With the SMW system in place for Usage, I was thinking it might be a good idea to sort the recipes for an item or block by the mod that adds it? Essentially add subsections to the recipe section for each mod?
With the SMW system in place for Usage, I was thinking it might be a good idea to sort the recipes for an item or block by the mod that adds it? Essentially add subsections to the recipe section for each mod?
A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software.
That would require some... creative use of nested queries and templates. One outer query gets a list of all mods that have items that can be crafted with {{PAGENAME}}. Each name is passed to a template, which gets a list of all items from mod {{{1}}} that can be crafted using {{PAGENAME}}. I'd be interested (and happy) to hear other, less complicated solutions though.
You know I'm talking about the recipes section, not usages, right? I was thinking of just listing them manually?
Essentially my question is, does everyone think this is a good idea? If so it can be added to the style guide.
Ah, I see Thought you were talking about the usage section. For the recipe section that does make sense. Though I'd say that there should be no heading if the only recipes are from the mod that adds the item. Maybe there should never be a subheader for recipes by the source mod, just for recipes from other mods.
Sections should probably be sorted alphabetically as well.
Re. this diff: I don't entirely agree with that - IMO the recipes should *always* be listed under the mod that adds them, no matter in what machine they are performed. If GregTech adds the ability to process TE4 Shiny Ore in an IC2 macerator, the recipe should be under the GregTech section, not IC2 just because it adds the machine.
Re. this diff: I don't entirely agree with that - IMO the recipes should *always* be listed under the mod that adds them, no matter in what machine they are performed. If GregTech adds the ability to process TE4 Shiny Ore in an IC2 macerator, the recipe should be under the GregTech section, not IC2 just because it adds the machine.
Yes, that's what I mean, but I found it hard to word the distinction properly.
I notice that RZR0 has been adding this template to a lot of articles, if an item has no Usage recipes should I remove this template?
I notice that RZR0 has been adding this template to a lot of articles, if an item has no Usage recipes should I remove this template?
Why? It would need to be re-added once that item is used to craft something. It has a proper default text saying that the item is not used in crafting, and it will update once it is used for something, so there's no problem with leaving the Usage section there.
Why? It would need to be re-added once that item is used to craft something. It has a proper default text saying that the item is not used in crafting, and it will update once it is used for something, so there's no problem with leaving the Usage section there.
Because it seems unlikely that they would be used to craft something?
The default text is why I asked instead of removing it.
I say, we put the Usage template on every item and block page. It clearly says there's no uses if there are none and if they're added, they will be displayed automatically. So it's a win-win for me.
It is for example unlikely that powered machines such as the Macerator would be used for any recipes, because it's basically a end-of-the-line crafting recipe, but yet GregTech adds recipes that do. It's really not something you can predict.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users