User talk:Wintergreen

Here, you may complain, compliment, or discuss my actions

Hello, I am Wintergreen, I believe that creating an efficient Wiki will allow players of all nature in Team Fortress 2 to develop keen brains and knowledge for their gameplay! Wintergreen 03:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Christmas song

I heard there was one. I can has links? – Smashman _(talk) 01:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Indeed there is, good sir. Here at this local link: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14496276/Christmas%20At%20The%20Wiki.mp3 Wintergreen 01:57, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Ahaha. What the hell. Benjamuffin is so crazy. Also, we reply to messages on the same talk page, to keep a track, and we sure as hell do not slap messages in the middle of a random topic. Thanks. – Smashman _(talk) 02:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, my bad. This is actually my first time trying to use the talk page between Users, thus it could be a bothersome. I also thought to stick this song into the "Christmas" section in your talk because I thought that was an appropriate place to add. I am sorry for any annoyance. Wintergreen 06:00, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

No annoyance, merely letting you, so you know for next time! So now you know, there won't be a problem next time. – Smashman _(talk) 11:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the blighted beak trivia

Howdy. Just noticing that you undid my removing of the plague doctor trivia. If you read my edit notes, you'll see that this has been an issue in the past. It's been removed over and over and over again, solely for the reason that it's already stated in the description of the beak. I posted this in the talk page (did you read it? If yes, please post, since it'll help all of us figure out where you're coming from). It seems overly redundant that we say "it was used by plague doctors" and then in the trivia, say it again, and then explain it further. If people want to know what it is, and why, they'll click on the link. Did you have some additional reasoning behind undo-ing my removal? Otherwise, this has been encountered before and I don't see why it should be handled differently all of a sudden. Thanks in advance for your time. -- CptObvious 06:37, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I see, I never took heed of that description bar. I was more focused on trivial things. If that was the case, I am sorry for undoing your deletion of that trivia. You have permission and acknowledgment to delete that trivia once more. Wintergreen 03:50, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Navs

I think it might be better if we used the big nav instead of making these tiny little navs. seb26 [talk] 03:32, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, yes, indeed. That will indeed better suffice than these little navs that would be quite cumbersome. Only reason I'm doing this was because someone else created one for the MNC. I will promptly ask you to delete these if you can if we were to switch to using this larger and more heavy Nav. Wintergreen 03:34, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hat Tab Concept

*Taps microphone* Testing, testing... Is this thing on? Yes? Alright then. *Ahem* Wind suggested that we synchronise our efforts regarding the tabbed Navbox concept that, it would seem, we are both working on. What are your thoughts on this, and what do you propose? Esquilax 01:44, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, that would be quite the useful help I might need. We should collaborate to bring up the tab as each of the classes nav being implemented into Template:All_Weapons_Nav for now until it could be moved by WindPower to a new location (Preferably, something like: Template:All_Class_Nav Something like that. Today, I received permission from Sir Pilk of Pilkington to expand this project nav. You are free to assist me. Wintergreen 01:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. How can I be of assistance exactly? In addition, would it be worthwhile having different types of Navs, e.g. one with weapons and one with hats, etc, or simply amalgamating all of the information into a single tab? Perhaps all three depending upon the article? The only problem with the amalgamated tab is that it may be a little "busy" for users. Esquilax 02:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

According to the people on IRC, it should be left to having three individual navs. They would be:

• Dynamics Template:All Classes Nav
• Weapons Template:All Weapons Nav
• Hats Template:All Hats Nav

The Dynamics would replace the individual class navs, but they would not feature the weapons or hats since it would be repetitive. Wintergreen 02:12, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Very good; that's my preferred solution as well. In that case. I'll finish off the Hat Navs, although it may have to wait until Monday (don't ask). In the meantime, let me know if you would like me to look into anything specific. Esquilax 02:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

*Yawn* Right, the Hat Nav has been done! I didn't think that I'd have the time or energy to complete it this afternoon, but there you go. It looks good, but we may need to rethink the way the "All class" tab works however, as it is very cluttered. There are 37 items from memory (25 hats and 12 miscellaneous items), so we may have to use the hat categories ("Halloween", "Promotional", etc) where relevant in order to space things out. That will not completely eliminate the clutter though. Thoughts? I'll be back on Monday and we can do this thang. Esquilax 04:20, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Seb The Great and I have decided to change the style once again, instead of three, we reverted back to one. It will be located at Template:All_class_nav. Wintergreen 23:31, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I know who Seb is (*shakes fist at Seb*)! ;) Fair enough, and one Nav it is then. So does anything else need to be done to the amalgamated Nav, or it is ready? Can I be of assistance? It looks good so far! I tried using columns myself, but the Navbox didn't seem to support tables :(. Esquilax 22:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I believe you should consult Seb26 about what to do now. I believe we might need to improve the All Class tab, but that's just me. Wintergreen 23:18, 20 February 2011 (UTC)