Talk:Flower Pot

Where is this information from? whizzer0 14:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't know. Spencer10APSC 15:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Reddit and twitter. --M0rphzone^(talk) (*How to remove sidebar*) 23:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing that potted saplings don't grow (that could be awkward), but that looks suspiciously like a two-block cactus in the pic. Do cactus and sugar cane grow in pots? (Can sugar cane be potted? Clearly sand isn't an issue, but water might be.) Also, would the cactus damage players or mobs that brush against it? --Mental Mouse 13:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Sugar cane cannot be planted on flower pots. Cactus could grow but it won't damage any mobs near it. Noobnathan 21:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Nothing grows. --Spy227X 21:36, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The crafting recipe is three bricks arranged in a V. I don't know how to add that to the page, someone might want to add it. --Minecraftdino 16:18, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The wiki page of Swamp Hut shows a flower pot with a red mushroom. Should it be added in this page?115.193.129.250 11:24, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Doesnt the fact that it generats in swamp huts make it renewable 74.98.182.183 23:55, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

No, because it only generates once per swamp hut, and there are a limited number of huts. -- Orthotope 09:05, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

As flower pots are not a tile entity, they store their current plant or lack thereof in their damage value. 0 for empty, 1 for red flower, 2 for yellow, etc... I feel this is worth adding to the article. Sokkerking12345 (talk) 13:08, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

When did Acacia and Dark Oak exist in flower pots with damage values? When Damage Values were used instead of title entities, they both did not exist. --KnightMiner ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:13, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Data values are still supported in 1.7, probably to avoid breaking old worlds. For example, /setblock x y z flower_pot 13 will produce a flower pot with a Dark Oak sapling in it. This also creates the corresponding tile entity. Pre-existing flower pots aren't automatically converted to use tile entities until something is placed in them. -- Orthotope^talk 06:52, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok, so I've found an issue with the current Style Guide, which specifies that "[t]he video section contains the video produced on the Minecraft Community Spotlight YouTube Channel by Curse". According to recent rollbacks here, it is implied that the video section may only contain that. However, the Flower Pot video in particular conflicts with a rule seen at least three times in the rules followed by the Minecraft Wiki: number 5 of the Wiki Rules, "Harassment, insults, ad hominem is [sic] not allowed on the wiki"; sentence 1, paragraph 2, heading "Content" of the Minecraft EULA, "... it must not be offensive to people ..."; and bullet 2 of the Essential Requirements in the Mojang Brand Guidelines, "[must] NOT be ... offensive"; in addition to YouTube's bullet 6 of the Don't Cross The Line list in its Community Guidelines, "... we do not permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status and [sic] sexual orientation/gender identity".

I don't have permission to change the actual video linked through /Flower Pot/video, and apparently editing the Video section of /Flower Pot is forbidden as well. This means that, through mcspotlight's monopoly of the wiki videos (which generally would not be bad), the wiki breaks its own rules, and that rule-breaking loop can't be broken without breaking more rules. I attempted to swap out the video for a non-bigoted video of the same nature, but that was rolled back – which is technically correct to do, according to the Style Guide, though it specifies that the article layout (under which the videos rule is specified) can have exceptions.

I, for one, would assume that the Rules take precedence over the Style Guide concerning what is appropriate for use on the wiki. The Style Guide states that its rules can have exceptions, but doesn't explicitly mention the application of the Rules to it. Three further sets of rules, however – two of which are followed by this wiki, per the Rules – support that the video should not be used.

Given all this, what should happen concerning our Rules, the Style Guide, and this page, especially with respect to the video?

Emeryradio (talk) 00:06, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Can you explain what exactly is so offensive about this video? None of the comments on Youtube have mentioned anything problematic about it. -- Orthotope^talk 02:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Only the curse video is allowed on the video section for consistency among pages, to avoid the sections being clogged up with videos and to ensure a high standard of videos. As far as I can see, the Curse videos are not at all biased and do not insult or harass any group of people. The actual linked page is protected to prevent it from being changed. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk
Contribs
Edits 03:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I would assume he is referring to the opening joke about teenagers. --KnightMiner ^(t|c) 16:15, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's the root of the problem. Emeryradio (talk) 03:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I personally do not find the opening joke vary offensive. If you find it so offensive that the video must be removed, please do not replace it with one that is outside of the style guide, just remove it completely for that reason. The main reason the videos are all made by one channel is to prevent people from just adding their own videos because it is "better" then the previous one, and making an exception for a single video on a single page will lead to a lot of trouble. --KnightMiner ^(t|c) 17:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I did that. Thank you.

I'd like to clarify something here, because I've recently been told about my being an "incessant (derogatory word for a homosexual man) prick" about this situation. (Not naming names). Replace the word "teenagers" with almost any other descriptor of a people – say, African-Americans. OH MY GOD, THIS VIDEO IS NOW SO FREAKING RACIST. But as soon as teenagers' lives are called into question, it's all cool – "yes", the average adult would say, "let's continue institutionalising bias against teenagers! We did it to homosexuals and prostitutes, and we can do it again to these powerless little brats as usual." Someone has to realise that this is not okay, and that it's time to stop treating us like an inferior species. Now hop off your chauvinistic bandwagon and learn how to respect. Emeryradio (talk) 23:24, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

I wonder whether anyone can contribute to this page a good description of exactly HOW the flowerpot determines what plant it's holding (as of 1.8). The block state, the block entity, or both? And if both, how, and why not just one or the other? If anyone has an answer that would be great, otherwise I guess I'll put it on my TODO list... – Sealbudsman (Aaron) 👁 Image
^t/_c 19:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Fenhl, I had just checked, the mushroom's still gone from the pot in 1.9.4, it's been missing since 1.8-something. – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 20:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Then maybe we should mention MC-63820 as it's a long-standing bug. —Fenhl 21:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good. That would also go in Mushroom#Obtaining and Generated_structures#Witch_hut. – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 22:11, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

The wiki's become so nested-Matryoshka-doll that I can't figure out how to edit certain tables. If someone can and wants to add this data somewhere, go for it.

I looked at the Block Entity (aka Tile Entity) format for the various flowers you can put in pots. Here they are:

Flower Pot Contents
Contents	Item	Data
empty	air	0
poppy	red_flower	0
blue orchid	red_flower	1
allium	red_flower	2
houstonia	red_flower	3
red tulip	red_flower	4
orange tulip	red_flower	5
white tulip	red_flower	6
pink tulip	red_flower	7
oxeye daisy	red_flower	8
dandelion	yellow_flower	0
red mushroom	red_mushroom	0
brown mushroom	brown_mushroom	0
oak sapling	sapling	0
spruce sapling	sapling	1
birch sapling	sapling	2
jungle sapling	sapling	3
acacia sapling	sapling	4
dark oak sapling	sapling	5
dead bush	deadbush	0
fern	tallgrass	2
cactus	cactus	0

I think it warrants a mention that like Cacti, a Wither Rose placed in a flower pot can't hurt the player or inflict the wither status upon anything. AgentParadox (talk) 13:57, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to add that, but please do it after you verify it. Lê Duy Quang (Make some words | Contributions) at 13h58:50 | 30/11/2018 (UTC)

I just noticed the flower pot has a bottom texture on Java Edition 20w06a. Can anyone else confirm, and, if so, add it to history? I'm not good with tables -FezEmerald (T|C) 00:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

That was a bug fix, which generally aren't listed as an actual change. (also note, potted plants are still affected.) FVbico (talk) 00:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Another thing, shouldn't we change the underside files (like 👁 Image
) to comply with the style guide? (ie: Potted Cactus (under) JE5)? -FezEmerald (Talk to me|See what I've been up to) 03:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Can someone please add renders of azalea bushes and their flowering veriant? Pi31-dot (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

In 1.19.4-pre2, the texture of cherry sapling was changed, so does that mean the texture of potted cherry sapling was also changed? I'm not 100% sure the texture of potted cherry sapling was changed or not. 👁 Image
Brain180 "click here to talk" 12:14, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Most of the plants/fungi in the pot have a cross-shaped part of their design, like the flowers. This cross-shaped design on the wiki isn't rendered like most other blocks, but the flowers in the pot are. See the difference in these images:

👁 Image
👁 Image

The flower in pot looks a bit distorted, and we don't have a clear idea of ​​what it actually looks like in the pot. Basically, we have information about the pot's shape, but we'll lose information about the flower itself, even though the pot is exactly the same in all cases, and we already have a rendering of it empty. For cases like the cactus, which doesn't use cross-shape, the current rendering is fine.

This further impacts the Java Edition removed blocks/Data variants page, where we don't have much of an idea of ​​what the cross-shaped blocks look like because, unlike the flowers, there's no rendering at a good angle of them (outside the pot). Aloi4 (talk) 21:39, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

The renders for cross models like non-potted flowers, cobwebs etc are intentionally taken from a non-standard angle to demonstrate their cross shape, otherwise they would appear as a single slightly stretched plane. The current flower pot renders are correct as they are taken from the standard point of view and are consistent with empty flower pot and non-cross model potted plants. I think both non-potted and potted plants are fine as they are currently. --Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 23:35, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

The issue is that the rendering of the plants in the pot isn't showing their cross shape on top of the pot. It shows the pot correctly, but not the flower. This doesn't make much sense, since someone wanting to see a rendering of a specific flower in the pot wouldn't want to only look at the side of the pot, which they can already see in the rendering of the empty pot.

It's precisely because plants are rendered in a different way to demonstrate their cross shape that plants in pots should also be rendered that way. Or at least have both renderings. Aloi4 (talk) 23:43, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

It's possible something similar could be done with other blocks, but in their case, two renderings might be good. So far, I've only been able to think of (all) lanterns and calibrated sculk sensor, but there must be other cases of mixed models. Aloi4 (talk) 23:56, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Hanging signs too (even from the current rendering, it seems that it has no connection to the top part) Aloi4 (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://minecraft.wiki/w/Talk:Flower_Pot?oldid=3503241"