Forum:Update-specific nav boxes

As a proof of concept, I've created a new set of navboxes, each covering a specific update (back until Trails & Tales). The idea would be that these navboxes:

• Replace {{Navbox Java Edition versions}} and {{Navbox Bedrock Edition versions}} on all version changelog pages with the respective version navbox. These navboxes have become extremely large and cumbersome to use.
• Add it to related articles, such as the guides, but also to articles about features that have been added in this update (not changed!).
  • However, each article should only have at most one such navbox.
  • It's ok if the navbox contains a link to a page that doesn't include the navbox itself.

These navboxes don't need to be comprehensive and should only contain the most important feature articles related to this article. However, they should list all versions.

I've also included versions that contain experimental features for an update. This information was previously pretty hard to find.

Here's the list of navboxes I've created as an example. Of course they could still be improved:

• {{Navbox Trails & Tales}}
• {{Navbox Bats and Pots}}
• {{Navbox Armored Paws}}
• {{Navbox Tricky Trials}}
• {{Navbox Bundles of Bravery}}
• {{Navbox The Garden Awakens}}
• {{Navbox Spring to Life}}
• {{Navbox Chase the Skies}}
• {{Navbox The Copper Age}}
• {{Navbox Mounts of Mayhem}}

Note that you can easily move back and forth between updates using the arrow links.

Let me know what you think! | violine1101 ^(talk) 20:52, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support Looks clean. BigEarsQuake 2 (talk) 20:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support; Looks great! If I'm not misinterpreting this completely this will make it so that the general version navboxes don't have to include hotfixes and snapshots etc. I still think there should be a navbox for major updates though, since it's a good visualization for major updates. Of all the memories of the wiki before making an account I remember looking at a navbox to learn all about the major update timeline. I get that that's no good reason to have it, but for the ease of finding pages I think it should be kept. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  21:00, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm neutral on the new navboxes, but I often use the current version navboxes to navigate through different unrelated version pages, or open multiple version pages in bulk, while the proposed navboxes would be limited to the previous and next update/drop. I see no reason to remove the current navboxes as they are perfectly usable IMO, but I think versions could be split into more subsections.

Also, these make sense for Update Aquatic onward, but how would past updates be dealt with? e.g. the Update Aquatic template would have to link to both World of Color (Java 1.12) and Better Together Update (Bedrock 1.2) as the past updates.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 23:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Was going to ask the same thing, best solution I can think of is having the links be labeled and placed in a lower space, like how some Wikipedia navboxes are. Realshow19 (talk) 01:58, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose. I personally don't see any problems with the version navboxes right now and it's very useful to quickly navigate between all versions. If it gets too long (after 1.21.160 i guess), I think we should move 1.20 to the 1.10 section and make a separate section for 1.21, which really isn't long at the moment compared to the other sections.

And as we keep these navboxes, we don't need to include all those versions. I also don't see the need to navigate between content of an update apart from when it releases, which is where the navbox new content is for.

Another thing I want to share here is that minor BE updates after a drop (.60, .80, .100, .120) really are not about that drop, like hotfixes. They only change/fix things because it's an update, but they do that for all things, not just that drop. If you look at 1.21.120 for example, not even a quarter is about The Copper Age, and there are also things from previous updates like the Hyper Potions splash. You just cannot call 1.21.120 part of the Copper Age, it's completely separate like game drops. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
16:42, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose removing the versions navs. These navs being big and annoying can make it take a little bit to find the version you're looking, but the version not being there at all is a lot worse than that I think. If there is another area of the wiki that allows you to go from any version page to any other version page then I'll change my mind on this probably but I'm not aware of that if it exists.

👁 Image
 Soft support the navboxes being added in general, if they are collapsed by default and under every other navbox (unless it is a page for a version of that update). I say this because I genuinely do not think these navs are useful. I can see some use for having features of the same update in a nav...if that update is recent, because that's when you'll care about the surrounding update, but the new content nav already exists for that. The versions are exceedingly useless because the history section already exists for versions of relevance to the feature, and they're just so far out of relevance otherwise. Whether or not they are useful matters because we cannot just have infinite navboxes, the more there are the more annoying the whole section is to use, and we already have some cases of too many navboxes before this proposal that adds a navbox to 90% of pages to the wiki. But I can still see the appeal of these navboxes, they have been suggested a couple times after all, so I really do not mind their addition as long as the space they take up is minimised entirely. Uncollapsed, even The Copper Age nav takes up as much space as the entities nav with just mobs uncollapsed. If versions weren't included in these I'd probably be fine with them uncollapsed, they always take up 3/4ths of the nav. - Harri / Talk 👁 Image
17:19, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

What about making the feature part and the version part separately collapsible (like structural, ornamental etc. in {{navbox blocks}}) so on feature pages the version list is collapsed. 👁 Image
Miner(👁 Image
talk 👁 Image
contributions) 15:02, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose removing the versions navs and 👁 Image
 Soft support the navboxes being added in general per Harri. 👁 Image
👁 Image
^{(T | C | pt-BR)} 17:26, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

I think the versions should be removed from these and that they shouldnt replace the version navbox, similar to what Harri said above. But I do disagree with his opinion that they should be default collapsed, because if they are collapsed they might as well not be there. So, a general 👁 Image
 Support for the idea, but how its implemented may need more discussion 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
17:29, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose per Harri, MinecraftBedrockPlayer7, and LieraGame. I think maybe a dedicated article page for "History/Timeline of features" would be better. The navboxes are big and annoying, and as Harri said, not very useful. The thematic navboxes on feature pages already bloat the navigation section. We don't need more "major update" navboxes bloating the section out of porportion. As MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 suggests, we can potentially split 1.20 and 1.21 into separate tabs. Delvin4519 (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Opposition in parts I don't think the idea of these navboxes is bad; they can be useful for finding a release's resources more easily (despite the existing {{additions table}}), but they would take up a lot of space in articles. So, my opinion is to add these navboxes only to version pages, above the general version navbox, without removing it. I also think the releases in these navboxes should be in a separate section (collapsed in the version articles), since the version navbox will be below. It would also be a good idea to split the general version navbox more, but I don't have many ideas for that other than what's already suggested here.
  — Herobrine222376 ^{( Talk | Contributions | pt-br )} 21:11, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak Support. Sounds like a good idea in general, but replacing the original ones is not good for readers who want to search for all the versions. 👁 Image
Ja17 07:41, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support addition of new navboxes. It's good and clean.

👁 Image
 Oppose removing the version navbox. -- 👁 Image
Dipanshu Sarkar (Talk) 08:19, 22 June 2026 (UTC)