Talk:Lava Spawner

I don't get the point of this block. Why not just make lava behave like water, in which two water source blocks adjacent to an empty block create another water source block? Currently lava isn't renewable this way. ~ Amatulic (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

It's a feature that has since been removed. I so suggest merging it to the lava page as part of the history section.--skylord_wars (talk) 04:38, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

If it was referred to as the "volcano" block by Notch, would that not be its official name? is there a way for anyone to determine the internal name of it in recent years (or does that even matter for the sake of this topic) Kayninedee (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I think its a more corret name,if notch called it this way.I will edit it. Frantastico2014 (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

The name of the class that contains code for both this and the water spawner is SpringTile (this is visible by decompiling Beta 1.2_02 (20110517), which is unobfuscated and contains unused classes that were normally removed in regular versions). "Water Spring" and "Lava Spring" could work as less conjectural names, but they could potentially be ambiguous as springs are a terrain feature in current versions. I'm not a fan of "volcano block" and - even worse - "item spawner block" as they are very unclear and weren't used in-game anyway. When it comes to features like this that never had in-game names, I think picking descriptive albeit conjectural names is better for readers than sticking with obscure names used only once.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 18:34, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I think that Lava (block) and Water (block) would be the best possible conjecture names.Drour1234 (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

No, regular water and lava are already blocks. Those names would be misleading. Personally I think the current names are perfectly fine.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 00:17, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

I think “water spawner” works because it is a name that was at one time used by Notch. On the other hand, we could merge Water Spawner and Lava Spawner into item spawner block.Drour1234 (talk) 01:13, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

There's no need to merge these into a single page and "item spawner block" is a terrible, unclear and misleading name.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 01:27, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

There's no need for it to be in title case then, right?  Nixinova  T ⁄ C  00:21, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

It should be in title case according to MCW:TITLE ("If a feature has neither a display name nor an ID, it should follow the same naming as other similar articles" i.e. block articles).--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 01:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

I suppose keeping this page at lava spawner can be justified by water spawner being a term used by Notch at one point. Nonetheless, I do think these pages should be lowercase because they are never referred to in uppercase.Drour1234 (talk) 03:25, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

In the Indev level format specification, Notch refers to the water spawner as an "infinite water source", so this is probably the best non-conjectural name we can have for that block (certainly better than "item spawner block"). This was posted one day before the lava spawner block was introduced, so it's not listed there. I think we can rename water spawner (back) to "Infinite Water Source", and lava spawner to "Infinite Lava Source" (which while still conjectural, it would be consistent with the water block and wouldn't be as unclear as "volcano block").--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 16:47, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
, should work.  Nixinova  T ⁄ C  00:47, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support ~2026-BearHillsFlower15324 (talk) 01:26, 4 June 2026 (UTC)