Talk:Firefly (mob)

Unprotect the page

Hitbox size

Froglights?

Merge with Firefly Bush

Fireflies are technically in the game now and people searching for "firefly" are probably going to look for the block and its associated particle effect that exist in-game. All the information related to the scrapped mob can be described in a paragraph within the History section of Firefly Bush.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 22:19, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Edit: alternatively, this page can be moved to "Firefly (mob)", and in turn "Firefly" would become a redirect to "Firefly Bush". I simply think it would be beneficial for readers who search for "firefly" to be redirected to the actual implementation of fireflies.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 22:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

The Firefly mob is now in the game as firefly particles, not as the firefly bush. The firefly bush is simply what emits the Firefly particles. Other than that clarification, I agree.Drour1234 (talk) 22:34, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I don’t know, the firefly bush is a pretty distinct feature from old fireflies, I think it’s a useful page to have still. I’d rather we just move “Firefly” to “Firefly (mob)”, turning “Firefly” into a redirect to “Firefly Bush” so users are never accidentally taken to the scrapped mob page. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
22:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Agree with Harristic. Rogerio980Pizzaa (talk) 22:47, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I’m conflicted. There’s not really any other feature like this. Obviously the bush is how they’re implementing fireflies, but it doesn’t use any of the existing code or properties. It’s not an iteration of the bush, doesn’t even use the same sprite. In theory they could still add a separate firefly mob. Realshow19 (talk) 22:47, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

That is also an option I would support. As long as players who search for "firefly" are redirected to the tangible, upcoming implementation of fireflies, it's fine to me.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 22:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

We could just make this page about the particle, not the mob.Drour1234 (talk) 22:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

That would mean splitting all particles into their own pages, that would be insane. Realshow19 (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't think "Firefly" should redirect to "Firefly Bush". It would add an unnecessary disambiguation to the title of "Firefly (mob)" in favor of not even an alias but just a partial title match redirect. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I think it's necessary. A user that searches for fireflies should be taken to the firefly feature that exists in the game, not the firefly feature from years ago that was scrapped. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
23:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

In that case Iceologer, Moobloom and Penguin would need to redirect to the add-on counterparts as well. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 23:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't think the general public would expect themselves to stumble on an old, unimplemented feature when they searched for fireflies. It should definitely get redirected into firefly bush. – ItsPlantseed ⟨₰|₢⟩ 23:37, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

This article is not very useful to have. I agree with the others that it should just redirect to firefly bush and put all this information into the History section, we should prioritize actual implemented features rather than the ones that never make it to the public. – ItsPlantseed ⟨₰|₢⟩ 23:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

What if the page redirects to Firefly (disambiguation) instead?Drour1234 (talk)< – Undated comment added at 23:40, 29 January 2025 (UTC). Please sign comments with ~~~~

I think the merge into Firefly Bush would be a good solution here and follow the similar precedent of Pigman. We also wouldn't need Firefly (disambiguation) anymore after the merge. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Well with pigmen, there was only ever one mob. Zombified piglins were just a rename and a slight redesign. Fireflies were originally a mob, we have builds with that version, and now they’re a particle for some bush with no behavior, let alone any retained features of the mob. I don’t think it’s really comparable. Realshow19 (talk) 23:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not referring to the Zombie Pigman, but the Pigman who, like the firefly, was never fully implemented. Only years later they got added as Piglin. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

My bad, though there’s still a difference there. Pigmen were exclusively an idea, if they were ever in a build we don’t have it. The firefly mob is technically distinct from the particle, I think at the very least the pages should be separate. Indifferent towards the name, but the mob isn’t a version of the block. Realshow19 (talk) 00:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

The Pigman had a texture in the game for over 2 years. There also was apparently some coding work done, though it doesn't seem to have ever been in any snapshot or release. But generally this seems quite similar to the firefly, who had some code mentions but was never fully added in any version. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 00:17, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

We still will need the Disambig page because of MCD:Firefly and Firebugs.Drour1234 (talk) 01:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Those could be list just using {{about}} or similar. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 01:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose - No reason to merge two essentially unrelated topics. The current Firefly should be moved to something like Firefly (Minecraft Live 2021) and Firefly should redirect to Firefly Bush since that is where the vast majority of people want to end up. Mudscape 👁 Image
talk 00:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support of this name change to Firefly (Minecraft Live 2021) 👁 Image
Ayaan 21:10, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

I agree. Moving Firefly to Firefly (mob) and having Firefly be a redirect to Firefly Bush seems like an ideal is something I support PlutonPerson (talk) 06:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I support harri's and Mudscape's solutions here – this version of firefly holds enough historical significance not to be merged, but firefly should be redirected to point to the "current" version. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose merging, 👁 Image
 Support rename — The current implementation of fireflies is quite different from what was suggested on Minecraft Live, and apparently the “old” firefly had some bits of code that made it to Bedrock Edition builds, which elevates it above Minecraft Live mobs that didn’t make it yet, like iceologers. BabylonAS 08:55, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Support "Firefly (mob)" rename and redirect from the primary topic, oppose merge. These are different concepts.  Nixinova   T   C   08:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. Firefly as a mob isn't in any way similar to firefly as a bush.--Arina (she/her) 09:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose merging and 👁 Image
 Support rename. — 3A |  T  C  09:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I 👁 Image
 Support merging.Drour1234 (talk) 11:51, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Shouldn't this page instead be a redirect to the particles page, as fireflies are particles? The firefly bush is a different feature, fireflies themselves were implemented as particles, which should be reflected. SeaOfPixels (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Well the point is that fireflies were originally a mob, there’s information about that version on the page. I don’t think anything similar has ever happened before, the particle isn’t an iteration of the mob, and certainly not the bush. It’s a concession of the concept. Realshow19 (talk) 16:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I 👁 Image
 Agree that this should be merged into the Firefly Bush page. While the Firefly mob did exist, it render like a particle and didn't have much more bahvior than one. I believe those who are saying that the mob was its own thing miss the point that, besides the texture being very slightly different, this is effectively the same feature gameplay-wise. The community already considers "fireflies" added. It would also be useful to have all this history on the firefly bush page. Perhaps the Firefly Bush page could have a subsection about the particle, rather than an entire page for the particle itself as someone suggested, and "Firefly" could redirect one directly to there. Feranogame (talk) 20:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

The more I think about this the less I want this to be merged with firefly bush. This page is detailed enough that it can stand on its own, instead of being trimmed down and forced into those dang history tables... however, it probably wouldn't be as bad if we stopped using tables for certain things (wink wink). I hereby declare my 👁 Image
 soft opposition to the merge.

However, I still think that it would be beneficial for the large majority of readers to be redirected to the firefly implementation that actually exists in-game if they search for "firefly". After being talked about for years, fireflies are finally in the game. As a particle effect, tied to a specific block, but they exist in the game now, and concrete, tangible features should always take precedence over scrapped implementations, removed features, april fools' jokes etc. So I 👁 Image
 strongly support moving this to "Firefly (mob)" or something similar, and redirecting "Firefly" to Firefly Bush.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 22:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I 👁 Image
 Oppose merging, but 👁 Image
 Support renaming into "Firefly (mob)". The article itself has enough information to stand on its own and just cramping it into the firefly bush article wouldn't achieve anything but make the information harder to find and read through. | violine1101 ^(talk) 00:05, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps we could redirect “Firefly” to “Firefly Bush” and turn this page into a subpage (“Firefly Bush/Minecraft Live 2021”). Merging the pages outright would make it harder to find information on the original fireflies but they’re so closely related that they should be kept together. GoldJackal (talk) 04:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

I 👁 Image
 Support renaming into Firefly (mob), and propose making Firefly a redirect to the particles page. SeaOfPixels (talk) 17:05, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Personally I don't think redirecting to the particle list would be useful. Not only it's split between Java and Bedrock, meaning that it would redirect to a disambiguation page, but those pages are also pretty technical and not very useful to the average player. The firefly particle effect is heavily tied to the block and its functionality is described in detail in the firefly bush page.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 17:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure "Firefly (mob)" should be the new title. It might defeat the purpose, as someone searching for Firefly will see results for a bush and a mob, and they might think the mob is what they're looking for, so they'll end up going there first anyways. UltraUsurper (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

I 👁 Image
 Support the idea of moving the firefly page to firefly (mob). Probably a temporary redirect to the bush? ESTEBAN1303YT (talk) 19:24, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Feedback (Thu, 13 Mar 2025 19:35:36 UTC)

Feedback (Sat, 15 Mar 2025 14:01:08 UTC)

Another merge request.