Talk:Achievement

Separate section for console
Could we please keep the separate section for console-only achievements? Also, editing restriction? What's going on? —Fenhl 00:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * MCW:admin noticeboard/Archive 24 and User talk:Wolffillms. – LauraFi -  talk  00:43, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I see. Any opinions on the content? I feel like having the subsection makes the article more readable. —Fenhl 01:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * . – LauraFi -  talk  01:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Pinging, since he is the main advocate against it.
 * It does seem a bit neater having it separated, but I feel like it has the purpose of separating out non-PC content rather than exclusive content, as most of the achievements also are on the Windows 10 edition. So sorting it does make the PC edition easier to navigate, but I feel it could make the rest harder, especially since the sorting feature of all achievements is lost. – KnightMiner  t/c 02:17, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * per the latter half of Knight's comment. My original revert occurred on November 29th of last year, almost six hours before the interaction ban went into effect against both myself and Wolf. Wolf then abruptly reverted my edit just over a month later, which in turn, technically violated the editing restriction against him. I questioned about that particular revert, but as of now, have gotten no response from him. Being bold, I decided to revert Wolf's edit in risk of a block, as again, Wolf's revert technically violated his editing restriction. -BDJP (t 02:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * There is already a column for what version the achievement applies to, and it would be easy enough to [minecraft.gamepedia.com/Template:Load_achievements?action=edit edit the template so that it you can split the table].? –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Blobs2 (talk • contribs) at 3:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * It would make much more sense to not have a "version restriction" column when almost all achievements are in all of the major editions, and instead have a seperate section for the Console/Windows 10 exclusive achievements for easier reading and better marking exclusiveness. Wolffillms (talk) 23:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I for a seperate section marking Console/Windows 10 Edition exclusive achievements, as per Minecraft Wiki:Projects/Highlighting Edition-Specific Information all Editon exclusive information should be highlighted as being exclusive for easier reading of pages. Wolffillms (talk) 23:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Your idea would basically make the version availability on mobs go caput. -BDJP (t 01:49, 20 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Are you making an analogy? What is the connection from this page to the mob page? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 04:33, 20 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Alternate idea: rather than use the current 'version restriction' column, use four yes/no columns: a PC column, an XBox column, a PS column, and a Win10 column.  Then within the same table you could sort those columns to find all the desired edition-specific achievements? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 15:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * with Sealbud's idea. -BDJP (t 18:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Something like this? I would to that, though it does become a bit bulky. it might be worth dropping a few of the other columns from the overall template to make a bit more room (not sure which though, it is all rather useful information) – KnightMiner  t/c 22:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I like that mockup. I made some syntax corrections to it (apologies for stepping into your sandbox, I felt like it was okay since it was a piece of code under discussion ..?), but there remains an issue with xbox points not showing in the second cell of split rows.
 * I don't think this table is that clunky, at least no more than the original. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 15:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I just noticed there's a problem with sorting that maybe we ought to try to overcome. Try this: sort by Win 10 column, look at 'Adventuring Time' within the Win 10 'yes' block.  It shows a red 'no' by the PC.  That's technically exactly the cell you should expect, of course.  But what if a user, through misinterpreting that 'no', interprets it to mean that 'Adventuring Time' isn't available on the PC?  The other 'Adventuring Time' isn't readily available to compare.  Maybe sorting inherently leads to this problem, or maybe this can be overcome?  Perhaps instead of showing 'no', show ... some other red-colored word that clearly communicates what is going on.
 * Secondly and more minor, I noticed that after sorting columns (clicking headers), it gets rid of those nice rowspanned cells. That's just an artifact of the sortable table not having a way to return to its original sort order, right?  Is this something we could overcome or is it too much bother? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 16:31, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * It's fine that you edited my sandbox, that is what it's here for (hence the line at the top of my sandbox)
 * The rowspan stuff is a side effect of the sorting, yes. In order to separately sort the two different possible values, it just splits them into two separate rows. I don't believe there is any easy way to overcome it, because keeping them together disables sorting between the two values
 * As for the "split in two" ones, I am not really sure what word to use there instead of "No" as there is not a lot of space for a full reason, though I did try a title just now on my sandbox like so: No? I applied that to the table. – KnightMiner  t/c 17:13, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh I see the note now. The rowspan stuff, I'm sure it'll be fine then.
 * I think the title is a good direction. By the time a person is looking closely at a line to see which editions don't 'Adventuring Time', they'll probably notice the note.  In case the dotted underline is too subtle, maybe the cell should be reddish-orange?  Is that too visually busy?
 * Also I notice that 'Monster Hunter' and 'Leader of the Pack' at least don't have different requirements, they're split only because of XBox points. How about, more generically, something like 'Available but in a slightly different form'? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 17:52, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * A reddish orange could work, though there are not a lot of distinctive colors left between red and yellow, so maybe I can leave the note the same color and switch the normal "no"'s color to something like "never" from tc? I don't think it will be busy as much as very common though, but it could work. If we are changing the color though, I really should try and come up with a better word, to make it more clearly distinctive.
 * I'll try tweaking the note a bit when I adjust the colors, but I would like to get a few more comments on the design (and hopefully a better word for the "Yes, but different" than "No"). – KnightMiner  t/c 23:44, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * with this idea. – LauraFi -  talk  14:28, 14 January 2016 (UTC)