Minecraft was one of the Video games good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 25, 2010 Articles for deletion Kept October 7, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed January 15, 2013 Good article nominee Listed August 26, 2013 Peer review Reviewed August 26, 2013 Featured article candidate Not promoted March 4, 2018 Good article reassessment Delisted Current status: Delisted good article

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Video games: Indie High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the indie task force. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks: Sweden Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Internet culture High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Spoken Wikipedia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia articles Introductions (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Introductions, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.IntroductionsWikipedia:WikiProject IntroductionsTemplate:WikiProject IntroductionsIntroductions articles Microsoft High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Lead Improvement Team This article is of interest to the Lead Improvement Team, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the lead sections of articles on Wikipedia. Minecraft has been added to our To-do list because its lead has been assessed as needing improvement. A member of our team is either currently working on remedying this, or will be shortly. If you think you can improve the lead yourself, please do so and then let us know so we can strike it off our list. If you are interested in helping with this project, please visit our project page and add your name to the list of participants. Lead Improvement TeamWikipedia:WikiProject Lead Improvement TeamTemplate:WikiProject Lead Improvement TeamLead Improvement Team articles

Other talk page banners

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: Through the Nether: A Critical Examination of Minecraft as a Social Construct The Routledge Companion to Imaginary Worlds Revisiting Imaginary Worlds Minecraft players go full propaganda mode as petition demanding the end of the 'mob vote' draws 300,000 signatures in just a few days The Minecraft mob vote boycott petition is missing the point The Minecraft Community Is "Boycotting" This Year's Mob Vote Minecraft Players Trying to Stop Mob Vote With Propaganda Posters and More Than 220,000 Signatures Over 150,000 players sign new Minecraft mob vote petition “United we bargain, divided we beg”: The 2023 Minecraft mob vote boycott explained After a proposed boycott, Minecraft mob vote faces more controversy in wake of rigging accusations

Adding a section for the Mob Vote controversy could be useful because it is quite significant. TheT.N.T.BOOM! (talk) 13:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And for those of us unfamiliar with the controversy, could you provide some details and some reliable sources to back them up? GSK (talk • edits) 14:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added — Hoangminhle2011 — Shape our Wiki 05:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just found several sources from reliable sources which can be used for the mob vote section.

Unsure if they are reliable enough: [1], [2]

From confirmed reliable sources: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]

There are more out there I could list but this is for now and also, I wonder if this section could be even expanded into its own article, just an idea. NatwonTSG^TALK 20:08, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've BOLDLY made a number of changes to the infobox recently, since it was getting really hard to read when editing through source and had the risk of becoming unstable. These changes include:

• Replacing the games cover art with the games logo. I've done this because, while there are several different cover arts, and the previous "most recognizable" one (which we generally go with on Wikipedia, if not the original one) had been replaced, the logo has generally been the same since the games initial release in 2011, and is present across most if not all 300 million copies of the game.
• Simplifying the infobox to not list every single developer and composer. The documentation of Template:Infobox video game states to only list the games primary developers and publishers, which in this instance boils down to only Mojang and Xbox Game Studios. So I've compressed all other developers, publishers, and composers into hatnotes in their respective sections.
  • I've also removed citations from the infobox per WP:CITELEAD, and also the fact the infobox was becoming impossible to view in source editing.

Please let me know if anyone disagrees with any of the changes I've made. λ NegativeMP1 23:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is NOT the logo of the game, this is the Minecraft (franchise) logo.

The game logo is here Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 02:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't recognize them as different (I thought the main game logo was changed earlier this year?), uploading the individual game logo right now. λ NegativeMP1 03:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with these changes, I feel the game's cover art is needed... I don't really understand why you've changed it though. Could you explain in greater detail? Squid45 (talk) 12:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I agree with the second developer point!! Squid45 (talk) 12:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think he changed Minecraft's cover art to the game's logo because Minecraft recently changed their cover art, and there were too many choices to see which cover art would be chosen to be included in the article Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 13:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Typically on Wikipedia, articles for video games/albums/movies generally go with either the original release artwork, or the most recognizable. Minecraft doesn't have either of those, since it technically didn't launch with cover art until the Xbox 360 release in 2012 and there's no real contender for the "most recognizable" box art. We could go back to the original Bedrock Edition box art with the caption "Original Bedrock Edition box art" if needed, but I feel like the logo which is common place across all box arts and predates any of them is better. It's also certainly better than the new cover art, which is yet to be included on any physical copies of the game (compared to the other cover arts tens of millions). λ NegativeMP1 17:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One day, the game logo will change, then what will we use to add to the article? Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 17:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If Mojang was too scared to change the creeper texture and the diamond ore textures for being "iconic", I don't think they'll ever change their logo. That would be a complete marketing failure, especially since the logo is on all of the other Minecraft games. Even if they for some reason did, I'd still say use the old logo, or maybe use both since I think you could get away with using both (one being the most recent, the other being used on all 300 million+ existing copies of the game) even when taking NFCC into account. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mojang confirmed that the new art will be used in all future printed physical copies of the game, including the PS5 version and Java/Bedrock codes. Java Edition already has the art present for when you launch the game, alongside the Xbox and soon Switch versions. The last cover art for Bedrock was used for years, and this seems to be a permanent change. Why can't we make an exception for a game as long-standing as Minecraft? Memoryman3 (talk) 18:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how that justifies giving an exception any more than it instead gives a reason why it shouldn't be used. Also, upon checking the documentation for Template:Infobox video game further, "The ideal image is an English-language cover or, in the case of an arcade game, a promotional flier. Secondarily, use a logo or foreign-language cover. When cover designs differ between regions, use the cover from the region associated with the game's first English language release, though do not change another English-language version that has been uploaded first." So technically speaking, if we want to argue this scenario to be similar to regional differences, the cover art we should be using would the Xbox 360 release, which is also flawed. I don't really see a good argument for why the new cover art (or any cover art, for that matter) should be used over a logo that has remained relatively the same since 2011, and is used across all versions. λ NegativeMP1 18:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The template was established in 2005, 6 years prior to the release of Minecraft and long before the rise of persistently updated games. I do not see how the Minecraft 360 cover is comparable, as that was a cover made only for that specific version, in contrast to the universal new Minecraft cover design which will be used in all currently maintained versions of the game for all regions (except the heavily altered China Edition). Using the cover art in place of the logo would make the article's presentation more consistent with the vast majority of game articles in this wiki, as logo use is primarily for articles covering game series. Memoryman3 (talk) 19:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The new Minecraft cover design is not "universal" though. As I have stated before, claiming that the new cover art is the primary means of identifying the subject would be a blatant lie since there have yet to be any physical copies spotted that use this new cover art, and hundreds of millions of physical copies out there exist with other cover art. However, the logo is consistent across all of them.

As for your argument about infobox consistency with other articles, you make a good point, but most games that persistently update their cover art do typically use logos despite technically having cover art and physical releases, with such an example being Fortnite and its sub-game Fortnite: Battle Royale. And the infobox template being that old is irrelevant, since documentations like that can be updated and were likely made with a consensus. λ NegativeMP1 19:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So can we add both cover art and logo to the article? Hoangminhle2011 (talk) 02:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think villagers and villages are very notable in the game, while helping players gain progress. Villages should also be mentioned because they also have resources inside the houses that are also guarded by iron golems. If piglin bartering is mentioned, why not villager trading? What I'm saying is that villagers and villages should be mentioned more because of their general notability. In a nutcheel (talk) 15:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless as to whether or not either should be included, I agree that villagers and villages are much more significant to the game than piglin bartering, a relatively newer mechanic that is less core to the game. 1101 (talk) 20:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia article on Wikipedia, not the Minecraft Wiki, so it's not notable enough to be included. Furthermore, the fact that Piglins is mentioned in the article is just a small detail, not noteworthy. — Hoangminhle2011 — Shape our Wiki 09:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]