Talk:Minecraft Live 2024

Why is this page categorized as part of the 15th anniversary? Are there any hints obvious enough or is this category covering every event happening in 2024? I mean the anniversary activities were virtually over by the end of this summer I guess. SorajimaAsugawa (talk) 14:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

The end of the cinematic has the 15th aniversary outro. 👁 Image
(talk|contributions) 14:42, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Not to mention it shares an aesthetic with the anniversary, just with added red cubes. The renders of Sunny and Efe on the website are directly taken from that campaign. Realshow19 (talk) 14:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

The reason given in the above response feels like a bit of a stretch to me for now. A lot of things that's come out since the date of the anniversary have that 15 branding someplace but I don't feel that makes them relevant to the 15th anniversary. Not sure exactly what "that website" is, but without seeing it, assets that are renders are just assets and not indicative of anything, assets are reused for things all the time. I've looked at the YouTube video, as well as the links on this page and also minecraft.net/live and see nothing of the sort. It's hard to refer to something so vague when it's not cited. Though I'm not ruling out that the event might fall into this category, currently it's hard to tell for sure since it hasn't happened yet. I feel the category should be removed and only put back after LIVE ends if it is indeed shown to be some part of the 15 anniversary celebration. -BrianGLHF (talk) 17:42, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree. In the end the category is for things directly associated with the 15th anniversary event. I don't think this Minecraft Live, which happens every year, applies. The 15 branding has been used ever since the 15th anniversary event in all YouTube videos regardless of whether they have anything to do with the anniversary or not, so if we were to go by that criterion I don't think the category would be useful. | violine1101 ^(talk) 17:54, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 I agree 👁 Image
(talk|contributions) 18:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Done I've removed the "15th anniversary" category from this page since there's currently no indication that the event will have any connection with the 15th anniversary itself. However, this category could be added back if the event itself ends up featuring a lot of 15th anniversary topics/themes; but we currently don't know if it will. | violine1101 ^(talk) 21:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

On this archived page (https://archive.ph/kqV48) and this archived page (https://web.archive.org/web/20240924180401/https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/live) it says:
"Watch the highlights Get the latest and greatest news from this year’s show: A first look at the pale garden and its hostile mob—the creaking, insight into bundles and Hardcore mode, and exclusive info on A Minecraft Movie and our upcoming immersive experience, Minecraft Experience: Villager Rescue."
Should this be added with a source to one of the archives? - Sebbog (talk) 21:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Leaks should not be added to the wiki. 👁 Image
(talk|contributions) 21:57, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

There is nothing in the rules saying that we can't add leaks to the wiki. If that wasn't enough, I have evidence that suggests that content from leaks is completely okay on this wiki if they are from an official source or build.

1. The wiki has pages mentioning leaked Bedrock development/marketplace builds that the public was never supposed to have. On the Reinforced Deepslate page under the trivia section, there is a picture of an unused reinforced deepslate type that has a hole at the top. That came from one of those leaked Bedrock development/marketplace builds. There's more though. The build called that block "Sculk Portal." This confirms that the structure in the deep dark with the reinforced deepslate in it is indeed a portal. The list of historical block textures page shows the cut texture with that name.

2. September 9, 2011: When a beta build for the Adventure Update was accidentally made public on September 9, 2011 (It was always called Beta 1.8 Pre-release) on assets.minecraft.net, the Ender Pearl page was made, the crafting recipe for Glass Panes was added, and information was added to the Enderman page saying that they sounded like zombies in the leak (They originally used zombie sounds as a placeholder). This was all done before Notch made his tweet approving of the leak at 22:04 UTC. After that, Mojang decided that they would intentionally release pre-releases to the public. That is the story of why Mojang decided to start releasing beta builds to the public for testing. Anyways, the point was that people posted things from the leak before anyone from Mojang approved of it.

3. March 15, 2024, UTC: The 15th anniversary cape was leaked, and it was added to the Cape page as the "creeper cape" before it was announced. It was there for a few weeks before the announcement and no one removed it. Because no one removed it, this seems to be proof that leaks are allowed on the wiki.

4. Mojang decided to cut ties with the wiki a few years ago. They have no control over this wiki, and they therefore can't control what we put here.

All the information I have indicates that content from leaks are okay on the wiki.

So, it is completely okay to add it at this time. Minermatt122514 (talk) 00:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

No, it is absolutely not OK to add this information to the wiki. Furthermore, Mojang can still file DMCA notices over information that cannot be posted to the wiki. BDJP ^(t|c) 01:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agreed Realshow19 (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agreed Thank you for clarifying this. Besides, I'm not sure now if that leak was legit or if Mojang did that to troll people. I guess we will find out on the 28th. Minermatt122514 (talk) 07:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I suspect that Mojang can’t DMCA information that they themselves publicly released for people to see. My suspicion is largely proven by the fact that they have not done take-downs of people posting this content, whereas they did take-downs for the movie leaks and scrapped sniffer plant leak. However, I don’t think we should put this information on this wiki, not because legality issues, but just to be decent. Mojang obviously didn’t intend this to get out there, and I just don’t think we should spoil people. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
12:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The problem with documenting leaks isn’t just the matter of privacy or NDAs, it’s the fact we don’t have access to the content. As of now we have no clue what this new content entails, only what a fraction of it is called. However we write about it could very easily be wrong, we can’t know if the description in the leak is misleading itself until Live actually happens. What you’re left with is a vacant, unhelpful list of names that doesn’t need to be there. Realshow19 (talk) 00:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I do not have an opinion on whether the leak should be added or not, but regardless it is important too say against wiki guidelines.

Furthermore, it will not be taken down by anyone as it is publicly available information obtained entirely legally. This should not be an argument.

If it is added in the end, I would advocate for it being in a collapsed section. –MetalManeMc, 👁 Image
French👁 Image
Wiki admin (Talk to me!👁 Image
) 09:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support to add said information. I don't know why we are holding back on this. I understand that some people may be concerned over Mojang being not happy, but this information has been all over Reddit, Twitter, etc. Given that Mojang hasn't taken down anyone on other platforms, it's safe to assume that we won't get DMCA for this. Besides, the words "pale garden" and "creaking" are not copyrightable. Therefore, there's no real ground Mojang can possibly issue a takedown for. Now that Mojang is actively teasing about the new additions, the amount of information that could be inferred is probably enough to warrant pages.

I would like to reiterate that this does not have anything to do with so-called "leaks". This is not a leak. A leak is when some information prematurely come out because there has been an insider who are obligated to not disclose it break their obligation. The wiki does not tolerate leaks, because it is inherently not-at-all verifiable. However, in this case, there is no doubt in whether the information is true, because it comes straight from Mojang. Mojang f-ed up by putting up the wrong page on their website. It's caught by the Wayback Machine. The information is now of public knowledge. Nothing illegal or scandalous happens here. It does not matter whether Mojang intended to do this – they've done it anyway, and information wants to be free. GIM Dianliang233 T C 08:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Changing my mind to 👁 Image
 Support documenting them. Mojang cannot and will not do take-downs on these “leaks”, they released the information publicly, and now they are teasing these “leaked” features on social media. We may as well give ourselves a head start in traffic by getting the pages made early. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
10:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support documenting this information for the reasons above. It's being posted on all other platforms without Mojang taking down anything. It's also been posted about by multiple Minecraft partner YouTubers, so it seems unlikely that Mojang is opposed to anyone documenting this info. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 10:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support documenting them before Minecraft Live. In addition to the points made above, there are also multiple secondary sources from news sites that are covering this news. — Misode (talk) 11:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support documenting information that is unquestionably accurate/trustworthy even if not extensive (which minecraft.net accidental publishing of information is). This is because of the following reasons:

• Game publisher/developer does not get to dictate the contents of a community wiki that minecraft.wiki is. We, as a community creating a widely available encyclopedia for Minecraft community are here to describe facts and events related to the game that are of interest to the reader. This is the point of encyclopedias. "Leaks" such as this one are of interest to the greater Minecraft community and can be covered on basis of factual events happening that we have secondary sources (including the archive link above) to confirm.
• People opposing describing this information did not cite what legal basis would Mojang have to sue anyone for covering those facts. You cannot copyright ideas, and just because some information got public on accident, doesn't make it legally any different from other types of information we have already on the wiki. As long as we don't use Mojang's copyrighted assets I don't see how coverage of this information could be legally challenged unless we are talking about SLAPP suits which I'd hope Mojang does not engage in - and even those have no legal basis. Even logically, if covering those so called "leaks" was illegal, gaming journalists would get sued for that on daily basis - they aren't. Because there is no legal reason game companies can go after people who didn't sign an NDA.
• Again, we do not serve as Mojang's marketing department but as a source of information for Minecraft fans/players. While we should absolutely try our best to have best relationship with Mojang, our priority in how the encyclopedia works is to fulfill our duties in describing facts and happenings. Censoring information goes against this goal of the wikis. Not describing this leak will be a disservice to the Minecraft community and will put into question neutrality of minecraft.wiki community in covering things related to Minecraft by posing a question of conflict of interest of its administrators by being complicit in removing "potentially unfavorable for Mojang" information.

If anyone is seriously worried, describe the events as a matter of fact - this and that has been published on minecraft.net at that time and was promptly removed, but do not censor the contents of a wiki citing questionable legal theories of "copyrightability" of feature names... Frisk (talk) 12:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support per the points made by other users, especially Frisk and Minermatt122514. We do already document certain things that were not meant to be public (i.e. Java versions such as Beta 1.2_02 (20110517), Beta 1.6 Test Build 3, tominecon.zip, Combat Test 8), and this is just some information Mojang themselves accidentally(?) posted too early, not a leak caused by an NDA violation or a malicious data breach. Overall I think it's important we maintain editorial independence.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 12:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Weak support – I don't think there's a legal reason for us not to be documenting these contents; the main reason for not documenting it on the wiki would be spoilers. Personally I dislike spoilers, but Mojang has now released proper teasers on social media and I'd assume that we haven't seen everything yet. It's also good to have something to build off of once we get more details at Minecraft Live, so that we can add all the details immediately to the wiki. However, I'd appreciate if there would be a spoiler warning on the "leaked" content for readers who'd prefer not to be spoiled, until Minecraft Live. | violine1101 ^(talk) 12:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Neutral on this issue. I was previously in support in understanding of BDJP's actions of deleting the "leaked" information within short notice of the pages being made, but with this discussion shifted from the discord to on the wiki itself, it provides more clarity on what the editors want from the wiki administration. Several issues:

1. The wiki rules may need clarification regarding this issue. Upon quick conclusion of this discussion (given the desire for creating pages early), the wiki rules may need updating to clarify what is allowed and isn't to avoid ambiguity, especially to ensure wiki administration complies with the discussion's concensus.
2. The issue of re: spoliers. It is preferable to include the spoiler banner at the top of the page, like with the end poem, etc., etc., as this "leak" probably may not have been intended to get out early. It also may be preferable to simply not link to these pages from other articles on the wiki until after Minecraft LIVE, that way readers who do not want spoilers, avoid the issue of clicking the wikilinks, if the wikilinks are not made to these dedicated pages until after the LIVE show has ended. Wiki editors should simply refrain from directly wikitext linking to the dedicated pages from other wiki articles until after the event.
3. It may still be acceptable to put the pages within mainspace, or maybe a MCW:Sandbox/subpage if it is decided the pages don't belong on mainspace ahead of the event. However, it should be noted that putting the dedicated pages in the mainspace is preferable since search engines will know where the pages will be indexed at properly, and will allow readers and IP editors, who search for the pages, can find the pages.
4. When this discussion approaches a concensus, wiki administration, especially members directly responsible for deleting the "leaked" information, should be informed of this discussion's consensus on the issue. This avoids repeated deletion of pages even after the wiki agreed on a concensus not to delete the pages.

Delvin4519 (talk) 13:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

About the issue of needing to clarify rules, nothing needs clarifying:

1. Rule #4 of MCW:N#General - The features have been officially announced by Mojang Studios, no matter Mojang's intention, so this doesn't need changing.
2. Rule #5 of MCW:N#Community - The articles simply don't break any rules to my knowledge
3. Rule #5.4 of MCW:N#Community - The articles don't fit any description from this rule

- Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
14:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I've added the information to Minecraft Live 2024, and created Creaking and Pale Garden. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
13:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

While I am neutral on adding this information, it doesn’t seem like a consensus has been reached. This discussion has been opened for less than 36 hours. -BrianGLHF (talk) 16:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

It's hasty, but I think it's fine because we've strongly established that this information is not a true leak (therefore violates no rules) and prevented spoilers with the spoiler warning template and collapsing information, therefore addressed the main concerns of adding the information. This discussion has also had significant participation already with extensive reasoning on the supporting side with little to no reasoning that hasn't been addressed on the opposing side. That said, in a typical scenario this discussion would stay open longer, but the outcome of this discussion will be largely inconsequential in less than two days. Considering all that I think it's fine to go through with it now. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
18:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Why is "Creaking" already in the entities navbox? I thought in discord it was suggested to not link to the pages until Minecraft LIVE itself to avoid spoilers. From discord and I quote from another user "One solution could be creating the pages but just, not linking them on other pages So if someone knows the mob name and searches it they’ll get the page But if they never search it they’ll never find it". For this reason that is why I never switched to support, only neutral. Delvin4519 (talk) 19:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

That suggestion should also have been made on wiki. - Sebbog (talk) 19:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I already suggested it as #2 in my original reply about spoilers. Both the spoiler banner notice and refraining from adding wikilinks are complementary. Delvin4519 (talk) 19:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Removed it. 👁 Image
(talk|contributions) 19:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I think we should only link it in places that are also spoiler-protected. For example, the News section of this page is what I'd call spoiler-protected, so it's no problem to link the Creaking there. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
19:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I thought we established that putting leaked stuff on this wiki was okay. Then, my images were deleted for a "copyright violation." What copyright violation? I credited the images with the proper license. I already made my points about this earlier. Also, as Capopanzo pointed out yesterday, this wiki has documented and provided download links to builds that were never supposed to be public. Please explain to the MCW community how doing this is okay, but uploading these pictures isn't. Minermatt122514 (talk) 20:43, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

They're different cases. The name leaks were published by Mojang on their official website, Mojang themselves released that information. The leaks you're trying to add are from a person breaking their NDA, essentially the same as Badgerman's scrapped sniffer plant leaks (which Mojang did strike down). Also, even if we think the leak is likely to be real, there is no hard confirmation that it is, thus there is no valid source. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
20:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Something else that I want to know. The leaker claims to be a Minecraft Wiki editor in their X/Twitter bio. If that is the case, then what is their username here? Minermatt122514 (talk) 20:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

If their Twitter name isn't the same/similar to their wiki name I don't think we'll know. Though, could you link their account? I haven't seen it. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
20:52, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Sure: https://x.com/Funny_Anar Minermatt122514 (talk) 20:53, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I did find an account registered on the wiki named Funny Anar. But they haven't done anything. Minermatt122514 (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Actually, that is their old account. Their current account is FunnyAnarr33. Minermatt122514 (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, he isn't the source of the leaks, he just reposted them. The original source is a now-deleted reddit post. - Harristic / Talk 👁 Image
20:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Just as a sidenote, that account is not the orignial poster of the leaks. The original source were from a now deleted twitter account and reddit post. -- 👁 Image
MarkusRost (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Will they mention update 1.22? Zachaybarb (talk) 20:03, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Minecraft Live 2024 already happened, and there was no explicit mention of 1.22. Only details on upcoming drops were given, alongside other information about other projects. Jurta (talk) 20:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)