User talk:DelboyDylan

In regards to upcoming versions, such as "1.11.2"
Hi. I understand that you may not know me, but I do appreciate your edits showing that an upcoming version was in the works for Minecraft PC. However, even though there is something showing that a upcoming version could end up being in the works, the reference that you provided (this one) is too vague to confirm that such an upcoming version could exist. I'd suggest taking a look at the official sources, which shows you what sources we, as editors, generally accept for articles. Perhaps a post from a developer on social media such as Twitter or Reddit could've confirmed that 1.11.2 was in development, or maybe even a comment on the bug tracker by a developer could work, too. As of right now, however, there has been no mention of 1.11.2 from a developer, but you never know when it could happen in the future.

For the time being, I have reverted your edits on various pages for this exact reason, and I promise I will add them back when such a version is confirmed by a developer for release. This isn't by any means to say you did something wrong; it's just something to remember for next time. If you'd like to talk to me about this (if you believe I did something wrong, of course), you can either reply to this message, or leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! -BDJP (t 21:33, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * There had been some discussion on this subject on the 1.11.1 talk page, that I had in fact raised myself. The consensus seemed to be that future version bug fixes on the bug tracker were enough to warrant a page. – DelboyDylan (talk 21:45, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah, right. I had forgotten about that, but what I was generally speaking about was for the fact that some users had done this before. Unfortunately, I can't remember of anything like this occurring, but I can recall some soft spots in which it did happen. Anyway, I suppose you should also notice the "+" following the version, as it very well could mean that Mojang could skip that version entirely for something like 1.11.3 or 1.11.24, as examples (or it very well could be just because of my autism). Cheers! -BDJP (t 22:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I certainly see your point, it's for those same reasons I originally questioned this in regards to the 1.11.1 page. I'll leave your reverts in place, as there's really no rush, and there appears to be some differences of opinion on this matter from the community. – DelboyDylan (talk 22:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)