Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion

create a new section

Broken external links on Tf Wiki pages

Everyone who desire to work with this list and fix broken links can do so--FreeXMan Talk | Cont 11:02, 28 May 2012 (PDT)

What do you mean by fixing? --Enthers. (I find this work intriguing. How about yourself, sir?) 16:24, 7 June 2012 (PDT)

Finding new versions of old pages, or removing the link if no current version exists. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 20:26, 7 June 2012 (PDT)

{{Backpack item}} improvements (again)

Since only 4 people chimed in last time.

Old template:

"Le Swag"
Face-Melting Knife - Kills: 1337
Upon a successful backstab you rapidly disguise as your victim
Silent Killer: No attack noise from backstabs
Wearer cannot disguise

New template:

"Le Swag"

Face-Melting Knife - Kills: 1337
Upon a successful backstab you rapidly disguise as your victim
Silent Killer: No attack noise from backstabs
Wearer cannot disguise

New fonts, consistent colors and font size, blah blah blah. Putin your 2 cents, please. rZ 13:20, 28 May 2012 (PDT)

 Support I like the fact that it is the font and font colour from the game itself. Taser9001 01:16, 29 May 2012 (PDT)

 Snap! 02:28, 29 May 2012 (PDT)

 Against because it is: Better readable <or> More Original ; I think it is better to show it more cleary, instead of a 100% copy of every game aspect. Also in each resolution the size differs, f.e. in low resolutions the wiki also is not good readable... (this has nothing to do with the topic, but i wanted to mention it). TheDoctor 13:38, 31 May 2012 (PDT)

 Against It's not how the graphic looks in-game, so why change it? Also, this text is harder to read than the original. --Enthers. (I find this work intriguing. How about yourself, sir?) 18:59, 6 June 2012 (PDT)

Actually it is a replica of the in-game appearance. Also it remains readable, which is all that matters. Not how much more- or less-readable it is compared to the old version. If that were the case we would be using White on Black and the Helvetica font to be absolutely maximum readable - however this is obviously not necessary as long as it remains above the baseline of legibility. 18:17, 7 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support I like it. —Moussekateer·talk 21:40, 8 June 2012 (PDT)

 Neutral Not as easy on the eye as I would expect, but I guess it'd be okay. Hm.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 13:28, 11 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support It's nice. It synergises with the Wiki really well, as well as strengthening the link between the game and the Wiki itself. 12:18, 14 June 2012 (PDT)

 Neutral The TF2 font is fairly readable, however I'm not sure we should be copying every aspect from the game verbatim when the current font works just fine. As our goal is to communicate information clearly, why should we make it more difficult even if it is only slightly? We should probably get more user input from different TF2 communities as this is a site-wide change, before taking any action (official forums, Facepunch, reddit etc.), to see whether this change would be accepted. Also, as the fonts are hosted by Wind, we'll need his approval as this might increase the load on his server due to this being site-wide. i-ghost 09:28, 15 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support | It would be an extremely good addition to the wiki, if this were implemented. -NameUser 22:28, 25 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support I don't see why not. It's still perfectly readable and looks better --Liquid Fire @H|H 12:36, 26 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support This template is meant to be a reproduction of the in-game thingy (that's why it looks lik the in-game one), so why make a compromise on its fonts when we can make them the same? It's still readable, and it doesn't make any difference to the existing load on my server because all fonts are loaded all the time anyway. — Wind 17:02, 26 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support Looks good. Gives everyone a good picture of TF2-style text. Collector1

 Support Yeah, new text is much better. I like it. And it's very readable. Bel 01:15, 29 June 2012 (PDT)

 Against I find this new template's text more difficult to read than current template's text. Good idea though. -Asplode 12:10, 30 June 2012 (PDT)

 Against I find it harder to read. Plus the original text is how it's like in-game Wariopunk 03:31, 9 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support Looks to be more in keeping with the spirit of TF2, and this wiki. It's larger, and consequently easier to read. Gilgamesh 07:16, 31 July 2012 (PDT)

 Neutral It follows the spirit of TF2, which I approve of. However, the font will be harder to read on smaller resolutions. JayLow 10:06, 1 August 2012 (PDT)

How should the "class" taunts pages be improved?

So i just saw that the Soldier taunts page lists all taunts, but mostly a link is missing on how the taunts are performed. So i added myself one link to a demonstration video. (Look here) But i thought this way is not that perfect and we need a better way of doing it. Sooo we need a strategy. Suggestions pleaseee, because i have no idea about either a template adjustment to the videos of each taunts(sets) or if there should be seperated movies about it. TheDoctor 10:53, 1 June 2012 (PDT)

I could conceivably make a script that will composite the frames from hlmv into a video file suitable for upload. I'll make it my next project after the quality database is finished. 10:54, 1 June 2012 (PDT)

There's no need to have a video demonstration on the taunt pages; the images and text are sufficient for showing what happens during the taunt and the weapon demonstration project shows the taunts too. i-ghost 13:37, 11 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support I was thinking about maybe using a .gif or attached video like you said, mainly the attached video like the demonstration video for weapons due to .gif's either being choppy or not in good quality. -Domo1037

Ad media

whats with the ad media everywhere? a lot of things are highlighted with ad media. TubbyMonster 20:55, 4 June 2012 (PDT)

What? The official wiki doesn't use ads, while www.tf2wiki.com (the unofficial one) does. Where are these ads you speak of? — Xenak (Talk|Contribs) 20:56, 4 June 2012 (PDT)

...ok maybe its just my computer but things are highlighted in green and it links me to ad media shananigans. TubbyMonster 21:04, 4 June 2012 (PDT)

Hmm... That's weird. Is it your browser? I know of a couple that basically have built in ad machines. — Xenak (Talk|Contribs) 21:06, 4 June 2012 (PDT)

Most likely you have something injecting ads into the webpage, be it a malicious browser extension or some adware program on your computer or your ISP itself injecting ads into the webapges you see (happens). This wiki has no advertisements on links, or banner ads, or pop-ups, or anything. — Wind 21:08, 4 June 2012 (PDT)

Maybe run a scan on your computer to see what's going on? Have you ran any executables or been to any 'unusual' websites in the past few days? -NameUser 22:59, 25 June 2012 (PDT)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Seperate scoreboard page

I was looking through the HUD page today, specifically for information on the Scoreboard and the points one gets for doing actions. To my surprise, there isn't a page that has both scoreboard information and the points one recieves. I was a bit surprised, really, so I set about making this new page. This unifies the necessary Scoreboard information, as well as detailing where things are on the scoreboard (with that new image) and makes things clear and concise (I hope)! With this page, there wouldn't be a need for the Points page (thus it can be deleted), and people could get two lots of information from a single page. Also, considering the information about the scoreboard has been taken from the HUD page, a simple sentence can be put in it's place alongside the generic Main article: Scoreboard thing.

I just wanted other people's opinion's before I considered posting this. Thanks in advance (also, I apologise if this discussion is in the wrong section)! 12:49, 6 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support zis rZ 13:29, 6 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support It'll be good to have a page explaining points and what exactly the elements of the scoreboard do. — Xenak (Talk|Contribs) 13:43, 6 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support It makes sense to link the scoreboard page with the points page, and the points page is so short it feels like something is missing. This page fits the bill nicely. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 13:45, 6 June 2012 (PDT)

 Comment Done, thanks everyone! 12:14, 14 June 2012 (PDT)

The preceding discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Class article galleries are a mess

I'd really like to clean up the class galleries. It's been on my list of things to do for awhile. Take the Engineer gallery for example. We have concept art, noteworthy class stills, and promo stuff. I don't think anything having to do with other games should be present on these galleries. All of those Worms images belong on the Worms: Reloaded article, all of the MNC and SMNC stuff belongs on those respective articles. I also think the "Class cards" should just be removed. They aren't cards, they're images of the classes. We have one of those at the top of the article. The class's default arsenals should either be removed to added to class infobox at the top of the article. Once the promos and "class cards" are gone, I think images should be sorted by age, oldest first. So, TF/TFC images first, then TF2 concept art, then trading cards, then any other TF2-age shots worth keeping. I believe these changes will make the galleries look much better, cleaner, as well as flesh out the promo articles a little. Opinions? --SilverHammer 13:19, 11 June 2012 (PDT)

They are actually cards. Oh wait, now I know what you mean. Yeah, those are unnecessary. 13:20, 11 June 2012 (PDT)

The other versions of the killicons

I have noticed throughout the wiki that pages which have killicons only have the versions that are seen when they apply to the player, and not the white-on-black ones when they don't. I believe we should use some CSS to make it so hovering over one of these killicons will show the white-on-black versions. This is of course easier said than done but I want to see whether everyone else thought it a good idea. rZ 14:51, 11 June 2012 (PDT)

It's Beige-on-Brown/Brown-on-Beige but  Support. 14:53, 11 June 2012 (PDT)

This doesn't add anything of value to the page which isn't already communicated by the image already in place. i-ghost 15:01, 11 June 2012 (PDT)

Paint Style Overlinking

When looking at the team colored painted variants for an item (such as Flip-Flops), the text RED and BLU are linked for every paint. This is a case of overlinking, and can be fixed, but would cause a lot of updates. The fix lies in {{Dictionary/items}}, wherein the team paints are all named (using RED and BLU links). By removing these links for all but the first paint (waterlogged lab coat IIRC) it would solve this problem. The catch lies in whether or not pages use this dictionary entry aside from via transclusion to {{Painted variants}}. Ideas? User:Darkid/Sig 18:35, 15 June 2012 (PDT)

Might I suggest that they don't need to be defined seperately or linked at all? Just replace (in the template) with a lookup for the base paint name and bolt on the team name, none of it linked... 06:15, 16 June 2012 (PDT)

Not linked at all sounds great. I don't see how you could configure it to not be defined separately, though. User:Darkid/Sig 07:34, 16 June 2012 (PDT)

It's been over a week since I said that, so I think that merits pushing this change. I'll wait a day or two if I hear anything against this in the next 2 hours... Darkid 12:23, 20 June 2012 (PDT)

 Disagree I don't know if I'd want to hunt around a table looking for the entry that holds the link. It's one thing to not link something more than once in a flowing paragraph, but in a table like this someone might be looking specifically for Cream Spirit, and not even notice that Waterlogged is the only one with a link Balladofwindfishes 12:26, 20 June 2012 (PDT)

(am now holding off for 1 day) I have no trouble locating the links (they're in the Dictionary wrapper), and would (As per above) remove all the links. RED and BLU are linked to on any painted item's page in the navbox. I understand the sentiment, though, of hunt+peck through a table for a link. Darkid 12:32, 20 June 2012 (PDT)

Darkid, please realize that just because nobody has objected doesn't mean that everybody supported, and that it's not a legitimate reason to go ahead and make a change that will affect large amounts of the wiki. rZ 12:30, 20 June 2012 (PDT)

Hence my wait. However, a week is sufficient time for someone to read the thread and comment. I can't be asked to petition around to see if the topic is passable (by say posting on every admin's talk page). Darkid 12:32, 20 June 2012 (PDT)

 Disagree I think it's a lot easier to have the linked names. They're not that much of a bother, in fact they're tiny, and removing all but one or two of the links will look slightly odd in my opinion. 15:50, 20 June 2012 (PDT)

A quote from wikipedia's Manual of Style: Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead. I feel that this link set, while not *aggravating* per se, is a gross example of overlinking. Besides, the pages Red and Blue don't have that much to do with these paint colors, except that the paints look different when on these teams. That would indicate that a link to Paint Can would be more useful. The fix would not, as has been suggested, remove only a subsection of these links, it would instead remove all of them. Again, there is no need (and no need to assume) that people are going to have trouble/want to see the pages RED and BLU after/from this page. Darkid 16:04, 20 June 2012 (PDT)

Ahem. So, I see a few concerns:

• First, this change is hard to push. False: The strings are in a dictionary wrapper, and easy to change.
• Second, removing some of the links will cause an issue. True: Thus, all links will be removed.
• Third, removing all of the links will cause an issue. Debatable: However, it seems unlikely that A. People will want to read a page about sub-companies and merchandise for a fictional team after looking at paints for an item and B. People will have trouble finding these links if they want to do so.
• Fourth, removing these links will cause a massive update. Partially true: This change will update 182 hats (in all languages), and will update no more than that, as these strings are only used on paintable hat pages. The strings will be changed simultaneously, so that each page need update only once.

Feedback? Darkid 20:54, 21 June 2012 (PDT)

 I agree on all counts It's also going to be slightly more optimal to not have a dictionary entry throwing out links. 03:48, 22 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support There really isn't a big necessity of having those pages linked everywhere, so I guess it's okay to remove those links. Afterall, the two companies are already in the index, on the Main Page. And the RED and BLU pages aren't really that important in the hat pages, such that if they are left out of those articles, it won't make much of a difference. Also, the pages will look a lot better.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 16:56, 22 June 2012 (PDT)

 Agree Though, my suggestion is to simply remove all of the links for RED and BLU. It's rather obvious to anyone that has played the game for a few minutes that they're going to be team-colored. One thing that would also help this is to put both images for the team-colored previews in one column for each of the respective paints. The redundant names are also a bit of an eyesore. -- Lagg 20:28, 22 June 2012 (PDT)

Liquidfire says (Via IRC): I  Agree. In my opinion, they should only be showed once User:LiquidFire 15:43, 23 June 2012 (PDT)

 Agree Indeed, I prefer to have all the links removed. It will look far better than the sheer over-linking or the odd one-or-two links. At any rate, there are almost always links on every Hat's page that already link to the respective team pages. 15:51, 23 June 2012 (PDT)

 Agree Remove all links. Red and Blu are not important things to link to. Balladofwindfishes 16:04, 23 June 2012 (PDT)

Failing insane thunderstorms, I'll push this change tomorrow. Brace yourselves :P Darkid 16:07, 23 June 2012 (PDT)

Translating MediaWiki UI Strings

Hello everybody (again) (Don't you ever get tired of mah discussorz?),

I've come to realize that using our {{lang}} template, we can translate the MediaWiki UI with great ease. If we can get all of our translators together, we can contribute to translate most if not all of the UI.

For example, at the top of this page there is a header which says "Project page". This string is stored at MediaWiki:Nstab-project, which only admins can edit. If all the translators can meet together to translate these core UI strings, we can have a more localized UI for the other languages, which makes everything better. (For example, the Spanish version of Project page would be Página de proyecto (if I translated that correctly)).

Obviously, this would require admin approval, which in turn requires community approval. Please feel free to discuss, and add any additional pros or cons as you see fit. rZ 18:01, 22 June 2012 (PDT)

Concern #1: Time. How bad is this on that?

Concern #2: Ease of translation. Should be peachy.

Concern #3: Necessity. Eh... if you found more of these, I'd be happy.

Darkid 18:31, 22 June 2012 (PDT)

Look around you. All of the tabs on the top of the page, the options to move, delete, and otherwise modify pages, the quick links at the top of the page (My talk, etc), the sidebar to the left, the options while editing a page... There are many, many UI strings that can and should be translated. rZ 03:06, 23 June 2012 (PDT)

I am a russian translator and I have set 'russian language UI' in my wiki settings. Being logged in, instead of 'Project page' I see russian translation ('О проекте'). So guess UI is already localized. — Stormbird ^T│C 03:39, 23 June 2012 (PDT)

Missing images in some browsers

For some reason, The Scout's leaderboard class icon doesn't show up in Firefox. Nor do some achievement icons (forget which), or the Banana Peel's backpack icon. Why is this?Open Source Forever 17:22, 25 June 2012 (PDT)

They work fine in my Firefox 17:23, 25 June 2012 (PDT)

What version are you using? I have 13.0.1.Open Source Forever 17:33, 25 June 2012 (PDT)

Those Archive links

So I just noticed that 2010 and 2011 run January-December (Top-Bottom), while 2012 runs December-January (Top-Bottom). This should be fixed, and I'd quickly suggest to flip 2010 and 2011, since that way it would read Newest-Oldest (Top-Bottom). Darkid 18:23, 25 June 2012 (PDT)

As seems to be the catch phrase around here, Be Bold! So I'm pushing through these changes. Darkid 17:19, 26 June 2012 (PDT)

New idea

Hey guys, so today I thought of adding something to the item page of the wiki, trading price. This game does focus on the community a lot and trading seems to be a big part of it. Just an idea and I'm wondering what you guys think of it.

 No. Item prices are subjective and depend with each trade; the Wiki is focused on factual information. There are already several sites out there focused on item prices, but since it's not specific, objective information, we should leave it out of the WIki. Also, this has been suggested several times in the past and was rejected every single time, for the reasons specified above.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 05:42, 27 June 2012 (PDT)

 Oh, okay then I was just being the curious guy I am.

Template:Item icon

With the release of the new weapons, I have noticed an interesting occurrence in this template. When it is specified a link which does not exist, it simply displays a redlink. This could be changed with an to link to. Since this is a heavily used template, we should consider whether this is simply a minor inconvenience to be pushed with a later update, or if it should be pushed independently. Darkid 16:58, 27 June 2012 (PDT)

It's very doable, and the way it currently is does mess up the layout a lot. I'm going to go ahead and implement a similar version; it will try to use the backpack icon before it uses the unknown one. rZ 05:25, 28 June 2012 (PDT)

Scratch that, only an admin can do it. rZ 05:26, 28 June 2012 (PDT)

Dat protected page, yep. Anyways, it still seems a good idea. Anyone else wanna comment? Darkid 06:35, 29 June 2012 (PDT)

I suggest you go ask an admin about it, for example on the IRC channel.

Freakie

06:39, 29 June 2012 (PDT)

Two admins, WindPower and Moussekateer, agreed that the {{#ifexist:}} tag is too expensive for the server when this template is used many times in a single page. The best solution for now is to redirect the item icon images to the backpack images. rZ 06:42, 29 June 2012 (PDT)

I agree--but that's rather self-defeating, since they'll get overwritten. It is true that ifexist is expensive. BTW, how did you ask them? Darkid (|) 19:02, 29 June 2012 (PDT)

Sorry for the late response – I asked them through the #tfwiki-staff channel. rZ 12:08, 4 July 2012 (PDT)

Comics

Should the illustrations for "Soldier Needs a Home" and the Poopy Joe Senate Hearing transcripts be included in the Comics page? If not, are they going to just stay on the Pyromania page? 02:50, 28 June 2012 (PDT)

 Support The Poopy Joe script should be added. It's quite a story, and an addition to the TF2 lore. "soldier needs a home" is hilarious, but far too short. I wish the made the other pages as well. Anyway, it does explain how the dumpster diver set came to be. Perhaps that story will be continued some other time... K-Raider NL 02:23, 2 July 2012 (PDT)

TF2 Wiki Table of Contents

An Idea to help TF2 wiki user to search items with ease. It is an organized list with all classes and items.

The Organization works by using Althebeticalation, Classification, and Categorization.

The approved and finalized list will be placed on the navigation bar on the left side of this webage: or the TF2 Wiki sidebar.

Here is a picture preview: it will look much different on the actual page.

Tell me what you think. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by General Cap (talk) • (contribs) 13:34, 20:34, 28 June 2012

I took the liberty of correcting your formatting. Please create a new section and sign at the end of your posts with ~~~~. It will automatically add your signature and a time stamp. 16:44, 28 June 2012 (PDT)

I did. It just somehow got put to the side of the picture in stead of below if that's what you mean. Next time I will try a double space.

--General Cap 13:21, 29 June 2012 (PDT)

How would it work? Where would this list be located? What benefits would this list bring the Wiki? I need to know a little more about this list/project before I can make an educated opinion. — Xenak (Talk|Contribs) 13:58, 30 June 2012 (PDT)

Currently, that formatting hurts my eyes. However, the concept is a potentially useful one. This page does very nearly that already, it just isn't pretty. Honestly, if you were able to create and maintain it, there's no harm. However, I'm having trouble coming up with a good reason wherein I would actually want to see a list. Darkid (|) 14:04, 30 June 2012 (PDT)

A good reason for TF2 Wiki to have a Table of Contents is because Wikipedia is like an encyclopedia. I have never seen a book encyclopedia without a table of contents, so I thought it would be cool to add one. The list would also be best for searching all items on a single page, rather than having to go back a webpage and opening more pages to search for things, or by continuously searching for items. This also, is not the finalized product of the table of contents. If you would like a better idea of what it will look like, visit the hat Wiki page. I will repost that updated version very soon. I'm considering of also placing the item picture to the left of the item, the name in the middle, and the description and link on the right. I have also updated the above text.--General Cap 16:15, 1 July 2012 (PDT)

See: Hats

As I pointed out, we already have an alphabetized list (TOC). Likewise, the *search* functionality serves much better--you seem to have been implying that we'd list every hat, paint, item, etc on a single page (with images). This is too taxing. The sidebar is, as far as I know, too cluttered to really need any more items added to it. At best it would go on the main page, at worst it would go on the Hats page. What's wrong with the current hat list on the hats page (or misc list on the misc page)? They do the trick if you know what kind of item you need. Darkid (|) 16:18, 1 July 2012 (PDT)

Do you mean the Index? That's not really like a TOC. Also, there are only seven topics on the navigation sidebar. How would that clutter it more? Now that I think about it, why isn't the index on the side bar? Perhaps we should discuss this project more on the wiki chatline?--General Cap 10:57, 2 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support After General_Cap explained to me how this would work and where it would go, I now see that the benefits of this would be great to add to the wiki. Since the wiki is like an encyclopedia, having a list that shows everything could help a lot to get somewhere quickly. It doesn't even have to be for hats/miscs, either. It could document contests, major updates, hats/miscs, weapons, game mechanics, maps, characters, and much, much more all on the convenience of one page. — Xenak (Talk|Contribs) 11:13, 2 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support Like I said last time this was up for discussion. Would be good if this was entirely parasable with javascript in order to have a search/autocompletion feature for this, to make it a fast and searchable list. — Wind 19:21, 6 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support GeneralCap had explained me this idea months ago, and this means, he's been working on it for months too. Hell of a job to put all classes into that table of contents once he's fully done. I find the concept of this work very interesting and I believe it will massively improve the TF2Wikipedia if the administrators decide to give this idea a chance. This table documents alot, not just hats/miscs. Please don't let this slide away and ignore what he has been working on 2 months or more now. Discuss it if necessary, but I see great potential here. · T-Wayne · Talk 11:45, 11 July 2012 (PDT)

 No. You were told multiple times (some of those times by me) to start this discussion and insisted on bothering someone over email instead of doing it the right way. You've already burned a bridge with me, and this combined with the overall reinvention of the wheel I'm seeing doesn't give me much of a reason to voice support. -- Lagg 19:32, 13 July 2012 (PDT)

 No I honestly do not see the use of a list like this. If someone wanted to search for something but didn't know the exact name of what they were looking for, there are already numerous indices for doing so. On top of which, this is a Wiki, which has a search bar, which does serve a purpose. Finally, you have not presented a plan as to how to enact such a page or list, so unless you do then it simply creates a significant amount of work for others to plan out and execute. -- LordKelvin 19:41, 13 July 2012 (PDT)

It is just an Idea. Nothing has been approved at all yet. I can't go anywhere with this project until something has been approved. So far, I have no approval to actually publish this idea. The only thing I can do is ask for opinions if this would be a good idea. I am now planning to make a new model of the T.O.C on my own user discussion page. The picture was just a pre-view of what it would resemble. I've spent over two months in the making of the Table of Contents. I'm not willing to give it up now. Let me make an actual wiki page of the real T.O.C, and then consider if it should be put into effect or not. I will also admit that personal emailing was not a good idea. Everything I do from now on will be public, not just to one person. I apologize to WIND for doing this. --User:General Cap/signature

Cheese Wheel

Cheese Wheel

Somebody rename it please. I cant do it myself. --Genuine GAL 12:00, 4 July 2012 (PDT)

Yes you can.

1. Click the downward facing arrow tab at the top of the page.
2. Select Move.
3. Choose the new name and press the Move button.

Hopefully that'll solve your problem. (By the way, for future reference, the IRC is a much better place to ask for quick help.) rZ 12:06, 4 July 2012 (PDT)

I know. And I was the one who renamed Banana Peel, Goldfish and etc. But I couldnt rename the cheese ^^ Dunno why. Wiki said I cant do that. --Genuine GAL 11:57, 5 July 2012 (PDT)

should we have a section for MVM?

I understand how you guys want to keep the wiki from speculation, but we do have hard facts in the game code, solid easter eggs and secrets hinting towards something. We need somewhere that keeps this information together, i can only keep up from blotty relay's of information on SPUF.

There's no mention on here about the hidden tobor files, the robot heads, the animations, and it would be excelent to have an official resource on the Mystery thats being built up. the info we have is what valve want us to know! --Drake3011 14:25, 10 July 2012 (PDT)

It's still speculation. MVM is not something we plan to make an article about unless it is officially announced or released. rZ 14:50, 10 July 2012 (PDT)

City on Fire Item Sets

Public Enemy
Urban Professional
Dumpster Diver

Would now be an appropriate time to restore these pages? The Mann Co. Store now offers these item sets in bundles similar to the Shogun Pack.

Does this qualify as an item set or are we waiting for the tooltip to show up when mousing over?

Lastly, has anyone tried to craft the set hat with 4 refined and a weapon? 01:13, 12 July 2012 (PDT)

Yes the last thing is interesting for me too. --Genuine GAL 06:51, 13 July 2012 (PDT)

It's an item set when the schema says it is. At the moment, it doesn't. rZ 07:04, 13 July 2012 (PDT)

Unarmed Combat

Hey guys whats the problem with this? Wtf then the Wingstick? I think it should be their. Hey editors stop deleting this with no reason. --Genuine GAL 21:05, 14 July 2012 (PDT)

Plz say something. I dont like IRC i shall never go to talk on it. This guy - Hinaomi - is continuing to remove information. --Genuine GAL 05:44, 15 July 2012 (PDT)

If I remember correctly, these "level does not appear in backpack" bugs were around before, and were also removed for the same reason Hinaomi is giving you. In my opinion, the information you posted does not constitute bug-worthy information, nor does it constitute trivia (so don't consider moving it to there, as you were saying to Hinaomi). 05:52, 15 July 2012 (PDT)

This is a strange thinking... Its not a clip bug (like "brass beast clips with heavy's hands") that is very common. This is a rare bug which appears only for a few items in the game. So why not to mention it? I think we must do it for other tf2 players. So please stop delete it just because some tf2-wiki-editors think that it is a common bug. --Genuine GAL 07:32, 15 July 2012 (PDT)

Every item Does or Does not show a weapon level. This is evident from the infobox, or from anyone having the item. Please do not make more of these edits, or re-do any undone edits until we can resolve this issue. Likewise, please do not take personal offense or insult others if you disagree with them. Darkid (|) 07:37, 15 July 2012 (PDT)

This is an oldish discussion but I wanted to chime in. The Unarmed, Made Man and Bird-Man are all set up properly to show their levels, so it is a bug that they do not show up. They are missing key strings in tf_english, which Valve forgot to add. Once you plug those in, the levels show up fine. It's a bug from an oversight of Valve's. By all accounts the items are suppose to show their levels, they just don't because of missing strings. 100% a bug Balladofwindfishes 17:27, 22 July 2012 (PDT)

Project Feature Length

I came across some less viewed pages of the wiki (like those for custom maps and community updates) and I thought to myself, What if a bunch of editors worked together to make the article better, so we can feature it? A little more thinking and I had an idea: Make a "behind-the-scenes spotlight", where editors have their attention drawn to a certain page to improve its quality and expand upon it, to the point where we can feature it to everybody. This will allow some of the dusty parts of the wiki to shine like they were brand new, squeaky clean, top of the line pages.

I propose a new Project page outlining the details, and a nomination process similar to that for featured articles, but instead used for pages that should be highlighted to editors so they can improve them.

TL;DR Bring the editors' attention to a page and improve it so we can bring everyone's attention to the page by featuring it. rZ 16:55, 22 July 2012 (PDT)
Note: I'll have a mockup of the proposed project page after I get back from camp on August 16th. rZ 17:50, 22 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support I've noticed whilst fixing links that many parts of the Wiki, specifically the less-seen parts, can sometimes be old, outdated, and in need of a major overhaul. Bringing some of these pages into the editor's spotlight can prepare the article for the actual spotlight, and can give some pages that were never viable to be featured a very real chance to shine. — Xenak (Talk|Contribs) 17:04, 22 July 2012 (PDT)

Seems like a good idea, but that's what should be happening already. Rather than it being a dedicated project I think that we need to figure out a way to make what you said be on people's minds. The discussion pages are there to do exactly what you're describing, it's just people don't do it. Furthermore rZ has said that he is going to create a draft in his user namespace for this when he's back from his trip -- Lagg 18:11, 22 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support The custom maps pages could definitely need some work. I think this is a great way to do it --Liquid Fire @H|H 05:46, 23 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support Much like Lagg says, I think this should already be happening, but nonetheless this is a good way of brining editors together in collaboration and an good idea altogether. 12:52, 24 July 2012 (PDT)

Bug Guidelines

TheDoctor messaged me awhile ago and gave me the idea for a guidelines page similar to the one Trivia has but for bugs. Over the last two days, I've been working on it, and I think it's ready for open discussion. Since bugs are becoming a large part of most articles (almost every weapon, and most hats have bugs!), there are more and more people adding bugs that may or may not be a bug. For instance, many people add clipping as a bug, when it is not by the Wiki's standard. Having a set of guidelines that sets in stone what is and what is not bugs should definitely clear up most of those issues. As aforemntioned, I have written them up and you can view them here.

If there is anything that should be removed/added, please don't hesitate to comment! I'd like to get as many opinions on this before I consider posting this, since this would be part of the Wiki guide. Thanks in advance! 09:02, 25 July 2012 (PDT)

As i assisted Wingless with some bug additions i can only say that i like it, and i hope more people think this is as good as i think it is. As always a good job Wingless. TheDoctor 09:04, 25 July 2012 (PDT)

Weapon Trivia - what real-life weapon each one looks like

So far we've got some pages for items with trivia that the weapon 'seems to be (based on)...' some weapon in real life. The Rocket Launcher is one such page. However, several item pages do not, and, in some cases, such trivia has been removed. I figure we ought to be consistent in whether we have such trivia. One good rule of thumb was brought up in that if Valve (or, in the case of community items, the item creator) confirms what it is based on, then that's what we put, else we do not include it. However, for things like the Rocket Launcher, we need to determine whether Valve writing RPG on the concept art qualifies it as being the RPG-7. -FlaminSarge 16:41, 25 July 2012 (PDT)

I don't like that sort of trivia unless it's backed by Valve or the contributor saying it's true. Awhile back we had that the Winger was based on a gun, and the contributor came and said "no it wasn't...." and we were left with information that had been on the wiki that was wrong for so long. Balladofwindfishes 16:45, 25 July 2012 (PDT)

I agree. If it's just speculation, we should leave it out. But if the creator comes along and says, "Oh, yeah, that's based on <insert gun here>", then it's interesting trivia. RPG =/= RPG-7 (it could also be 1–6). "RPG" is just quicker to write than "Rocket Launcher". I'd vote for taking the trivia out until the creator (in this case, Valve) confirms it. dendodge 17:03, 25 July 2012 (PDT)

 Support for removal. They really bothered me during my Trivia reviews - they are, for the most part, speculation which is something the Wiki doesn't agree with. 18:18, 25 July 2012 (PDT)

TF2 WIKI TABLE OF CONTENTS: UPDATED PROJECT

The final work for the TF2 Wiki table of contents. Requesting review if it shall be put into effect.

It includes four pages. It had to be this way to be able to show everything.

Page four is not complete. It will need Further tweaking on later dates.

It has taken a total of four months to get this far into the project. DARKID was of assistance.

Links:

Part One

http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/User:General_Cap/Table_Of_Contents:_Part_One

Part Two

http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/User:General_Cap/Table_Of_Contents:_Part_Two

Part Three

http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/User:General_Cap/Table_Of_Contents:_Part_Three

Part Four: (Incomplete)

http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/User:General_Cap/Table_Of_Contents:_Part_Four

--General Cap 20:09, 27 July 2012 (PDT)

 Against As much as I can't deny a lot was put into this, I think this is completely unnecessary. This is just a simple copy-paste from several pages around the Wiki. If I want to find weapon for a certain class, say a Scout drink, there are several places, linked in the main page, where I can search for them (even entering "drink" in the search bar, which isn't a disambig, shows me some results and helps me to search what I want). The same can be said about hats or miscs. For map stamps, there's a single page for all of them. Basically, everything covered in this table of contents can be found with just a few clicks away from the main page. There are already enough resources for locating the info you want about whatever you want here and a table of contents like this is not a solution. It just grabs what we already have and it mashes it up altogether in a single (or four) page(s) which, in my honest opinion, only makes it harder to look through to find a certain item.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 17:45, 30 July 2012 (PDT)

Original Weapon stats

One of the things that's interesting to do is to look at how a weapon's stats got changed. However, it is rather hard to find the original weapon's stats. Would it be possible to, in the update history, list what the original stats were? RBGolbat 09:36, 1 August 2012 (PDT)

I have brought this up before in the Weapon Demonstration talk page. In short, I had expressed regret that the only way to view a weapon's original stats (such as the Sandman removing the Scout's double-jump and have the ability to stun Ubercharged enemies, or the Razorback slowing down the Sniper's speed) was to comb through the Update History (which is mostly updated by hand) and infer the stats from when Valve changed them.

As such there is little record of a definitive list of a weapon's original or changed attributes besides the current stats.

I had hoped that there would be a video archive of a weapon's original stats (as it is much easier to experience how a weapon functioned and looked), but it was deemed to be redundant and not particularly high on the priority list in the midst of re-doing the melee demonstrations. The videos are deleted anyway after they have been updated.

Thus, there is little chance to view how a weapon actually functioned or looked prior to the current demonstration unless the original creator/uploader kept a copy such as here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YgirY6n-vc

As you go further back, it becomes difficult if not impossible to obtain a meaningful demonstration without fiddling around in the game files yourself. Perhaps you can ask i-ghost for tips such as from the videos he has here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgixryQEcO8

18:05, 1 August 2012 (PDT)

What about the pages that announced their release? Don't those have them? And for the ones more recent, aren't they in the edit history?