User talk:TheNeocities

I disagree with replacing "Natural generation" headers with your more specific section headers, because I believe the former serve an important purpose that your edits are negating.

The "Natural generation" section lists methods that are (in principle) available to anybody, anytime, to obtain needed items without having to first obtain some ingredient or other prerequisite item. The people who need these methods the most are those with less experience (because experienced players already know them) and those in the early stages of a world (because they probably don't have the ingredients for crafting, smelting, and more advanced or esoteric methods). When you replace the "Natural generation" header with your specific ones, putting all the methods at the same level, inexperienced players are forced to study all the methods and decide which ones are available to them, but their limited experience may make this difficult for them. The "Natural generation" header is useful because it groups the most basic methods, which helps them focus on the information most relevant to them.

After thinking about this for a good while and trying to look at it from your point of view, I can see that there is value to the consistency you're working toward, though to be honest I don't see the importance of it. But I think we might be able to agree on this compromise: Retain (or restore, for those you've removed) the "Natural generation" header and insert (or retain) your more specific headers as subsections of it. This would support both the grouping feature I think less experienced/early game users need, as well as the indexing feature I assume you expect the specific headers to provide. How do you feel about this compromise? (Please reply here; I will have this page on my watchlist.) — Auldrick (talk) 19:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I saw that it had to be with chest loot, because that is stated at the guide on how to make a page. If you read that then you will understand my toughs?--TheNeocities () 12:05, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

What guide page are you talking about, and where on the page? I'm pretty sure we don't dictate a list of acceptable section names for an Obtaining section; I think you made up that list yourself. Or if you're referring to some less specific guideline about "consistency", editors have pretty consistently used "Natural generation" on hundreds of articles, so you're not increasing the consistency, you're dividing it or replacing it with your own.

Also, when you cite rules or guidelines to justify for your edits, it's helpful to provide a link so everybody's talking about the same guidance.

Also, I indented your response above. the talk page guidelines demonstrate how to use indentation to show the conversational structure on talk pages. — Auldrick (talk · contribs) 15:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)