Aether Dragon Egg Better Minecraft
Pang Murdock
Sometimes, (on very rare occasions) a dragon with a strong bond with their owner can come back from the dead. There are many theories to why some dragons do this, but two are more popular than others.
Where you live is also a factor that changes what dragon you could have. For instance, if you live in a desert by a river, you have a good chance of getting a fire or water dragon. Fire dragons hatch on sand, water dragons hatch in the water, nature dragons hatch in the forest, nether dragons hatch on netherrack or in lava, ender dragons hatch on stone or dirt, aether dragons hatch 200 blocks up in the air, ice dragons hatch on ice, and ghost dragons hatch at bedrock.
Over a week ago, I proposed on the talk pages of the two projects Raspberry Pi History and Minecraft Pocket Edition that they be merged under the new Highlighting Edition-Specific Information project. I have not had a reply on either talk page, so I am bringing this suggestion back to the Community Portal, to confirm this merger.
The Raspberry Pi History Project page has seen no activity since 23-Feb-2013, when it was last edited by GingerGeek, who also has not edited the Wiki at all since then. That looks to be the ONLY activity in this project.
The reason for this merger, firstly, is that Ultradude25 has stated above that "I don't think a separate project for each edition is necessary". Secondly, having given some thought to Ultradude's comment, I can see the logic in this, and it would be easier to find all information about making the Minecraft Wiki easier to navigate for edition-specific information if it were all under a single project.
I've added a script that replaces normal tooltips with these minecraft style tooltips, primarily for the grid template (although that's disabled for now, to make sure the script isn't horribly broken), but can be added to any element with the minetip class.
To get the title the script will first look for a data-minetip-title attribute, then a normal title attribute, then a normal title attribute on the first link directly within the element. You can also add a description with the data-minetip-text attribute, which will also convert forward slashes (/) to line breaks. The description requires a title (in some form).
Both the title and the description support the standard minecraft formatting codes (except k), except using & instead of , for typing convenience (although I could easily support the section symbol too if wanted). Since the formatting codes are styled by just using classes (in the format of format-a, a being the formatting code), these classes can be used anywhere. For example: Pink text. The styling works best in conjunction with the minecraft font.
Now, onto using the script. If you just want an unformatted title (maybe with a description), it is best to use the title attribute instead of data-minetip-title, as at least then people will still be able to see the title with JavaScript disabled. However, if you want formatting in the title, you should use data-minetip-title with an unformatted title attribute. If you add formatting to the title attribute, it'll still work, but in cases where JavaScript is disabled, the formatting codes will show up in the title.
If you don't like the minecraft tooltips, or perhaps you're on a browser such as Opera which places the link URL into the tooltip, with no way to remove it without removing the link, you can add window.mcw.useNativeMinetip = true to your userjs (or run window.mcw.minetip.native() in your console to test it on this page), which will revert back to using the native browser tooltips, however it retains the multi-line description, so you're not missing out on information (just formatting). (FYI, I plan to create a "script options" script at some point, so things like this can be done through a menu. It'll save client-side though.)
Please test this script in your browsers, so I can enable it for the grid template. When it is, you'll still have to wait until the lua version for proper support of this script (requires additional syntax). In the meantime, you can use the title parameter of the grid template, but formatting will still look bad with JavaScript disabled.
So, why hasn't this wiki been required to change to the new style like brickipedia and the aether wiki were? It's just like the cutting room floor, it looks just like an old wiki. So, why isn't it like all the others if it's a wiki? Brickticks (talk) 19:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
We need to sort out how we do the version history pages. Currently we have these massive pages which occasionally have to have older versions archived to sub-pages to make them still barely usable, and when a new version is released the content from the upcoming features page is cut and pasted to the version history page, losing all the edit history. This is far from ideal in many areas. We also don't have redirects set up for every version, instead relying on the verlink template to get to the right page. This is bad for searchability (although search is still horribly broken anyway) and also means we're relying on a complicated template which doesn't actually even work correctly for all versions (and while the lua version would fix the issue of it being complicated and not working properly, redirects would still be easier and work better). If we had redirects set up we could just link to any version directly and it would get to the right place. These redirects should exist regardless of what we do.
There was discussion about having a version namespace and each minor version will have its own page, with patches and related dev versions on the same page. Personally I don't know what the benefit of a version namespace would be, however I do certainly think separate pages would work better. I suppose in this case we'd convert the old version history pages into disambiguation-like pages. Using load-page isn't an acceptable solution (more of a workaround really), anchors won't work and you have to wait for the normal page to load with content you don't want, then have a second delay to load the content you do. So I feel separate pages may be the only viable option anyway.
If we were to go with the separate page route, I don't think it should just be for the PC versions; in which case we need to think about handling all the different editions. Of course, we could just have all the editions on the same page, but I feel that would be messy, especially since there is no relation between the version numbers of different editions. The Xbox Edition is easy as they use TU*, but the other editions have conflicting versioning with the PC edition. Should we have the PC edition take up the main name as usual, and other versions are prefixed with their edition, maybe with an about template linking them together?
Something else I'd like to solve, but it isn't that important is the duplication of content between snapshots and the final version release. I don't really know what to do with this without keeping all the extra guff that happens between snapshots that are irrelevant to the final release. Perhaps something similar to what I wanted to do with the history template where snapshot information could be toggled. However, there are editing usability and formatting issues there that need to be sorted out, which is why that never happened in the first place.
1. Should snapshots each have their own page? They range from huge to tiny, so you either have separate pages with some of them being stubs, or merged pages with some of them being massive (having both isn't an option, it'd be inconsistent and confusing). Because the infobox provides very easy navigation between versions, having separate stub pages doesn't seem much of an issue, whereas massive pages cause awful loading and editing times, as well as apparently making it impossible to view/edit on some browsers. Opinions?
2. And what about pre-releases? Do we treat them like snapshots? What should they be named? Do we stop saying snapshots and instead say dev/development versions, so pre-releases can be included?
4. What do we call each part of the version number (for the type field)? It looks like semantic versioning, so: Major.Minor.Patch; however the "minor" versions aren't really that minor, often involving large overhauls of code, and there's always the issue of old versions which were hugely inconsistent with their version numbers.
I'm not sure about that. If we put the snapshots in individual pages, it will be more annoying to see every single page, instead of seeing all the news in one single page. And it won't be more organized. Think, if an snapshot is out, it will cost a lot of time to create a new article, and the editing will be less organized. I think that we must keep the original Version History page, but organizing them in different versions pages (e.g. 1.8, 1.7) --The Wither Steve (talk) 23:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
The main reason (at least for me) the box that summarizes each block has Data Values is for commands such as /give. Since we are now changing to use the ID Name instead of the Data Value, we should put that in the box. Many of them are fairly obvious, but some are not. They can be found on the page , but I don't want to start on a project that really should be done consistantly throughout the Wiki. I also just realized that I don't know how to edit stuff in that box. I'm talking about the box with the picture, and then things like durability, stackability, drops, damage, etc.PuzzleMage (talk) 12:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
So with Minecraft - Volume Beta released, adding more music to the game, there are many .ogg files that need to be uploaded (the page; so empty). However I do not know how to upload them, and with the whole copyright issues, it seems too risky to even try. User:Kizzycocoa, or anybody, I know this is not an easy task, but could you spare time to upload the new .ogg files? --Neutral0814 (talk) 02:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
c80f0f1006