Talk:Food/Archive 1

Food in an old mod
Hm. Having a problem with food after downloading one of the mod compilations. (http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=124219) that one. I can eat porkchops fine. But everything else? Not at all. Cooked fish, apples, bread and all that. Doesn't seem to register as food. Any thoughts? Zargen
 * Well, it's a mod. :U Won't have much luck asking for support here, let alone for mods. Especially for the community pack, which is always broken one way or another (through my experience, anyway. it seems the guy putting it together doesn't actually bother properly testing it) --Gnu32 08:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I found the problem xD Very stupid oversight. Can't eat food if it's stacked. Got to unstack, eat then restack the pile.Zargen

Healing efficiency
If anyone wants an explanation as to how exactly I arrived at any of the figures given in the "Healing efficiency" column of the food items table, say which one(s) and I'll be happy to provide said explanation. =) I'd also welcome suggestions on clarifications or restructurings that might make the whole thing easier to understand. ;) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 07:58, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * All of them. The Food/HE Calculations page doesn't help either, just confuses me more. Explain... everything! Cool12309(T 21:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, let's look at a simple one, bread.
 * To start with, bread doesn't stack, so you can only have one bread in each inventory space. Because each bread heals 2.5 hearts, if you're carrying precrafted bread, the best healing-to-inventory ratio you'll get is 2.5 hearts per inventory space.
 * However, if you carry wheat instead of bread, it starts to get more interesting: you can carry stacks of 64 wheat in one inventory space.
 * First, let's look at using a single space:
 * The largest multiple of 3 (we're using 3 because one bread is made from 3 wheat) which is less than 64 is 63 (we don't strictly have to do this - we could just have a full stack of 64 - but if we do that, we'll be left with 1 wheat which takes up its own inventory space and therefore reduces the healing ratio).
 * 63 divided by 3 is 21, so we can craft 21 bread from a single stack of 63 wheat.
 * One bread heals for 2.5 hearts, so 21 bread will heal for 52.5 hearts. Since we're only using one inventory space, that gives us a healing-to-inventory ratio of 52.5 hearts per inventory space.
 * Now, we turn to figuring out the best ratio we could get, which is done by carrying three stacks of wheat (two stacks aren't better than one, because we'll be left with two leftover wheat, or have two stacks of 63 wheat (or one stack of 64 and one of 62) - wasted space!).
 * Using these three spaces lets us craft 64 bread, which will heal for 160 hearts total.
 * To get our ratio, then, we divide 160 by three (remember, we used three inventory spaces) and get 53.333... - 53 1/3 hearts per inventory space. This is the absolute best-case scenario for bread, and doesn't change if we only have three full stacks of wheat, or 36 (which would get us 768 bread (36 * 64 = 2304 wheat; 2304 / 3 = 768 bread)), because if you divide the total hearts the bread will heal by the number of inventory spaces used, it always comes out the same - 53 1/3.
 * This is all well and good, but we want to figure these ratios out including a workbench. This isn't a problem, we just add one inventory space to our above calculations:
 * For a single stack of wheat, after we've gotten our 52.5 hearts' worth from the crafted bread, we divide it by 2, since we're now using two inventory spaces instead of just one. This gets us 26.25 hearts per inventory space.
 * For three stacks of wheat, instead of dividing our 160 hearts by three, we divide it by 4 (three stacks of wheat and one workbench). This gets us a nice, even 40 hearts per inventory space.
 * But! This is where it gets really interesting: if we include a workbench in our figuring, we can get better ratios by using more inventory spaces!
 * The player has 36 spaces total at their disposal (four rows of nine). One of these spaces is being used for the workbench, leaving us with 35 free spaces. The largest multiple of three (remember, we want a multiple of three so we can have all full stacks of 64 wheat, with no leftover or wasted space) that is less than 35 is 33.
 * 33 stacks of wheat will get us 704 bread (33 * 64 = 2112; 2112 / 3 = 704), which will heal a total of 1760 hearts.
 * We're using 34 inventory spaces (one workbench, and 33 stacks of wheat), so we divide 1760 by 34 to get 51.76 (we get a lot more decimals than that, actually, but we'll ignore the rest of them to make things easier).
 * This isn't quite as good as it gets, though - this is one situation where carrying a partial stack gets us a slightly better ratio.
 * Instead of leaving those last two spaces empty, let's put a stack of 63 wheat in each one. This will give us a total of 2238 wheat (33 * 64 = 2112, 2 * 63 = 126, 2112 + 126 = 2238).
 * After crafting, we get 746 bread, which will heal for 1865 hearts.
 * We divide that by 36 (we're using all of our inventory spaces this time), resulting in a ratio of 51.80555... - round up to make it a bit easier, and we have a ratio of roughly 51.81 hearts per inventory space!
 * So, to recap:
 * One stack of wheat can heal a maximum of 52.5 hearts per inventory space.
 * Three stacks can heal 53 1/3 hearts per inventory space (this is the same if we carry any other number of stacks, as long as it's a multiple of three).
 * One stack of wheat and one workbench can heal 26.25 hearts per inventory space.
 * Three stacks of wheat and one workbench can heal 40 hearts per inventory space.
 * 33 stacks of wheat and one workbench can heal about 51.76 hearts per inventory space.
 * 35 stacks of wheat (33 full stacks and 2 stacks of 63) and one workbench can heal about 51.81 hearts per inventory space.
 * I can do other food items if there are still bits you don't understand (I'm thinking, in particular, of mushroom soup and cake). =) Also, if you compare my ratios here with those in the article, you'll notice that some don't match - I somehow messed up some of my calculations when getting the ratios for the article, and everything needs to be recalculated and fixed. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 18:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Do we include the fuel in the slots needed if we do smelting to obtain the prepared food? Assisstion 18:09, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Ooh, that's something I hadn't thought of! The whole point to specifically including the furnace/workbench in the calculations is to assume that we're carrying all the supplies we need to craft the food - meaning we don't need to gather any supplies when we're ready to craft it - so I would say yes, include the fuel. For simplicity's sake, we'll also assume that we can get "perfect" use from each piece of fuel - for instance, that we can cook 8 porkchops with one piece of coal (even though, in-game, even the most nimble-fingered person will only get through seven and a part). 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 18:17, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Apples
This page says that apples can only be obtained by killing Notch; the red apple page and the dungeon pages say they can be found in dungeon chests. Which is right? I'm writing this on a computer I don't have Minecraft installed on or I would find out myself. Could somebody find out and edit the pages or put up the results so somebody else can. Thanks Woodcock 00:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)


 * According to what I've read, while red apples could formerly be found in dungeon chests, they can't be now. I don't know if this is really true, but the person who wrote it offered a piece of the reconstructed source (a routine responsible for selecting the items to be placed in dungeon chests) and it didn't have red apples as one of the selection options. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 02:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

hotdog?
i though it was known that the hotdog tweet was a joke.pointing out that because he sais he liked a hotdog that people would think he is going to add them,followed up by him tweeting some thing very similar to the above statement. [i don't know how to sign my name onto the post so SlyRatchet] Just type four of these ~. Woodcock 01:08, 8 May 2011 (UTC).

Will need updating
In the pre-release all food items stack. --Ecksearoh 12:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Red Apples
The page says it heals 2, but the table says 1. Can someone clarify? Cool12309(T 10:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Beta 1.8 Food Engine
Food in Beta 1.8 doesn't seem to be quite as simple as it appears.

level.dat is showing 4 food values for players now:

TAG_FLOAT foodExhaustionLevel TAG_INT foodTickTimer TAG_INT foodLevel TAG_FLOAT foodSaturationLevel

foodLevel is the visible food bar which works in a manner identical to the health bar. (20 foodLevel = 10 full icons, 5 food = two full icons and one half icon, etc)

foodExhaustionLevel counts up to 4.0 (apparently), and then resets, subtracting 1 from foodSaturationLevel, if it's nonzero, or foodLevel if fSL is zero.

foodTickTimer counts down(?) in 'ticks' between health regen/health loss from starving events.

foodSaturationLevel is a bit odd. I thought it was an overflow variable for foodLevel, but it's not. Every time the player eats food, foodSaturationValue gains some points, approximately around the value of the food eaten, but sometimes greater.

...

When a player sneaks, runs, sprints, jumps, or breaks blocks (and possibly other activities), the game increments foodExhaustionLevel. Once that reaches 4 (or thereabouts), it resets, and 1 food is deducted. This food is taken from foodSaturationLevel if it's nonzero, or foodLevel if it is zero.

This lets the player sprint about for a while after eating without depleting the visible food bar. This also means that food has roughly double it's effect than would be suggested by the visible bar alone.

My test result values for foodSaturationLevel have varied from the item being eaten's value to something considerably larger than that value (ex. steak has varied from 8 to 12.6). I strongly suspect that the foodExhaustionLevel is being factored in there, although results are a bit screwy so far.

~ Renegrade 18:00, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * there I already found out, what is it for. — MiiNiPaa (talk) 09:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Add SaturationLevel restoration to the table
As except normal hunger level there is second "invisible" saturation level, I think, it should be added to the food table. And there is should be link to hunger mechanics. I'm not confident in my English and wiki editing experience, so I'd like someone to do it. — MiiNiPaa (talk) 15:27, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Already done — MiiNiPaaT 09:42, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

It seems to me that this column could use a bit of expansion. With the way that the saturation level restored by various kinds of food sorta seems to represent how 'healthy' the food is, I'd think that the most useful form of this information would be as 'saturation restored / food restored' - i.e. if you fill up a certain number of food points with this kind of food, how many saturation points do you get? This would normalize the 'healthiness' of different kinds of food to take into account the varying food restoration values, so you can see at a glance which are the most effective at keeping the saturation level high. After all, when eating the concern usually is to restore however many food points you're down, so it would be nice to see what kind of food would restore the most saturation points for whatever number of food points you're trying to restore. I'd personally add this as another column to the table, perhaps also slightly expanding the blurb on saturation. Anyone else think this would be useful?

further edit: proposed label for the column: "Normalized Saturation (newline) (saturation restored/food restored)". I'd add the sentence "Foods with higher normalized saturation are 'healthier'; eating such food will generally allow you to go longer before your food bar starts to decrease again." to the blurb about hunger. 141.211.198.115 19:02, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

"Heal" hunger?
There should be a better word to describe the refilling of the hunger bar (example Cooked Fish and Template:Food). I suggest the word "fill" instead. "Restore" is my second choice.--72.19.91.191 01:09, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Milk
I didn't find anything about cure from poison in source. Does it really cures you ingame? — MiiNiPaaT 09:41, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Declaration in Item.java:  part of the ItemBucket.java: There is nothing about cure. — MiiNiPaaT 09:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

So I commented the milk part. If somebody can prove, that milk really cures food poisoning, feel free to uncomment. — MiiNiPaaT 13:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I heard that milk isn't really supposed to cure food poisoning, but rather it cures poison from a spider or some other monster.75.168.245.122 00:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC) Ooogity Boogity.


 * I know the stuff for 1.9 says it clears potion effects, poisoning included. I guess that doesn't happen in 1.8 yet. Cobalt32 01:08, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Page has an illogical statement?
Under Nourishment Value, it says, "Note: Higher nourishment does not always indicate that a food is a better choice. For example, 3 piece of bread provide less saturation than 2 soups even though they have the same nourishment value."

If you do the math, 3 pieces of bread heals 7.5 hunger. 2 bowls of mushroom stew heals 8 hunger. Considering they have equal nourishment value, the total bread (18) would be expected to provide less saturation than the total mushroom stew (19.2).

Simply put, nourishment value is a ratio, and that's just how ratios work. 7.5:18 = 8:19.2, just as well as 7.5:8 = 18:19.2. I'm removing that note. If anyone thinks otherwise, discuss it here. 76.20.78.75 06:28, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

If anything should be noted under nourishment value, it is that hunger does not decrease until saturation is empty. Therefore, while the food bar is jittery (saturation = 0) foods with higher nourishment values are preferred (unless your hunger is near 0, as saturation cannot surpass hunger). 76.20.78.75 06:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Golden Blocks in Ingredients section
Golden Blocks are items that cannot be eaten on their own. Instead, they are crafted with other ingredients to produce certain food items. So, Should we add them?
 * Not really. They're just a way to upgrade an existing food item, and gold really isn't that edible, it probably just has some mythical magic effect on the food. But then again, I'm using logic, and that does not exist in some areas of minecraft. --HexZyle 14:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Yah I agree with that and I thought about it again and I realised that if we add Golden Blocks we have to add coal, charcoal...... which can be also used to upgrade an existing food item. So, yah I dont think it is a that good idea to add them.

Golden Apples restore 24 saturation?
This is pretty strange, since saturation is capped at only 20. Are you sure about the number? Anyway, if it is OK, maybe we should add a note about it, that effective nourishment value of apples is only 2.0, not 2.4. --95.221.24.167 13:06, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, these values from source code. BTW saturation caped not at 20 but at current food level. Eating nourished food while starving is a waste of some saturation points. — MiiNiPaaT 13:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Wheat
It says wheat is used to make bread, cookies, and cake. Shouldn't we also say it can make beef, pork, and chicken, because of wheat being used in animal breeding? Funky3000 21:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Technically, wheat is creating entities (cows, chickens, etc.), not actual items in a crafting area, so no.

Concerns about the saturation points possibly being incorrect
"foodExhaustionLevel ranges from 0.0 to 4.0 and increases with every action you take. When the exhaustion level reaches above 4.0 it will get subtracted by 4.0 and subtracts 1 point either from foodSaturationLevel or, if foodSaturationLevel equals zero, from foodLevel."

"Jumping = 0.2 of exhaustion"

Knowing that, If you do exactly 20 jumps (0.2x20 = 4.0) without moving, you lose a food point (or a saturation point). The tests consist of doing sets of 20 jumps without moving. I counted the amount of sets I could last for each food and got these results. Almost none of my results are like the wiki values (bread and cooked fish are the only ones). It seems like the wiki values aren't all under the same denominator (Which should be /20 like with the food points, instead it's apparently /48, /20, 19.2, 19.6923..., /18, /16, /12, /8, /4) unlike my results (all /20).

Here's my results, the wiki values and what I think are the denominators for each of the wiki value.

If you don't believe me, try it yourself, it will give you the exact same results.


 * Try to eat two cookies in a row and run your test again. You will see, that eating two cookies will let you jump 20 times before hunger bar start jumping. It happens because saturation level is a float, not an integer as foodpoints. And code for saturation decrease is: saturation = max(saturation - 1, 0). All values was taken right from the source and was tested multiple times by me. And so, they are accurate for 1.0.0. You got bread and fish saturation values like mine because they are whole numbers unlike the rest. — MiiNiPaaT 22:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * And golden apples saturation value will possibly be wrong because of 1.1 changes, but before it WAS a 24 saturation, but because of "Note that this cannot exceed foodLevel" effective (and therefore verifiable in game) value cannot exceed 20. — MiiNiPaaT 22:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying this mystery to me. It adds up almost perfectly with all my numbers (12.8->13, 0.2->1, etc). However, there are still 2 numbers that are of concern to me : the spider eye and the golden apple. The golden apple was, as you said, pretty much predictable since it was nerfed in 1.1. It should be something between 9.1 and 10.0 since my result was 10 (possibly 9.6 just like stew). As for the spider eye, my result was 4, so it should be a number between 3.1 and 4.0. If you know that, then there's no way it's 0.8.
 * Err~ I have never tested spider eye. Must be someone else. When my exams are over, I will update this page witht newer values — MiiNiPaaT 20:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Updated list with up to date values — MiiNiPaaT 09:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Recommend renaming "Food" section
It's nonsense to have a section called "A" in the article also named "A." Not sure how Wiki would handle links directly to that section, however, so I'm just making the suggestion. Perhaps "food list" or "food table?" 174.99.111.243 00:15, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There aren't any issues linking to it; however using the same name as the article might be unhelpful. If you don't understand how it works, then don't speculate about it. --M0rphzone (talk) (*How to remove sidebar*) 00:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Saturation or Satiation?
Maybe it's just me, but what exactly does the word 'saturation' have to do with food? Was the intended word 'satiation'? Maybe one of the non-english native speaking devs mixed up those two words? Whatever the reason and regardless of how it is called in the code, the wiki page should call it something that makes sense, and to me 'satiation' makes much more sense in this context than 'saturation'. Anonymous 67.170.77.97 11:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * After checking a dictionary, both words mean about the same thing. Saturation means "to fill someone or something until their full" and satiation means "satisfied to the full", so no change is necessary in my opinion. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 10.120.2.126 (talk) at 13:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC). Please sign your posts with
 * I agree that "satiation" would be a much more natural usage, but apparently "saturation" is used in the code, so it's used here. This may reflect translation or usage by a non-native speaker of English.--Mental Mouse 01:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Rotten flesh needs updating
Rotten flesh no longer gives you food poisoning.

Instead, it makes you hungry.

Net effect: Eating only a single piece will cost you hunger; eating many will fill you up (because the hunger effect does not stack).

I don't have the ability to determine exact numbers. Can someone with knowledge of the source work it out?

Keybounce 07:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Unless something changed in the 1.3 snapshots, 'hunger' is the food poisoning effect; see Hunger. -- Orthotope 10:30, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Food stacking
Food stacks in stacks of 8 and not 64
 * Could you include a date of this? Because to my knowledge, all foods except legitimate cake stack in 64, what are you talking about? If it's a mod for when food was NOT stackable, then you should talk to the creator or give up because it is no longer needed.

Milk is not a 'Food'
You can confirm by opening Creative Inventory. Milk is categorized 'Miscellaneous', not 'Foodstuffs'. See also: --AMotohiko 23:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Nourishment value
Why is the spider eye in the second row in the Nourishment value chart? This is awkward. --139.30.104.215 00:11, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Because even though it only restores 2 hunger points (1 shank), it restores 1.6 times that in saturation. So if you can deal with the poison, and have lots of spider eyes, they actually will not only fill your hunger bar, but also fill your saturation.  And that's the point of "nourishment". --Mental Mouse 01:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Delete a section
Will someone delete the section "Food saturations"? It was added by some vandal. I tried to remove as much as I could, but, as an unregistered user, it wouldn't let me. I'd really appreciate if someone did. Thanks! --71.118.222.30 23:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

1.6 changes to hunger values
Some food values have changed. I don't want to update the ones I know because some will be updated whilst others are not, causing confusion.

I know carrots, rotten flesh, and pork heal twice a much. I assume potatoes and steak are the same.

1.8 changes to hunger values
The 1.8 patch notes indicate that Carrots and Baked Potatoes have had their food values lowered by 1 point each. The food and saturation table has been updated with the new food values, but I think the saturation values have been lowered for these foods as well. Both of these foods used to have a food efficiency of 1.2, and now they're listed as 1.6 and 1.44 respectively. I did a quick test in-game (jump 20+ times) and I don't think the saturation value for a carrot is higher than 4, let alone 4.8 like the table indicates.

Is there any way to see the raw hunger values for food items in the game code? This would let me update the table with known correct values.

WMSkyfall (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Changelog needs a 1.8 section
New foods and fish were added in 1.8, that needs to be indicated in the history section.

Keybounce (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I've added the new foods to the table, a few things are still missing from other aspects though, but I am reluctant to add them until a definition as far as what belongs in the section is added. I would opt for any information related directly to their use as a food/ingredient, which would note the first edition they are a food or ingredient, any new food recipes that use the ingredient, and changes to the usage of foods. – KnightMiner  t/c 22:33, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Fish and guardians
As of 1.8 you can obtain all fish from guardians.In the obtain section of all fish, it says fishing. Please add killing guardians. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 96.236.223.233 (talk) at 21:17, 03 June 2015 (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Merge with Hunger
I think this page should be merged with Hunger because the pages share related content. I would not support merging hunger with this page be cause this page has content that doesn't match hunger. The BlobsPaper.png 01:42, 11 September 2015 (UTC)


 * To translate, I think you mean the main Page, page merge, as a suggestion. Then, to Not, merge the "Talk" pages - like this one - with the other.  I'd been looking for "exhaustion," though, and personally I think there should be some mention of exhaustion on the food Page, not just the Hunger, 1.  ~ Yilante 108.215.209.201 18:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hunger is about the mechanic, while this page is a category of items. While hunger is mainly gotten from food, food has uses other than hunger and hunger can be affected by status effects as well. Instead, I would replace the "Hunger vs. Saturation" section with a main link to hunger. – KnightMiner  t/c 18:45, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Saturation potion effect
Shouldn't the saturation potion effect also be on this list? Technically, I'd say it would count as a food (though it can never be obtained in normal gameplay), since you "eat" it. --Pokechu22 (talk) 23:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Merge the raw and cooked meats with one title
Hello. I asking to merge the raw and cooked meats (not fish) with one title (example: Raw Porkchop with Cooked Porkchop with one title, simply "Porkchop". The raw and cooked porkchop can then be redirected to the "Porkchop" article. Question is abut the Raw Beef and Steak articles, which title can be used?

Asked merges:
 * Raw Porkchop with Cooked Porkchop. New title: Porkchop
 * Raw Beef with Steak. New title: Beef?
 * Raw Mutton with Cooked Mutton. New title: Mutton
 * Raw Chicken with Cooked Chicken. New title: Chicken (food)
 * Raw Rabbit with Cooked Rabbit. New title: Rabbit (food)

Any questions: ask them below. -- Philip57sundfors TALK CONTRIBUTIONS 08:44, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you aware there's an undiscussed merge proposal with significant opposition, which, just like your post, provides absolutely no reasons as to why these pages should be merged? --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 10:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The reason for the merge is: The raw and cooked meat articles does not need separate articles. They can be merged with the raw and cooked food and have a title that is simply the food's name.-- Philip57sundfors TALK CONTRIBUTIONS 10:44, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not a reason to merge, it's a rephrasing of "we should merge these articles". --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 11:47, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I believe the reasoning was meant to be "because they're raw and cooked versions of the same food, thus they don't need separate articles", similarly to fish.
 * As for "significant opposition", there's a significant amount of text written by the opposing side, but only 2 users actually opposing (at least in the discussion regarding the topic). 3 if you count the one user who supported fish being split into raw and cooked. Meanwhile, 5 users support, as they signed the project. 7 including Philip here and one of the users opposing the fish split who wasn't already signed on to the project.
 * Me, I don't particularly care either way, though I would like it to be consistent. So, either split fish or merge the others. That being said, I lean slightly in favor of splitting fish. Splitting them would make it a neater cooked fish for cooked cod and salmon, raw fish for the raw ones, including pufferfish and clownfish, and then just fish for the mobs, with the current disambiguation page moved to fish (disambiguation). - Princess Nightmoon (Splash Potions.gifLingering Potions.gif) 12:39, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Sweet berry error
The sweet berries give an error in the table. I'm surprised this wasn't noticed before. I tried to edit it, but that section doesn't seem to contain the letters "berr" at all! I have no idea how it appears on the page then, but it's not correctly done apparently. Fabian42 (talk) 14:27, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Fixed for now; the template that generates the table didn't expect to not have a numeric value for saturation. -- Orthotopetalk 14:52, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Broken tropical fish link
This page links to the tropical fish mob when I think it was supposed to link to the tropical fish item, but I can't figure out how to fix the link. Can someone tell me how to fix it? an_awsome_person (talk) 02:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * When pufferfish and tropcial fish link changed to food item, invsprite changed to missing sprite. ImakerB (talk) 21:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The sprites look fine to me. Can it possibly be because we're using different web browsers? an_awsome_person (talk) 14:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)