User:Frozenne

Why, hello there. I am a simple player of the rather enjoyable game known as Minecraft, as I will assume most who visit this wiki are. I like knowing every detail about a game, including previously available items and creatures that have been removed, and well known fandom topics. Why is this important? It's not at all important, but I wanted to give a brief overview of myself.

I am a member of this wiki because I love Minecraft, but I dislike the way the wiki is run. I haven't come across a single admin that I like. (If an admin comes across this, please do not be offended; my opinion doesn't matter in the slightest.) Recently I have come across numerous talk pages that mention Giants and Herobrine. As a lover of video game details and fandom, I was surprised to discover that both topics were considered inappropriate to have their own pages. This topic was hard for me to avoid, as I read talk pages just as much as the informational pages, and read both sides of both debates. I will inject my opinion into my user page (rather than reviving old arguments on old talk pages) because I can and because my opinion shouldn't offend anybody as it really doesn't matter.

Giants
I believe Giants should have their own page, or a subsection of the Zombie page. I believe this because they have code in the game which can allow them to be spawned while using hacks. If the code still exists, it is possible Notch may still be planning to include them in the final version of the game, as he has said he wants to add boss mobs; what would be more boss than a huge creature wandering over the landscape, demolishing blocks in its way and having incredible amounts of health?

"But that's only a potential addition. Notch never said he was planning on adding them besides that one youtube video." (Not that it would matter if he said it or tested it; supposedly Spiders were supposed to drop web when killed way back when they were introduced, and they still don't.) While it is true that Giants are a potential update, they still have a current rudimentary state. I myself was surprised that players could still spawn Giants using a hack, but they seemed to be able to function somewhat well; the first place I went after finding these videos was the wiki, and could find no information on a standard page.

It's all fine and proper if Giants don't deserve their own page; it makes sense, as fewer players would know of their existence... or even care without them being a threat to their castle. However, the main argument against them having a page was that they are a prefix mob. This is understandable, as they seem to use the same code as Zombies. The counter argument made (albeit less... clear) was that Zombie Pigmen are a prefix of Pigmen, so why should the two variants of Pigmen be allowed two pages while the two variants of Zombies only be allowed one, when both groups include an unused mob. I believe this is a good point, and in my (unnecessary) opinion should have been a considered more than it was.

When I first noticed there was a separate page for Pigmen I was a little surprised; I wasn't bothered at all, because I have always felt more information was better than less. This was why I was so surprised Giants were not allowed to have their own page. "Surely this is a double standard!" was my reaction. I still believe it is, and I also believe that the double standard is caused because of the hype between the two mobs: Pigmen are more "interesting" in the long run (seeing as some players have hypothesized that they will form a basis of npc interaction within the game), while Giants are "only" big Zombies. This is a fair evaluation of the value of the creatures, as I suspect if both were implemented I would care more about Pigmen than Giants. However, whether something is interesting or not does not decide whether it should be included in a wiki.

How may I explain this... Pigmen are mobs that have not been officially released. Notch has probably tested them somewhat and decided they are not ready to be released or that they are never going to be released. Even if they can be hacked in it is hypothesized that they will behave similarly to Zombie Pigmen, with a few possible changes. Now replace "Pigmen" with "Giant Zombies" and replace "Zombie Pigmen" with "Zombies". The sentence's phrasing still works, showing that they are able to be compared. This is why I don't understand why Pigmen are allowed their own page, while Giants are not.

I really don't know how to make this more clear, and I apologize for that. My (irrelevant) opinion is that Pigmen should be merged with Zombie Pigmen, while Giant[ Zombie]s should be merged with Zombies.

tl;dr: Giants are to Zombies as Pigmen are to Zombie Pigmen. Why should Pigmen have a page while Giants don't?

Herobrine
The other page I would like to see returned is Herobrine's page. The justification for the removal of this page seemed to be that he did not exist in the game and therefore didn't have a place here; that he was only a hoax, meant to lead new players astray. I read a copy of the Herobrine page before it was deleted, and that was how I learned about the details of the "legend".

Without the page I would have had only a vague idea as to what the inside joke of Herobrine was about. I would never have believed something like this story (as I've seen quite a few fakes in my lifetime), but I could see people believing it. Removing the page only causes people to wonder more, and the hesitation over an answer can lead some people to decide something false is true. We know Herobrine is a hoax; why not keep a page up (perhaps a protected version) and keep new people from believing the false tale? I would rather new players be able to see the page, read it, and say "LOL I almost believed that!" than continue to feel left out of the Minecraft community or pass on their misinformation to others.

On the justification that Herobrine is not canon and therefore doesn't belong here... May I please point you to several other wikis? The first one that comes to mind for me is a few pages on Bulbapedia (a Pokémon online encyclopedia using wiki formatting) about subjects that don't exist in game; for example, see these pages:
 * http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Pok%C3%A9Gods
 * http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/S.S._Anne#Rumors
 * http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Unreleased_Pok%C3%A9mon_and_characters
 * http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Shipping
 * http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/HSOWA

These are all pages meant to enlighten visitors as to what a fandom term or subject is. (Fun fact: Bulbapedia actually has a project fandom, meant to help people learn more about things the fans have invented.) How embarrassing it would be for a person to think they know what HSOWA is and post about Hoenn's Second Open World Association, using the abbreviation, only to realize they were way off base? If for no other reason we should have something on Herobrine to keep people from making assumptions and making fools of themselves.

It would also be nice to note that the second link there points directly to a community rumour that had many people doing their best to try it in game. I tried it. This rumour came to be because somebody decided it would be funny to post online, and other people picked up on it and believed it; if they had had a reliable source of information to check with they would have known it was false right away and not have been duped into wasting a significant amount of time in their games. This can be directly compared to what Herobrine could have been without this wiki previously having a page for him.

(The third link is also something that should be taken into note on other subjects: Just because something was tried and removed doesn't mean it shouldn't be recorded. A wiki should record all relevant information about the topic's past. Bulbapedia takes it a bit far by displaying beta sketches that appeared only once or twice, but history is not simply limited to officially released patches... Do you see what I'm trying to say about how this relates to Notch's comments on future content, Giants, Glitches, Slimes, Rana and cohorts, etc?)

If it can be said that Herobrine opens the floodgates for many fan-made stories about Minecraft mythos, then it can be said that any story written by any fanboy of ANY game/book/movie/tv show/whatever could be able to have an article about said story on Wikipedia just because that other famous fanfiction does. (Wicked, a best selling and imo well written book could actually be termed fanfiction, and yet it has its own article.) If Wikipedia is able to weed out the unsatisfactory articles, then why can't this community? Some of us are smart people (although I don't know yet whether I'd consider myself within those ranks). Perhaps if too many people wanted to make articles there could be a page on "Possible Origin of a Minecrafter and his Environment", which creates summaries of the main ideas of exactly why your character is stranded in a deserted landscape, or why there are green exploding phalluses that try to kamikaze you when you get too close. Maybe "religions" could be on this page as well (or a separate one), with pictures of monuments and shrines that tend to get built more often than other buildings (ie pyramids). (Once I get enough gold blocks, iron blocks, and obsidian I plan on building a shrine for Notch, even more so now that I can build it out of sandstone in the middle of a desert)

The argument that it is a vanity page can be bypassed by not making a big deal of the originators of the hoax. Tbh I don't give two hoots about the creator, only the story. It's the same way I don't care about the name of the guy who made Santa Claus as well known as he is today, I just care about why he exists and what people believe about him.

I really don't understand why after there was a debate about Herobrine's page existing there was a rule added to the Minecraft Rules page:
 * 19 Things that are not in the game and have simply been thought up by people ("legends", hoaxes, religions, etc.) are not allowed. This is because they have nothing to do with the game itself and are primarily used by trolls.

Actually, I understand quite well. I don't mean to make any personal attacks here (that is absolutely not my intention), but said rule's phrasing just screams my-wiki-my-rules. Herobrine may be used by trolls and may have originated from trolls, but just because he is adored by many people does not mean every person who posts is a troll. I love building little shelters in my games that I pretend will protect Herobrine from storms (when Notch finally makes weather). Not once have I vandalized this wiki; tbh I'm scared to edit the actual pages for risk of ending up banned for misunderstandings. I am not a troll and don't intend to be. Assuming everybody who likes something is a troll is a common trap, but please don't fall into it or you'll end up being bitter about the subject. (On another note, please rewrite this; it comes across as unprofessional and just looks... bad.)

We are supposed to not create "parody/comedic/nonsense/hoax pages or pages that could mislead players". I really don't understand how a thorough explanation of Herobrine, including in big bold letters that he is and has been a hoax can be misleading to others. At this point Herobrine has gone beyond being a silly thing to an actual conscious entity the community has become attached to. I know this rule was probably made to deal specifically with the old nickname for redstone (see Redstone Names, below) but it could not really apply to Herobrine without a stretch.

This link right here I think somewhat identifies what I'm trying to point out about fandom pages:
 * http://goldensunwiki.net/Shipping

tl;dr If the Golden Sun wiki can have an article on fanpairings and mentions a ONE TIME CRACK PAIRING WHERE THE MAIN CHARACTER TRIES TO SHAG HIS ROOF I think we'd be fine adding a page for Herobrine. Especially since we'd be doing it to inform, not to amuse.

Games
I believe that this wiki should have a summary page for games and such. It's nice to have Spleef as an official page, but it seems unfair to include only one game rather than several. If this list/page belongs on the forums and not the wiki, fine, but the Spleef page should have a better justification for existing other than "Notch plays it".

Redstone Names
I believe the Redstone page should have a note about the brief time period it had being nicknamed Aspergite by a select few people. I know this name can be considered offensive; however, afaik this naming fiasco was what led to Notch finally picking a name. I don't see how this is not of note, yet not one of the Redstone articles mention this subject at all.

Keep in mind that Wikipedia itself has a list of racial slurs, some of which are very offensive. If the brief nickname of Redstone offends you, I suggest you take a look at that list.