User talk:DelCastillo8405 - minecraft.fandom.com

Copying from the moved Minecraft Wiki[]

The license of the new Minecraft Wiki does not allow its content to be used without attribution or for commercial uses (like here on Fandom would be). I have therefore reverted your edits on Ominous Event.

- DarkShadowTNT (talk) 11:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Reply[]

Hi DarkShadowTNT, I see, I understand that copying source from the new Minecraft Wiki and pasting it on Fandom is not allowed.

- DelCastillo8405 (talk) 12:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry![]

Sorry, I didn't realize there was a draft being made at Minecraft_Wiki:Drafts/Java_Edition_1.21.6. I will check for drafts in the future before creating pages. Good grief, I am really embarrassed! Ferretwings (talk) 18:48, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Reply[]

Hi Ferretwings, that's ok at least I did edit that article.

- DelCastillo8405 (talk) 23:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm filing a little complaint[]

I'm not trying to offend you or anything, but I think your text doesn't make any sense. I'm not angry or anything, I'm just really disappointed that you won't let me get creative. Remember that ANYONE can be part of the Minecraft Wiki and you can't just hog some random page. You HAVE to give others a chance, so I recommend that. If you don't accept this, that's okay. But please remember that you have to allow room for others' ideas.

In the meantime, I have reverted your edits on Bedrock Edition 1.21.70 and this will therefore be the last time I do so. Please acknowledge this and have a good day, thanks you.

Also, please don't report me or anything. I'm just discussing something and there's no need to tell on me.

DatRollytheBall (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2025 (UTC)DatRollytheBallDatRollytheBall (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, DelCastillo8405 has reverted your edits on two different matters. The first is the next parameter in the infobox. You think it should be 1.21.80 while DelCastillo8405 thinks it should be 1.21.71. Are you sure you're correct here? The second is the opening paragraph. Most Bedrock Edition version articles don't describe the contents of the update in their opening paragraph, but some (e.g., Bedrock Edition 1.16.100) do. As for the name of the update: it's usually "1.abc, the first release of [[xyz]], is..." or "1.abc, the release of [[xyz]], is..." It seems that each of you got a third of that correct. SLScool 17:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

(To SLScool) I was actually referring to the edit I made where the update's name would appear BEFORE the "minor update" text appeared, but I guess you've got a point. DatRollytheBall (talk) 17:06, 2 June 2025 (UTC)DatRollytheBallDatRollytheBall (talk) 17:06, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I did see that. That's the third that you got correct. Originally, I disagreed with your removal of the link to Spring to Life, but I've now realized that that article doesn't exist yet (except as a draft), so I now agree with your decision to delink it. The final third is having "named" when it's normally "the (first) release of." SLScool 18:54, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

DelCastillo8405, what was your reason for this reversion? Given your edit history, I'm guessing you had some good reason, but you didn't leave any edit summary to explain it. SLScool 18:54, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Reply[]

Hi guys, it's fine, no worries about reverting those articles.

- DelCastillo8405 (talk) 08:49, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

WHOOPS[]

I didn’t even know 1.21.100 was REAL until now— sorry—

ShadowVoid (talk) 10:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Unofficial Launchers[]

Back in January, after you made the PojavLauncher article, you told me about it on my talk page. I responded by saying, "Unless it's something officially endorsed by Mojang, it can go wherever we normally keep third-party launcher." Two days ago, you asked me why I deleted it, and I told you where to find your answer. You seem to have missed both of my respones. The wiki's community notability section in the style guide says this:

"Articles about client or server mods, or third-party programs and map editors, are not allowed to be created on the wiki.

"Such articles are better reserved to the Feed the Beast Wiki, a wiki focused on documenting modded content.

"While many pages regarding mods can currently still be found on the wiki (mostly as subpages of Mods and Programs and editors), these are kept for predominantly legacy purposes, and are currently being exported to the FTB Wiki for better management."

Based on that, these articles should not be here on the wiki.

In my reply yesterday, I told you to look at the deletion log on the PojavLauncher page along with the article's edit history. If you'd done that, you would've learned that I deleted the article for not meeting community notability guidelines (although, I originally deleted it with the wrong reason, so I undeleted it and redeleted it with the right reason). After that, someone recreated the article, but they filled it with vandalism, so I deleted the article and used vandalism as the reason. SLScool 20:39, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

I looked into the FTB Wiki, and found the category for 3rd-party Minecraft launchers. If nobody else does, I can move the 2 launcher pages over tomorrow. Ferretwings (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Reply[]

I see, I understand it SLScool.

- DelCastillo8405 (talk) 06:18, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Articles for Each Copper Tool[]

We have articles for the axe, pickaxe, shovel, hoe, and sword. We do not have any articles for individual tiers of each item (e.g., diamond hoe is simply a redirect to hoe). Why are you making articles on each individual copper tool/weapon? SLScool 20:06, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Copying from the new Minecraft Wiki yet again[]

The license of the new Minecraft Wiki does not allow its content to be used without attribution or for commercial uses (like here on Fandom would be). I therefore reverted your edit on MCW:Drafts/Shelf. You have been told this before and I would expect a content moderator of this wiki to follow the rules. -- MarkusRost (talk) 🐴 12:32, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

reply[]

My apologies MarkusRost, I will accept my consequences.

- DelCastillo8405 (talk) 12:38, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Nautilus edits[]

Nautili is the proper plural form of nautilus.

reply[]

Ah, I see.

- DelCastillo8405 (talk) 04:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)