Talk:Stained Terracotta

Crafting recipe

Should this be merged with the Hardened Clay article?

Separated from the "Hardened Clay" page.

Proposed change in "Usage" paragraph.

Merge back

The split of the Hardened Clay article by Screenbones 1 year ago was made unilaterally, against consensus, and with no applicable arguments (data values don't really matter for players, as does location in Creative mode inventory). I propose re-merging the articles. — 👁 Image
NickTheRed37 (talk|contributions) 09:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

The pages were separated by Screenbones, then reverted. See Special:Diff/662053 and Special:Diff/662126. Later they were separated again by Goandgoo. 👁 Image
 Neutral. –LauraFi - talk 12:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Under what consensus Goandgoo re-split them? — 👁 Image
NickTheRed37 (talk|contributions) 12:42, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't know. –LauraFi - talk 12:52, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Well then, so we have to search it... — 👁 Image
NickTheRed37 (talk|contributions) 12:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't find any in article talk pages and Minecraft Wiki talk pages. In a discussion about this with GreenStone on IRC, he concluded that no consensus to re-split articles was ever made. — 👁 Image
NickTheRed37 (talk|contributions) 13:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Apologies, back then the wiki did not have this merge/split process as established. I must have seen the earlier split and wanted to finish the split (or something like that - looking at those edits I can't remember). Funnily enough though, in the topic above, I give my opinion that the pages should be merged. That is my current decision - 👁 Image
 Agree –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk
Contribs 00:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

My opinion is that stained clay is the same hardened clay, just recolored (by dyes or otherwise). — 👁 Image
NickTheRed37 (talk|contributions) 13:51, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree 71.212.10.80 16:49, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Honestly , it should be that clay and hardened clay should be merged while stained clay is separated. 👁 Image
 Other 98.182.58.147 14:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Can you please explain why should it be that way? — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I 👁 Image
 oppose the anon's proposal (clay and hardened clay are too different IMO) and 👁 Image
 agree with merging Stained Clay and Hardened Clay. --GreenStone (talk) 14:40, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Just an argument against merging: The reader will probably be confused if they finds stained clay and hardened clay on the same page. Their textures are not as different enough to merge the two pages. Also, how do you want to name the page? And why do you want to merge all pages? Are the next pages you want to merge wood and wood planks just because they're both wooden? | violine1101^(Talk) 16:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

The reader will probably be confused if they finds stained clay and hardened clay on the same page is speculation. You can't read readers' minds. Their textures are not as different enough to merge the two pages: you reduce the list of merge/split choice criteria to textures? What about obtaining and usage similarities? Also, how do you want to name the page? Hardened Clay. Stained clay is essentially stained hardened clay, and this is stated in the article. And why do you want to merge all pages? Are the next pages you want to merge wood and wood planks just because they're both wooden? Are you talking to NickTheRed37? You might want to specify that explicitly. --GreenStone (talk) 16:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that the merging could create confusion because hardened clay and stained (hardened) clay aren't the same blocks although the both blocks are very similar. I doubt it would be reasonable for most readers so a merge would potentially be counterproductive. Also, in my last sentence, I didn't talk to anybody. It's a general question: Why have pages to be merged? In some cases, I can understand why they were merged but I don't think it's always reasonable to merge pages. I hyperbolized a bit saying that wood and wood planks could be merged, but I generally said what I wanted to say - I'm 👁 Image
 Neutral in this discussion although I don't really feel confident about this merge suggestion. Also I'm sorry for my previous post which was a bit rude. | violine1101^(Talk) 22:13, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose Clay and hardened clay are mined differently and are used differently. 71.212.10.80 22:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree: The pages could easily be merged under the hardened clay title, as both have the same usage and similar obtaining (both generate in mesas, one can be crafted, the other smelted), similar to the case of wool. They also both have just about the same usage, which is a colored durable building block. –KnightMiner ^t/_c 19:15, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree. –LauraFi - talk 19:38, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree too. – Sealbudsman (Aaron) 👁 Image
^t/_c 01:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

I also 👁 Image
 Agree. BDJP ^(t|c) 02:27, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Agree. -Mikazukinoyaiba 17:19, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Let's wait Majr, Orthotope and Dinoguy1000. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 06:16, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

— Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 06:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support a merge of Hardened Clay and Stained Clay. And while I'm here, I would like to note that while it is good to feel out the possibility of merging similar cases (I wholeheartedly support any proposal to merge the glass types as mentioned in GreenStone's IRC comment above), this discussion is ultimately specifically about merging these two pages, and not about merging any others, so it's inappropriate to propose unrelated merges here (speaking specifically to the anon who proposed instead merging Clay and Hardened Clay). 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 09:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose purely on the basis that there would be 17 inv images in the infobox and it would look awful. :( –Majr ᐸ Talk
Contribs 08:57, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

This is a limitation in the infobox module, and it can be fixed by implementing separators, which is a simple thing. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:02, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

It is a limitation in the fact that 17 can't be evenly split. –Majr ᐸ Talk
Contribs 08:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Then... maybe implement half-shift? But we shouldn't discuss the module, we should discuss articles. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Nick, it seems as if most people are agreeing to the concept behind the merge, but this technical issue with the infobox can't simply be discounted - it is quite a major issue which needs consideration. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk
Contribs 08:58, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Let's move to Module talk:Infobox for a while then. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:02, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Actually, it's not that bad. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Looks alright in mobile, but on PC it has 2 rows of 8 and 1 row of 1 on the bottom. My opinion is ideally that 1 row of 1 would be on top, and normal hard clay would be there, and stained clay would be the 16 below. – Sealbudsman (Aaron) 👁 Image
^t/_c 12:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I am the anon who said that clay and hardened clay should be merged. I said that to show how biased you are. You have mixed opinions about stained and hardened clay. But you all oppose merging hardened clay and regular clay. Both merges are practically the same. For that matter , you want to merge stained clay and hardened clay. That is like my suggestion. For that matter , that is like merging cactus and lapis lazuli ore. Both you smelt to get a dye. That is obviously totally wrong. Same thing for Hardened and stained. 👁 Image
 Oppose 70.184.8.105 16:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Did you even read any of the arguments for merging before commenting? It seems not as you are refuting a point that was not made.

Cactus and lapis lazuli ore have completely different properties and usage, and the same is true of clay and hardened clay (note that one is soft, and the other hard. One drops clay balls, the other itself. One is found in lakes, the other in mesas, etc.). Hardened clay and stained clay on the other hand have identical properties and only a slight difference in recipe. It would more accurately be described as merging white wool with the other colors. We are not merging because of names, nor a single property, we are merging because of many properties. –KnightMiner ^t/_c 00:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay fine. Same anon btw but made an account. You are right. Keeping these split is like splitting Tate and Liza on bulbapedia to a Tate page and a Liza page. It's stupid. I see your point. But still there should be different sections and the crafting recipe will have recipes for 2 different blocks and what will the page name be? And also , what will become of the talk page for a Hardened clay? If these can be fixed after merge then merge. But if not , keep them split. 👁 Image
 Agree But before we do , we need to fix what I say. #Justmadeaccount t Boorider7 (talk) 14:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

The talk pages can be merged, like the article itself (which will be after all named Hardened Clay, since, including but not limited to, stained clay is the same hardened clay, just colored). Blocks are too similar to warrant a separate section for stained clay. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree that a few sections are needed, but only in the obtaining section, as their usage is just about identical. Rather then use a "stained clay" and a "hardened clay" section though, it would make a little more sense to have the sections "smelting" which would state "hardened clay can be smelted from clay", "crafting" which would states "hardened clay can be stained", and "natural generation" which would state which types can be found in mesas. See grass or stone bricks for a similar example of a multi-block obtaining section.

As for the title, it is also worth noting that stained clay is referenced as "stained hardened clay" in the code (including its ID name), so "stained clay" is still effectively "hardened clay" –KnightMiner ^t/_c 00:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Looks like it is prominent that people think the articles should be merged. Can someone summarize this discussion? (Me doing this is questionable due to my fallen reputation.) — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 09:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I think we first need to decide how we are displaying 17 blocks in the infobox. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk
Contribs 10:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Goandgoo? It's easy to show 17 blocks in the infobox, just the same way we've shown 16. AwesomeMan31415926 (profile|contribs) 13:14, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

He means showing it and still having it look nice. See Majr's comment above. –KnightMiner ^t/_c 14:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

How about something like: [[File:Sealbudsman_Hardened_Clay_17.png|36px]], which you could implement in {{infobox}} by making it so that invimagen = - (hyphen) gives something like a line break in the inv-image section? – Sealbudsman (Aaron) 👁 Image
^T/_C 15:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

My comment was really just a jab amongst the more serious discussion (if the emote didn't make that obvious), and as an excuse to oppose as I don't like merging. It really isn't a reason to not merge it, it just won't look all nice and even. –Majr ᐸ Talk
Contribs 16:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Module talk:Infobox#Inventory image separators. Discuss infobox improvement there. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 16:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 In progress I created a project for the merge. The Blobs^{👁 Image}
15:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose. Stained Glass and Glass are separate articles - MinecraftPhotos4U (talk) 11:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

WP:OTHER. These are articles about things that are not enough related to hardened clay for this to matter. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 15:10, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Both glass and hardened clay are blocks which are both smelted from similar looking blocks to create blocks which can then be dyed to create coloured versions of the blocks. And the coloured versions are different block IDs than the non-dyed block. Wool isn't like that. There isn't an undyed wool block, as this is taken by white wool which is in all technicality the same block as the other colours, whereas white stained glass and clay are still dyed versions of the regular block. So if Hardened Clay and Stained Clay are merged, so should Glass and Stained Glass. - MinecraftPhotos4U (talk) 18:43, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

That’s a matter to be discussed separately, since we are at the talk page of an article about clay, not glass. There might be some things to be considered for glass, that are not yet known. One of them is likely making me oppose merging of glass. And data values are not something an amateur player should be looking for, since they don’t affect gameplay directly. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Done by Goandgoo. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Merge.

This page really should be merged with terracotta for several reasons. 1. I hate the name "stained terracotta". It's not used anywhere in-game. 2. Shulker Boxes and dyed Shulker Boxes are the same page, Candles and dyed Candles are the same page, Bundles and dyed Bundles are the same page, they're is really no reason this shouldn't be merged except from it smelting into Glazed Terracotta, which isn't enough reason to have two pages with pretty much the exact same info. CrockCraftMC (talk) 23:21, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I think some reasons it isn't merged is because of the crafting recipes and smelting. 👁 Image
NmF (talk) 23:54, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I think it should stay as is, and honestly I think the other "undyed" things should be split, but that's not a discussion for right here. 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
00:00, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Well the bundle and candle have no differences besides texture between their dyed and undyed forms, while stained terracotta is both functionally and technically different, so they should all probably stay as-is (unless all dyed stuff gets split at some point). 👁 Image
GameCatastrophe (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I just feel like it should be done for consistancy with things like Shulker Boxes. CrockCraftMC (talk) 13:12, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

What do you mean "technically different." If you mean they have different ids, pretty much all dyed blocks and items do. CrockCraftMC (talk) 16:08, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong oppose

Bundles, Candles, and Shulker Boxes are supposed to be split, but haven’t been so yet due to opposition from primarily a single editor. We should be splitting the remaining undyed variants. It is inconsistent to have some colored material pages have 17 items and other colored material items have only 16. For consistency all colored material items should cover just the 16 colored items and the undyed variants go on a separate page.

There are very technical reasons why the undyed variants are supposed to be split. The most pressing issue is that our infoboxes only have 8 columns and so they can only fit 16 colors on 2 rows. There is no room for a 17th icon without blowing up the infobox out of proportion. Also 17 different tabs in the infobox is just ridiculous to have as a common practice.

We ought to cut down on the amount of bloat in the unwieldy large infoboxes, and cutting the undyed variants over to a dedicated page is one the best bang for the buck we can get. It allows readers looking for basic info on terracotta, bundles, candles, and shulker boxes; to quickly scroll down to read the core functionality of the item without being met with to an oversized infobox. If a reader wants info on the dyed variants and all their textures and ids, they can go over to the dedicated page for the dyed variants for the specific info as a separate page from the undyed variant.

Plus, the obtaining and usage sections are not the same for the dyed or undyed variant. They differ quite a bit; and this goes for all undyed variants for any item with an undyed variant. You result with obtaining and usage sections that are just disorganized and not applicable to all the undyed and dyed items. They cannot be merged properly.

The DIG project has been wasting time on splitting the wrong pages. If we ought to split something, then splitting the undyed materials is one of the more logical splits to conduct. Delvin4519 (talk) 16:44, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Unlike stained terracotta (which I do 👁 Image
 Oppose the merge back into Terracotta), there is absolutely no functional difference between undyed and dyed bundles, candles, and shulker boxes. They should remain merged with their dyed variants as the undyed variant is no different than a seventeenth color for those items. 👁 align=top
Sightnado ( talk / contribs ) 02:48, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose — Stained terracotta is not used in any crafting recipe (glazed terracotta is created by smelting stained terracotta). Also, terracotta staining is not a reversible process, unlike dyeing shulker boxes or bundles (so those should not be split). The term "stained terracotta" is used in the game files (I personally added a reference link that justifies the name) and is analogous to the older name "stained clay". — BabylonAS 16:54, 13 November 2025 (UTC)