Talk:Crying Obsidian/Archive 1

I don't know about you but this looks a HELL of a lot like the nano-metal in Tiny Tank. Maybe Jeb played it and thought "hehehe maybe notch won't notic this little file...*copy**paste*...I will insert this later" and the rest is history...Wrestler987 01:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Wasn't this block called Bleeding Obsidian a few days ago? --Nerfman100 17:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ive gone through the small history, It was never called bleeding obsidian. Though, is it possible to get this item onto the map via /give?, if so, what code number? --Neil2250 21:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure there was a page here about it before. --Nerfman100 01:33, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You can't get it, it isn't an actual block (you probably know this by now). It was only known as bleeding or crying obsidian for it's appearance. Elite6809 (talk) (forum) 19:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Rename
I think because jeb tweeted about this block being a change-spawn obelisk, I think the page should be renamed to that. Piber20 04:00, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * That is definably a valid idea. However, i think "change-spawn obelisk" was just a discription by Jeb (correct me if I'm wrong). Plus he quoted the texture as "Crying Obsidian". --Imdill3 04:23, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

False information
Please don't insert false information onto this page. Just last night I signed up here on the Wiki to remove a completely false statement from the page. Here's what I removed, which was added onto the page by User:NathanIsEpic999:

" It actually has no current use in the game, but will drop a strange sort of dust used to create a special torch. The torch doesn't produce light, but it creates a new type of portal if used in the right spot. Can only be placed in the Nether instead of the surface world. "

I also went ahead and changed all the information in the infobox to ?'s. This block is not available ingame yet, and is simply just a texture at this point. Please keep false information like the above off of the page. However, I'd like to say something to NathanIsEpic999; I apologize if what I removed was actually true, and if it is "true", please provide the source of where you heard the information. Thanks. Minecraftinerryday 14:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

"It actually has no current use in the game, but will drop a strange sort of dust used to create a special torch. The torch doesn't produce light, but it creates a new type of portal if used in the right spot. Can only be placed in the Nether instead of the surface world."''

^ this kinda reminded me of this here: Portal Gun v1 for BETA V1.3_01 --Bambooz 18:06, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Remind me again why this page exists?
Conjectural articles honestly have no place in a wiki dealing with the concrete, especially when we already have the concrete that says that the item in question does not and will not exist. Plus, the existence of this article will just drag in even more retarded noobs than it already has. --GreyMario 00:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Well as we can clearly see above this sentence, it's already dragged in one "retarded noob" who doesn't understand why this page is here. It's here because it should be. Now go away. That Canadian Guy 03:14, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Kindly fuck off with your pretentious attitude. --GreyMario 21:39, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Now, now, there's no call for that sort of language. This is not a conjectural article because I can go to my minecraft.jar and look at this texture.  There's your hard evidence.  This merely explains to the, ahem, "retarded noobs" what the weird blue-and-purple thing is.  Until it no longer exists in the jar file, it is still "in Minecraft".  If jeb_ removes it next update, we can safely say that it no longer exists and then remove this page.  But not an inch before that.  Jaeil 22:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Even at that point, I wouldn't say the page should be removed. If anything, it should just make a note that it used to be in the files, never made it into the game, and at this point is just something that used to be there. We still have pages for lanterns, gears, and sponges, and this mystery block has certainly had more impact on the game files at this point than lanterns we only heard talked about.Serow 21:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)


 * If we were to merge them into the Blocks section that we'd have to move a lot and the lantern's coming to Minecraft in no time at all. Gear and Spong are also useful articles as Sponge can still be used in a few games, and mods may use gears for experienced players. R  ocĸetor talk  20:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

My Hypothesis
This is my hypothesis on this so-called "bleeding obsidian."

I was thinking that maybe jeb_ was going to add bluestone dust to the game but ran out of time or something. Maybe it was going to be in the Nether or somewhere else? What do you guys think? Electrk 16:28, 26 March 2011 (PST)
 * It probably was for the Nether, but we shouldn't put speculation in articles per rule 7A. Alphap 00:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but it doesn't technically count as a "normal" page. Electrk 20:12, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I really thought this was going to be a teleport block for a player to teleport around the overworld or The Nether compactly. perhaps Flint and Steel the Mystery Block and set a number, it will dial a code to a matching pair. R ocĸetor talk  20:33, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * When I first looked at the texture I thought it was a special nether lapiz ore. Piber20 03:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Never mind. Electrk 05:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Spawn location info
Does that little bit about the bed respawn in 1.4 really need to be there? It doesn't even remotely belong unless additional information that ties it to the mystery block is provided. Was this block originally thought to be used to set the spawn point, once it got added to the game? If so, that should be added if the spawn bit is to be kept, IMO. &mdash; Neithan Diniem   †  02:58, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Name (important!)
On Jeb's twitter he called it Crying Obsidian because he was replacing the crying obsidian file with grass edge. dk how to do links, so heres a copy-paste:

For texture packers, the grass edge tile has replaced the crying obsidian in the texture file 2:20 AM Apr 15th via TweetDeck

--R ocĸetor talk  10:29, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion
Considering this is just a texture (which has even been removed as of 1.5) and there is no coding for this, I don't see any reason to keep this page.

It's obvious it won't be added again (or the texture wouldn't have been replaced), and there's going to be no more information about it, so it'll remain a stub on something that doesn't exist at all in the game. – ultradude25 ( T at 02:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * That would also warrant deletion of the gear, would it not? --{ Fishrock123 } ( Talk ) 03:08, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The gear actually existed ingame at one point. It should probably be kept for historical purposes. - Alphap T ~ C 03:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Well gears have plenty of information on them (and Notch showed them in a video once), whereas this is just a stub. – ultradude25 ( T at 03:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't really need this anymore as it will be removed from the file in 1.5, unlike the quiver, which will stay in the file. Delete this when 1.5 comes out. --R ocĸetor talk  07:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Well you guys dont need to delete it. its a memento of an abandoned project. I use it as my login background and i hanged obsidians texture to bleeding obsidian, because i prefer it. PLEASE DONT DELETE IT - Mrburger 20:28, 19 April 2011 (UTC)Mrburger


 * lol what? Anyway, because of how minor "crying obsidian" (when did it become crying?) is due to lack of information and the fact it only manifested as a texture, this article should deleted and the information should be kept in some kind of page related to behind-the-scenes stuff or as a subsection of Jeb. Hell, we can even make it redirect there. --Gnu32 20:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * "is due to lack of information", so your saying we should just delete all of the stubs because they lack info too? --Imdill3 04:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Stubs (valid ones) are stubs because so far nobody's fully written them up yet; they still have information to put in. Crying Obsidian has absolutely nothing about it other than it being a "failed project" by Jeb. --Gnu32 15:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

There's already a "deleted" section (that it currently appears under) that seems useful for historical archiving. I typically don't suggest deletion of anything from an informational wiki, as it can be nice to have history. Why not leave it alone? Besides, its removal from the file doesn't necessarily mean it'll never be used, just that it's not being used. It wouldn't be that difficult for them to have saved a copy to put back in later, when/if the block is implemented. Gatherer818 01:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Here's the thing, there's absolutely no reason to remove this article! It has rare (and sourced!!!) information, it was apart of Minecraft, the information is legit, it's history and it's interesting information (imo). If anything, removing this article would be like removing the [TNT] article, any argument to remove it would be pure opinion and a negative effect on the wiki. --Imdill3 04:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Here's the thing, it has nothing to do with Minecraft except being in the texture file at one point. I'm for deletion simply because its actually from a previous project of Jeb and never really featured in Minecraft at all. Someone who never went into the game's jar wouldn't even notice it. However, I do think that it should be mentioned on Jeb's article, because it does have something to do with him. Its no Minecraft content, its something Jeb left there.--Quatroking -  MCWiki Administrator  09:03, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Your exactly right on one thing "being in the texture file at one point". It was at one point apart of Minecraft. Why is it so hard to keep good content? Here's an analogy: What if Mojang thought that no one was using sandstone? They wouldn't just remove the whole thing.

Okay, but it has to have a subtitle and the information still on his page. Seriously, its historic bits of info is why I love MCW. If we put it on jebs's page, including all info, I would be content. this info should stille be accessible - Mrburger


 * Weird, obscure, forgotten bits of historical info make for the most interesting bits of trivia. If Minecraft wiki doesn't document it, who will? It is definitely part of Minecraft, just a minor one that was very easy to miss. It's also not a stub if every bit of information that could be ever reasonably be expected to be gathered is on the page, and sourced appropriately. Manifold 19:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I do think we should add this as a subsection under Jeb's article. We don't have an article on the "Fire Tex" found in terrain.png, as nothing is really known about it. We do know a little about this "Crying Obsidian," but it's nowhere near notable enough to have its own article. --Zrowny 20:35, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It was called Crying Obsidian since that was the last name Jeb called it, on his Twitter. I don't think it should be an article by itself, as it is not even in the block files anymore, as such we should delete this and redirect it to Jeb's page, and add in a section about Jeb's abandoned projects.I'm for deletion; reason: not in minecraft and has been confirmed by Jeb that Crying Obsidian will never be in the game again as of Beta 1.5_01.--R ocĸetor talk  22:35, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that it should be kept for historical reasons. But I also agree that this shouldn't be it's own article.--DemonSlayerThe3rd 23:26, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I think that it should NOT be deleted, because it does have something to do with minecraft, and if someone wanted minecraft information, they'd come here first; so yes, it should be kept for historical reasons, and it will be a good source of information for anyone wanting to know more, because they had heard about it and wanted to know what it was. That's how I got here. ScipioWarrior 23:48, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I think having a texture in the source as well as a few tweets from an important dev should meet notability guidelines for a Minecraft wiki. If we go by wikipedia standards, notability isn't temporary, saying it's not in the files anymore shouldn't be a valid argument.  I don't think it should be moved to Jed's page, because it really isn't related to him, unless we made a list of all the other features he added/worked on.  Romnempire 01:24, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Will officially not be in Minecraft again, not in the terrain.png anymore, block never made it into Minecraft (only as an unused texture), it's use has been replace by beds. Redirect this article to a 'deleted blocks' page or something. As far as I'm concerned and as everyone else should be, if it's not in the files, it's not Minecraft. --R ocĸetor talk  03:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * But, you do admit that it was minecraft, so were quivers, gears, ect. --Imdill3 03:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Should we start deleting everything that was removed from the game, like Rana? --Imdill3 03:41, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Rana was actually in the game, and has a good amount of information on the page. This just existed in the texture file for a few versions, and the page is basically "it's an abandoned idea replaced with beds". Quivers were actually used to hold arrows and is still in the texture files. – ultradude25 ( T at 03:47, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * As far as I'm concerned and (i think) everyone else should be, if it has ever been in the files, it is Minecraft. I think it should be within the project goals for MCWiki to be a history of Minecraft, not simply a shoddy hyperlinked Prima guide. But then, I'm new to this wiki, is there a community/admin consensus i don't know about?  romnempire 04:49, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * But this article has never been, is not, and never will be! This article is useless! There's no evidence for it to return! Nothing! Unlike quivers, which may have a use to extend arrow capacity per slot to 128, or something. --R ocĸetor talk  05:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * To reiterate - I think we have different goals. I don't think a history of Minecraft is useless, and things that simply could-have-been, to the point they got into the codebase, if only a little, are useful for a history.  You might think a history of Minecraft is useless, and that this should simply be a player's guide, in which case I would agree there is little to no merit for this article, but I don't think this should just be a player's guide. romnempire 05:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't you understand what I'm saying - I want an article with old and deleted items/blocks/mobs! I agree with your point, but I don't want an entire article on it.Then we'll have a massive amount of stubs in the future. --R ocĸetor talk  06:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Exactly. We don't need a page on every single tiny thing that existed for a few versions or less, because they'd all be stubs. – ultradude25 ( T at 11:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This page is no longer a stub, which is fine because this is 100% of the information available to us. Anyway, we have several people who want this information preserved in some way, so let's focus on how to handle it. The options I see are to move the content to Jeb's page, keep the page as it is, or to make a "deleted blocks" page that would include this, gears, etc. I'd prefer to either keep it on this page or to make a "deleted blocks" page. Manifold 15:16, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree, we should put it on jeb's page. another section maybe like this:

Abandoned projects --"_"oyster"_" 16:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * crying obsidian(little summary of what it was suppose to do.)

1.5
If anything, it should be moved to grass, because for whatever reason, crying obsidian is the new side of the grass block.

0.0 It IS in the place of grass in the texture file but your idea is just... Well, stupid. --NEG4tive 13:49, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * He probably did what I did when 1.5 came out and forgot to replace the Crying Obsidian texture with the Sidegrass texture. It actually makes for some really ugly sidegrass.  :/ --Markus 21:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC)