Talk:Canyon

The trivia section
Why is that info about the seed there? I checked it and it's at most 5 ravines overlapping. It's not overly huge or impressive. Was it larger on an older version? Maybe it should be on a seed website instead of here. KDNX-Wyatt (talk) 17:57, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's a Bedrock vs Java thing? I can't test; the computer on which I played Minecraft has died. You might want to ask who added that trivia in October. He added others that I removed as speculative, but I left that one in. Amatulic (talk) 18:22, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Merge with cave
Canyons are another type of carver, and Cave already covers all types of carvers, and even noise caves which aren't carvers. Also, it includes "Crack Carvers", which are visually similar to canyons, and are a type of carver that generates using the "canyon" type.

So, canyons should be in the Carvers section from the Cave article, since not only they are carvers, but also because they are a type of cave internally. And there is underwater canyon generation (underwater caves), so it would be better to add them to that page. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 13:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Canyon is not a Cave --TreeIsLife (talk) 18:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * They have the same generation system than caves. Also, if they are separated then "Crack Carvers" shouldn't be included on the Cave aticle as they don't look at all like caves. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 19:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , they're different features in-game. I'd rather move crack carvers here, or give them a unique page. The page is called "cave", not "carver". -PancakeIdentity (talk) 07:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * - if anything, we should have a third page explaining carvers from a custom world gen perspective. - User-12316399 (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in common, I see no reason to merge those 2 pages. --Goro488 (talk) 10:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if that's true, canyons generate with a system really similar to the cave obe, even if they look or not like caves. If we included Crack carvers somewhere else, that would be misinformation as they are a carver type. And if crack carvers are a type of carver that is included there, canyons should be part of the main Cave article too, even if they don't look related. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * - if anything, we should have a third page explaining carvers from a custom world gen perspective. - User-12316399 (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in common, I see no reason to merge those 2 pages. --Goro488 (talk) 10:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if that's true, canyons generate with a system really similar to the cave obe, even if they look or not like caves. If we included Crack carvers somewhere else, that would be misinformation as they are a carver type. And if crack carvers are a type of carver that is included there, canyons should be part of the main Cave article too, even if they don't look related. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in common, I see no reason to merge those 2 pages. --Goro488 (talk) 10:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if that's true, canyons generate with a system really similar to the cave obe, even if they look or not like caves. If we included Crack carvers somewhere else, that would be misinformation as they are a carver type. And if crack carvers are a type of carver that is included there, canyons should be part of the main Cave article too, even if they don't look related. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if that's true, canyons generate with a system really similar to the cave obe, even if they look or not like caves. If we included Crack carvers somewhere else, that would be misinformation as they are a carver type. And if crack carvers are a type of carver that is included there, canyons should be part of the main Cave article too, even if they don't look related. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)