User talk:Tolerabledruid6

Regarding the old Java Edition pages
Please do not add any content to pages that can appear to be speculative in nature. Thanks. -BDJP (t 20:38, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there. While I agree some of the content I added was speculative - most of it was actually true. For example, the Creative version of that one 20100133 says that "health was removed, re-enabling creative mode" however this is totally false - creative mode was simply just re-enabled. I'm actually from OmniArchive, which is currently the biggest and most popular Minecraft archiving community (and is also recognised by Mojang - Dinnerbone is even in our Discord server), and I can also prove that claims like "0.0.5a through 0.0.8a don't have proof but almost certainly exist" are probably best for the articles - we 100% think that they exist, but Notch wasn't active on any social media/chat during the times those versions were released. I hope this clear things up, and may I ask which parts may I re-add to the page? The biggest thing I'm concerned about is the "health removed" claim. Tolerabledruid6 (talk) 17:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Method to play .jar files of old MC not on launcher
Hey Tolerabledruid6, thanks for all the help in preserving information about old versions of Minecraft. 350 edits is insane! I'm really interested in this topic too but can't play old jar files of MC that are downloadable from the wiki but not on the launcher. I see higher up on the page that you're on the Omniarchive so I hope you have some method that allow you to play these old versions. Some help would be very appreciated. --Bluecrab277745 (talk) 15:44, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry for not seeing this message earlier! You should join our Discord server at https://discord.gg/h45wxn, so we can help you there. My name on there is also TolerableDruid6#7510, so feel free to ask there and I can help you. Tolerabledruid6 (talk) 20:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Beta 1.7.1
Where proofs that this version does not exist?

Regarding your edits
Hi! I saw you deleting manually-moved pages but those pages are fine. The Great Spring (talk | contribs) (Tagalog translation) 12:44, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * They are not fine, in fact, this is actually quite disruptive. The page name you manually moved it to isn't even consistent with the others, and the redirect placed on Early Classic means I cannot actually move the page to where it should be. Tolerabledruid6 (talk) 12:46, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe this user is the one who created the page. The Great Spring (talk | contribs) (Tagalog translation) 12:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Please do not continue to revert my edits. This is disuptive. It doesn't matter who did what, as I explained, this change is inconstant with the other pages and pages *should not* be manually moved. I was the one who originally requested the page to be moved but this isn't what I had actually requested. I would have just moved the page myself if I knew this would happen, no offence intended.Tolerabledruid6 (talk) 12:50, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That is my fault. Sorry. The Great Spring (talk | contribs) (Tagalog translation) 12:51, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's fine, no worries. I'm just trying to make sure these pages are up to date since they're all kinda in a mess right now, they have been the same way for probably years.Tolerabledruid6 (talk) 12:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Reverted Edits
Hey you might wanna check up on your edits you recently made, a user has gone around and singlehandedly reverted the for false information and said they are useless. James Haydon (talk) 02:38, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Saw, thanks for letting me know. I've posted about this in the wiki Discord and will get in touch with an admin about this, what a strange thing to do (for the record, it's not false information, this doesn't seem to be their first offence either) Tolerabledruid6 (talk) 15:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)