Maybe a new section under the page’s Data values section would be better, especially some tags only exist as block tags, or item tags, and not the other. FVbico (talk) 11:06, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Latest comment: 3 December 20181 comment1 person in discussion
Yall need to add the potion related tags, not just because they are missing but also since brewing recipes are right around the corner –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 187.188.186.144 (talk) at 22:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~
This was apparently a tag in 1.13, but I can't find anything about it. From what I remember, it had to deal with all blocks the player could move through, like air. I'm wondering what all blocks were in it so I can port something from that version. ----Airtoum
If the "Function tag" is different on Bedrock, it would be then trivial to create a page "Function tag (Bedrock Edition)". I don't think that such a process requires consensus to be carried out.
II would do it myself, but unfortunately I don't know enough about the differences between Java/Bedrock to do so. In fact, I didn't even know that "Function tag" was available in Bedrock.
👁 Image Support the page itself is not really overly long, but there's pretty much no overlap and the page is already split into multiple Java and Bedrock sections.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 16:20, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
👁 Image Oppose – If a see the idea behind the the sudden interest in this topic, I am opposed to it.
Firstly, this topic was created before the big split Split each Tags type to their own pages, so its existence is therefore somewhat outdated, and it initial purpose already solved.
Where the debate has shifted today is to separate the pages based on technical differences between Java and Bedrock tags, which I also oppose. Although the question is relevant, the current grouping of the two on a single page produces a very modest page that is easy to find, read and navigate, and where the two versions and their techniques aspects with none of them that "bloat" the page content.
Additionaly, separating the tag page between the Java and Bedrock versions would reduce the effectiveness of the current page as a central hub. –un_pogaztalk06:15, 27 July 2025 (UTC)
Latest comment: 3 August 20243 comments2 people in discussion
It's very important that we keep an example like "@e[type=#minecraft:skeletons]" in the page for all us MC wiki players+readers that have close to no programming knowledge at all. Dan2024 (talk) 19:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Ah thanks, also thanks for reminding me, I still see potential for better structuring and am working on improvements. Dan2024 (talk) 17:33, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
I was actually thinking that we should split block tags, item tags, ... off into their own pages instead, as they comprise by far the most information on this page. - User-12316399 (talk) 14:05, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm personaly start this project some time ago. The only thing left for me is to rebuild the history of "Block", "Entity type", "Game event" and items. I'm thinking of sharing it and discussing it on the Discord.
Latest comment: 17 February 202524 comments7 people in discussion
Actually, the page includes all the tags for every type used in the game, and... let be honest: it became a gigantic monster.
Now, I recognize that the page has been cleverly designed to make it easy to edit despite its ever-growing size, but unfortunately, some section can't benefit from such separation, like the history section. In addition, I find that the table format currently used isn't really very handy for reading tags and their contents.
So where my proposal: Spliting each type of tag into their own page, and so with their own history section.
Right now, there is some thing to adjust, but the page are complete, up to date and ready to use (just need to move them out of the user space and overide the current tag page).
👁 Image Support Those pages look great! For naming I would prefer if they weren't subpages, but rather be named e.g. "Block tags (Java Edition)" or similar. -- jacobsjo (talk) 00:34, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
I also support the idea of making them separate pages rather than subpages, but in my opinion it is better to merge java and bedrock block tags into a «Block tag» page instead of making different pages for different editions — 👁 Image 👁 Image MetroKopUA (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Since there isn't much overlap between the editions, the "merged" pages would probably end up with "Java Edition" and "Bedrock Edition" sections, which sort of defeats the purpose of having them merged. -- jacobsjo (talk) 10:49, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the enthusiasm. I take note of the idea to make simple page, but I want open this discussion to debat of this point and presented my reasoning to use subpage instead:
The first is to regrouped every tag page, which are quite similar in their format, into one place.
The second is to preserve the in-game naming of the tag type. Example: The page for the biome tags will be named "Tag/Worldgen/Biome", wich is coherent with the in-game files
Aditionaly, if we use subpage, the title page will naturaly inlude the word "Tag", and every tag page will also naturaly include a link to the main page about tags.
Don't forget that in both case, we can make redirection page.
Also, I want to separate Bedrock and Java because, even for the same type, the tags for each version are very different and never overlaps. It result that their content and history are completely independent of each other, and so it will be much more practical to read and maintain a page specificity for each edition, for the same reason of this initial split.
If the vast majority of tags was common to both edition, with only few of them specific to each one, Yes it will make sense to merge them, but that realy not the case.
I have a dislike of subpages personally, and as such I'd prefer option 2 (although as per MCW:TITLE the "Tag" should be lowercase, i.e. "Block tag" not "Block Tag"). For the same reason (and also because it works much better as an article title), I think for "worldgen" sub-tags, it should just be "Biome tag", the "worldgen" part is not really relevant and just part of the path. | violine1101(talk)18:15, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Split the Tag into several page with the presented content
Use regular page <type> tag (<edition>) for naming
Except major objection, the split will take effect the Monday 17 February (in now).
Thanks for taking part in the discussion.
PS: I currently working on a template which will greatly easier the editing of tags, rather than use raw treeview and nbt node. The final page will use it and the visual ressult will be the same.
I think the consensus was on <type> tag (<edition>), but the split now happened to <type> tags (<edition>). I 👁 Image Oppose the use of plurals in the page names. -- jacobsjo (talk) 15:16, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, I a bit mess up here because it was a precipted thing do after the split.
There is two reason:
After make the page, the use of singular for tag in the title when the page is a list of plurals tags realy don't fit
And after looking the original version of the Tag page, each section use plurals for tags in the title section
If I had realized that before batch create/move all the page to the inital <type> tag (<edition>), I would have reset the Countdown and informe the discussion. And so soon after the effective implementation, I was precipted mind.
I deeply apologize for this precipited unconslted change, that I only allowed myself to do because it seemed really small and in the continuity of the original content. Be assured I realy the first to have been disappointed to have done that.
@Un pogaz, how did you perform all of those replacements from "Tag table row" to "Tag list" (obviously you didn't do it manually)? Did you use some kind of regular expression? If so, do you mind giving me one? — 👁 Image 👁 Image MetroKopUA (talk) 18:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Yes and No. For the Tag list, I extract the data from the Minecraft jar of the last snapshot and create the list from that with a Python script. I also I compare with a other list based of the last release to manual add the upoming/until flag when nessesary. But that only work for the list itself, for retrive the description of tag, here a use a regex and a merged the 2 set of data. I also use regex for
That say, the first version I create use raw treview and nbt node. I only work of a template tag list later, so I had to redo everything almost from scratch.
Also, I maintain my own Minecraft generated data, which was very useful to rebuild from scratch the history table of every tag type with every data change. But I still had to compare this new history table with the original (absolutly tidious).
That was... quite a project to take. And a complet random mess. Unsharable.
If is for translation, it will much easier to copy the english page and replaces the description of each tag. That I can try to dig up and share a clean version.
... ah, but if it's for translations, it will be more complicated for the history table. On the other hand, since it always use the same groups of words, severals regex would be probably work but its on your own.
Timing, I just found the regex fot the {Tag table row}. Like I say, it not very usable to convert {tag list}, but you will at least retrive the tag type (1), the tag name (2) and the description (3). However warning, you need to remove manualy the |note= (or any params in the table row) before use the regex because it miss up the regex (but since is quite rare, it easy to manipulate them).
Latest comment: 26 October 20253 comments3 people in discussion
After a debat on Talk:Damage_type_tag, we poited out and suggest me a new possible nameming convention:
Tag (<edition>)/<type>
This new nameming convention use subpage, but unlike the previous proposal, this one is linked to a root page that is already edition specific (wich one was not existing at the time).
Since subpages are not very popular, and are more offten use to "store" data related to the root page, this require a clear strong approval. –un_pogaztalk07:47, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
👁 Image Weak oppose Subpages always make the title less descriptive, and result in the subpages being seen as less important. I'd prefer if they stay as independent articles describing the tags fully, rather than just being subpages that list tags of specific types. Indeed I would be in favor of including some more usage information on the individual pages (such as directory structure and json format). -- jacobsjo (talk) 12:08, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
