Talk: MarioProtIV

MarioProtIV is inactive.

MarioProtIV hasn't edited since December 24, 2016, so he will probably not receive any messages left here. Please keep this in mind before leaving a message.

Welcome[]

Hello, MarioProtIV, and welcome to the Minecraft Wiki!

Here are some links to get you started:

Need help editing? Help:Contents may be of use.
If you are already familiar with editing, try the style guide.
Make sure to read and follow the rules.
The community portal is the community's main discussion page. You can talk about anything wiki-related there.
You can join or create a community project at Minecraft Wiki:Projects.
Recent changes will let you see others' contributions as they happen.
You can customize your user page if you like.
Any issues that require an admin can be lodged on the admin noticeboard.
If you have trouble with anything on the wiki or you're not sure about a specific topic, feel free to join the IRC.
If you would like to talk about Minecraft for ideas, suggestions, and other general topics, the forums are a great place to start.

When posting on a talk page, remember to add ~~~~ onto the end of your post.

Any way you chose, you can be part of the Minecraft Wiki community! MrWikiPro (talk) 18:19, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back! –LauraFi - talk 20:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Pocket Edition mentioned features[]

You have recently been undoing my actions on the page. Maybe my edit summaries were unclear. The piece of information doesn't belong there for the following reasons:

In Pocket Edition, there are no commands, so don't say that they have been partiallly implemented when they haven't.
The page is about the future, so anything that mentions a feature that already exists doesn't belong there.

If you still think you're actions were constructive, please post a comment on talk page. The Blobs 22:28, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

What is really wrong with stating that some of its functionality exists in other ways? If a user is looking for information on future plans for commands in PE, they will be more benefited knowing they can currently change their gamemode then they are disbenefitted by stating a feature that already exists. Also, we have in the past stated similar implementations of features, a current example is on Mentioned features#Brief mentions –KnightMiner ^t/_c 22:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

That brings up another reason. Commands are a lot more than the ability to switch the gamemode. See the page if you don't know what I mean. The Blobs 22:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I know, I'm in the edit history there. My specific statement is some of the functionality, which means not all. The point is not to say "there is no reason for this to be added because it already exists", it is to say "some of the planned features have already been added or have an available alternative" –KnightMiner ^t/_c 22:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

The other problem is that the switch-gamemode option and commands were tweeted separately. The Blobs 23:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Editing/behavioral restrictions[]

Please take note of the editing/behavioral restrictions outlined at Talk:Pocket Edition v0.12.0 alpha#Protection (again) and Project:Admin noticeboard#Editing/behavioral restrictions on Pocket Edition Alpha 0.12.0, and in particular that they apply to all edits you perform on the wiki, not just those to Pocket Edition Alpha 0.12.0. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 05:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Undid my change[]

There was ONE actual grammar error. It said "Magma Cube" instead of "Magma Cubes". Just wanted to let ya know. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Enderderp572 (talk • contribs) at 1:10, 05 August 2015 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Skipping 0.12.0[]

Can you please explain why we should skip 0.12.0 in the infoboxes? It was clearly both numbered before and released before 0.12.1. Also, removing links to the update simply isolates it rather than providing users with any less confusion (it seems like more confusion of why we would skip the update).

Also, I should mention that you are the only one who has stated in favor of skipping 0.12.0, while four different users have reverted back to the 0.12.0 version between the different articles affected. –KnightMiner ^t/_c 01:30, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

I've provided my thoughts on the issue on the community portal. MarioProtIV, please do not constantly revert edits. I would like to remind you of your editing restrictions - regardless of the intentions of your edits, you have violated them. Let this be your final warning - next time you break your editing restriction rules you will be blocked without notice. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk
Contribs 09:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Snapshot / build articles[]

When it comes to making snapshot articles, please make sure you find any information before you make the page, as you should've done with 15w33a. I was going to create the page with all the fixes from the tracker but you somehow beat me to it... -BDJP ^(t|c) 14:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Media vs. Other[]

On the Minecraft template you said that you disagree with it being called "Other" in stead of "Media". Here is why I believe you are wrong:

Minecon is a convention not Media
Minecraft: The Story of Mojang us a movie not media
Minecraft in education and End poem belong in a template and the Minecraft template makes the most sense.
As they all belong in the Minecraft template but don't relate to anything else or each other "Other" makes most sense.

Wolffillms (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Delete due to breaking a template[]

Please do not mark pages for deletion simply because of a minor sorting error. The update 15w35b was released, so there is no reason we should delete it just because of an issue elsewhere. Also, when it comes to pages breaking templates, it is always more important have the information than have all the templates working right. –KnightMiner ^t/_c 16:52, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Constantly reverting Pocket Edition template[]

I recently noticed that you are reverting every change to the Pocket Edition versions template-- repeatedly, if another user attempts to undo your revert. In the future, could you please discuss your objections on the talk page prior to performing a revert of legitimate content (regardless of whether or not you announce it as an undo)? -Illidicia (t+c) 15:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Good faith edits on Template:Computer versions[]

Hello. I have reverted your two edits recently on the page mentioned above for the following reasons:

Pre-releases always go in front of snapshots.
We don't add an image regarding the update until we get an official name for said update.

-BDJP ^(t|c) 20:48, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Mario, the misplaced prerelease link was probably a site cache issue; the 1.10-pre1 page was miscategorized for a few minutes. If you still see it out of place, there's a purge button under the 'More' tab.. or it'll just correct itself over time. Good eye though, thanks. – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 21:05, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi[]

First of all, I know you might not see this, for you are more active on Wikipedia. Second, I messaged you because I'm just curious why did you lack interest of Minecraft. Minecraft is getting more interesting, actually. What's wrong with 1.9? The update isn't that bad, in my opinion. Probably due to attack delay? You can still click rapidly, but it won't deal much damage as of waiting much time in order to deal 100% damage. Also, you can continue on playing versions older than 1.9, like 1.8 or something. In fact, most multiplayer servers are still in 1.8 as of the time of me writing this message. Bedrock Edition still allows you to deal 100% damage when clicking (or tapping) fast. In other words, why lack interest of Minecraft? – Dentedharp90041^tce 18:44, 5 October 2017 (UTC)