Feed The Beast Wiki:Staff's Noticeboard

Category overhaul
Everything related to categories is terrible. To start, we have changed the policy to allow for multiple categories per page. To make this more useful, we will be creating more descriptive categories. The following list of new categories will be updated as we add more:



We are also going to be renaming some categories and reevaluating their usefulness. The following categories need to be renamed and/or reevaluated:


 * Base
 * Resource Page
 * Transformation
 * Other
 * Converters
 * Portable
 * Sorting
 * Pipes
 * Tubes
 * Conduit
 * Modules
 * Attributes
 * Redpower
 * Miscellaneous Automation

The following categories have been replaced:


 * Documentation has been replaced with
 * Electric has been replaced with
 * Attributes has been replaced with

This project is more clearly documented on its project page.

Please discuss stuff. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 22:14, 8 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay so I have a few ideas with some of those; namely pipes, conduits and tubes etc..
 * My suggestion is to use categories that are bit more inclusive such as, , which could each respectively classify things like BC pipes, IC2 Cable and Fluiducts. Another group of categories to assist this could be , , and  which would classify items such as IC2 Batteries as well as BC Tanks
 * These could then also be supplemented (only for the energy ones) by the specifics such as or.


 * To recap how this would look
 * A BC Wooden pipe would be categorized as -
 * An IC2 Cable would be --
 * A TE Energy Cell would be --
 * An OpenBlocks Tank would be -
 * Wolfman_123_ ·&#32;✉ F T B  Wiki Staff  04:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Small continuation after looking through some more categories; I believe is perfectly fine as it's simply just Steve's Carts modules which would be categorized as -
 * I also believe is fine however it may need a renaming to  or something like that (I think this is the word Forestry uses to describe them, but please don't quote me on that)
 * Wolfman_123_ ·&#32;✉ F T B  Wiki Staff  04:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Last one I hope...
 * Can someone please explain what the hell is supposed to be as I don't really see much of a link between all of the content.
 * Wolfman_123_ ·&#32;✉ F T B  Wiki Staff  04:52, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I think is being used for machines that would be part of a large-scale industrial base? I'm not entirely sure though, there's one or two outliers in that.
 * Maybe it's for for pages that act as the base point for some form of industrialization, and are built on from there? Like 'components' but larger scale?
 * You're right though, there is not a lot of consistency across that category. PaladinAHOne  Staff (talk) 07:01, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh god then I realized that Forge and FML were in ... What the hell was this category even?? PaladinAHOne  Staff (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Base is one of those categories that you just wonder what the hell went wrong. Really, it should either just have base mods like Forge and FML in, or they should go in and I guess  deleted.  Chocohead  Nag • Edits • Staff 19:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite sure what to do about Forge and FML, but I have an idea for all the generators in that category sticking with the theme above.
 * Wolfman_123_ ·&#32;✉ F T B  Wiki Staff  23:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Wolfman_123_ ·&#32;✉ F T B  Wiki Staff  23:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Wolfman_123_ ·&#32;✉ F T B  Wiki Staff  23:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Base was for energy generators. The problem with Modules is it's too broad. It could mean SC modules, modules of mods, etc. Same goes for Attributes. I agree with your transportation stuff. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 02:51, 13 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Are you continuing on doing this? —  NickTheRed37  ᐸ t · ru.MCW user c · ru translator  13:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I've been busy with other stuff, but it will be completed at some point. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 19:10, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I may later think of an image of what I want to have as a category tree. — NickTheRed37  ᐸ t · ru.MCW user c · ru translator  06:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)


 * For those interested, I have been working on the categorization stuff. I moved -> . -Xbony2 (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * So, uh, what is a consumer called? Like, Macerator (IndustrialCraft 2) or Induction Smelter. I'd propose something like:


 * Macerator (IndustrialCraft 2): --- (btw, should we do anything about the Crushing category, or not?)
 * Induction Smelter: ---
 * Remote Thermal Monitor: --- (nuclear may need to be re-evalulated too)

-Xbony2 (talk) 15:11, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Why did you put in ? :P  Chocohead  Nag • Edits • Staff 22:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I didn't do it! :P I'm not even listed in the history of the page. -Xbony2 (talk) 22:46, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * So you just edited ... Alistaire14820 added Miner to it years ago. :| Our categories are so screwed up.  Chocohead Nag • Edits • Staff 23:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * btw, can you look over Energy Units? Thanks. -Xbony2 (talk) 23:31, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * since nobody loves me, I'm going ahead with my proposition :P -Xbony2 (talk) 13:33, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I have created a utility that can help us along with phase 1 of the Category Overhaul greatly. It requires Ruby, and the mediawiki_api gem created by wikimedia (be sure to use 0.3.1 as the newer versions are broken). You can find it in the SatanicBot repo. You will need to create your own secure.txt file with the formatting "USERNAME \newline PASSWORD". Alternatively you can just edit your clone of generalutils to use your username and password. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 23:00, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Templates that may want to be made
(Altars are popular these days) -Xbony2, Master of Feed The Beast Wiki (talk) 01:47, 2 November 2015 (UTC) -Xbony2, Master of Feed The Beast Wiki (talk) 00:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Cg/Runic Altar - PaladinAHOne  Staff (talk) 07:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Cg/Blood Altar - PaladinAHOne Staff (talk) 07:46, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Cg/SAG Mill
 * Cg/Alloy Smelter/Ender IO
 * Cg/The Vat
 * Cg/Slice'N'Splice


 * Cg/Chemical Decomposer
 * Cg/Chemical Fusion Chamber
 * Cg/Chemical Fission Chamber

All from MineChem. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 20:51, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think over the free days I'll create the template for the Decomposer. --LuminousLizard de-native / "en-B2" (talk) 21:54, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

-Xbony2 (talk) 13:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC) -Xbony2 (talk) 13:22, 30 December 2015 (UTC) --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 02:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Cg/Alloy Smelter/GregTech 4
 * Cg/Extruder
 * Navbox Mariculture
 * I will do that in the next days. Should I create a normal navbox or a module ? --LuminousLizard de-native / "en-2" (talk) 20:16, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * From quickly looking at the mod, it looks like it adds a lot of content, so I'd recommend a module if it doesn't make you uncomfortable. -Xbony2 (talk) 20:47, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Done from my side ! Navbox created and tilesheets uploaded. Problem not solved .. should someone else make the rest => Section: Problem with SheetImporter

All of the GUIs can be found here. Thanks -Xbony2 (talk) 14:04, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Cg/Infusion Altar -Xbony2 (talk) 13:08, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Cg/Animal Trap
 * Cg/Apiary/Pam's HarvestCraft (these are all PHC btw)
 * Cg/Churn
 * Cg/Fish Trap/Pam's HarvestCraft
 * Cg/Oven
 * Cg/Presser
 * Cg/Quern
 * I'll make the last 3 in the list this weekend. Btw your link is broken ... but I can extract the GUIs out of the mod. --LuminousLizard (Wiki Staff and Editor) de-N / "en-2" (talk) 07:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Pam removed her machines in 1.8. Your link looks broken too :P In your preferences, you can set the "page type" to "Use a standard user wiki page" so User:LuminousLizard is your regular page, and UserProfile:LuminousLizard is the default global one. -Xbony2 (talk) 12:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Done ! The link to my page is ok for me. One page is for a brief overview and the other for more, if interested.


 * Cg/Tool Forge
 * Cg/Stencil Table
 * Cg/Part Builder

The working stations from Tinkers' Construct. I will create the Stencil Table this weekend. --LuminousLizard (Wiki Staff and Editor) de-N / "en-2" (talk) 07:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC) Why don't we have this... -Xbony2 (talk) 00:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Cg/Brewing Stand


 * Navbox RFTools --LuminousLizard FTB Wiki Staff de-N / "en-2" (talk) 11:14, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Cg/Drying Rack from TiCo, since it got a shit ton more recipes added to it in 1.9/1.10. --  Satanic Santa 🎅F T B Wiki Admin 01:26, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Mods that need devoted editors
Hey guys. What mods do you think need devoted editors? These would be kind of like mod-appointed developers, except that they would be recruited by higher-up FTB Staff Members. My current list goes something like:
 * All SlimeKnights mods (Tinkers' Construct, Tinkers' Mechworks, Tinkers' Steelworks, Natura)
 * Engineer's Toolbox
 * All CoFH mods (Thermal Expansion of all notable versions, Thermal Foundation, CoFH Core, etc)
 * Thaumcraft of all versions
 * Mekanism
 * Universal Electricity mods

Please provide your thoughts. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 21:28, 11 November 2015 (UTC) on Universal Electricity. That mod is dead. -Xbony2, Master of Feed The Beast Wiki (talk) 22:17, 11 November 2015 (UTC) oh and... -Xbony2, Master of Feed The Beast Wiki (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ComputerCraft
 * OpenComputers
 * RFTools
 * IndustrialCraft 2
 * BuildCraft
 * Ender IO
 * Extra Utilities
 * MineFactory Reloaded
 * Blood Magic
 * Botania

--LuminousLizard de-native / "en-B2" (talk) 09:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I already mentioned that xd -Xbony2 (talk) 12:54, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry ... should only mean that I'm working something about it. --LuminousLizard de-native / "en-B2" (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Final list for slow
Mods
 * SlimeKnights mods (Tinkers' Construct, other minor mods)
 * I have been working on Tinkers' Construct a bit and Tinkers' Steelworks, and plan on being more active now to continue work. I'll gladly work on the other SlimeKnights mods once I finish the two Tinkers' –KnightMiner t/c 03:36, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll start documenting Tinkers' Construct very soon, because I saw no progress made to it and TiC (Tinkers' Construct) in 1.9 have major changes that must be documented. -- sokratis 12GR  Staff  05:17, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Psi
 * CoFH Mods
 * Thaumcraft of all versions (mainly 4/5)
 * Mekanism
 * ComputerCraft
 * OpenComputers
 * RFTools
 * IndustrialCraft 2
 * BuildCraft
 * LuminousLizard has been working on this. -Xbony2 (talk) 12:22, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ender IO
 * I'm working on this. -Xbony2 (talk) 12:22, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Extra Utilities
 * I'll take care of this to start with. beanxxbot (talk) 21:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * MineFactory Reloaded
 * Blood Magic
 * Botania
 * Draconic Evolution
 * Reika's mods
 * I'll gladly deal with these, I'm already working on RoC, ReC is coming soon once I get home. (Need the tilesheet files, which are on my home pc). ChromatiCraft is the only mod I'm unfamiliar with, so someone else may have to do it or let it wait a bit until I become familiar with it. Up to you guys. Luke14199 (talk) 11:09, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Getting Started Guide writer(s)
 * Steve's Factory Manager
 * Factorization
 * Ender IO
 * Draconic Evolution
 * Mekanism
 * Big Reactors
 * Logistics Pipes

General Guide writers
 * Mystcraft
 * Forestry
 * ChromaticCraft
 * I have a plan to write a ChromatiCraft guide in the near future. Luke14199 (talk) 10:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Anything else you or the modpack team deem necessary. We also need translators of all languages, and general editors of all types.

--  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 22:16, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * More reliable communications with the rest of the organization. - PaladinAHOne Staff (talk) 20:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * meh -Xbony2 (talk) 21:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I'd recommend using the teamspeak we have tbh, anyone working on the same project could communicate more efficiently. Admins could have their own channel, etc etc. Or if this is not an option, perhaps we could setup a forum or subforum somewhere? Just my 2 cents. Luke14199 (talk) 11:03, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Teamspeak is kind of annoying because not everyone can use a microphone. We have Slack and IRC right now and it seems to be doing okay. We do have a subforum, along with the wiki staff's own barely-used hidden subforum. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 11:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The wiki staff are super-crazy, I don't want to talk to them :P -Xbony2 (talk) 13:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * How much do you want ComputerCraft covered here? It does have an official wiki written by a large group of ComputerCraft fans (including myself), and I'd prefer not to have duplicate information between the two wikis. I would suggest having just a basic description of the features here, and leaving all content related to programming in ComputerCraft Lua to the official wiki. –KnightMiner t/c 03:36, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This wiki is basically meant to include all information about all mods ever... which includes lua programming in ComputerCraft. It just wouldn't be complete without it. -Xbony2 (talk) 13:09, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * It may not be complete without it, but there still is the issue that covering ComputerCraft in its entirety would basically make this wiki be competing with with official wiki, and do we really want another case of multiple wikis competing to cover modded Minecraft?. Also, the majority of ComputerCraft fans seem to already contribute to the official wiki, so it would be a lot harder to get contributors here (on a personal case, I really could not write articles on the available APIs without copying from the official wiki, as nearly everything I know about programming in ComputerCraft comes directly from the official wiki).
 * Maybe we could include programming as it relates to other mods, such as a lot of the information on OpenPeripherals, and some tutorials might be relevant, but leave the specific functions and APIs to an interwiki link? –KnightMiner t/c 21:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that we should keep API docs to the CC wiki. However, that isn't to say we can't have very detailed articles about CC. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 22:16, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This wiki is meant to be all-encompassing; linking to the CC wiki for the API docs and whatnot is fine, but that doesn't mean documenting those APIs here isn't something that can't be done and doesn't mean that that documenting the APIs here isn't something that isn't on the "ultimate TODO list" or "ultimate agenda" of the wiki. -Xbony2 (talk) 01:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Blocking policy
Feed The Beast Wiki:Blocking policy should be a thing. And while this message sits in this noticeboard, someone at some point will do it. That someone is not me because I worded it badly when I tried and it looked stupid. -Xbony2 (talk) 23:25, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the whole principle of a noticeboard is rather undermined if things are done after the requests are removed from it ;)  Chocohead Nag • Edits • Staff 23:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Navbox Requests
Hey guys, I figured that since we don't really have a section for requests of people making navboxes, and I'm completely out of my depth in this regard, would someone mind helping me create the ChromatiCraft navbox? I can help with the categorisation and organisation of the pages, I just need someone to write the code. Cheers, Luke14199 (talk) 22:53, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not really code; well, it is, but the formatting is constant and easy to copy. Just start with this:

extend it, and put it at Module:Navbox/ChromatiCraft. I'll add the translation tags. -Xbony2 (talk) 00:33, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Just FYI, I have started scratching: User:3tusk/Sandbox/Navbox_ChromatiCraft. T3==ThaumicTechTinker, Urey.S.Knowledge Welcome back, commander 03:06, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Modpacks reform
I'm proposing a few ideas on how to reform the documentation of modpacks on the wiki. Thoughts? -Xbony2 (talk) 00:15, 14 March 2016 (UTC) --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 02:44, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Removing "Mods Included" sections on modpack pages, and linking to its auto-generated list on CurseForge instead (ex). Virtually all mods in modern modpacks are hosted on CurseForge. There may be a case or two where this incorrect, but the stubborn ones that come to mind (IndustrialCraft 2, Twilight Forest, etc) are all up there. GregTech is the only "big" exception, but I wouldn't be surprised if it followed IC2 in the near future.
 * The "Mods Included" section really serves little purpose; it's absolutely tedious to update and create (speaking from experience), thus they often aren't really updated. Lastly, they are pretty much unused- It's not 2014 anymore; if you want to know what mods a modpack includes, you go it's CurseForge page, or go the launcher; the wiki is not the first stop.
 * There should be exceptions to this rule, of course. Historical modpacks not moved over, like the Ampz Modpack, should allow for a mod list. This rule is mainly meant for future modpacks and current ones, like Infinity 1.7.
 * 1) Changing Infobox mod to convert "Modpacks" to a normal argument, instead of a section, and making it link to its auto-generated list of CurseForge instead (ex). The Modpacks section in mods is also not really updated, or even that used.
 * It's a good thing it isn't that updated, or pages like BuildCraft would go on forever with the list of every modpack it's been in. The only downfall to this is that it will be incorrect for historical packs.
 * 1) With the current (unwritten?) policies, "listed packs" are the only allowed modpacks. Technically, all CurseVoice packs are listed, meaning they can all be documented. I think this should be kept as it is.
 * Policy-wise, modpacks should be treated like mods ( Technically, modpacks are mods, just a mod with many components from many people. ). All modpacks should be allowed to be documented here, just like all mods can be documented here. Of course, like mods, FTB Wiki Staff should focus on documenting FTB packs. But, who are we to point away other users' modpacks? That only pushes users to host their documentation elsewhere, on other wikis or their own wikis.
 * One point that has been used to counter against letting other modpacks be documented here is that it would clutter Navbox Modpacks. My solution to this is pretty simple- just keep FTB-created packs on that navigation box. A proper list could created like our mods, but I think keeping Navbox Modpacks FTB-only would be a good thing.
 * 1) Anyway, the point of these changes is to allow modpack documenters to focus their time on useful things, like creating modpack guides and better descriptions. It's to allow information better hosted elsewhere to be better hosted elsewhere, and to bring our modpack documentation and policies from 2014 into 2016.
 * 1) I think the main reason we still have Mods Included is because you can use that to navigate from modpacks -> mods. I know I personally use this all the time, even if it is absurdly outdated. I think some sort of automatic way to do it, or to get the modpack team to update it themselves would be good. I agree it needs to change.
 * 2) I have been thinking about this for a long time. Perhaps that is a good idea, though not all mods utilize that dependency feature (e.g., Flaxbeard's Steam Power).
 * 3) Agree. I think they could be listed as Unlisted Packs in the navbox.
 * k
 * Get the modpack team to update it. Ha. Automatically generating would make the most sense if we want to keep it. -Xbony2 (talk) 11:10, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Vegan/Vegetarian Categories
So, the Vegan and Vegetarian Food categories are shit. Most of the things in them are not inherently vegan, but have the option to be made with vegan things (e.g., Apricot Glazed Pork can be made with Tofu since it is made with the listAllporkcooked oredict). We need some sort of change to the way these categories are set up. I don't know how though. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 00:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * How about having the sub-category substitute for them both, and things that can be cheated using Tofu can go in those.  Chocohead Nag • Edits • Staff 00:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Proposing the categories of-

To replace the current categories. I don't think we need to have a category that includes cheaty substitutes, since most MC foods can use said cheaty substitutes. -Xbony2 (talk) 23:45, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * (anybody have a better name?)
 * (subcat of last cat, for pure meats)
 * And a philosophical question- if I cheat in a Raw Chicken from NEI, does it count as vegan/vegetarian because no chickens were hurt in the process? -Xbony2 (talk) 23:47, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I live with vegans and am friends with a lot of vegans, and I hear "non-vegan" quite a bit when referring to food made with animal. So I think that's a fine name for a category. Otherwise, there's also omni/carnivorous which get used a lot as well. --  Satanic Santa F T B Wiki Admin 00:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

New editor retention, an invitation
As former wiki lead, I invite everyone to participate in the discussion on the issue of editor retention: Admin's noticeboard -- Jin. (so xbony2 doesn't think i'm jc)

The Wiki's look via mobile
This is a question and suggestion about the mobile look. To start, via mobile you can't access Special pages like Recent Changes and such except if you search their full names. Other thing is tang you can't open stacked up changes for a page, I mean that the button doesn't work as intended, you have again manually to look for the change you want, or look it via viewing all the changes until you find the right one. Other thing is that you can't access page's talk or go to other.pages like, http://ftb.gamepedia.com/user:sokratis12GR and http://ftb.gamepedia.com/UserProfile:sokratis12GR you once again have to search this things. Other thing that's really bad is "sections", for achievements, sub headers and such. They are pretty bad, especially on user profiles and talk pages --(sokratis12GR, My Phone) --94.69.171.110 14:42, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the mobile situation is bad \o/ -Xbony2 (talk) 15:04, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Not being access the special pages is annoying, but from an end user perspective, the issue is Gc doesn't show up, and navboxes don't either. It makes navigation even more clunky and frustrating, as well as defeating the point of most pages as the Gc that is in the infobox and crafting template(s) is normally the most useful part because people want to know what the item/block looks like and how it's made, which on mobile you just aren't shown.  Chocohead Nag • Edits • Staff 15:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Another things that are really bad mostly for editing are that you can really easily by mistake click the back button while editing and you will lose your entire edit/page creations, because there is no warning to stop you, other shitty thing is that your text is overlayed with somewhat transparent black color, I can list a lot more things that needs to be fixed/changed, other thing also is that whenever you have added a page to your "Watch list" they aren't shown like they are watched. Well I think Cblair92 can help fix this issue -- sokratis 12GR  Staff  18:19, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Tis Cblair91. Well, Developaws, but it doesn't seem her account's name has fully migrated.
 * Editing pages doesn't really work on mobile in general. I don't think that's going to be improved much, but viewing pages certainly. -Xbony2 (talk) 00:33, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * About wiki's look via mobile. Because of CSS not working on mobile makes pages look ugly and don't have a structure, other thing is that templates & modules override their place and load exactly where they are added, like a Babel info if added in the middle of 2 Sections it will be written inside the one section and won't have lines or "ending points" which are would be better if they were there for the reader -- sokratis 12GR  Staff  11:04, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, I other thing I want to add is, take a look at https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/ It is more otginized for mobile and they also have a mobile app on Google play . Which is really well done for mobile (some things still arent). -- sokratis 12GR  Staff  11:10, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Curator for Moritz30's mods
I'd like to appoint myself as curator for my mods (actually MoreFood and MegaMod). I'll actively maintain the documentation of my mods. They weren't updated for a while but I'll publish updates for them soon. - Moritz30
 * Awesome ^_^ btw, make sure to sign yourself with four tides ( ~ ). Retep/Santa will give you the rights soon. -Xbony2 (talk) 16:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks - Moritz30 (talk) 16:40, 6 July 2016 (UTC)Moritz30
 * I did things. 🐇 R e t e p 9 9 8 🐇🐰 Bunny Overlord 🐰 17:20, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, Thanks - Moritz30 (talk) 18:21, 6 July 2016 (UTC)Moritz30

Necessity of the staff system
This wiki is known for the editorial staff system which is rarely met on other wikis. I don’t like inequalities that I sometimes see between the staff users and regular ones, but there comes a bigger question: is this staff system necessary at all? Minecraft Wiki doesn’t use it. Memory Alpha (the main Star Trek wiki) doesn’t use it. Wikipedia doesn’t use it. And they are all working well.

So I propose to avoid excess bureaucratization and break the current backbone of this wiki, so a more democratic system takes its place. As a compensation, if the staff system is going to be removed, I propose to do these things:
 * Grant full administrator (not bureaucrat) status to Xbony2, and possibly Chocohead.
 * Add,  ,  ,   and all   rights to autoconfirmed users.   and   should remain for administrators, number of whom will be already increased.

— NickTheRed37 (talk) 16:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * what inequalities exactly? --  Satanic Santa 🎅F T B Wiki Admin 17:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Inequalities such as votes where only staff members can participate in. Approval of a new staff member, for example, has to be discussed by everyone. — NickTheRed37 (talk) 17:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * do non staff even want to vote for staff members though? There aren't really votes that non staff members are excluded from that they'd even care to participate in. I can't remember if we still do this, but we used to encourage everyone to participate in staff votes-- turns out non staff members care more about content than user rights. I think at most we had 1 non staff member participate in a staff vote. --  Satanic Santa 🎅F T B Wiki Admin 17:34, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If we had non-staff that did vote, we'd honestly probably just let them vote. -Xbony2 (talk) 18:44, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I very strongly do not trust regular users with oredict/tilesheet rights. They are technical and easily abusable. And I do not want those rights to remain with three administrators, particularly when two of those administrators' activity happens to resemble the moon. This is one of the reasons we have staff, among a few others.
 * I've talked a good bit about merging administrator and bureaucrat. I just don't understand why you trust me with your personal JavaScript but don't trust me with access to assigning groups. That just seems silly to me. -Xbony2 (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

You are being very inconsistent here xbony. You claim that we have staff because we don't trust regular users with the oredict/tilesheet extension (is this reason a priori? Staff came way before these extensions.) yet you claim that we should trust admins automatically with bureaucrat rights. I don't know you too well as I've only interacted with you a few days, but the impression I get from your response is that you're just salty that your aren't admin and bureaucrat.

The difference in responsibility between staff and editors is virtually nothing when compared to that between admin/bureaucrat. You have been against removing staff rank but you're for merging admin and bureaucrat together. Your argument is even more absurd when put into this perspective: "I don't understand why you trust me with your personal JavaScript but don't trust me with access to assigning group". I don't see any logical connection between trusting you with javascript and trusting you with groups. If I following along with your line of thought, I should be giving staff ranks to editors because "I trust them not to screw up". Personally, I find your position and motivation to be highly suspicious.

To sum up your argument in one sencence: The tilesheet/oredict extensions are more abusable than bureaucrat rights. Which is totally absurd.

This comment was reworded for clarity. --  Jin bo  bo  04:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * uwot
 * Tilesheet/oredict stuff is not the only reason we have staff. It's just one of them. Patrolling, staff protection and banning are some of the other reasons- rights that certainly don't fit into my "editor" group (or autoconfirmed or whatever), and that shouldn't be restricted to the one and half admins. There's also other reasons we staff that aren't really related right-related; staff is partially more of a "title group" in that sense. Welcoming newcomers, making sure templates are made and applied right, making sure translations are done right, etc, stuff that non-staff don't do.
 * I am quite salty about that. I'm also quite salty that you're calling me an ignorant asshole. I'm also quite salty that I'm the only staff participating in these debates, that none of the staff have really stepped in to defend or rebuke me. But, it's more than that.
 * Anyway, JavaScript access, adminship in general, shows a very high level of trust. Admins can nuke user contributions. Admins can insert malware into the global JS. What greater level trust is there? Letting the admin raise your babies? :P (I'm not open for that by the way, in case you couldn't tell I was joking) . I don't think assigning groups is a greater level of trust, but if it is, it is not by much at all.
 * Tilesheet and OreDict rights are abusable, but also technical. The trust is in both not abusing it, and not breaking it. If a user edits a hundred pages incorrectly, then we can nuke their contributions. If a user edits a hundred ore dictionary requests incorrectly, then we're shit screwed, and I have to spend an hour reverting their changes.
 * Btw, if it happens to interest you, my wiki survey shows that, so far, people who don't contribute very much don't contribute very much for a number of reasons. Lack of time is the leading reasons at the moment, with 19 votes, followed by lack of interest with 11 votes. Complex and unfair groups? Zero votes. You'd think it would get at least one vote, but I guess not. Users can select multiple reasons, btw, before someone accuses me of fucking that up . I'm not ready to release the full results yet, or call them full results (going to on August 1st), but this the group situation is one you (and me too, to be fair) have made a much greater fuss about than users really care about it. -Xbony2 (talk) 11:55, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * That’s why I suggest assigning a few new administrators, so their number increases to at least four (SatanicSanta, Retep998, you (Xbony2), Chocohead). Speaking of bureaucrats, if we want someone with rights assigned, and no bureaucrats are active, we can always talk to Curse.
 * Welcoming new users and checking what is done correctly can be done by anybody. I myself once welcomed a few users in Russian Minepedia, although I didn’t have any rank or title. Added in 14:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I have an idea: create separate user groups for ones that are permitted to edit either tilesheets or OreDict database, if not more. That’s similar to Wikipedia: there are separate groups for users with auto-patrolled edits, patrollers, rollbackers, ones that can rename without making redirects, “template editors” (ones who can edit some protected templates) and (as I’ve seen in Russian Wikipedia) even ones that can upload files. We already have something like that, in the form of  user group. Similar thing can be made here.
 * Tilesheet editors (, new usergroup)
 * Edit entries for the OreDict extension
 * Translate tile names and descriptions for the Tilesheets extension
 * OreDict editors (, new usergroup)
 * Edit tile data for the Tilesheets extension
 * Administrators (, additions to existing group)
 * Add groups: Tilesheet editors, OreDict editors
 * Remove groups: Tilesheet editors, OreDict editors
 * — NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * P. S. Special:Nuke is for deleting new pages, not reverting new edits. — NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yuck. I'd rather not have staff rights be cut up into pieces. Part of my group proposal seeks to eliminate that.
 * Also- there's something I disagree with you on, that I'd like to mention. Wikipedia and Wiktionary do have staff- it's just they're called administrators, bureaucrats and stewards there. The staff here are like the administrators there, but without access to JS and a few other tools. -Xbony2 (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You’re lying. Majority of active editors on Wikipedia seem to be simple users. — NickTheRed37 (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't say otherwise. But the "staff" there are the same as the staff in the fact they administer the wiki. -Xbony2 (talk) 15:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Then why we need a separate usergroup? I, once again, think that assigning new administrators, introducing the new microgroups that I proposed, and respreading the responsibilites will do the thing. — NickTheRed37 (talk) 16:26, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * But why have all the sloppy microgroups when you can roll it all in one group?
 * Also, random thing I noticed- technically, there's no written rule that states non-staff can't vote, at least any that I could find. It is a written rule of my group proposal, though, but I'll probably remove it; I personally don't see a problem with non-staff voting, even though they generally haven't expressed a desire to vote. -Xbony2 (talk) 16:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Because the system will become more flexible when using them. Think yourself: why do we have the  group if we could otherwise incorporate the only right it gives (the right to block users) into the staff usergroup? — NickTheRed37 (talk) 17:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)