User talk:KnightMiner/Archive 4

Pocket Edition data values - change of items in light blue category
In Pocket Edition data values, it looks like you added many items to a "Light Blue" category titled "Cannot be obtained no matter what." With the exception of Air, the rest of the items on this page are available in player survival inventory via supplemental apps. I run MCPE-0.11.1 and PocketMine in ios. I survival, I play with Fire, Glowing Obsidian, and Ghasts because of Pocketmine. (This app logs into your local multiplayer world, and the '"fake" user drops items you request in front of you. It works because MCPE does not validate player inventory.)  In short, I would like to change these items back to the "Red" category: "Cannot be legitimately obtained. Only available via inventory editors". Thanks. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Babyrabbit (talk • contribs) at 14:05, 02 July 2015 (UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * Done. I guess I figured the Pocket Edition has those IDs removed like the PC edition. If you need to set any to the red case in the future, use the keyword "give", which adds the red category. – Knight Miner  15:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Bot request
Would you be able to use your bot to change all references to 0.12.0 in the history section to 0.12.1? Many thanks. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 02:58, 1 August 2015 (UTC)


 * – Knight Miner  03:49, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Would you be able to fix all double redirects and make all pages that link to End Portal (block) link to End Portal Frame? –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 10:53, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Most of the links were removed, though I ignored user and talk pages, along with any translation pages the bot could not handle easily. – Knight Miner  21:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Could you remove the Rewritten entity category from pages now that the Entity sub-project is complete? –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 13:25, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * again. Well, I guess its time to think of more categories to rewrite, as only one is left. – Knight Miner  14:43, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Could you fix all double redirects? Thanks. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk Contribs 11:56, 22 August 2015 (UTC)


 * – Knight Miner  14:34, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

help with WhatLinksHere
See: http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Technical_blocks&limit=500

For a lot of these pages, I cannot for the life of me find where the link to Technical blocks is supposed to be, for instance in the Czech, Icelandic or Hebrew pages, or even in Blocks. Do you have any insight into this? – Sealbudsman (Aaron) T/C 16:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Site cache it seems, between template cache and pages linking the former redirects. I sent my bot to poke all the pages, so it should be accurate now. – Knight Miner  17:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh nice, thanks. – Sealbudsman (Aaron) SealbudsmanFace.png T/C 18:04, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Water Bottle Arrows
Water Bottle Arrows aren't fake. There are some videos about them, and if you say /give water_bottle_arrow it works.

173.196.222.4 13:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Doesn't work in snapshots 15w36b or 15w31c. If there is a snapshot it can be confirmed to work in, that would be of interest in the History section of the Arrow page, but a short-lived, removed feature doesn't warrant having its own article. -- Orthotopetalk 16:06, 2 September 2015 (UTC)


 * You are most likely thinking of the arrow of splashing, which is obtained by the ID name "tipped_arrow" (without any affects applied).
 * In the future, please actually test things yourself in the latest snapshot before adding the information to articles – Knight Miner  22:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

0.12.1 history things
Can you use your bot to convert all the history sections for 0.12.1 into the PE Alpha part as the update was just released on Amazon, as shown here. Thanks. --MarioProtIV (talk) 22:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * – Knight Miner  03:38, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Bot Request (not to be confused with the second nonarchived topic on the list)
I request for an tag to be put on all of the proposed splits and proposed merges that I made in talk pages. Boorider7 (talk) 21:03, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * It is way to complicated to detect whether a discussion is a proposal or not (bots run mainly on find and replace or direct adding of text, and in neither case would it really know if a discussion was a merge discussion or just someone agreeing with another user).
 * Also, that template is hardly required to be used, so there is no real need to add it to a bunch of archived discussions, especially when the main point is to make it easier to see the result (which is not required on closed topics as much). – Knight Miner  21:13, 13 September 2015 (UTC)