Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion

create a new section

PlayStation Button Templates

Hey. I had a look on the Taunts page, realizing a very minor issues with the button templates.

1)Wiki rules donot allow images in text, so all buttons should belong in template form, as it wont be accesible to everyone easily.

2)The PlayStation ones would look more appealing and more familiar to players if it were changed from this : to 20px. If this is accepted. I will make the background of the button transparent.

Notes:

• The file is a .PNG
• The square is the same one as before
• The circle is made by me

That's all, thanks. --DiscoDiva (talk) 01:06, 21 August 2013 (PDT)

Would have been easier to have just uploaded over the previous version instead of having 2 different ones. Ashes (talk) 02:18, 21 August 2013 (PDT)

He wanted to check if it was good first. It would be ideal, as DiscoDiva said in 1) for this to work similarly to Template:Key, and thus be a template. However, some nicer images are never bad. Darkid (|) 06:04, 21 August 2013 (PDT)

So shall I get going and make the nicer images in a template form? No worries, I know that stuff. Just wanted an approval.--DiscoDiva (talk) 23:15, 22 August 2013 (PDT)

By "template form" I meant without images--i.e. a "square" character on a black background, or something. Darkid (|) 06:52, 23 August 2013 (PDT)

Yeah, I'll make the template pages, so they are accesible to however wants to use by just writing the text. Shall I proceed? --DiscoDiva (talk) 09:41, 23 August 2013 (PDT)

WP:BeBold! Go for it. Darkid (|) 09:51, 23 August 2013 (PDT)

Okee doke. I uploaded the new versions and made the separate template pages for the first batch of buttons. You can see my work here and add anything that would help and make it more convenient, if you wish.

• Template:PS Square
• Template:PS X
• Template:PS Circle
• Template:PS Triangle

There are still a few format issues on the template page, though. --DiscoDiva (talk) 23:46, 31 August 2013 (PDT)

I changed from normal link to wiki link one, please use [[ and ]] to create the link that're in this wiki. Rikka Takanashi (talk) • (contributions) 00:23, 1 September 2013 (PDT)

I now realize that I didn't make myself clear--I was hoping for one template, like {{Playstation Button}} which took a parameter (Square, X, Circle, Triangle). Templates are nice for shortcuts, but if they transclude an image then certain things (like width, alt-text, etc) can't be set. Darkid (|) 12:25, 1 September 2013 (PDT)

As in merging them in one template page? Well, I did tried that, but I decided to what I was able to do better. Atleast they are there. --DiscoDiva (talk) 06:24, 3 September 2013 (PDT)

I merged them quickly into one template and you can find the result from {{PSTemplate}}. Due to quick merge its name is what it is and it just directs to those PS Square, X, etc templates at this moment, but those can be quickly changed if needed. -Asplode (talk) 07:41, 3 September 2013 (PDT)

I've gone ahead and merged this all into {{PS Button}}. Please try not to over-think templates, it will save you headaches in the long-run. i-ghost (talk) 14:43, 31 October 2013 (PDT)

Adding file names to items

Should we add where items can be found in the files to hats and weapons pages? A lot of the files are counter-intuitively named and it makes it hard to find particular items in Source Film Maker. Guybrush20X6 (talk) 08:13, 3 September 2013 (PDT)

I think that adding that information to every single weapon and item page might be worth less than the time it takes to do it; however, if you'd be willing to meet halfway and have a single page with all of that information listed (basically a list of the names, images, and location of the weapon/item in question) in a nice template, I'd love to have that resource around. ~Sven~ (talk) 08:16, 3 September 2013 (PDT)

Yes, it's called the item schema. This discussion has been shot down before. i-ghost (talk) 14:43, 31 October 2013 (PDT)

The Wiki Cap: Recognition or Reward?

I've been hearing a lot of chatter recently (and in general, too) about people who hop on the wiki and try to get a Wiki Cap. These people tend to be misguided, assuming that they can do this quickly and with little effort, but it raises a larger question: Is the Wiki Cap viewed as recognition for one's work on the wiki, or is it a reward to encourage editors? (Alternately, both.)

I feel like this question merits some discussion on the wiki, but I also looked to see what the current opinion seems to be. In other words, I calculated some statistics about the 144 current Wiki Cap owners. The raw data is here, but before getting into that I'd like to summarize some key results:

1. A large majority of users (83%) who get a Wiki Cap lose interest in editing afterwards, that is to say their edits per day drops by a factor of 3+ (I.e. from 10 edits per day to 3 edits per day).
2. Of this majority, a further 18% (15% overall) stopped editing completely, which is to say their edits per day dropped by a factor of 100+ (From 10 edits per day to 1 edit per 10 days).
3. A mere 9 users (6%) showed an increase in edit rate after getting a Wiki Cap. Of these 9 users, 5 showed increases in editing by over 50% (From 10 edits per day to 15 edits per day).

Some general notes about this data:

• The data is compiled from Wiki-Fi and reflects the accuracy present there.
  • As a result, the data is only accurate to 3 decimal places due to the accuracy of the cumulative edits statistic on stats.wiki.tf.
• This table does not account for the fact that editors may not have started editing when they created their account, or that they may not have been editing actively until a few months after their first edit.
  • As a result, editors who had long "dry" stretches at the beginning of their wiki lives may have under-represented productivity drops, as their productivity prior to getting a Wiki Cap will be under-represented.
• Wiki Caps were decided to be awarded at some delay to them being received.
• Certain users had Wiki Caps awarded to them based on work unrelated to editing. This affects only 3 users as I see, and should not have too great an impact on the overall data.

This data seems to imply that the Wiki Cap is a reward, but the question still remains if this is the correct mindset.
Darkid (|) 12:55, 15 September 2013 (PDT)

It can be the golden fleece for all I care if it properly incentivizes useful contributions to the wiki. In the end this is more valuable than a single given person quitting editing after they get one. Recognition, reward, bragging rights. It's all the same in the end as long as it compels people to be useful. Even considering the people that think there is some kind of magic number of edits and that it's the same thing as a promo item and their edit quality reflects that mindset, their collective contributions probably outweigh what a single person could do. -- Lagg 13:24, 15 September 2013 (PDT)

By the time somebody actually achieves the Wiki Cap, they have already done so much for the Wiki that they wouldn't even need to contribute anymore. While it's sad to lose such a helpful editor, they've already dramatically improved the Wiki to the point that they feel like their duty is complete. Although this isn't true for translators and the like (because how many people who speak Japanese are playing TF2?), on the English Wiki things will manage fine without them. After all, how many people would actually be on the Wiki if it wasn't for the hope of a one-of-a-kind cap? --Samuel Enthers 14:09, 24 September 2013 (PDT)

Crafting Australian Christmas and Pyromania item set hats

The hats and cosmetics associated with these sets have only been recently instated as being part of an actual set:

Big Chief, Scotch Bonnet, Berliner's Bucket Helm, Fed-Fightin' Fedora, Dillinger's Duffel Bag, Helmet Without a Home, Captain's Cocktails, Liquidator's Lid

Can anyone confirm that their crafting recipes exist as well? e.g. 4 Refined Metal and set weapon creates the hat

13:33, 17 September 2013 (PDT)

When I go into Fabricate Set Headgear, the game allows me to use the caber (big chief) crossbow (bucket helm), so I assume it works. Darkid (|) 13:58, 17 September 2013 (PDT)

There was a note on the Big Chief discussion page about the crafting page recognizing the blueprint, but not following through after pressing Craft. I can't seem to find where crafting recipes are located in the schema files and I'm not sure if people want to actually use metal for this. 14:19, 17 September 2013 (PDT)

They are not in the schema, they are server-based (much like crate unboxing). Thus, it's quite likely that if a bug becomes documented, valve can fix it on their end. Darkid (|) 18:03, 17 September 2013 (PDT)

Strategy section overhaul

I'd really like to start an effort to reorganize the whole of the strategy pages as much of the data in them is out of date and I don't think they're organized very efficiently anyway. There's a lot of redundant - and possibly conflicting - info. The current system is:

• Basic Strategy - General class strategy and basic weapon tactics. It's all fairly brief and highly curated; "official" in a sense.
• Class Match-Ups - How that class fares against any other class, also fairly succinct.
• Anti-Class Strategy - Info for going up against a class and their weapons. Another "basic" article.
• Community Strategy - Class strategy, weapon tactics, match-ups against classes, pairings with classes, loadout recommendations... All less monitored but more detailed than the previous three.

It seems really inefficient to lump all the scattered community data into one page but have the brief "curated" stuff in separated pages when they could fit in one page much more easily than all the community stuff while remaining easy to monitor and keep up-to-date. Thus, I propose:

• Overall Strategy - A merge of the basic strategy and class match-up articles, along with new "general" class pairing info and basic weapon loadout examples (stock loadout, defined sets like Special Delivery or Hibernating Bear). The data from the anti-class page would also be merged in by not only providing strategy for each weapon in their sections, but also against it, eliminating the need for a separate article. A "cheat-sheet," if you will.
• Community Tactics - Community class strategy and weapon tactics. Should be much easier to manage if it's just in its own article, and keep track of when data becomes outdated. Like the new overall data page, would also contain data against each weapon as well as for it.
• Match-Ups/Pairings - The match-up/pairing info from the current community pages. Each article is into two halves: match-ups against enemy classes, and pairing tactics with friendly classes.
• Loadout Recommendations - A page for community loadout recommendations. Each recommendation has a title or brief description, the loadout, an explanation, and both the name of the submitter and the date of submission, in order to gauge how up-to-date a recommendation is in light of ongoing balance patches.

But yeah. Basically group all the "general" data while the community data is split up into pages. VinLAURiA (talk) 03:20, 18 September 2013 (PDT)

The only issue with this major grouping is the page size. One of the reasons I still (rarely) use the strategy pages is because I can quickly find the relevant counter-class or counter-weapon strategy. I'm not sure if this is just me, but with this rework, try to keep in mind readability. Darkid (|) 05:39, 18 September 2013 (PDT)

 Support This overhaul would be an extremely clean way to display all of the relevant information, unlike the clutter we have now. --Samuel Enthers 16:34, 21 September 2013 (PDT)

Eradicating the <tt> element

The <tt> element is a presentation element and fails to indicate the semantic context of the contents. As such it has been removed in HTML 5.[1]

I want to clean the wiki of it and replace it with semantic markup instead. But it is a big job and I can't do it alone.

Can I please get some help?

I first want to find a list of suitable replacements. Marking everything with <code> elements is not optimal here. We want templates like Cvar that can be given complicated code as needed.

Only after the correct replacements are figured out can a proper cleanup be done.--Henke37 (talk) 12:47, 18 September 2013 (PDT)

What kind of markup are we talking about here? --Samuel Enthers 13:57, 24 September 2013 (PDT)

About quotes

Moved from User talk:Rikka Takanashi
Most of the quotes on the wiki are supplemented by a little extra detail, perhaps to add context or to make a joke to an otherwise empty phrase. However, not all of the quotes on the hat and weapon pages has that additional wording, especially on some of the older pages. Naturally, this creates a problem with consistency. I wanted to fix the consistency issue by adding in more information to these quotes not only to make them more appealing, but to keep every page on the Wiki on an equal level. In this case, it is very necessary to add in extra details for the sake of improving the Wiki. You don't have a problem with this, I assume? --Samuel Enthers 17:22, 18 September 2013 (PDT)

I don't think so. Why we need to add little extra information? Also on the page that added to make it "not same" as another page that use the same quote or the quote that can't fit with the article. Those pages I removed because the quotes already fit the page, no need to expand. Rikka Takanashi (talk) • (contributions) 17:30, 18 September 2013 (PDT)

It's just a formality. We need to add information to make it more professional. If nobody needed to add any more information to the end of quotes, then why do we have them on such articles like the Crafty Hair, the Dillinger's Duffel, and the Bolt Boy? It's because not only does it tie into TF2's comedic and not-so-serious universe, but because at the end of the day it just looks better. It looks like more work has been put into the article, just by adding in one sentence. It works wonders on adding a little more to the already-bare cosmetic pages, and it's painless without causing any trouble. Just because something doesn't need to be done, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. Look at the Glossary of Player Terms, for example. We could manage just fine as a Wiki without adding in that page. But we did, and it's one of the most useful pages on the Wiki by rounding out it's general content. I really don't see a problem here. --Samuel Enthers 17:41, 18 September 2013 (PDT)

I think we should move this thread to General discussion to make it more clear, should we? Because I never think it's necessary unless it needs to specific to fit the items like Spy-cicle ("I see spy!" is not fit unless we added that the Heavy played pun to "Icy spy!") Rikka Takanashi (talk) • (contributions) 01:36, 19 September 2013 (PDT)

It was a good call moving this to the general discussion. Clearly we weren't going to settle this on our own. For the reasons stated above, I'll have to add in my  Support. --Samuel Enthers 14:58, 19 September 2013 (PDT)

 Oppose, with reason above. Rikka Takanashi (talk) • (contributions) 16:49, 19 September 2013 (PDT)

Create a standardized format for the Community Strategy articles?

Some of my favorite articles on the Wiki to read and edit are the Community Strategy Pages. However, I've noticed that they're a bit of a mess. The formatting and style is very inconsistent with one another, with sections and content having different names and placement. It annoys me that there isn't much consistency for such an important part of the Wiki. It's time to create a format that will lessen confusion among readers who go through the strategy pages often, and to make things nice and organised for all. I've developed the following format for strategy pages that combines all of the content from all 9 class pages that I think will work well. Of course, it isn't set in stone.

Lead section Paragraph and summary about the classes specific playstyles and unique abilities, as well as the general specs of each one (E.G. health, speed, etc.). The goal is to provide a brief overview of the class in a more in-depth summary than the classes main pages, without going too into detail so it isn't hard to read through.

1. Quick Tips Little "Protips" specific to the individual class. These provide little bits of strategy that the basic player can understand and carry out. They're like the in-game tips that you see on the bottom-left corner of the load screen.

2. General These are general bits of strategy that aren't weapon specific but apply only to abilities that the specific class can carry out or will find use in. A Soldier general tip shouldn't apply to the Pyro, etc. This section leads into the next section.

2.1 Class specific ability #1

2.2 Class specific ability #2

2.3 Class specific ability #3 These 3 subsections are designed to provide more in-depth strategy about the classes' specific abilities in a detailed and specific way. The goal is to only take the abilities that the specific classes will find a use for (E.G. Build locations for the Engineer, Headshots for the Sniper, Rocket Jumping for the Soldier) and create much more detailed strategies for them that other classes won't be able to make use of. Obviously we're not going to make a section about jumping for the Heavy because he almost never jumps in combat, but a section about jumping for the Scout will be extremely useful because jumping is one of the Scout's main combat strategies.

3. Weapon Specific

3.1 Primary Weapons (except Spy)

3.2 Secondary Weapons

3.3 Melee Weapons

3.4 Secondary PDA (Spy only)

3.5 Buildings (Spy only) These subsections are designed to provide more information and strategy about the specific weapons that the class uses that wouldn't apply in general strategy. The first sentence would be an overview about the weapons stats, and the rest of the section would be the actual strategy and tips. The Spy is a special case because he has no primary weapon, but instead has Sappers and Watches to talk about.

4. Buildings (Engineer only) The Engineer's buildings are obviously very different from the weapons he uses, so obviously they get their own sections and strategy.

4.1 Sentry Gun

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

4.2 Dispenser

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

4.3 Teleporter

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

4.4 Combat Mini-Sentry Gun These sections are supposed to provide placement and maintenance strategies for the specific buildings and levels. As the Engineer's buildings level up the strategies change as well. The Engineer article should be more accommodating of these minute differences in building strategies and not just group all 3 levels together.

4. Taunt attacks Much like the weapon strategy above, but only for specific taunt attacks.

5. Weapon Combinations This section focuses on weapon loadouts and specific strategies for use with them, much like we already have.

6. Class Priority (Medic, Sniper, and Spy only) The Medic, Sniper, and Spy play much differently than the other classes, where they have to choose what classes they target in order to ensure positive results. Because of this, it would be beneficial to the strategy page if the 3 classes had a numbered list of classes that they need to target first so that they know what the best classes to kill/heal would be.

6. Cooperative Class Strategies This section is designed to create new strategies that are specific to teamwork with 2 or more players of different classes. They involve thinking outside of the box, encouraging team play, and making comparisons between two classes in a unique way.

7. Other class specific strategies Sometimes we can't say all that we can about a class in just 6 sections. Sometimes we need to go further to go more in detail about the class, such as with the Spy. If it is necessary, we can add in these strategies somewhere within the article, not necessarily #7.

Of course, this is just my idea. But I hope that we can work together to revitalise and reinvent the Community Strategy Pages so that they can be restored to their former glory. --Samuel Enthers 12:24, 24 September 2013 (PDT)

Looks like you've put a lot of thought into this layout, and the strategy pages really could do with an overhaul. Maybe if you could try throwing together an example page in your own namespace so more people can see how it would look? » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 03:36, 25 September 2013 (PDT)

 Agree'd The Community Stratedgy articles are the most messy ones, if I were a staff member, I'd give this the green light! StarHorder 08:24, 25 September 2013 (PDT)

Like Cooper Kid said, I want to see it on the page rather than in comment. I can't imagine clearly. And RobTheStarCollector, next time use {{c}} template instead of Pro and Con one. Rikka Takanashi (talk) • (contributions) 08:48, 25 September 2013 (PDT)

Alright everybody, it's all in the works. I'm making a markup in my user namespace and it will be done when I have an hour of free opportunity. It should be complete in a few hours at this time of posting, but I'm just letting you know that I am working on it. I really appreciate the support though! --Samuel Enthers 11:14, 25 September 2013 (PDT)

I've finished up the example! I've added in relevant information in bold. I can re-write the whole Spy article to fit in with this template, but I just need permission to go ahead and do that. What does everybody think? --Samuel Enthers 17:42, 25 September 2013 (PDT)

Also, if this goes until Monday with no objections, I will go ahead and implement this to the articles. After a thorough rewrite of course. --Samuel Enthers 07:28, 27 September 2013 (PDT)

I question the need for a template--as opposed to {{Match-Up}}, there's negligible formatting--but the formatting is good overall. I question (for engineer) the need for subheadings for different levels of anything but sentries. TOC limit is fun, but the most useful subsection headers are probably the weapon subheaders. Also specifically, how is an engineer a more important target than a medic? Darkid (|) 07:49, 27 September 2013 (PDT)

Now, this isn't a template per say. It's a guideline that I just whipped up together in my user space. It's used to help us with rewriting the strategy pages without being cast in stone. I mostly copied what the strategy pages already have while reformatting it myself, so it isn't meant to be a re-write yet. Also, if there's an Engineer on the enemy team you're not going to waste time on the Medic, you're going to sap all of his buildings and kill him. --Samuel Enthers 08:33, 27 September 2013 (PDT)

Standardizing the formatting is a good idea, but may I recommend combining this with my categorization suggestion above so that all the community stuff isn't lumped together. You were already in support of that, right? VinLAURiA (talk) 16:18, 29 September 2013 (PDT)

503 errors everywhere!

From any device I use, the site takes like 3 minutes to load and frequently gets 503s. Either it's just me, or the wiki needs a fix. Sometimes I accidentally make double edits or it never submits. ErnieTheGreatest (talk) 18:14, 31 October 2013 (PDT)

Can't do much about it. Its site traffic. Either wait or edit at a later time. There really is no fix. Ashes (talk) 18:16, 31 October 2013 (PDT)

This happens every major update. Wait a few days for it to pass. VinLAURiA (talk) 02:41, 2 November 2013 (PDT)

This has been happening way before the major updates--in fact, I'd associate the time with when we upgraded mediawiki (although I doubt this *caused* the problem). Darkid (|) 09:24, 2 November 2013 (PDT)

Renaming Scream Fortress 2013 to Helloween Special

Similar to how last year's Spectral Halloween Special was taken from the subtitle, I figured we'd keep things consistent by also doing the same thing this year instead of the generic title we have now. I actually tried to do this myself, but I'm pretty green when it comes to MediaWiki workings so I've been told that my method was a very crude and tedious "brute force" method and that I should've asked for consensus first anyway. So, yes? No? VinLAURiA (talk) 07:29, 6 November 2013 (PST)

I'm fine with renaming. Scream Fortress is to generic anyways. Just need a Bot to do all the changes and its all good really. Ashes (talk) 19:28, 9 November 2013 (PST)

What changes? All we need to do is move the update pages, nav templates, and categories. Darkid (|) 12:23, 10 November 2013 (PST)

... I blame Ashes. VinLAURiA (talk) 18:39, 10 November 2013 (PST)

Yeah, But using a bot would be more useful as we're moving hundreds of pages, templates and categories, Including translations. So a Bot would be more reasonable for a task like this. Ashes (talk) 18:44, 10 November 2013 (PST)

Category:Scream Fortress 2013 Template:Scream Fortress 2013 Nav Scream Fortress 2013 Scream Fortress 2013/cs Scream Fortress 2013/de Scream Fortress 2013/fr Scream Fortress 2013/pt-br Scream Fortress 2013/ru Scream Fortress 2013/zh-hant. Any others? Darkid (|) 18:56, 10 November 2013 (PST)

Not that I'm aware of. As I said elsewhere, I'm fairly certain changing the categories in the navigation templates would update all the appropriate pages without the need for bots. VinLAURiA (talk) 18:06, 11 November 2013 (PST)

Is there a reason not to use the official update name instead? tf2.com/history.php lists it as 'Scream Fortress V'. — Armisael (T · C) 19:16, 10 November 2013 (PST)

The same thing could be said for last year's special, which was officially Scream Fortress IV. The point is they're more distinct this way; just numbering them generically is pretty bland. VinLAURiA (talk) 16:54, 11 November 2013 (PST)

They're more distinct, but is it actually useful? I have no idea what year the Very Scary Halloween special was without looking it up (or what it was about) - I consider them more informative. And yes, we would want to change the name of last year's halloween special as well, but as noted above, that's not that difficult. — Armisael (T · C) 22:11, 11 November 2013 (PST)

That's not necessary. In many of the cases where more than one Halloween special is mentioned - such as the nav templates - there will usually be the year in parenthesis or some other mention of where each one falls in order with the others. Not only would "Scream Fortress #" be more generic, it'd be redundant. And from memory, the Very Scary Halloween Special was 2011's battle against MONOCULUS! It's really not that hard to remember. VinLAURiA (talk) 22:14, 12 November 2013 (PST)

If I'm user, I prefer the way to easy to remember the name, like The Forth Anniversary of Scream Fortress. The specific name like Very Scary Halloween Special can make me confuse with another Halloween Update. Rikka Takanashi (talk) • (contributions) 03:17, 13 November 2013 (PST)

So... should we do a vote, then? 'Cuz I'm saying  Support VinLAURiA (talk) 07:11, 22 November 2013 (PST)

Golden Frying Pen 22 November 2013

Здравствуйте дорогие участники! Я в конце каталога нашел оружие ближнего боя "Золотая сковорода". Ребят, это новая вещичка или я туплю? В интернете про нее ничего нету! Hello dear... players? I've just found a golden frying pan in the end of catalogue Mann Co! Is it new item or i am a just slowpoke? There is nothing in Internet about that!

See Golden Frying Pan.

Zabidenu

(contribs ▪ talk) 05:40, 22 November 2013 (PST)

An official 'Update Checklist'

This wiki has gotten very complex over the years, and one of the greatest complexities, mixed with the largest scrambles, and one of the easiest entry points for new users is updates. They're frequent, but the things they modify are so stretched out these days that invariably, even the most experienced editors forget some detain in some template somewhere. I propose, to be added to the Help: namespace, an update checklist which will allow users, new and old, to ensure that no nuance of any update is missed. I have mocked one up here, and although it likely has inaccuracies, I feel that it is close enough to complete to warrant possible submission. What do you all think of the idea/my mock-up? Darkid (|) 04:21, 23 November 2013 (PST)

I'd add the following for the weapons / etc. that mess around with a classes health, speed: Template:Metrics/Speed, Template:Metrics/Health, Template:Class health table, Template:Class speed table, since those hide the 'hidden math voodoo' of the game --Org (talk) 11:25, 23 November 2013 (PST)

Done. Darkid (|) 11:30, 23 November 2013 (PST)

Well I guess I'll put this to formal vote, since there was no discussion.  Agree It's not clear, even to experienced editors (like me!) what to do every update. Certain pages which should be maintained (like {{Itemcount}} and {{Dictionary/quad}}) have fallen behind, due to obscurity. A formal list of what to do will solve both of these problems, as well as simplifying what needs to be done every update--People can just read off the list. Darkid (|) 11:06, 30 November 2013 (PST)

 Agree This would be a pretty useful thing to have too, as long as the checklist covers some more stuff, like the painted variants section of the page, and the lists of paintable items. It can be pretty hard to work out what things need to be done with updates, especially when new items are added, or there are significant changes needed to existing pages. --Omolong (talk) 11:11, 30 November 2013 (PST)

 Agree Poot. —Moussekateer·talk 11:19, 30 November 2013 (PST)

Pages for Mann vs Machine upgrades?

I was thinking that MvM upgrades deserve their own pages, especially for stuff like disposable sentries and the projectile shield, because I can't find any info about it. I'd be more than glad to make a few pages myself about what I do know.

Thanks for reading. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oscarvdhooft (talk) • (contribs)

Upgrade Station Darkid (|) 13:10, 24 November 2013 (PST)

NOT what I meant. Actual pages for invidual upgrades, clearly describing their mechanics. Complex upgrades like projectile shield, knockback rage and disposable sentries could use their own page because there is no info on it anywhere. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oscarvdhooft (talk) • (contribs)

Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~. I feel like, although important upgrades, they would only constitute around a paragraph of detail (Minisentries especially do not need much explanation). This information could be easily put on that page, if you would like to add it. Darkid (|) 12:31, 27 November 2013 (PST)

Signing? How does that work? And the disposable sentry gun is actually different from the regular mini sentry gun. I still believe that upgrades like the projectile shield deserve their own page because there is much more than a paragraph about it. I unfortunately can't add anything about it because I don't know anything about because- you guessed it, there's no wiki page and I don't know how I can access and understand TF2 coding, while others do and could write a page about it.

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oscarvdhooft (talk) • (contribs)

Giving a page for every single upgrade would be pointless. It would more less clutter. Its easier to compile it all into one page which we already have anyways. Just saying. Ashes (talk) 08:56, 28 November 2013 (PST)

Wiki editing is mostly done in WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get). If you can provide the text for the pages, someone else can deal with the formatting. By signing, I only mean ending your post with ~~~~.

Darkid (|) 10:47, 28 November 2013 (PST)

Well I'm not the best writer or formatter for that matter, but what I wanted was more of a request for people to make them. As of now there is no information I can find on the projectile shield, and I'd like to learn about its mechanics.

Oscarvdhooft (talk) 23:59, 30 November 2013 (PST)

Blocks bullets and projectiles, deals typeless (bison) damage on contact. Builds from healing/overhealing. Upgrading increases degree coverage, duration, and build rate. A formal paragraph would add numbers to all of this (degrees up/down, etc). I can do this, if you like. Darkid (|) 00:03, 1 December 2013 (PST)

Would it not easier to just add this information onto the Upgrade Station page. Since that's where all upgrades are listed. Ashes (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2013 (PST)

Currently no Page for Heart of Gold

This item has been around since the 11/26/13, yet no one has created a page for it. Is there not sufficient information about the item or is everyone waiting for someone else to make the page? Neither one seems likely since the TF2Wiki has a large community and many people take responsibility. Also, pages are created and allowed to stay for things we barely know about. I'd gladly make the page myself but I'm not really sure how or what to do in order to create an acceptable page, or why it's not being done in the first place. --Shnowshner (talk) 19:53, 28 November 2013 (PST)

Must have been overlooked in the recent bustle of edits still being made to the large MvM patch. I will create the base page now. —Moussekateer·talk 20:04, 28 November 2013 (PST)

Okay, thanks. --Shnowshner (talk) 20:08, 28 November 2013 (PST)

Update, please, Main Page/ru

Up - RUS VERSION Down - EN VERSION

A good spot to post this request would the Translators' Noticeboard. Nobody here can really help with that request--only one of the russian translators can. If it's a seriously outdated main page (it looks rather alright, btw), then you might post on an active russian editor's talk page. However, keep in mind that translation is by volunteer only--if someone does not want to translate the page (because it's a lot of work) they don't have to do so. Darkid (|) 11:35, 30 November 2013 (PST)