Talk:Bugrock

Delete

This is not a good disambig or redirect. "bugrock" is just an insult and we don't cover random fandom nonsense like that on the wiki. Make this go back to being red.  Nixinova   T   C   22:19, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support for civility purposes. 👁 Image
BigEarsQuake 2 22:22, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, terrible as a disambiguation page (no one calls infested stones "bugrocks") and not good as a redirect (similarly, Lagva should be deleted).--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 22:27, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - Lagva should also be deleted.Drour1234 (talk) 22:41, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

sorry if i created the lagva page --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 22:55, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - I only made this redirect into a disambiguation page to raise awareness to the fact that it is an insult instead of a nickname.Drour1234 (talk) 22:38, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support for the same reason as BigEars and Capopanzo. –👁 Image
 Rert  (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support for both Bugrock and Lagva. I am against all of this edition competition stuff and besides as Nixinova said we don't cover that sort of nonsense. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:14, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Buggy Nerdyguy2000 thing. why do you use -~- instead of -- without the tilde ~ 2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 00:16, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

It's just a part of my signature, to be unique :) -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:17, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Also what about Badrock? Sure it's a typo, but also potentially an insult. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:18, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

I've changed the redirect target to Bedrock; if it's a typo then it probably doesn't refer to the edition. I believe that redirect is no longer an issue. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  01:01, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

It would be really funny if it just redirected to Infested Stone and was protected, but if that's not gonna happen then 👁 Image
 Support the deletion. Grzesiek11 (talk) 00:24, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

*Infested Block; no double redirects on my watch! (not mad though, just a slight correction) -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:25, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Didn't realize it's a redirect, good catch. Grzesiek11 (talk) 00:27, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

It would be a double redirect, though thanks :) (still not sure about how likely it is that it will get redirected to infested block) -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:29, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Oops, I see you edited your comment as a correction. Ignore my previous comment then! -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:29, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

lol also 👁 Image
 Strong support and also for Lagva, Badrock and Bugrock Edition. 2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 00:26, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

You know, that ain't the worst option. If we outright deleted it then that would make an immortal SearchDigest entry, though if I'm not going crazy SearchDigest entries can be blocked by admins. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  01:04, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

SearchDigest* (with a link) --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 01:06, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support, this will prevent people from creating the page, and will be infinitely funny while still being correct 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
02:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Or blank the page except for the delete when template. 2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 01:33, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

And... what would that do, really? -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  01:37, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

I think there is a good reason for the page to exist. I can imagine someone coming across the term "bugrock" in the community and wondering what it might refer to, thus consulting the wiki.

Regarding "Lagva", I first read that as a typo of "Lava" and have never heard the term before. | violine1101 ^(talk) 01:38, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

I changed, so it's no longer a redirect. --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 01:41, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that term exists, see: https://reddit.com/r/MinecraftMemes/comments/1aogydd/lagva_vs_bugrock_wither/ --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 01:47, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support deleting it, together with Lagva and Badrock. Do we have something for console editions? Like gonesole or something 👁 Image
QwertyLilley [ talk ] 02:19, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

See the list. I LOVE QwertyLilley! 2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 02:24, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Looking at the redirects for Legacy Console Edition I can't see any insulting names. So yeah, I suppose. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  15:12, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

All the terms mentioned here should be deleted, though I would 👁 Image
 Support lagva redirecting to lava as a misspelling as in that case, it wouldn’t be an insult.Drour1234 (talk) 02:27, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Lagva is no longer a disambig :) 2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 02:31, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Redirected to Infested block. 👁 Image
 Oppose because no one calls infested stones "bugrocks" and I want it to become a red link again. --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

No longer. --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 15:13, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, not everything from Special:SearchDigest needs to be redirected. I also 👁 Image
 Oppose to redirect Bugrock to infested stone or Badrock to bedrock, it simply does not make sense. People searching for bugrock or badrock are obviously not searching for something different than Bedrock Edition. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
13:57, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree with MinecraftBedrockPlayer7. --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 23:29, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

That is exactly why it's funny. I think prohibiting fun is a valid stance, but I'm personally pro-fun. Grzesiek11 (talk) 16:55, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Extremely strong oppose. First of all, all the arguments in support seem to be extremely nonsensical with their reasoning that it "is just an insult and we don't cover random fandom nonsense". The wiki should be a neutral party (i.e. not take sides) and should not censor information just because it may seem childish to you. If players refer to Bedrock Edition as Bugrock, why should we interfere with that?

As well, "bugrock" has diminished its foulness to a nickname (in certain scenarios) to geniunely refer to Bedrock Edition as seen in Mojira.

I also 👁 Image
 Extremely strong oppose redirecting Bugrock to Infested Block as this literally said by no-one to refer to these blocks. 💀 Every single post mentioning Bugrock is literally referring to Bedrock Edition. If you think it's necessary to create a disambiguation, we can do something similar to Baby Ghast (disambiguation) where Baby Ghast is a redirect to what people actually refer to this name, rather than what's technically correct.

Personally, this is how I would do it:

• Bugrock to Bedrock Edition
• Lagva to Java Edition
• Badrock to Bedrock (or deletion. It is too ambiguous if it was a spelling mistake or intentional for Bedrock Edition.)

_{All my arguments are under the basis that people are indeed searching these terms up, which should be confirmed by Special:SearchDigest.} 👁 Image
Ayaan 00:16, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

You know, I do agree with that. Changing my stance to 👁 Image
 Oppose per Ayaan; we document Minecraft and the community sometimes, and this is a part of it all. Wikipedia doesn't do this sort of censorship like you said. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Redirected to Bedrock Edition per Ayaan's reply --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 00:22, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Why is such reasoning nonsensical? Patent fandom nonsense is a valid deletion reason as these do not fall under the Redirect criteria at Minecraft Wiki:Notability#Redirects.  Nixinova   T   C   00:55, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

truly true. --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 00:56, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

"Alternative or shortened name, provided the name is common usage [by the community]"

Under my reading, it does 👁 Image
Ayaan 01:23, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't think removing a redirect really constitutes censorship. It's not like we're banning the phrase from being used in quotes, it's preventing a childish meme from being immortalized. This isn't a matter of community representation, it's an insult used by a vocal minority. All fandom war culture is. It's all inherently uncritical and inevitably going to be forgotten. As a redirect it can easily be read as "even the wiki thinks Bedrock is buggy," especially when very few people would logically stumble upon a term like lagva. Realshow19 (talk) 01:43, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I personally have never seen the the term lagva be used for anything other than a misspelling of lava before this talk page discussion began.Drour1234 (talk) 02:44, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I've never even seen it anywhere as a typo. 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
02:45, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

This entire paragraph to me sums that "using the phrase Bugrock is kinda cringe". It vastly overexaggerates human behaviour and follows quite a silly idea that this somehow reinforces that players' beliefs that Bedrock is bad and therefore cause a riot?

Genuinely, do you believe the outcome that there will be multiple Twitter posts, YouTube comments, Discord messages everywhere saying "haha Bugrock redirects to Bedrock on the wiki. The game is soooo bad"?

Players are equally finding Lagva to Bugrock.

The reason I'm so against deletion because I believe the redirect will help more people finding what they wanted, more easily and more quickly. So what if they call the game "Bugrock"? Why are we policing their choice of words? It's not "Fandom war culture" if the word has been used by multiple separate people to legitimately refer to Bedrock Edition. There's no glorifying anything, we should stick to what the majority of the players who use this word to what it means, rather than trying to be politically correct in a word that doesn't do much harm anyway. 👁 Image
Ayaan 06:46, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Redirects like this are intended to make searching easier, but I don't think people that enter "Bugrock" in the search bar don't know where to find Bedrock Edition. Redirects aren't intended to clean Special:SearchDigest. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
06:51, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I feel like I said that "I believe the redirect will help more people finding what they wanted, more easily and more quickly."

I apologise if it wasn't clear enough. 👁 Image
Ayaan 06:54, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I’ve seen enough doomposting to know that the idea of 'even the wiki thinks Bedrock is buggy' isn’t so far-fetched. The mere existence of a redirect only reinforces the insult, especially considering that many people take the wiki as factual and proof. Redirects aren't really content, and they aren’t censorship unless they block access to information. The wiki doesn't forbid them accessing information about Bedrock Edition 👁 Image
QwertyLilley [ talk ] 02:03, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I would love some examples of that on the wiki. I fear that it might simply be personal bias in favouring Java Edition because they like it more. 👁 Image
Ayaan 06:48, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

before I supported the deletion. but now, 👁 Image
 Extremely strong oppose per Ayaan. --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 00:38, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

This is like a forum. --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 00:39, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Ooookay? So? -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:40, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

are you talking to me? like, please move it! --2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 00:41, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

This only affects a few pages. 's fine as is. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  00:43, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

This doesn't need to be on the forum as it is only about a handful of individual pages, and doesnt have any sitewide affects.  Nixinova   T   C   00:56, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support Already said a dozen times here but we shouldn't dignify a petty insult like this. Realshow19 (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Comment. Let's resolve this by majority, if we go with consensus, we are going to take weeks or even months, and may not get things done like the drop name forum. We're not talking about official names here. 👁 Image
QwertyLilley [ talk ] 02:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I think it should either stay as is, or be a redirect to infested stone. I dont have a preference on which one, but it is such a frequently used term that I am against deleting it. 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
02:23, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I would make it a protected title personally. It's not something we should be glorifying, if it's a redirect people will take it as validation, and if we leave it open someone will inevitably remake the page. Realshow19 (talk) 02:25, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

In what way does a redirect "glorify"? Anyways, the wiki should stay neutral in these matters, and not choose our own side because it makes us uncomfortable that its a term used by people.

By deleting the redirect because of this reason, what else will be censored because it's not to our liking? 👁 Image
Ayaan 06:36, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

I think Bugrock should redirect to Infested Blocks or Mojang Bug Tracker. I think that Lagva should remain redirected to Lava. I think that Badrock should be redirected to Bedrock. I think that Bugrock Edition should be deleted.Drour1234 (talk) 02:44, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
02:45, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I think both you and I know that this wouldn't help anyone because it's not what those words mean (with the exception of Badrock because that's simply to ambiguous). 👁 Image
Ayaan 06:50, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Random comment: Still no admins deleting it 2025 Whydeletemyaccs (talk) 12:18, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support, this redirect was solely created to clean up Special:SearchDigest which isn't on its own a valid reason to make a redirect. Sightnado ( talk / contribs ) 18:55, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I agree but now there are other reasons to keep it, becoming a legitimate term to refer to Bedrock Edition. Focusing on why it was created instead of focusing why it should stay seems such a weak point and is now totally irrelevant. 👁 Image
Ayaan 07:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

a legitimate term to refer to Bedrock Edition - how so? It's not used by any official sources AFAIK and it's also not a "typo redirect" - badrock would be a legitimate typo redirect but "Bugrock" is obviously a different word. I don't see any reasons for "Bugrock" to be a legitimate redirect in Template:Redr#List of reasons. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
07:33, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

According to Minecraft Wiki:Notability#Redirects (which does not need official sources), it says "Alternative or shortened name, provided the name is common usage". Which is evidenced via Google Trends.

Whereas the majority of the support is based on personal opinion, I'm acting upon notability criteria of the wiki. 👁 Image
Ayaan 07:52, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

The reason why that's a valid reason for redirects is to help people find an article they otherwise cannot find. While most unnofficial alternative names that are used as redirect fulfill in that (such as Baby Ghast, hay block and server setup), over 95% - if not all - of people searching for "Bugrock" or "Badrock" know it's called Bedrock Edition and know where to find that article. And it's not an article that may be hard to find, it's even the fourth link on the mainpage (not counting the namespace tabs), and prominently on the sidebar. People that search for Bugrock only do that because they want to find how buggy Bedrock Edition can be, or just other opinions about bedrock being bad, or they pretend to be funny. Keeping it only to follow this notability rule does not sound like a valid reason to me, aren't these rules a set of guidelines with many exceptions that don't need to be followed word by word at any time?

And the reason to remove this redirect is because we as a wiki don't want to support such infamous "jokes"/insults. Keeping the redirect is almost agreeing as wiki that "bugrock" would be true, we should set a good example on Java/Bedrock arguing. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
13:22, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree Whydeletemyaccs/talk/my edits 13:38, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Maybe 5% _don't_ know what's meant with "Bugrock", and for _those_ people the redirect should be there. Even if it's a small minority. | violine1101 ^(talk) 15:19, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Agreed! -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  15:36, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Also 👁 Image
 Agree 👁 Image
Ayaan 07:18, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

The burden of proof is on you to substantiate your claims is on you. Let's assume 95% of people know how to find Bedrock Edition, that's still a huge number of people who don't know. 5% on a page that can get hundreds of thousands of visitors monthly is nothing to laugh at. Should we disregard those 5%? With the same notion, only 10 people mispel painting as paintin. Should we also remove that redirect because so few people use it?

I can say this though, Bedrock Edition is one of the most accessible pages to get to, featuring in almost every page, but if it's "not an article that may be hard to find", then why don't we also get rid those links, and the link in the sidebar? We can't because that would make it even more inaccessible and hard to find and this is the same logic for Bugrock. We don't get rid of it because the page is already so accessible, it's why it is accessible!

"People that search for Bugrock only do that because they want to find how buggy Bedrock Edition can be, or just other opinions about bedrock being bad, or they pretend to be funny."

There's no evidence for that. Objectively, when people search up Bugrock, then they go to Bedrock Edition. This could imply that when people search up this redirect, then they only want to view Bedrock. Also, I have said before in other talk comments: Bugrock is becoming a legitimate term for Bedrock Edition. And so what if ' "Bugrock" would be true'? The wiki should not take sides and stay neutral by being helpful for those who use this redirect.

"Keeping it only to follow this notability rule does not sound like a valid reason to me"

But why? Because you don't like the way Bugrock sounds? If you think the criteria has a problem, it might be better to have that conversation there.

To summarise, we shouldn't assume that this redirect has any other purpose than being a redirect. It's not an endorsement of any kind and improves accessibility to those who want to find Bedrock Edition. 👁 Image
Ayaan 07:04, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

You're stating that not having this redirect equals disregarding those 5%, but those 5% you're referring to are often Google searches (compared to "minecraft bedrock" is 0.1% btw). If you search Bugrock on Google you'll find what people are searching for, that's how Google works: funny videos about bugs, people talking about bugrock, a "bugrock edition" texture pack, etc. I don't even think there is anyone searching for Bugrock who doesn't know where to find the page, though you can't evidence that of course.

"Bugrock is becoming a legitimate term for Bedrock Edition" - sorry to interrupt you there but that's simply not true and will never be. And I think it's obvious why.

"Bugrock" being true is also an opinion.

About notability rule: I meant that the notability rules do not prevent us to remove this redirect, not that those should be changed.

The reason to remove this redirect, if it wasn't clear, is: "It's an insult, and we shouldn't cover insults". Even though you might think it's an innocent term or at most a funny "joke", there are people who explicitly use it as an insult and there are people who feel it like an insult. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
08:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Having a redirect isn't the same as covering the topic. I don't think we should have an article about "Bugrock" (i.e. cover the topic of the insult), but a redirect is totally fine imo. | violine1101 ^(talk) 12:53, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey. If you can't provide evidence for your claims then I will just have to disregard them. And if you can't explain why something is true or not, then you shouldn't say it at all, especially when you said "And I think it's obvious why" when it's not because I clearly provided evidence that it shows it is true. Frankly, I don't really care if "Bugrock" is true or not, people use as a term for Bedrock Edition and that's end of story (evidenced via Google Trends). Whether or not if its an insult, it's better to remain 👁 Image
 Neutral, because that's when we also introduce other policies like preventing swear words on pages because they can be used as insults (a point that you made and is largely opposed by the majority of the community).

All of your points are more of your personal stance (which can be a good thing!) but its being extremely restrictive to the objective facts of accessibility as you want to take a side in this so-called fandom war about which is better. 👁 Image
Ayaan 18:51, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

not a full reply to you, maybe later. I think we're having a misunderstanding here of what we call a "legitimate term". In my opinion a legitimate term is always an official term, either from the game or used by Mojang, and that's obviously not what Bugrock is. Being searched often on Google may be a legitimate reason to have a redirect, but it's not a legitimate game term. Same goes for why Duck isn't a legitimate term for chicken, but it can still be worth mentioning chicken on the disambig. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
19:05, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm using the phrase "legitimate term" to convey how Bugrock means Bedrock Edition. I agree that it's not an official term too which I've stayed consistent about. Hopefully, that sorts this ordeal. 👁 Image
Ayaan 21:07, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

@Whydeletemyaccs, can you please say why you are reverting the edits to the page? This is turning it into an edit war. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  16:53, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Because if someone will try searching "Bugrock", they expect to be redirected to Bedrock Edition, not to "Infested Block". Whydeletemyaccs/talk/my edits 16:56, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

And it'll delete the {{delete when}} template. --Whydeletemyaccs/talk/my edits 16:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but please provide that reason in your revert summaries. Thank you. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  16:59, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Delete this, minecraft youtubers sucks 186.53.13.125 09:49, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong Support deleting. 👁 Image
Ja17 (talk) 07:06, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Close reasoning doesn't make sense

Redirect to Tutorial:Game terms#Bugrock

This should follow a consensus as it redirects to the Tutorial namespace (which is less restrictive on what it allows as notable). This follows a consistency with other words in Tutorial:Game terms where Noob redirects to the noob heading. 👁 Image
Ayaan 05:40, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
If this page is to be recreated, this is the only place it should go toward. 👁 Image
 Neutral on actually making it.  Nixinova   T   C   05:42, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Context: Bugrock was added in this edit. 👁 Image
Ayaan 05:51, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Shouldn't we wait with adding this before there is a consensus? MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
08:58, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Please go to Tutorial talk:Game terms. We are not here to discuss content on other articles. 👁 Image
Ayaan 09:16, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, the redirect was originally created from SearchDigest so clearly people are looking for information on the topic, and this would succinctly tell people exactly what "Bugrock" is without directly implying Bedrock Edition is buggy (it certainly does have issues but most of my problems with it are related to its intentional design and not bugs, the game has become much more stable since "Bugrock" was at its peak usage) 👁 align=top
Sightnado ( talk / contribs ) 05:55, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose, I don't think Bugrock should be in that page. We as a wiki shouldn't support the use of that term at all. Noting it on such a page is even worse than redirecting it to Bedrock Edition. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
08:56, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Comment Irrelevant, please go to Tutorial talk:Game terms. We are not here to discuss content on other articles. 👁 Image
Ayaan 09:15, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm gonna ignore that. This is completely relevant to this discussion as that section has been created for the sole purpose of re-creating Bugrock, as you know from the Discord. There is no rule discussions on talk pages can't affect other pages, splitting this discussion makes it only more messy. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
09:45, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

We're solely talking about where should Bugrock redirect. You're talking about if Bugrock should exist on Tutorial:Game terms. You are conflating these two proposals as one. 👁 Image
Ayaan 09:52, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I will continue this discussion. The whole point of Tutorial:Game terms is to teach players what words created by the community or in general. By not including Bugrock, it is a negligible act on our part and partakes in censorship as we are not documenting a word because it feels a little bit uncomfortable. 👁 Image
Ayaan 10:02, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Well, then I'm just gonna be rude here: in my opinion we should censor Bugrock, if you want to call it like that. I'll provide an argument later, I don't have much time now. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
11:09, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Just a question, would you also censor swear words on a page if they had it? 👁 Image
Ayaan 11:31, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

If officially sourced: no. In any other case, yes. I think everyone agrees with that. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
12:00, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Btw, I'm calling it "like that" because it is what it is. I'm being blunt because by masquerading the meaning behind eloquent words isn't useful for anyone in this productive conversation.

I'll wait for your other response about the first part of my paragraph 👍 👁 Image
Ayaan 11:57, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

1. It's an unserious term. It's not even slang, it's just unserious and nonsense.

2. Some people may find the term insulting. While it may be mostly used as a joke, some toxic people actually use it to insult people that prefer Bedrock Edition over Java.

3. It's a negative criticism against the biggest part of the Minecraft franchise. We shouldn't censor criticism of course, but such an unserious term does not count as valid criticism for me. We want to support the Minecraft franchise, so we should not support the use of terms that humiliate it.

While a page like Tutorial:Game terms could be the least bad place to put Bugrock in, it still somewhat acts as/can be seen as "supporting" these terms, so we should exclude Bugrock from it. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
12:07, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm going to base my reasoning on this. That section was added conincidently shortly after the original redirect got deleted, and then the discussion to recreate this page came 8 minutes after the term got added to the tutorials page. This is highly unlikely to not be a conincidence. As such I will have to be 👁 Image
 Very skeptical about the concept of recreating this page. I would think otherwise had the term existed on the tutorials page for quite a long time (almost certaintly longer than 8 minutes). As such, I have 👁 Image
 No support to recreate this page, but it seems like I cannot oppose it as on the wiki, as editors should normally assume good faith, so I can only 👁 Image
 Abstain from supporting. Delvin4519 (talk) 20:48, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Tutorial:Game terms lists terms that are often used by the community, and Bugrock is one of them, is it not? "Bugrock" is also described in such a way that does not directly imply whether it is actually an accurate criticism. 👁 align=top
Sightnado ( talk / contribs ) 19:00, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support 89.163.140.206 09:18, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, people who are used to frequently use "Bugrock" may search this term in the wiki, and the page Tutorial:Game terms records its meaning, so "Bugrock" should redirect there. Aed8814 (talk) 09:35, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Huh, such page exists. That wasn't an option before. Yeah sure redirect it there 👁 Image
 Support 👁 Image
QwertyLilley [ talk ] 12:07, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Of course, if there is a section about Bugrock this should redirect to it, so I'd 👁 Image
 Support that. I still oppose having that section there. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
12:10, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support, much better for thw wiki. This will give poeple the info they need when searching for the redirect. And that's what wikis are for, no? -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  16:05, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support | violine1101 ^(talk) 19:25, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support. Makes sense. == Rout | Talk 19:49, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support (wait, something's not right..) 37.163.243.77 19:51, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

You support but the icon you used is 👁 Image
 Oppose? ––– Aed8814 (C | T) 01:51, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Since most people support that the page can be created as a redirect to Tutorial:Game terms#Bugrock, can we create it now? ––– Aed8814 (C | T) 01:53, 27 September 2025 (UTC)