Talk:Minecraft

Mob Vote Controversy
Adding a section for the Mob Vote controversy could be useful because it is quite significant. TheT.N.T.BOOM! (talk) 13:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)


 * And for those of us unfamiliar with the controversy, could you provide some details and some reliable sources to back them up? GSK (talk • edits) 14:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Added  — Hoangminhle 2011 —   Shape our Wiki  05:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I just found several sources from reliable sources which can be used for the mob vote section.
 * Unsure if they are reliable enough: [1 ], [2 ]
 * From confirmed reliable sources: [3 ], [4 ], [5 ], [6 ], [7 ]
 * There are more out there I could list but this is for now and also, I wonder if this section could be even expanded into its own article, just an idea.  NatwonTSG TALK 20:08, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Infobox changes
I've BOLDLY made a number of changes to the infobox recently, since it was getting really hard to read when editing through source and had the risk of becoming unstable. These changes include: Please let me know if anyone disagrees with any of the changes I've made. λ Negative  MP1  23:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Replacing the games cover art with the games logo. I've done this because, while there are several different cover arts, and the previous "most recognizable" one (which we generally go with on Wikipedia, if not the original one) had been replaced, the logo has generally been the same since the games initial release in 2011, and is present across most if not all 300 million copies of the game.
 * Simplifying the infobox to not list every single developer and composer. The documentation of Template:Infobox video game states to only list the games primary developers and publishers, which in this instance boils down to only Mojang and Xbox Game Studios. So I've compressed all other developers, publishers, and composers into hatnotes in their respective sections.
 * I've also removed citations from the infobox per WP:CITELEAD, and also the fact the infobox was becoming impossible to view in source editing.


 * This is NOT the logo of the game, this is the Minecraft (franchise) logo.
 * The game logo is here Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 02:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I didn't recognize them as different (I thought the main game logo was changed earlier this year?), uploading the individual game logo right now. λ Negative  MP1  03:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I disagree with these changes, I feel the game's cover art is needed... I don't really understand why you've changed it though. Could you explain in greater detail? Squid45 (talk) 12:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * But I agree with the second developer point!! Squid45 (talk) 12:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think he changed Minecraft's cover art to the game's logo because Minecraft recently changed their cover art, and there were too many choices to see which cover art would be chosen to be included in the article Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 13:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Typically on Wikipedia, articles for video games/albums/movies generally go with either the original release artwork, or the most recognizable. Minecraft doesn't have either of those, since it technically didn't launch with cover art until the Xbox 360 release in 2012 and there's no real contender for the "most recognizable" box art. We could go back to the original Bedrock Edition box art with the caption "Original Bedrock Edition box art" if needed, but I feel like the logo which is common place across all box arts and predates any of them is better. It's also certainly better than the new cover art, which is yet to be included on any physical copies of the game (compared to the other cover arts tens of millions). λ Negative  MP1  17:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * One day, the game logo will change, then what will we use to add to the article? Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 17:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * If Mojang was too scared to change the creeper texture and the diamond ore textures for being "iconic", I don't think they'll ever change their logo. That would be a complete marketing failure, especially since the logo is on all of the other Minecraft games. Even if they for some reason did, I'd still say use the old logo, or maybe use both since I think you could get away with using both (one being the most recent, the other being used on all 300 million+ existing copies of the game) even when taking NFCC into account. λ Negative  MP1  17:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Mojang confirmed that the new art will be used in all future printed physical copies of the game, including the PS5 version and Java/Bedrock codes. Java Edition already has the art present for when you launch the game, alongside the Xbox and soon Switch versions. The last cover art for Bedrock was used for years, and this seems to be a permanent change. Why can't we make an exception for a game as long-standing as Minecraft? Memoryman3 (talk) 18:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how that justifies giving an exception any more than it instead gives a reason why it shouldn't be used. Also, upon checking the documentation for Template:Infobox video game further, "The ideal image is an English-language cover or, in the case of an arcade game, a promotional flier. Secondarily, use a logo or foreign-language cover. When cover designs differ between regions, use the cover from the region associated with the game's first English language release, though do not change another English-language version that has been uploaded first." So technically speaking, if we want to argue this scenario to be similar to regional differences, the cover art we should be using would the Xbox 360 release, which is also flawed. I don't really see a good argument for why the new cover art (or any cover art, for that matter) should be used over a logo that has remained relatively the same since 2011, and is used across all versions. λ Negative  MP1  18:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The template was established in 2005, 6 years prior to the release of Minecraft and long before the rise of persistently updated games. I do not see how the Minecraft 360 cover is comparable, as that was a cover made only for that specific version, in contrast to the universal new Minecraft cover design which will be used in all currently maintained versions of the game for all regions (except the heavily altered China Edition). Using the cover art in place of the logo would make the article's presentation more consistent with the vast majority of game articles in this wiki, as logo use is primarily for articles covering game series. Memoryman3 (talk) 19:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The new Minecraft cover design is not "universal" though. As I have stated before, claiming that the new cover art is the primary means of identifying the subject would be a blatant lie since there have yet to be any physical copies spotted that use this new cover art, and hundreds of millions of physical copies out there exist with other cover art. However, the logo is consistent across all of them.
 * As for your argument about infobox consistency with other articles, you make a good point, but most games that persistently update their cover art do typically use logos despite technically having cover art and physical releases, with such an example being Fortnite and its sub-game Fortnite: Battle Royale. And the infobox template being that old is irrelevant, since documentations like that can be updated and were likely made with a consensus. λ Negative  MP1  19:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * So can we add both cover art and logo to the article? Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 02:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Villages and Villagers
I think villagers and villages are very notable in the game, while helping players gain progress. Villages should also be mentioned because they also have resources inside the houses that are also guarded by iron golems. If piglin bartering is mentioned, why not villager trading? What I'm saying is that villagers and villages should be mentioned more because of their general notability. In a nutcheel (talk) 15:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Regardless as to whether or not either should be included, I agree that villagers and villages are much more significant to the game than piglin bartering, a relatively newer mechanic that is less core to the game. 1101 (talk) 20:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This is an encyclopedia article on Wikipedia, not the Minecraft Wiki, so it's not notable enough to be included. Furthermore, the fact that Piglins is mentioned in the article is just a small detail, not noteworthy.  — Hoangminhle 2011 —   Shape our Wiki  09:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)