Forum:Legal entity name

Please provide and discuss name suggestions for the MCW legal entity. Please note that any names that might be owned by someone else (Minecraft, Creeper, Redstone, etc.) can't be used inside the name.

Due to the type of company we are most likely to create, the actual name will be followed by "Unternehmergesellschaft (haftungsbeschränkt)" or, as an abbreviated form, "UG (haftungsbeschränkt)".

-- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I would like to suggest "Suspicious Stew" because thematically it fits nicely with Weird Gloop. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Although this would be a great name, the acronym is incredibly unfortunate especially since it's a German company. I don't think we can really ignore the abbreviation problem. - Harristic / Talk 👁 DungeonsEntitySprite penguin-onesie.png: Sprite image for penguin-onesie in Minecraft
23:45, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - due to abbreviation problems when the abbreviation is used in DE and other related abbreviations. Delvin4519 (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support - If we always use the full name and not the acronym is it really that huge of a problem? It isn't something I would have ever thought of personally. I wouldn't be defending it except for the fact that this is by far the best suggestion on this page barring that one issue. Ishbosheth (talk) 02:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

One way it could work is by shortening it to “SuS”. But I still favor an other option over Suspicious Stew. — BabylonAS 04:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - With SuS as the abbreviation I like it even more GIM Dianliang233 T C 05:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong Support It's probably the 1st or second best name on here. I really don't think the abbreviation is a problem. There are still hundreds if not thousands of companies that abbreviate down too SS; We commonly use ss for screenshot anyway. Babylons idea to shorten to sus works too. Consumed (Talk│Contributions) 15:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose – I feel a bit uneasy about naming a company "suspicious", and directly using an item from the game feels a bit weak and disconnected to the wiki itself. | violine1101 ^(talk) 00:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Mght be silly, but I think it ticks a few boxes: - References the nature of the wiki (anyone can write, edit, and participate); - Thematically relevant; - A subtle nod to the editor badge. Unsouppable (talk) 00:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support – I like this one, it's simple but effective! | violine1101 ^(talk) 18:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: it seems like MetalManeMc and Delvin (commenting below) misread the suggestion - it's block and quill. That'd be a potential downside though, if people tend to misread this, it might not be as good of a name. | violine1101 ^(talk) 04:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

No I did not misread the suggestion. The problem is that the names are too similar, hence this can potentially cause confusion. This is the problem. Delvin4519 (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I misunderstood your comment then, sorry! | violine1101 ^(talk) 21:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support Personally really like this one, it combines Minecraft and writing/editing well. Frisk (talk) 19:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - 👁 text-middle
Delycache ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose I think it's way to simple, and I don't like having at the top of the book and quill page "For the company operating this wiki, see Book and Quill UG. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 21:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support This name also ticks the box for no potential legal ramifications of using words/terms owned by someone else. (BrianGLHF (talk) 21:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC))

👁 Image
 Oppose - This name would cause a disambiguation notice to be placed on the "book and quill" page for the in game item, which is undesirable. Delvin4519 (talk) 22:24, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support, though admittedly I also read it as "Book and Quill" before reading the comments. –Sonicwave ^talk 05:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - This is a very cute name! I like to imagine that the "block" here is just a huge stack of legal documents. However, I can also see the common mistake of misreading the name, as well as the need to make a disambiguation at the top of the Book and Quill page, as possible reasons to oppose. —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Neutral It's a nice name and defines both the game and the purpose of this site. On the other hand, many misread it as Book and Quill, so I suspect it will happen with readers too. --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Comment perhaps it needs an additional word to help from being misread or misinterpreted. Example “Block and Quill Contributors” -BrianGLHF (talk) 08:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - An incredibly forgettable name, being forgettable is the worst sin a name could commit. The portmanteau is cute but that's all it has going for it. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
14:10, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

I understand that it's not the best name, but I just wanted to mention that I don't think the legal entity name needs to be particularly recognizable. Optimally only people who are involved in wiki governance would care about the name of the legal entity – for this reason it might even be desirable to have the name be obscure. The primary brand we have to care about is "Minecraft Wiki", not the legal entity name. If we could, we probably would have named the legal entity just "Minecraft Wiki UG", but that's not possible due to trademark. | violine1101 ^(talk) 22:35, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose - Easily confusable with Book and Quill. Although it's easily associable with Minecraft, it doesn't really evoke much of anything - as Harristic said, its not very memorable. - BD (talk) 02:01, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support - It's not bad, but it's not all that memorable. Consumed (Talk│Contributions) 07:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

One of the most seached terms on the wiki, thanks to a video by Camman18 where he claimed it was a secret item (it was, in fact, a retextured fishing rod in a map, but he had no idea).

I think this name would be fun because:

• it has lore

I get the downside that it's based on fake stuff, and the wiki only covers truth (obviously), but I feel it has a story, like WeirdGloop. After the video released there was an investigation by multiple editors on whether the item is modded or not, and it still pops up on conversations here and there.

Also everybody who searches for Ender Communicator would finally have a result instead of a red link.

Overall, it's not perfect but I personally prefer it to the other current options. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 00:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support so the others who keep on looking up the name can finally either breathe a sigh of relief or get very triggered upon realizing that they stumbled into the realm of legal mumbo jumbo. BDJP ^(t|c) 00:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - This is exactly the kind of weird obscure situation that only we'd understand that I wanted for the name. Also "Ender Communicator" rolls off the tongue pretty well. - Harristic / Talk 👁 DungeonsEntitySprite penguin-onesie.png: Sprite image for penguin-onesie in Minecraft
00:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose I feel like we shouldn't base the name of our company on straight up misinformation. The ender communicator was part of a Minecraft map that we don't cover on the wiki and is not a part of the core game. | violine1101 ^(talk) 04:07, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's based on misinformation, the item existed even if it's not in the scope of what we cover on the wiki, and I'm not sure what tangible negative there is to basing the name on something like that. - Harristic / Talk 👁 DungeonsEntitySprite penguin-onesie.png: Sprite image for penguin-onesie in Minecraft
13:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

It is misinformation because the item never existed. It's a retextured fishing rod. Retexturing and renaming of existing items happens all the time in plenty of maps but that doesn't mean that those are official items. The only reason for why the ender communicator is notable is because a YouTuber made a blatantly false video about it. | violine1101 ^(talk) 18:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

So what is the actual negative of basing the name on an event that involves misinformation, is there a negative that isn't incredibly vague and undefined? - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
20:10, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

The wiki should strive towards documenting true facts about the game, and not misinformation, and I feel like the association with a hoax item would strongly go against that. | violine1101 ^(talk) 04:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support--Arceusgjengen (talk) 20:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose 👁 Image
Software512 (talk) 21:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Violine's reasoning. Delvin4519 (talk) 00:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose, per reasoning by violine1101. Meeples10 (talk) 01:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per violine – I don't like the idea of drawing associations with and immortalizing misleading information made up by a YouTuber, especially if they are known for regularly doing so. –Sonicwave ^talk 05:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - Whether you want to call it tangentially Minecraft-relevant lore or entirely irrelevant misinformation, I personally think that there are better references to make that would be more applicable to the entire Minecraft community as a whole than something only the audience of a misinformed content creator would get. (see: Squid Milk) —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support It seems to be one of the most searched articles, so that would fill the hole we have right now. The fact it is not official the classic way does not mean anything, just that we don't host it per our rules. --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Violine’s reasoning. - BD (talk) 16:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per violine. Completly fake, misleading, not very good in the first place and not an actual thingConsumed (Talk│Contributions) 07:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest the simple name "Minepedia" for the legal entity, for the following reasons: (1) it makes it obvious what the company is about, (2) it is associated with the Minecraft wiki as one of its former names, (3) it does not contain anything trademarked, (4) we already own the domain minepedia.net, and (5) it is a pretty short name, which is advantagous for the required legal suffix. A potential downside would be that it could be confusing what's the name of the wiki and what's the name of the legal entity, but that could be avoided by always using the legal suffix. | violine1101 ^(talk) 00:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support. I like it. - Jack McKalling (talk) 09:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose - I still think this is just confusing and an excuse to use that name. Slapping a name made for a wiki onto a company name doesn't automatically work just because the company runs this wiki. Also, the legal suffix is so comically long that the full company name will be very long even if the base name was a single letter, so I don't think we should worry about the length of the base name. But I weak oppose because I guess the name is cute. - Harristic / Talk 👁 DungeonsEntitySprite penguin-onesie.png: Sprite image for penguin-onesie in Minecraft
13:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support. It's not great, but it makes sense. I don't think it's the best idea, but it's definitely not a bad one.–MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 21:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support - 👁 Image
Delycache ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 23:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose - per Harristic. Delvin4519 (talk) 00:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support – pretty matter of fact as to the purpose of the legal entity without being mundane, though using the former wiki name does seem somewhat forced – though probably not enough people will regularly stumble upon it to be a big issue. –Sonicwave ^talk 05:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - I don't think I know the full situation, but didn't Minecraft Wiki need to change their name away from Minepedia for legal reasons in the first place? Also, I tried to visit "minepedia.net," and was met with a 404 error without the "https://" beforehand, and a warning that the connection wasn't secure with; so I question whether or not we still have the domain anymore anyway. Either way, I don't think it's really in the spirit of the new wiki to be returning to an old name, even if it's just for the associated legal entity. —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The previous owner of minepedia.net was the reason why the Minecraft Wiki needed to change its name. However, that organization no longer exists. We do still own the domain (more precisely, I do), but I intentionally have it reply with a 404. DarkShadowTNT (talk) 13:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support It's part of our history and it won't require buying another domain --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support – ThisNewWikiIsSoMuchBettertalk | contribs 16:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Harristic. - BD (talk) 16:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support --Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 22:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support - per TreeIsLife.Drour1234 (talk) 01:31, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - I like it. Simple, it's already known and it works well. Consumed (Talk│Contributions) 07:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support — Compared to other suggested options, I find this a fairly safe bet for a legal entity name. — BabylonAS 18:20, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Relevant to the history of the game and unlikely to be confused with the name of the wiki itself. Meeples10 (talk) 05:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose – naming after an otherwise unrelated in-game concept seems arbitrary, though this term does immediately draw an association with Minecraft. –Sonicwave ^talk 05:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - While it may not be easily confused with the wiki name itself, it will definitely be confused for and need a disambiguation from the in-game Far Lands page. I don't think there is enough of a parallel between a legal entity and this terrain generation phenomenon to warrant needing to make this distinction. —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Sonicwave and Ms4tune. Delvin4519 (talk) 15:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose We are not a Minecraft History Wiki --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

(or Ifrit/Afrit/other spelling of the last word)

A Russian wiki meme, coming from one of the most famous discussions that wiki had in 2011-12 — on how to translate “Blaze”. One of the users suggested “ифрит” (ifrit), a fiery being of hell from Islamic folklore, based on the mob's apparent similarity to a unit from Heroes of Might and Magic III also called “efreet”. And while the administrators supported that variant, many others did not like it. One of such users had made a joke image where all mobs on the Mob article were renamed to “ifrit”, while retaining adjectives in some cases. One of such names is “деревенский ифрит” (“village ifrit” or “rustic ifrit”), from “деревенский житель” (“village inhabitant”), which is the Russian wiki's contemporary (and current) name for a villager.

While not obviously Minecraft-related, this variant is quite unique in my opinion and reflective of a moment in MCW's history. — BabylonAS 06:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose. Using a religious term, especially a term for a type of demon, seems unwise. Meeples10 (talk) 06:42, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose per above –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 21:15, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose per above Delvin4519 (talk) 22:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - Reading about moments in Minecraft Wiki's history like this is interesting, but I think basing the entire name on a single event would be a bit too niche, even if it weren't for the main reason to oppose already stated (per above). –Ms4tune (talk) 13:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong Oppose per Meeples --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The root word, "biblio," comes from Greek and means "book." I figured it might fit the name, what with the wiki being essentially a digital library of Minecraft-related information. Since this name is a bit on the longer side, it would likely be referred to as the "Biblio-bureau" or "BGB" casually. I also find it a little funny that "BGBUG" pronounced phonetically is "bug-a-bug."

Just a simple suggestion from a simple-minded fan of alliteration :) —Ms4tune (talk) 09:19, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose On the opposite of Book & Quill, I feel this is too complicated for what it is, and doesn't have enough lore to justify it. – Unsigned comment added by MetalManeMc (talk • contribs) at 21:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC). Sign comments with ~~~~

👁 Image
 Support I like the alliteration. This name is generic enough to not raise flags from trademark holders yet still explanatory. Biblio is a fantastic word and Bureau comes off strong. (BrianGLHF (talk) 22:24, 10 December 2023 (UTC))

👁 Image
 Oppose as it seems somewhat convoluted, and "block game" specifically appears as a knockoff attempting to avoid the "Minecraft" name. I do like the idea of having a library theme to the name though. –Sonicwave ^talk 05:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Comment - I appreciate the comments here, and admittedly, also agree that this name would need some workshopping to be more viable. I'm somewhat proud of Biblio-bureau, but think it's a bit too generic to be standalone. The obviousness of Block Game being another way to refer to Minecraft without using its name didn't occur to me before, but now that you've mentioned it, I know I'll never unsee it, and it's going to bother me indefinitely. Good points all around though! —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Sonicwave. Delvin4519 (talk) 15:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose Kinda long and the last word could make some believe we're full of bureaucracy. --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Sonicwave. - BD (talk) 01:58, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

A play on "Minecraft Wiki", the name of the wiki that the company is representing, while referencing more of an entity (the Wookie part) than a platform. Clearly a joke, but also at the same time a mock of the fact we had to think of a different name than just "Minecraft Wiki" itself for "lame bureaucratic reasons". No offence. - Jack McKalling (talk) 21:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support - Terrible name, I will defend it valiantly. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
21:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose It’s cute and clever but I don’t think it’s best to use the term “Wookie” as it is very similar to a trademark owned by a very large corporation with a lot of lawyers. Plus “Wookieepedia” is a popular Star Wars wiki and could cause a disturbance in the force confusion. (BrianGLHF (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC))

👁 Image
 Oppose per User:BrianGLHF's reasoning. Delvin4519 (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose on principle. A name for which the motivation comes down to "lame bureaucratic reasons" is just petty, even more so if part of the name contains a word associated with complaining. DarkShadowTNT (talk) 22:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Regarding "moan", to be fair that is just the wookie sound. But I understand your point. - Jack McKalling (talk) 08:56, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per BrianGLHF. The corporation in question is known for being very protective of their intellectual property. Meeples10 (talk) 01:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose Wookie is associated with Wookiepedia (which is associated with Fandom) and isn't Moancraft some server or some Let's Play? --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Veto – I'm pretty sure that "wookie" is a trademark, so we cannot use that. | violine1101 ^(talk) 22:30, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

In reference to squids being milkable during Java Edition Beta 1.2_01. It's an obscure Minecraft detail and the MCW board Discord server is already using a milk bucket as server icon. Weird Gloop is also in a bucket, so we would fit right in. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 22:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support--Arceusgjengen (talk) 22:42, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support because ummmm squid milk. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
22:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Changing this to a 👁 Image
 strong support and giving some actual thoughts on since there's been opposition to this name. Firstly, the name is just fun and it works, it rolls off the tongue well, is a short name, has a unique acronym, is distinct enough to not be confused with anything else, and is a fun piece of trivia, trivia you will only know about because of this wiki. Secondly, squids are immediately recognizable to anyone who plays Minecraft as one of the more iconic Minecraft mobs even if they are real world creatures, so I think the point about the name not containing anything unique to Minecraft is null. Thirdly, about the silliness of the name...I think people need to allow themselves to have more fun, this wiki takes thing too seriously sometimes. Obviously comedy is subjective yada yada, but there seems to be an issue with the name being goofy in the first place and not whether it's really funny or not. Fourthly, I think a name that stands out is good. We could stick to being serious and end up with Block and Quill, a name that is, in my opinion, uninspired and forgettable, or we could have some personality and have a name that is immediately recognisable because of its potential strangeness. That's all. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
14:05, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support - I like the silliness of it, feels very Minecraft-y, and I agree with the reasoning. - BD (talk) 22:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - 👁 Image
Delycache ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 23:36, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - CrowdingFaun624 (talk) 23:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - Looks fun  DIR GIM Dianliang233 T C 00:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - I like the name Squid Milk on it’s own merits. -(BrianGLHF (talk) 04:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC))

👁 Image
 Support 👁 Image
Meeples10 (talk) 04:58, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose Oppose – I'm personally not the biggest fan of referencing an obscure game detail just for the sake of following Weird Gloop's pattern as it seems arbitrary, especially if it's made up of everyday terms that don't draw an association to Minecraft unless explicitly pointed out. (Edit: The "biological" nature of the term "Squid Milk" also doesn't quite sit right with me, per DarkShadow's and Jack's comments below.) –Sonicwave ^talk 05:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree. But also Squid Milk as a term on it’s own has been a sort of meme in the community for a while. I remember it being a thing in the official Twitch stream chats a few years ago. (BrianGLHF (talk) 05:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC))

It isn't for the sake of following Weird Gloop's pattern, being similar to Weird Gloop is essentially just a cute little side point. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
13:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support - Even though I made a different suggestion myself earlier, I actually support this one very much over my own. I love the fact that the MCW board's Discord server icon is already a milk bucket; that's such a hilarious coincidence. I also like that this name references in-game trivia, even if it's a lesser-known detail about an older version of the game. As a possible counter to Sonicwave's point above, I don't think it's too much of an issue to use everyday terms that might not hold as much meaning to those who aren't already in the know as part of the name; there is enough of an interesting story behind it to reward those who are inquisitive enough to ask why we chose it. If companies named after common fruits can make big names for themselves in the competitive tech industry, I believe we, as a community, can define Squid Milk as something more explicitly Minecraft-related than it already is by simply agreeing on the name here, if we so choose. —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak Support - Changing my opinion a little due to some opposition, I think it would be better to change "Milk" to "Bucket." Squid Bucket does not exist in the game. Jonasagra (talk) 👁 Image
Director [PT] 14:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Sonicwave. Delvin4519 (talk) 15:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Changing to 👁 Image
 Strong Oppose per DarkShadowTNT, MetalManeMc, and Sonicwave. Delvin4519 (talk) 00:21, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Neutral Per Sonic --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - I like the name, although it is a little disturbing. I don't mind that it looks like WG, and we could get a cool logo out of it. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 18:12, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Changing to 👁 Image
 Oppose per DarkShadow. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 06:21, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose, because this name really doesn't sit well with me. It reads like childish humor to me (in the role of editor) and I (in the role of board member) certainly don't particularly look forward to signing documents on which "Squid Milk" has been typed. DarkShadowTNT (talk) 22:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong opposeDrour1234 (talk) 01:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 strong supportThe name definitely feels very Minecraft. I like referencing old features to the new present and also maybe Weird Gloop has some milk mixed inside of that gloop. PotatoMan3525463 (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose on the basis that a good friend of mine has a severe and persisting childhood fear of Minecraft squids. - User-12316399 (talk) 00:48, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose, as "the milk of a squid" is giving me a distasteful connotation, and I wouldn't want to use that in any legally recognized name. - Jack McKalling (talk) 09:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per Jack Mckalling, sonic & dark. It's funny but more or less in the childish way. It's similar to weird gloop, as an obscure and funny reference, but it's just slightly more....wrong. – Unsigned comment added by Consumed (talk • contribs) at 08:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC). Sign comments with ~~~~

👁 Image
 Support – Unsigned comment added by Software512 (talk • contribs) at 23:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC). Sign comments with ~~~~

👁 Image
 Support - UnExpectedDino ᐸ talk | contribs 👁 Image
01:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per Jack Mckalling, sonic & dark. "Squid Milk" just doesn't sit right with me. Ishbosheth (talk) 02:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I believe it can, right? It is a term linked to a block but that term is an alternative term, not the name of the block itself.

Jonasagra (talk) 👁 Image
 Director [PT] 23:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support (BrianGLHF (talk) 05:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC))

👁 Image
 Oppose – ThisNewWikiIsSoMuchBettertalk | contribs 10:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - While the block itself is an iconic and frequently interacted with part of the game, I don't think using it directly as a name here is worth needing to create a disambiguation with the actual block's page. Personally, I'd prefer something a bit more distinct and personalized, even if just slightly. (see: Block and Quill) —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Comment - Ok Ms4tune, thanks. The other names are a cool suggestion too. :D Jonasagra (talk) 👁 Image
Director [PT] 15:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose Historical name --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose, per Ms4tune. Delvin4519 (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose - not quite a veto, but there are other companies with the name "Workbench", or part of their name being "Workbench", so I don't think "Workbench" by itself would work very well as it could cause potential problems in the future. There's also the issue that it doesn't make it clear what the company is about, it could also be a woodworking company, judging by that name. | violine1101 ^(talk) 21:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Comment - Thanks, Violine1101 By paying attention to this, I wasn't taking into account that there could be other companies with that name hah. Jonasagra (talk) 👁 Image
Director [PT] 00:06, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

It basically the Suspicious Stew but with that abbreviation problem avoided. And the grass (block) is known be a signature of Minecraft, and, once for Minecraft Wiki. --siiftun1857[T/C/E] 08:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose – ThisNewWikiIsSoMuchBettertalk | contribs 10:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - While this is a good workaround for the abbreviation issue of Suspicious Stew, it comes at the cost of abstracting away from the initial reason for picking that name in the first place. Grass is a lot less bucket-able and a lot less goopy than stew; so while your point that the grass block is a well-known Minecraft icon is pretty inarguable, its use in this name specifically feels a bit arbitrary and out of place to me. —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose Another instance of trying to follow Weird Gloop pattern --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per TreeIsLife and Ms4tune. Delvin4519 (talk) 15:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - There doesn’t really seem to be much purpose behind this name. While the abbreviation problem is solved, the meaning is lost; it’s not recognizable as Minecraft in any way, either. Also sounds like weed. - BD (talk) 17:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - Sounds like weed. - BrianGLHF (talk) 15:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Similar to my other suggestion above. A play on the name of the wiki to show innocent ignorance to the purpose of the name. Also, "Minceraft" is a word that has been literally referenced by the game itself on multiple occasions, an on purpose typo of the game's name. The "kiwi" part could also be a legitimate misspelling of "wiki". So to any unknowing reader it should be very obvious what it means, or what the name is used for, since it's only two pairs of letters that have been swapped. Especially if the name gets associated with this wiki by the footer or something. Lastly, I do think if the sole purpose of this entity is to be the head behind this wiki, it would make sense to somehow tie its name to the wiki's name like this. - Jack McKalling (talk) 11:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose Minceraft is to similar to Minecraft. --Arceusgjengen (talk) 12:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose - I actually really like "kiwi" being a play on words for "wiki," but as Arceusgjengen pointed out, I definitely misread "Minceraft" as "Minecraft" due to typoglycemia and didn't realize until I read your explanation of the name. Either way it's spelled, I worry that the word might be a trademark/copyright issue anyway. —Ms4tune (talk) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - per Arceusgjengen. Delvin4519 (talk) 15:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose --TreeIsLife (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Veto - I have seen reports of legal conflicts between companies with bigger differences and even if that name doesn't cause any actual legal trouble, it would look very bad during any official communications with Mojang. I wouldn't be comfortable to create a company with that name. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 16:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose - "Minceraft" is far too similar to "Minecraft." Meeples10 (talk) 18:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I think this one would work because its immediately associable with Minecraft but doesn’t have Minecraft in the name of it, and is a scrapped feature which connects it to wikis. Mining is a core part of Minecraft, so tying into that makes sense. - BD (talk) 19:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose, this is just like Workbench above, a historical feature. - Jack McKalling (talk) 19:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

So…is someone going to explain why historical features are bad for names? When did we invent this rule exactly? - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
20:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

We are not a "Minecraft Discontinued Features Wiki" or a "Minecraft History Wiki". This wiki also covers modern day Minecraft. Plus, there is the issue of having to add an disambiguation notice at the top of the affected historical feature. Delvin4519 (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Yet we literally do cover ruby ore on this wiki, we cover the entire history of this game, it’s just that pages reflect most recent versions. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
20:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Confusion between the legal entity and the historical feature is still a concern by selecting the names of in game or historical features. See the "Block and Quill" entry when an editor alleged that two other editors confused the proposed name with the name of an in-game feature. Delvin4519 (talk) 20:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose, per Jack McKalling. Delvin4519 (talk) 20:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Within the minecraft community, including the modded one, naming something "BlablaCraft" is a common trend (See BuildCraft, BiblioCraft, HarvestCraft, PneumaticCraft, EvilCraft, Thaumcraft). What about WikiCraft for the governing entity of the wiki itself? - Jack McKalling (talk) 19:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Neutral – this seems corny and reminds me of community creations like mods and texture packs rather than an organization. What about "WikiCrafters" as a variation of this? –Sonicwave ^talk 06:25, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Fine. Added to the suggestion. - Jack McKalling (talk) 07:52, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - As Sonicwave said, seems quite corny. This doesn't really come off as a company name to me, either - more like a community name or name for a mod or project of some form. - BD (talk) 01:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - Oppose per BD. Delvin4519 (talk) 21:37, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

or some variation thereof. Feel free to build off of this. —BrianGLHF (talk) 08:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose - Seems a bit too long to me. I would also like to add that it doesn't really say much? What about us is a cube contenet contributor collective? Its like its dancing around being linked to Minecraft without making a direct reference to it, and I find it a bit awkward. - BD (talk) 01:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - Oppose per BD. Delvin4519 (talk) 21:36, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose – I'd like to add that naming the company "contributors" and "collective" are quite a bit misleading. The legal entity will only have very few members who are responsible for running the company, and while consisting of wiki contributors, if you're a contributor you're not necessarily part of the company.
Apart from this, I'm not sure about "content" – I feel like in recent years this word has become a bit more negative and distant to actual users/contributors/creators than I'd like. | violine1101 ^(talk) 22:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

I think including the Knowledge Book in the name would be a fitting nod to the Minecraft Wiki. Together with the Crafters part of the name, it is descriptive of what we do: We are collecting knowledge in an encyclopedia, one might say we are crafting a knowledge book. — 👁 Image
Delycache ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 10:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support. It's not particularly unique, but has works surprisingly well. It's not too awkward (squid milk...) or obscure. I also like the fact it perfectly represents the wiki. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 21:08, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support - It's based on an currently existing item that only few users know about and the name as well as item usage prepresent the wiki very well. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 21:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support - Not as good as Minepedia though.Drour1234 (talk) 01:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak oppose, but only on the notion that this sounds a bit too much like a sports team than a wiki organization, and it does feel a little long. Personally I'd omit the "Crafters" part and just affix a company descriptor to distinguish as from the in-game Knowledge Book, in the same way Weird Gloop is suffixed with Ltd. Arisadeci (talk) 04:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

In any case we will be suffixed by "UG (haftungsbeschränkt)". –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 06:10, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Neutral - It's cute, I like that it's basically just another way of saying "Makers of the Minecraft Wiki", but it's corny in the same way a username you made when you were 13 is corny, and that doesn't seem intentional. I otherwise feel nothing towards the name. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
12:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per Arisadeci. Plus the issue of having to add a disambiguation notice on the "Knowledge Book" article. Names should not result in having to add disambiguation notices on existing pages. Delvin4519 (talk) 22:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support. This is currently my favorite. A disambiguation notice is not necessarily a bad thing. Knowledge books aren't used much in the game, and it's not like the legal entity name will be searched for a lot where it becomes a problem. Personally I like "Knowledge Book" more without the "Crafters" book suffix. — Misode (talk) 08:29, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - I don’t want there to be a disambiguation notice, and using “knowledge book” or “crafters” at all seems awkward. It’s just very long and blunt, theres not much to it. - BD (talk) 16:37, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support either "Knowledge Book" or "Knowledge Crafters", I like the idea behind it and "knowledge crafters" seems like a better version of my "WikiCrafters" suggestion above. "Knowledge Book Crafters" seems long-winded for the sake of referencing both the in-game item and "crafters" at the same time, though I wouldn't necessarily oppose it. –Sonicwave ^talk 00:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

"Powered Beacon" evokes Minecraft despite not being an official term used in the game. Meeples10 (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - This doesn’t really have any meaning, and seems arbitrarily chosen for the sake of a name that doesn’t require a disambiguation notice. It’s somewhat memorable but still easily confusable for actual beacons. - BD (talk) 16:35, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - Oppose per BD. Delvin4519 (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

We're yet to find a name everyone agrees on so I guess I'll give this a shot.

I'm suggesting Crystallized Honey as the name, because I think it rolls off the tongue well, it is a unique and memorable name but isn't "silly", it is a piece of trivia by referencing the crystallized honey item. Crystallized honey is a real world thing, but is lesser known than just...a dog, or something, meaning we wouldn't have issues with copyright while the name is still unique. No, we wouldn't need a disambig page, maybe we could have hatnotes but that's not a problem at all. This was one of the original names suggested on Discord many months back, and some people seemed to be keen on it.

Before you oppose because it is a historical feature, please accompany your response with an explanation of why that is at all relevant. If your explanation is "we are not a Minecraft History Wiki" then my response is: yes we are. We document everything Minecraft, that includes the history. There is no zero why a historical thing couldn't be used as the name.- Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
09:52, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose I don't like the idea of using the name of a crapped feature just for the sake of it. At least Squid Milk is particularly memorable. I find it difficult to see how Crystallized Honey represents us well – Unsigned comment added by MetalManeMc (talk • contribs) at 21:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC). Sign comments with ~~~~

I’m unsure how you read my list of reasons and then gathered that the name would be used for the sake of one of those reasons. And I don’t think the name needs to be descriptive of what the company does. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
21:39, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

It's just the way I feel when reading the name. And I do think a name should partly represent what the company does. You can argue it isn't the case for WeirdGloop, but their name has a very unique reason behind it. Crystallized Honey is neither representative of the comany nor unique enough to not represent it in my opinion. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 21:44, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - Oppose per MetalManeMc. Delvin4519 (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support for reasons listed in proposal Consumed (Talk│Contributions) 07:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose – this seems arbitrary, and not particularly evocative of Minecraft (at least to me) or more memorable than the real-life phenomenon. –Sonicwave ^talk 00:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

"Legal Entity Name For Minecraft Wiki", or Lenafomiwi for short. Or a variation of that. My logic was, if none of the words above get full support, maybe it shouldn't be a word. - Jack McKalling (talk) 08:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose - This is pretty similar to the Moancraft Wookie one, and I don’t find it particularly funny either. This is just completely meaningless gibberish. We shouldn’t be trying to find ideas that get the least opposes but ones that are truly the best options. - BD (talk) 16:32, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose per BD Consumed (Talk│Contributions) 07:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I've always liked a name that used mooshroom. They're a pretty recognizable mob and it just sounds nice. The name itself (might) not just be mooshroom, but added to another word. Something like Red Mooshroom or Mooshroom Fields. Additionally, it gives us a nice little logo (like weird gloop has the actual bucket that they use) that can made in a bunch of different styles, and is pretty cute. Consumed (Talk│Contributions) 08:21, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per page description. Anything from Minecraft such as Redstone, Creeper, is not allowed. Mooshroom is a name made up specifically for Minecraft, so falls under that category. It cannot be the name, and cannot be in the name. - Jack McKalling (talk) 08:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I forgot about that little stipulation, thanks. Consumed (Talk│Contributions) 15:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose per Jack McKalling. Delvin4519 (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Veto per requirements in the introductory text. DarkShadowTNT (talk) 19:23, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I've been wondering though, why do we need to have a legal company entity for this really? Was there a contract to be signed between the fandom wiki and Fandom too? What is the difference? I didn't find an explanation for this anywhere on-site. - Jack McKalling (talk) 09:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

We want a legally binding contract with WeirdGloop to set the hosting agreements in stone. This would also theoretically make it possible to have parnerships. There was no contract with Fandom because they owned 100% of the wiki, which is why we couldn't have it closed. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 09:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

See also the response by violine at this topic. –Sonicwave ^talk 00:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Given the discussion above, the interim board has narrowed down the name proposals to the following:

• Block and Quill
• Minepedia
• Knowledge Book Crafters / Knowledge Book / Knowledge Crafters

We will decide for one of them in our next meeting. There will be no voting by the wider community, but we will take feedback given here into account. Please add any comments on these name proposals below! | violine1101 ^(talk) 22:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

We have decided for the name "Block & Quill". In order of most preferred to least preferred: (1) Block & Quill; (2) Minepedia; (3) Knowledge Book Crafters and variants. | violine1101 ^(talk) 23:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://minecraft.wiki/w/Forum:Legal_entity_name?oldid=3345688"