Talk:Commands

Split "Raw JSON text" section to a new page
This suggestion has been for a long time. That is: That is not just for commands and exists as section seems not proper. So I intend to split it to page Raw JSON text format. That's all. -- Icyphantom  TalkIContributions 11:06, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I strongly agree. This will allow us to have a more clear description of the json structure of text, etc. liach (talk) 16:16, 9 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Not only it's not just for commands (as Icyphantom said), but it will also help shortening the page. 78.193.28.136 14:15, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , it's not appropriate to make it a section of Commands. --SolidBlock (not good at English!) 01:34, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * icyphantom@liachmodded Is it ok to move now? --SolidBlock (not good at English!) 10:45, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I think it's time: All comments until now are support, and it has been for a too long time.-- Icyphantom  TalkIContributions 09:02, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * that Bedrock Edition's page is Bedrock Edition raw JSON text format. For consistency, it might be better to split this to Java Edition raw JSON text format. It's also possible these could be merged onto the same page; however I don't know if that is a good idea. jahunsbe (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * per above, plus it's been months.-- LakeJasonFace.png Lakejason0  (Talk • Contribs) 12:56, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Looks like this has been done. See Raw JSON text format, and separate sections there about Bedrock and Java. Amatulic (talk) 14:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Move /resupply?
Is there a good reason that /resupply isn't in the Removed Commands table? It was only ever in Bedrock, doesn't have a page, and is no longer in any version of the game. -- DigiDuncan! (talk) 06:41, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

--108.198.127.77 17:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

No command block
Which commands cannot be executed via the command block? (184.22.110.242 08:22, 13 March 2020 (UTC))

Code connection
I have no window10 so I have some question about commands for code connection.

Do /code, /move, /remove, etc. really not exist in minecraft for win10 with code connection?

If we haven't installed code connection, do these commands for agent still exist in EE or BE?--Chixvv (talk) 02:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Shouldn't we say when commands were added/removed in the history?
Hello everyone, a little while ago, Thomanski "Removed all specific command history and kept the history about the command system overall" (I'm quoting from his edit summary) because subpages were created for each command.

While this certainly made sense for changes like the addition of /team modify displayName, I feel like it makes sense to at least say when entire commands were added/removed in the history, just to have an overview of that. What do you think about it? Sagessylu (talk) 12:14, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Of corse we shoud!--108.198.127.77 17:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Whitespace is sensitive in command files (teleport arguments)
I just dealt with a spurious "Cannot mix world & local coordinates (everything must either use ^ or not)" in a datapack. Turns out the problem was extra spaces among the arguments for /fill. Even spaces between the two coordinate triads triggers the message. Since all the visible arguments were caret refs, the only thing I can think is that it's taking the extra spacing as a null argument and defaulting it to (absolute) 0. BTW, this was in vanilla 1.16.3. --MentalMouse42 (talk) 12:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Detecting a new player
So I was attempting (and also messing around) to make a parkour map. I obviously wanted to make it look cool by adding color text and everything. However, I wanted to make a welcome message appear when a new player joins the game. I'm not really familiar with commands, so is there any way to do this? Also, is there a video or website or something that explains how the commands work more simply that reading it off the wiki? Thanks, ChipsAndSalsa (talk) 02:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The discord is probably a better place to ask about this; that said, you might try using two tags: "new player" and "welcomed".  First tag any player as new who hasn't been welcomed, then send the message to any player with the "new" tag, then replace the "new" tag with the "welcomed" tag.  Using the two tags should avoid atomic-operation problems when a bunch of players join at once. --MentalMouse42 (talk) 03:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Split between Java Edition Commands, Bedrock Edition Commands, and Education Edition Commands

 * I the split because the command subpages will also be split. The Great Spring (talk | contribs) (Tagalog translation) 04:03, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * not for that (which wouldn't happen) but because it's unnecessary, the table shows edition specificity well enough.  Nixinova   T   C   04:20, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I the split because it will be easier to navigate. I hate that we have three different versions of Minecraft commands all jampacked into one single page. It's extremely dumb... Though the subpages wouldn't need to be split tho that's fine. The commands page is just too long. (posted 19 jan 2021) --VykeType (talk) 03:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Use the below discussion. TheGreatSpring (talk) 03:32, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I the split for the same reasons as above. --99.111.19.232 13:47, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

A somewhat different proposal
I propose a different way to approach this split. I don't think the subpages are that much of a problem, and we can just turn Commands into a disambiguation of the three pages. The subpages will remain where they are. Here is my proposal: Any thoughts? I personally this change. Blockofnetherite Talk Contributions 18:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) The subpages remain the same
 * 2) Commands will become a disambiguation listing the three pages
 * 3) The three pages will list each of their features and how they work, due to how commands in these three editions vary differently.


 * I think it isn't necessary to create different pages for every command for the different versions as a lot of the information would be repeated. However, I think it's a good idea to split the Commands page as it is quite long and somewhat confusing. - Cherryblossom000 (talk/contributions) 06:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Splitting along edition lines. The majority of information is relevant to Java Edition, so splitting the pages would only slightly shrink its page. The Bedrock/Education Edition pages would also require a lot of duplicate information. The only real chunk of information that would be removed from the Java Edition page is the BE Debug commands. I would support splitting those or collapsing them since they aren't really useful except from a historical perspective. Jahunsbe (talk) 15:04, 17 January 2021 (UTC)


 * but personally, I am TheGreatSpring (talk) 03:32, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * per Jahunsbe. BDJP (t 07:00, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I and welcome this change, as a Bedrock player trying to understand broken commands is already hard, but having explanations crammed up and mixed with Java features makes it impossible! MetalManiac at ya&#39; service fellow human! (talk) 17:20, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I had rewritten this page, see, and made commands in each edition clearer. So I think it unnecessary to split it now.--Chixvv (talk) 14:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Split based on topic instead of edition
The proposal above proposes to split the article into the two editions. I propose to instead split it into, for example (I'm open for other suggestions):
 * "Commands" for a basic overview
 * "Target selectors" (currently you actually need to click a link to view this section, why not extract it altogether?)
 * "Data tags"
 * "Coordinates" (article already exists, could be expanded to add local and relative coordinates; alternatively have a separate article "Coordinate notation"?)
 * "Command syntax" (?)
 * "Permission level"
 * "List of commands"

The current article is kind of a mess and makes it difficult to find something specific.

Note that this split is not necessarily incompatible with the one above. Both can happen at the same time if desired (although I don't think that makes much sense) | violine1101 (talk) 12:47, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I am constantly frustrated by this page. I don't think I'm alone in that the way I most often use it is to reach a specific command I'm interested in, but the summary table is inexplicably and ridiculously at the very bottom of the page. (I realize I could go directly to the command subpage, but readers shouldn't be expected to know when or how to do that.) This page should be the summary, with table entries linking to subpages and everything else moved to a main page or at least collapsed until it's needed, depending on length. — Auldrick (talk) 14:10, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Yep. Each one of these topics is very distinct and is very important. They should all be pages OR subpages. VykeType (talk) 03:01, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I will this, because it seems like because many people dislike splitting among edition lines, it ends up creating a large page which will definitely help, but not enough. Really, I just wanted this page split somehow to clean up this mess. This seems to be a better option, and I assume the subpages will remain the same. Not sure about making these subpages (like Commands/Data tags, Commands/Target selectors, Commands/Command syntax, or Commands/Permission level), because although it generally makes sense, the issue is 1) It may be confusing with the existing subpages (of course, the commands  to  have ever existed), 2) Subpages are not so well supported or promoted by wiki infrastructure (from the random page button never getting there, and other things), and 3) More than just commands may use these proposed split pages, as Functions use target selectors and permission level, right? Blockofnetherite Talk Contributions 00:40, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Overall, here are my thoughts about this page:
 * splitting in general
 * splitting upon edition lines
 * splitting upon 's proposal to split among topic (currently the only proposal that doesn't split upon edition lines, may be improved).
 * The same proposal as above that I put "Stronger support", only that these pages would be subtopics, as I prefer having them independent rather than a subpage for the 3 reasons
 * splitting the existing subpages for each command, as they are fine the way it is
 * not splitting at all.
 * Blockofnetherite Talk Contributions 00:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I did not take splitting the subpages into consideration and I'm not advocating for it. My proposal is exclusively about splitting the "Commands" article itself and wouldn't affect the command subpages. | violine1101 (talk) 10:19, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * To add onto this, I'd personally also prefer these new split-off articles to not be subpages of Commands but articles in their own right. The subpages of "Commands" should be reserved for the commands themselves. | violine1101 (talk) 10:23, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * . TheGreatSpring (talk) 00:44, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , this page is so messy, confusing, and hard to navigate. I also personally per above.Humiebee (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

/getchunks not in BE
The /getchunks and /getchunkdata do not exist in BE NotRobotForSure (talk) 01:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * They do. They're just hidden commands.--Chixvv (talk) 02:36, 17 February 2021 (UTC)