, 14 November 2010 (CST)
 * Both C418 and Deadmau5 aren't in Sweden, and seeing as they're just making music I guess they don't really need to be in the office. – ultradude25 ( T at 21:28, 14 November 2010 (CST)

Previous employees?
Should we add a line for previous employees (like Dock?) -F1racer101 12:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that'd be fine, the more non-trivial information the better. --Soosk 00:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Employee pages
Can I suggest that until we have enough information to give each employee a page of his own, we merge all the employee pages here? As it is, most of the recently added employee pages violate Wiki Rule #4. --DannyF1966 12:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

name change
Game is now copyright "Mojang AB", that is the name of the new company formed, "Mojang Specifications" was Notch himself. Br4indead 15:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Employee pages
I'd like to propose a change to the current way the way Mojang information is displayed. The only employee who currently has enough information to warrant a page is Notch, all the other employees pages contain nothing but the place the work (which doesn't need to be displayed on each employees page, because it's obvious they work for Mojang) and then "We don't know much else". It's silly to have 7 pages for 7 employees we know nothing about. Therefore I would like to suggest creating a single page (or even just using this page (Mojang)) for all employees (besides Notch) that lists their information, then if at some point in the future an employee has enough information to warrant a page, they can have their own page. Redirects can be used too to make it easier. Any thoughts? This is my first attempt at doing this, so apologies if I'm suggesting in the wrong place, please redirect if I am. tl:dr; merge all employee pages until they have enough info to warrant their own pages (like Notch) Citricsquid 17:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)citricsquid

Seems I'm a moron and didn't see the person above suggesting exactly the same, I +1 his suggestion in that case Citricsquid 17:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)citricsquid

Editing collision :/
I added a new logo to the article at the exact same time as someone else changed the new one... TheYeIIowDucK 21:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Uh no, that's been changed for a whole day before your edit. – ultradude25 ( T at 23:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That's odd, i was sure that it was outdated when i edited it out...TheYeIIowDucK 09:58, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

New Award
Mojang AB just won the March Developers' Showdown 2011! Anyways, should this be put on the main page(our "page" for Minecraft), or on here. We REALLY need a page for Minecraft. Drenay 23:24, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

new employee
I think I read on twitter something about a new internship joining the place.. but i can't find it back now. Anyone know his name etc so we can keep the page up to date?

Elathuria?
jeb_ says: "The best thing about the employees listing on MinecraftWiki is that nobody here knows who "Elathuria" is" --Kaydeethree (talk) 07:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * So uh, your point is?--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  07:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Wait, shit. How did this get through unnoticed? fffffff--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  07:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

A subtle but helpful way to identify
In the 'Employees' section, I suggest we arrange the employee positions in the graph, so that it lines up with the photo placed above it, to help with identification, and at least make it simpler to see who is who. Good? Bad? Learner4 10:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

And possibly a picture of each employee's skin, so as to identify them in-game. And each employee deserves as much credit as Notch, since they help give that "final touch" to the game. Imagine the game without it's sounds. Yeah, I know.


 * Well, Notch is the face of the company so I think it's fair to treat him differently. Does each employee have a post of their skin somewhere?  This would be a great place for it, but the only skin I've ever seen is Notch's.  Uh, their Minecraft avatar texture.  ... This conversation out of context is pretty creepy. --Theothersteve7 19:53, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Bomb Boy/BomuBoi?
Does anyone know who @BomuBoi is? He's got one of JunkBoy's avatars, and the Mojang crew talk to and about him like he's an employee, but there's no info on the Mojang website. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 17:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * He was hired for Scrolls artwork. They announced him via Twitter a while ago. See here: https://twitter.com/#!/BomuBoi/status/85285964720775168 as well as here. Ordona 23:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Betheseda vs Mojang?
How can this have gone unnoticed? I propose we follow the (very useful, btw) "Recent Articles" section on our right and track the lawsuit's updates. It's very important, and we should actually give Scrolls it's own page so if Betheseda wins, we can redirect it to the new title. TheroeticallyScrewed 19:38, 22 August 2011 (UTC)TheoreticallyScrewed

Minecraftchick
Please find the source that this Lydia is a full time employee before adding her to that list. The Mojang website mentions nothing of this.

If she is only hired to represent mojang at certain events which is more likely the case add her to contract employee's or something since that means she is not a full time employee. Kamrat 08:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Added source. -- { Fishrock123 } (Talk) 22:27, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, great. Kamrat 07:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * It's just that all the info I found was second hand sources that said she was the "Director of fun", which sounds like a made up title. This lead me to believe it was a joke that people misunderstood. I'm happy to be corrected. :) Kamrat 07:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * She is in charge of the blog at mojang.com, as well as event coordinating(PAX booth, Minecon, E3 demonstration) 67.170.243.224 07:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Mojang Logo
When logging into minecraft does anyone else every see the black background Mojang Logo? 90% of the time its a white background with orange lettering for their logo. But the other 10% of the time I get a black background on it. No its not the window in the background doing it. I can get a screenshot with out that, its just my .bat file anyway to push more ram to MC. Is it just me? Or do others get this to? EDIT: NO ITS NOT A TEXTURE PACK! -- Throex  '''TALK 19:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC) [[Media:BlackM.png]]


 * I have noticed in a trailer I found for Scrolls, that Mojang has a black background logo showing in the beginning of the trailer. Could the occasional black background I get be a hint of some kind? -- Throex  '''TALK 00:26, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Nope, never got anything like that--98.111.219.231 09:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * If it happens, take a screenshot with the "print screen" (prt sc) key. Pokechu22 23:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

re: Position
I edited earlier to change "Minecraft.net" in the blurb of Notch to "Minecraft" and the blurb of Jahkob to "Scrolls" instead of "Scrolls.com" but there appears to be a disagreement over whether or not we should use the blurbs provided by Mojang verbatim or in a cleaned up format. Personally I think they should read "Minecraft" and "Scrolls" as the reason they use the domains on the help page is because it's designed for those who don't know Mojang projects, whereas this wiki can directly reference to them as we have pages about them. I would like to propose we change the descriptions to reference to the wiki pages and remove the domain portion of it, so instead of reading "Founder of Mojang and creator of Minecraft.net" Notch's blurb would read "Founder of Mojang and creator of Minecraft" which seems cleaner and sensible, even if it does differ slightly. Thoughts? --Citricsquid 05:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep in mind that the page they're quoted from could trivially just use the terms "Minecraft" and "Scrolls", and link them to the respective websites; at some level, a decision was made to go with unlinked domain names instead of (unlinked or linked) game names.
 * As for the question of whether we should "clean up" the blurbs, I would ask, where do we draw the line? Should we, for instance, change Karin's blurb from "Calculates all our money" to something like "Manages Mojang's finances" (which also "seems cleaner and sensible")? You see the problem with this thinking, right? 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 06:17, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I understand your point regarding "where do we draw the line" but I think what I proposed has a clear potential "rule": If the blurb references to something that we cover on the wiki then there should be a link to that page, beyond that we leave it unaltered. For the case of Minecraft it's obvious what that is, but Scrolls might not be so well known within the community, a user might not have heard of Scrolls before, surely it would make most sense for us to link directly to our page on Scrolls instead of them seeing "scrolls.com", going to the website themselves and trying to work out what it is when our Scrolls page does that all for them, in the wiki way. If they come to the Minecraft wiki and see a reference to Scrolls, wouldn't they want to see Scrolls information presented in the same format? If the rule was to only reference to internal pages I don't see any way this could have problems. Also I can't see any discussion of the unlinked domains thing, but I assume I'm looking in the wrong place (no idea how wikis work) can you provide a link please? Thanks. --Citricsquid 06:36, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * When I was talking about "unlinked domains" and the like, I was referring specifically to the original page, not the page here on the wiki. Obviously, I don't know any of the discussion or motivations that may or may not have played a role in the final outcome of the page, but I think it is safe to say the whole thing wasn't completely random.
 * I suppose I should have pointed out the possibility of a compromise, as well, and in this case it lets us have our cake and eat it, too. We can leave the text as "Minecraft.com" and "Scrolls.com", but link it to our articles on Minecraft and Scrolls, and so solve this whole debate. What do you think? =) 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 13:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism?
I really can't tell if this is vandalism or not:

Minecraft is the brainchild of Markus Persson. Rumors have it that he programmed it during a power outage in the summer of 1812 while he was carrying infants out of a burning church which was built on the back of a giant opossum. Also he is 11'6" tall and glows in the dark.[notes 2] 1. Enjoy games 2. Pick up programming 3. ???? 4. Profit

☁ Shockman25 ☂ Talk ☁ 02:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Nope, that's a description taken from the old minecraft.net/about page, which has since been taken down in favor of help.mojang.com (and, sort of, mojang.com/about). 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 02:59, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Good thing the support page was archived a few times. I looked it up on WaybackMachine (archive.org) and was able to get an archived copy of the page to replace the link. - Asterick6 06:49, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Ordering?
Should the ordering of the page be changed? I am wondering, because it seems pretty disorganized right now, with it being based around the length of time the employees have been a part of the company, rather than their designated departments. D arth B otto talk•cont 01:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It's partially based on the ordering used on the mojang.com and minecraft.net websites, but other than that is more-or-less arbitrary (though it does tend to follow the order in which they became employees, as you noted). Ordering by designated departments would also be somewhat arbitrary, though, because then you have the issue of what order the departments should have, and what order multiple employees in the same department should be given in. The only non-arbitrary method would be alphabetical by name, and even that carries issues as to whether we use their real name or screen name, and in the former case, what to do in cases where they aren't known by their real name (JunkBoy), and in the latter, what to do when they're known by multiple screen names (BomuBoi/BombBoy). I think probably the best solution is to just keep ordering based on the order on the official websites, and for employees not listed there yet, just order them in order of announcement. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 07:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

In-game name?
Wouldn't it be good to have everyones MC-username in one collumn? many people don't know most of them, and their mid-name doesn't fill that purpouse for everyone, nor does the twitter-name. 83.251.166.85 12:01, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Aaron Neiminen's Cap
It looks to me oddly like a water polo cap... Maybe because I play it, but I think it actually might be one. :P --Batorhos 11:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

S*** vandal
I saw that someone said the sh word on the page and he said no to change it but i did becuse little kids play minecraft. can someone block that guy?
 * He's actually an Admin himself so I doubt he would ban himself. He undid your edit because it was a direct quote from the person the page was covering. I agree though that a large number of younger kids will read this page so I'll talk to him and for now put a more suitable word but in brackets to show that it's not the actual word he used. --Moxxy 01:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree with both of you. Just because a Mojang person said something, doesn't mean that something has to go word for word onto these pages. We could, for example, just link to the quote. Or not even do that.--82.69.54.207 03:22, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It's a single word on a single page, used as an object in a (relatively) non-offensive fashion, rather than being used to describe someone. Furthermore, it's used in a direct quote which used the same word. What if the quote had instead used "crap"? How about "skit"? Some people take offense to the word "poo(p)", so where do we draw the line? If we decide to censor in this case, who's to say we shouldn't use some term other than "kill" when talking about killing mobs, or other than "die" to talk about the player dying? Political correctness is a dangerous game to play, and it's one I have no interest in. Yes, common sense applies in how we present the information on the wiki, but in a case like this, I believe the argument for allowing the word is much stronger than the argument for censoring it in some fashion. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 04:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm against censorship in every way. This game, while supposedly "kid friendly", is not advertised as such. Also, if you are worried about censoring your child on the Internet, don't let him play any online games that interact with anyone. You can't do anything about real-time interactions, regardless of a game's rating or any actions the "offending" player may incur on themselves if the game has a moderation system. The "damage" has been done if your kid is exposed, if there's any damage to speak of anyways. If you are worried about kids not your own, mind your own business (for lack of a better phrase). My 2 cents. -- Kanegasi  ☺  C  12:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I changed the S word to 'defecate'. 68.51.28.219 17:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Bukkit team avatars?
Should we use their bukkit.org forum avatars until they've been given official ones? Spykee 15:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Cobalt release
It says it will be released in aurum. But that was written in 2011 (Or it was that way then). Is there a official release date anywhere? Pokechu22 00:05, 30 January 2013 (UT)
 * on the Cobalt Website it sais on the top that it is coming out October 2015. Also recently (about a week ago) I edited the Cobalt section to be more accurate. Wolffillms (talk) 13:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Former employees "organized"
In response to "|bleh It does not matter if there are more sections, if it means the page is more organized.", I really don't feel like the former employees need to be split up into several subsections. Looks really messy, IMTAHO. -BDJP (t 22:10, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * could you please explain why you believe it is less organized this way? Wolffillms (talk) 22:47, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Why is there any need to split former employees up into separate sections? Unless you can provide a compelling reason to do so (and saying it's "more organized" is not a compelling reason, but a nebulous and subjective observation), I'm going to agree with BDJP here. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 09:25, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * if you split former employees into sections it is
 * consistent with the rest of the article
 * more organized as it does not have manny employees in a random order
 * easier for people to read as it is not in a random order
 * Wolffillms (talk) 12:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see how that makes it any more consistent. Active employees are grouped according to their role in the company; former employees are grouped by the fact that they are no longer involved with the company. Very simple, very straightforward.
 * There are a grand total of 15 former employees listed. With so few, ease of reading is really not a huge concern. I would not be opposed to sorting, though; there are two obvious sort orders that could be used for the list: alphabetically by name, or by the date they left Mojang. Of these, we have no guarantee of knowing the second one, leaving me to prefer alphabetical by name. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 13:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * what I'm saying is we arrange the former employees section into there former roles in the company to make in consistent with the Employees section. Wolffillms (talk) 13:50, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I know what you're saying. I'm saying you have yet to give a compelling reason to do so. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 13:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I have provided my reasons earlier
 * consistent with the rest of the article
 * more organized as it does not have manny employees in a random order
 * easier for people to read as it is not in a random order
 * If this is not what you mean by "reasons" could you please explain? Wolffillms (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * There is simply just no need to break up the former employees section as per reasons above. Judging from your tests in your user space, it looks much worse. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 22:56, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I still fail to see why having it be consistent with the rest of the article, more organized as it does not have manny employees in a random order, and easier for people to read as it is not in a random order is a bad thing. Wolffillms (talk) 23:08, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Because excessive organization is detrimental. For example, if Mojang only had say 10 employees, we wouldn't use sections at all, as having each section with only a few employees would make it more difficult to read.
 * Or take another example, you would organize your photos by month because the organization makes it easier to go through your photos. You wouldn't however organize them by day, because you probably don't take a photo most days, and when you do you only take a few, so the excessive organization would make it more difficult to go through your photos. If you did take hundreds of photos a day, then it could be a useful level of organization. And if Mojang did have many former employees, then the sections could be a useful level of orgnaization. –Majr ᐸ Talk Contribs 03:22, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * well I don't believe it would be excessive organization, but I'm pretty sure I'm not getting my way on this :). Wolffillms (talk) 14:49, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Move Dinnerbone
Can someone move Dinnerbone to wherever he is supposed to go on the employees list? He doesn't develop Minecraft PC anymore. I would do it, but I am not good at tables and I don't know what he does now. -PancakeIdentity (talk) 20:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)