Talk:Mineshaft

By testing a single biome world of only deep dark, I found out that mineshafts do not generate in deep dark biomes. Please someone confirm for bedrock edition Manjuew (talk) 17:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Do you guys think it's notable as a trivia that mineshafts are the most common generated structure in Minecraft? I mean geodes and monster rooms are more common but they're structure-like features, not structures. Also if I like to cite this, should I use the Chunkbase website as a citation or should I use something else? Windwend (talk) 02:19, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

I thought village buildings are more common. In any case, if it's true, it would deserve a mention in the "Natural generation" section.

Whether to cite Chunkbase depends on the context. If you're just doing visual inspection of maps, you can't draw a statistically valid conclusion. You'd need to examine the code or do some data mining of world databases to reach a conclusion. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:01, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Well I'm not very good at examining the code or doing data mining. I indeed reached my conclusion after reviewing Chunkbase, but I think it is clear enough that Mineshafts are more common than any other structure in Minecraft. If you could suggest me some ways I can examine the code or databases I would appreciate that. Windwend (talk) 03:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Based on my own examination of chunkbase, I guess it's OK to add the statement. You're right that geodes are way more common than mineshafts, but as you pointed out they are structure-like features. My initial comment about village buildings being more common was due to my own misunderstanding of what you meant by "structure"; the village is the structure, not the buildings, and villages are less common.

This shouldn't be trivia, however. A single sentence in the generation section is enough.

There are some articles that show a distribution graph of the probability of a structure or feature occurring as a function of depth. This might be useful to add also. I think that information is derived from analysis of Java Edition worlds, and I don't know how to do that. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

I added a message box suggesting that. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 10:10, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Opposed. Badlands variant generates nothing more than regular variant. Hxy123abc (talk) 02:34, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

hmm... personally i don't think splitting the badlands mineshaft is as justifiable as splitting the village variants. it's purely a palette swap unlike the village variants which have wholly unique components, and its loot table is also the same mariberry-hearn! (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree == Rout | Talk 11:13, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose splitting mesa mineshafts as they are just a visual variant. The loot and the structure itself are identical.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 02:40, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose. The village variants differ from each other, but the mineshaft variants do not. 👁 Image
Dazzle ^{[ talk | edits ]} 21:16, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose Villages are entirely differnt structures, and if it was split, what would keep it from being a copy-paste of the other page aside from history. CrockCraftMC (talk) 19:21, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

After a few days, if the consensus stays as is, I'll resolve this feedback and remove the {{split}}. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 19:28, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose not enough differences to split the page. –LauraFi - talk 20:09, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

The statement is still correct. Trial spawners are different from monster spawners. BDJP ^(t|c) 18:52, 18 January 2026 (UTC)