Talk:Biomes

Format
In all environments pages there are these repetitive "inside the" and "found in the" etc., i think that should be deleted, not sure though --The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bow Artist3 (talk &bull; contribs) at 13:18, May 23, 2011 (UTC).
 * I agree. Unless we eventually learn a lot more about the specific biomes, I'd say they all get merged here and redirected when searched for. MarekkPie 14:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge
A merge has recently been suggest for this page. I am against it, simply because it is too soon. I think we have to wait and give those pages a chance to be stand alone. Worst case scenario, we merge later. By merging too soon, we undermine the individual page's chance of becoming a full fledged article. Happypal 15:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I just want to add that I don't like this idea either - having long wordy articles with many many subcategories is fine for some things, but can also be extremely cluttered looking, especially if each section has screenshots and the like. And also, yes, the game is still very in development, lots of things are likely to be added quite soon for each section. --FungusTrooper 15:49, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * As I stated under meteorites, look a the Ore page along with the subsections for how I believe the Environments page should work, a small article with minor notes on the biomes then subpages for each environment. -Shadowclaimer 16:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it would a merge would be the wrong solution, I'm just saying it is too soon for such a big change. Ore is just a block, and there is not much to say about it. An environment, on the other hand, I can see growing into great articles, with images and tons of things. If it turns out I'm wrong, then a merge would indeed be the right solution; merges are easy, un-merges are hard.
 * That said, I see nothing wrong with presenting the environment page like the ore one, with a little subsection and a link. Happypal 18:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Move
I am proposing a move of the pages Deserts, Forests and Floating Islands/(+subpages) to Desert, Forest and Floating Island. Why? apart from the fact that a wiki page about something should be singular, every other environment is also singular. This page (Environment, as of this edit), is also singular. Wikipedia does it this way too for Forest, and even Floating island. It's just the standard way of doing things. Happypal 06:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * We aren't Wikipedia, we don't follow Wikipedia rules. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  06:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * What rules do we follow? What is your explanation for Dungeon, Meteorite, Underground, but Deserts, Forests and Floating Islands?
 * I really don't think anyone cares as long as there are appropriate redirects (which there should be) --Colonel Thirty Two 23:29, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Those who have an unhealthy obsession with consistency/uniformity care, such as myself :) It's something of a mixed blessing. I know this topic is ancient, but ya... I agree with Happypal in preferring singular to plural. My reasoning, in the hopes of influencing future page titles:
 * keep things as simple as possible;
 * plurality is a longer and more complex variant than singularity;
 * fewer redirect pages;
 * people's eyes aren't constantly catching on the "(Redirected from Foo)" line on their way from the title to the intro paragraph;
 * Wikipedia precedent;
 * there's an inherent beauty in consistency—though I appreciate diversity and variety in art and nature.
 * I'm certainly tempted to add 'move' templates to dozens of pages, but I'd just end up annoying all the "normal" people out there for whom consistency is a non-issue. I guess I just always like to feel as though some kind of perfection is being approached, which is why I find wiki editing rather addictive, and why I always spend so much time refactoring code. Chibs84 17:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Floating Islands
Floating islands aren't really a biome. The entire sky up to a certain hight not above the center of the map is the sky biome. The biome is actually the mostly empty vast space where harpies spawn. The floating islands are just a part of it. --Moxxy 17:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Defining a Biome
What exactly defines a Biome? Sometimes removing the background destroys a biome and sometimes removing walls or adding stones destroys a biome. My example is based on the dungeon biome, where i currently have the phenomenia that when i remove walls nothing changes, but when i remove the backwall, the biome gets destroyed. On the contrary, placing enough corrupted stones will make any biome partly corruption, with spawn and music around a certain high (which i have yet to determine, sorry). So what is youre idea? --Preceding unsigned comment added by Faya (talk • contribs)
 * It's mostly nearby tiles, depth, and occasionally, background walls. For example, a certain number of jungle tiles means it's a Jungle, but at a certain depth, it's an Underground Jungle instead. A Dungeon is a Dungeon when there's 250 Dungeon-only bricks nearby, the player is at 0 ft or lower, and the player's standing in front of an unsafe background wall, not including no background wall. --Lunboks 12:35, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Corrupted/Hallowed Desert, should they be added?
Both basically are real biomes on their own. They even have their own backgrounds and enemies. If at all, it wouldn't be more than a sub-sub-section, but I'm wondering if this should be added at all? - Selbi 22:55, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you sure that they have "own" backgrounds? In my opinion it's just recolored standard desert background with overlayed rainbow in hallowed case.
 * Yes, they do. "Just a recolor" still makes them a full background design on their own. - Selbi 17:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)