Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion

create a new section

Tabbed box styles v2

Shiny ahead~ Boxes are now quite consistent with the current navboxes, with the exception of the color of the left column; it is a purposefully different color so that people don't confuse it with regular, non-interactive navboxes. Still need to vote on animations or not.

• No animations:

• Animations:

User:WindPower/TabsTweak2 Again, the animation is faster than the time the human eye takes to click the link, see something on the page has changed, refocus itself to the position where changed thing is, recognize that there is text there, and start reading it. Additionally, animation subconsciously draws the eye to the animated zone. Animation is disabled on browsers that don't support it (IE) and that are too slow for it. — Wind 22:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I like the animation, it's not too slow. Looks great! —Moussekateer·talk 00:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

 Support It looks good, WindPower. It's simple and effective, and reduces page clutter by incorporating the multiple boxes into a single area. I like it! I would probably go with the version with animations, as it provides a visual cue to the user that allows them easily identify when the content has changed. Considering the identical structure of the tabs for each class, I see that as important. Esquilax 00:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

 Support I loved this style of nav before and I still love it, hope to see it implemented and the only problem I can think of is the affect it will have on the wiki when edited (Slow Wiki Syndrome) and that is more of a server thing anyway. ^Scatman _John (Talk | Contrib) 21:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Also animations ^Scatman _John (Talk | Contrib) 21:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

 Support Poot animation! I know I voted against the animations last time, but I'm starting to like them. My only problem with the nav now is that it doesn't horizontally scale. It doesn't fit in my browser window, which is not tiny baby size (about 1200 px). — nVis (talk) 21:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

That can be customized with the width parameter, and yeah the default is 1000px which is a bit beeg — Wind 22:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

 Neutral You know my position on this in general but this is definitely an improvement and fits the wiki style much better. However I still like the one without animations more. -- Lagg 01:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

 Support Poot animations here. Slower wiki ftw Vulturas 06:04, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Animations one definitely, without the animations the resizing of the box jumps around and is distracting to the eye. Only change I would make would to not include Weapon and Hat icons in it, just text. Other than that, I agree completely. MogDog66 _{t c p} || 06:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I like the animation. Final Verdict; Awesome Flick. Maggosh 06:08, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I don't even see the animations haha. Just stick to the one without animations anyway. It seems like it would be over done with animations. -- No-oneSpecial (talk | contribs) 06:09, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I agree that the animated implementation is superior. However, I would suggest having the table be a set height (whatever that ends up being when you input the rest of the links), as even with the animations the sudden change in height between tabs is jarring, and could potentially cause other elements in the article to shift with it. --Ten19 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

So... What's keeping us from making it to live? --Parseus (talk • contrib) 11:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

It's alive now at Template:All Weapons Nav. Just created it on order of WindPower. The Win Duo now awaits for critiques on how to improve this method. Wintergreen 21:49, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I liked the idea of merging the class, weapon and hat navs together like the example above. Are we going to split them again? seb26 [talk] 21:52, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Seconded - one big class-weapon-hat nav (I don't have any clue how to name it) is really cool and IMO easier to manage. --Parseus (talk • contrib) 10:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Currently, this is the work in progress nav (Note: Likely to be updated): Template:All Weapons Nav Please post your critiques and comments for us to make it better, thanks. Wintergreen 00:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Huge update!!! Our team of top men (those who are helping in the project) have decided to split the tabs into three different parts:

• Dynamics

• Weapons

• Hats

This ensures that there would be no repetitiveness between the classes and allow room for items to be expressed without clogging up any other additional room. Critique and comment is grateful. Wintergreen 05:51, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

DELETED! Shock394 16:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

BLU team images on class pages

I was looking for a good quality image of BLU team Medic, and it turns out... there isn't one on the entire Wiki. There's a few images that have BLU Medic in the image, but not at a good quality and not without a background. Why don't we have BLU team images on the class pages? It just seems like such an obvious thing to have, yet it's just not there. Would it be difficult to throw together 9 images and put the images at the bottom of the class page where the other class related images are? Balladofwindfishes 16:06, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Have them like tabs in the infoboxes so you can switch between the two. They'd have to be in the same positions though for the effect to be noticed.--Focusknock 20:43, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

 This is good idea! Mar 00:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I agree. Tabber coding would be put to good use here. maggosh 03:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

 Comment We might hafta get a RED Spy Image though. The current one appears to be BLU as seen on the "Class Match-Up" Pages. Lancer anti-tank Rocket 12:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I'm for it. If I could make a suggestion (as seen on another wiki), the tabs to RED and BLU could be put above the infobox's picture (with BLU on top left and RED on top right, like on the HUD). HunterCham 13:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I also think this sounds like a good idea, assuming it doesn't require massive amounts of effort to implement. Flash 07:32, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Show preview template

I have taken the time to create an updated version of the Show preview template. The version I created links to the Recent Changes log, gives more than one reason for using the button, and thanks the user for doing so. I have also reduced the icon's size.

Note: It has already been discussed that translating this message is not a good idea; we are trying to promote using English on all talk pages.

Thank you for any input. Here is an example:

Old Show preview

{{subst:void|This template should always be substituted. Please change {{sp}} to {{subst:sp}}}} [[File:{{subst:#switch: 0 | 0 | #default = Pictogram info | 1 = Warning yellow | 2 = Warning red }}.png|25px|link=]] Please make use of the Show preview button. It gives you a preview of the edit you are making, allowing you to perfect your changes before you save the page. You can edit the whole article by clicking the edit button at the top of the page, which is preferable to editing multiple sections consecutively.
— minip 19:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

New Show preview

Please use the Show preview button; this feature enables an editor to preview changes before saving them. Constantly editing the same page will spam the Recent Changes log. It is possible to edit an entire page at once; this is done by clicking the edit tab located at the top of a page. Thank you for your cooperation.
— minip 19:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The newer text is misleading to new users in my opinion. It gives the impression that making multiple edits without preview is somehow going to flood or crash the RC logs. The message should give outline why it's better to use show preview instead of scaring people into it with exaggerations. seb26 [talk] 06:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Should I change the word "flood" to "spam"?
— minip 23:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Featured articles navigator

I have created a Featured articles navigator. This can be placed on the bottom of articles that have already been tagged at the top. I believe that adding this navigator to an article will highlight its coveted status. This will also enable localized users to quickly see what other articles have been featured, or what links need to be corrected. Since there is only one Featured articles page (that all Featured article tags link to), this template will provide a browsing alternative for users who do not speak English.

This navigator is currently translated into four other languages.
Supported languages for this template: es, fr, pt-br, ru (add)

Here is an example:

I appreciate any feedback. I purposely did not add any icons to the article names. Feel free to create your own copy of this navigator.
— minip 19:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The navigator looks great and will be helpful to many. My only concern is what will go in it. Many of the old featured articles were either from the unofficial wiki, or if were put through the candidacy process today would not have made the cut. Additionally the featured article page itself has fallen into disrepair, as the Buff Banner section is still there even after its feature was a while ago. Therefore, before this navigator can be implemented and be of any use, I suggest a complete overhaul and at least a tidy up of the featured articles process altogether.--Focusknock 23:09, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

The featured article project is largely outdated and many articles currently classified as 'featured' are in a rather bad state. The ones currently linked from the nav seem to be articles that fitted nicely on the Main Page. I don't think it's worthing linking to them for now. seb26 [talk] 06:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I noticed this as well, I only included the articles from the Previously featured section. Some other pages marked as "Featured" are indeed in a rather bad state.
— minip 23:53, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Audio Weapon Files Integration Discussion

So my Dream is an extra Link on every class(all 9) article. Should look like this:

• Scout Weapons Sound <- something like this.
• Scout taunts
• Scout responses ...etc.

Why? -It get's more and more important to know, what Weapon the enemy has. A Soldier with a Black Box only has 3 shots, that's your advantage. Or a Pyro with Degreaser u can hurt him a little longer... etc. Every time you hear the enemies weapon before you see him is good for you. If you can distinguish the Weapons by it's original sound you have an advantage. I don't see any weapon-sound-class related article's here. So i'm in need for help. I have almost no template skills, i know how to extract the audio file and can distinguish them, but that's it. Would like to have an open discussion and hope you all can help me.

This Editor is undead, be advised to shoot him in the head.

 Nope This has been suggested before. The Weapon Demonstration project already sufficiently covers weapon sounds as part of the videos. — nVis (talk) 14:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

nVis wrong wrong wrong, videos are not equal to the original weapon sounds. why? youtube reduce original sounds and video quality to make videos watchable. that's why i suggested original audio upload on the wiki so you don't need to rely on youtube. {{subst:void|This template should always be substituted. Please change {{Unsigned}} to {{subst:Unsigned}}}}— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Godlike11219 (talk) • (contribs) 2024-11-30, 10:40 UTC

There's no way a YouTube video reduces audio quality to the extent that one can't tell what a weapon sounds like. Toomai Glittershine 18:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Godlike11219 is wrong wrong wrong. We have videos. That's good enough. And last I checked, the Wiki isn't meant to be used as a training camp for TF2 super soldiers who can pick up on weapon sounds and instantly go into defense mode. 404 User Not Found 19:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Because of no good responses, I'm gonna drop this idea. I just thought for modder and other guys it would/could be interesting to get the audio files of one gun or action, to put it in another game or modificate his gun sound in tf2. But anyways u can put my idea into archive. NoWhereMan(DSvY) "Ich machen liebe Lannnnng" 04:44, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Promotional Update Pages

I think we should make a page for each promtional update eg: the recent Rift update, it will have the things that were added, details about it, and maybe even a bit about the game itself, and the main picture could be the picture for that update on the blog.

I think this page and this page cover it well enough? —Moussekateer·talk 10:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Related-Achievement Multilanguage Template?(links for classes...)

As some of you know i don't know many things that are discussed elsewhere, so please don't say it is already discussed and stuff, i just want to ask....

Black_Box#Related_Achievements <--this is nicely done, the Picture of the Class, and the Classname are linked correctly to the class wikipage. But if you look at the german text --> Black_Box/de#Zugehörige_Errungenschaften , it has no linkin no picture in it. My Question is not about how to edit it and make it look like the english one. It is about a general template for all classes, for the achievment-related weapon pages, so you don't need to edit every weapon article with my own hands or a bot....For germans even the picture link must be: link=Pyro/de for example, in many german wiki articles you get to the english wikipage because it is not correctly linked. I really would like a template with language switches, if there is not already one i'm overlookins, soooo what about my idea? Bad, Bader, a nightmare? NoWhereMan(DSvY) "Ich machen liebe Lannnnng" 23:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

See {{Class link}} — Wind 23:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Note tag

This template was created for noting various pieces of information. This tag promotes a consistent format throughout all pages, it uses a style similar to that of the Wikipedia Tutorial.

Supported languages for this template: en, pl, pt-br, ro (add)

{{User:Minip/Template:Note|Noted information here.}}

en:

Note: N/D: No Damage. - N/A: Not Available. - HP: Health. - sec.: Seconds. - N/R: No Range. - ∞: Unlimited.

pt-br:

Nota: N/D: Sem dano. - N/A: Não disponível. - HP: Vida. - seg.: Segundos. - N/R: Sem distância. - ∞: Ilimitado.

Thank you for any feedback. I am looking for help with the translation portion of this project.
— minip 07:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Image name consistancy

This is going to be a long one if we do it, but I propose we fix the current image names so that they have a consistant format. What I mean by this is best described by the maps list from the Classless Update.

Game Mode	Image	Map Name	File Name
King Of The Hill		Viaduct	koth_viaduct
		Sawmill	koth_sawmill
		Nucleus	koth_nucleus
Capture The Flag		Sawmill	ctf_sawmill
Arena		Offblast	arena_offblast_final
Control Point		Yukon	cp_yukon_final

The images are named: Viaduct_01.jpg, kothsawmill.jpg, Nucleus.PNG, CTF Sawmill Center.png, offblast_01.jpg and CP_Yukon_overview.png.

I'm not saying all of the images need to be the same file type, I'm saying we should have some consistancy when naming the actual images, such as using all lowercase, whether we use spaces or underscores ect. I just think it would really help with coding of current later pages so you don't have to go to the maps page and look at the coding to find out what it was obscurely named. ---- No-oneSpecial (talk | contribs) 06:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Consistancy can really help with this sort of thing, and I have had trouble like this before as well whilst trying to find certain images because they didn't use consistant names. Perhaps an image naming guideline page would be useful as well? ^Scatman _John (Talk | Contrib) 08:17, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Comment In case of images, underscores are equivalent to spaces; image links work either way. That said, I've noticed the inconsistency in naming too, and I think it's part of a bigger problem: the map articles in general are an inconsistent bunch. Hopefully the upcoming map demonstration project will help clean the pages up. — nVis  08:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Yes, this is a very good idea. As someone who uploads a lot of images for the map articles I find it would be much easier to stick to a consistent naming system. ~Garticuno♥_(talk) 08:33, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support. I think, however, that it should not be enforced as if it were a set of strict rules but as a set of general naming guidelines for some direction to avoid File:Cpdustbowlstage2point20004.jpg and the like. We shouldn't use this to scare away new people who are only trying to upload a couple of screenshots. Also it should be noted that though that most map images can be found by browsing each map's category from Category:Images by map and the filename itself can be found by simply hovering over the image. seb26 [talk] 08:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support It is also partly due to Valve, and not having consistent file names. But it would be a good idea to set some guidelines, or maybe an easier way to rename a picture, other than moving it and making the old image a redirect. MogDog66 _{t c p} || 22:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I do support this, but what I think you're aiming for here is a large complete overhaul of every image name. I never bother with images so, I'm not sure if those can be edited purely on the Wiki or are stored when you upload the image. But I digress, if you're going to do this, make it a complete overhaul on how to name images when you upload them for articles. If you don't, we're going back to square one. Fendermcbender 22:11, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Map_infobox improvements

Any suggestion? Opinions? --Kid Of The Century 11:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Looks too busy really, too much info in one box methinks. —Moussekateer·talk 17:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I like it. -- OluapPlayer _(t) 17:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

So do I. Final verdict; awesome flick. maggosh 18:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've added also the "No. of Stages". To Mousse: I purposedly crammed the infobox with infos, mostly to find out which ones are useful and which are superfluous. Personally I'd merge "Setting" with "Weather", having a single entry that says "daylight, clear".--Kid Of The Century 10:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, I wasn't very pleased with the all-text previous version. So, tell me what you think. --Kid Of The Century 18:31, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

А вы сидите здесь ради редкой шапки Official Wiki ?

Я вот например да, а вы?{{subst:void|This template should always be substituted. Please change {{Unsigned}} to {{subst:Unsigned}}}}— The preceding unsigned comment was added by FaERoN (talk) • (contribs) 2024-11-30, 10:40 UTC

In English? —Moussekateer·talk 17:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't bother, he is just sooo stupid, that he can't realize that this is ENGLISH TALKING PAGE. Идиот. Честное слово, идиот. DrAkcel ^{(T | C)} 17:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Russian sounds (responses)

Ok main problem in our /ru responses pages that we didnt have alot of sounds in wiki base. There are divergences in transfers and official russian sounds. So my question is: Can i upload official missing(russian) sounds and then use them to re-edit pages? Rins (talk | contribs) 17:55, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

There is already a lot of them. Try use this page to find them. And be careful: a lot of sound files do not have Russian translation. DrAkcel ^{(T | C)} 11:53, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Trivial clipping?

The last few weeks, it seems many of the bugs sections of many pages have been getting absolutely trivial clipping "issues" being added as bugs. I understand they're bugs... but honestly, is it even worth noting that the Targe slightly clips every so often when taunting with the bottle? I mean... where does it end? Do we note that heavy's fingers clip slightly while taunting with his miniguns? Or how Bonk clips into Scout's lips very slightly when he drinks? How about we start listing every single area of a map where the player can clip slightly into the wall? I'd say there's a few major clipping issues worth noting (Spy mask with fez for example, blighted beak, loch n load, jag, stuff like that is worth noting). I think going forward, clipping issues, and I use the term "issue lightly", should be more carefully added. Some of them just seem to be nit picking, especially since every single 3D video game ever made has clipping. Some aspects of modeling even require clipping Balladofwindfishes 01:05, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I can see where you're coming from but I don't exactly agree. Granted, there are certain clipping issues that are completely impossible to avoid, such as with walls, during animations and such. However, a clipping issues should be considered more where it is so jarring obvious that a reasonable person would be able to spot it and note it. The targe one, I would agree, is not easily findable, but other things people in the past have scoffed at would definitely fit the bill. Caution should be exercised, yes, but not to the extent that is done with trivia.--Focusknock 23:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Link the Updates in the Hat Tables

We're all about connecting related information together so why not link the related updates in the hat tables. So from this:

To this:

Thoughts? ---- No-oneSpecial (talk | contribs) 20:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Not sure why this hasn't happened already.

 Support I like it, it's brilliant, hire this man. -- Alsoodani 20:43, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Enuff said DrAkcel ^{(T | C)} 20:47, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Why not~ — Wind 21:28, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Just change "Classless" to "Classless Update" and it would be just perfect. --LordKelvin 23:51, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

The new evaluation system

I want to offer the new evaluation system for user actions. You can praise and criticize the users in accordance with their actions.
Of course, you can write to the user something like this "Your edits are very bad !!!! lol stop plz", but it's not very correct form.
You guys can find my project here. As you can see there's source code and how it looks when you write it.
Maybe it's not perfect, but I wish that this was available to all. — VeKoB 20:22, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't think canned responses are a good idea. In case of {{sp}} it's warranted because it's something a lot of new users have to learn the hard way, but generally speaking, every case should be considered individually. Instead of posting a message saying "bad edit", tell the editor why you think it's bad. On the other hand, if you just want let the user know you appreciate their work, there are already ways to do that. — nVis  21:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I would get a bad one, but i'm willed to improve myself and was told by Lagg to think more, longer, be calm, and then start writing. I try that, and most of the time I end with a failure, but hey i can edit it out somehow... I think your idea would scare people away and the wiki would have less editors. I for myself know only a handfull germans here, and the most of them are not long here, i think they would quit if someone says:"bad boy!" to them. But as a reward you can post at peoples userpage and give them a cookie or whatever and say "good boy!". I'm myself just hope for more german coordination and support in the wiki, but we are only a few with a lot of ambition but no great plan, only speakin for me.
NoWhereMan(godlike11219) 21:51, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

It's so hard to get the wikichievements because no one who dares. It is very rare. But with this method, there is a kind of mini-social life, where everyone can praise other. And of course you should not use these messages if you do not want, just insert the right place when you see fit, this is purely your decision... — VeKoB 09:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Strategy pages overhaul

I've been keeping an eye on and doing active overhauls of 4 of the community strategy pages, but it's kinda hard to do it all by myself. On top of which, lots of them still need changes, especially the map-specific sections, to make them readable. Most of the time, whenever someone adds a tip to these pages they don't bother to format their tips properly, or place repeat tips on them, or something else entirely. Also, several of the pages need overhauls to remove "you"s and the like.

I've been actively watching the Medic, Pyro, Soldier, and Heavy pages, but it's kind of a lot of work to do by myself. Could I ask for some help from other users please? Thanks. --LordKelvin 00:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I second this. The pages have frankly degenerated into bullet point drivel, reading like an informal conversation about vague points concerning the game rather than in depth consideration of strategy. I can help out with proofreading and wheedling out the "you"s where I can but more people need to help out.--Focusknock 00:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm in. Should we begin with the Basic Strategy sections, merging the bullet points into small paragraphs? That's not too big of a job, so if you were after the bigger community pages, I can do that. -- InShane 06:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

That being said, do we gradually change each page, one by one, or save them as Word documents and the like and do everything in GIANT MAN chunks? I'm more for gradual changes. -- InShane 06:39, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The thing with the strategy pages is that, by their nature, you're going to get a ton of subjective opinion. On top of which, as I already mentioned, most people just like to add their own little insight without paying attention to the flow of the entire article (or grammar, but that's easily fixed if not always welcome). I tried to fix that with the Medic, Pyro, Soldier, and Heavy articles, but doing so means that I have to keep an eye on those pages every time someone adds something to it, and adjust it accordingly. And again, the map-specific sections are a bitch to take care of since that's where much of the subjective opinion seems to go.

Bullet points make adding tips and strategies a lot easier, but also make the article itself less cohesive as well as harder to understand overall. Paragraph form is excellent for making an article flow, but also requires extensive editing to ensure that it's cohesive and it's harder to add to, and you need someone to keep a vigil on the article to make sure that any additions that are made do mesh with the rest of the article. Some sections and certain approaches are better done with bullet points (such as listing places where an Engineer can place Sentry nests), while others are best done using paragraph format; the trick is to find a good blend.

What I want to propose is a better sectioning of the Community Strategy section. Instead of an in-depth-and-convoluted version of the Basic Strategy pages, perhaps we could split it in two: have one page where players can add their insights and suggestions in whatever form they want, and then have another user read those over and mesh them into a paragraph-and-bullet format strategy page where attention is kept on article quality. This way, suggestions can be "screened" for grammar, usefulness, and the like before being put into the actual community strategy page, increasing its overall quality.

Another thing that I wanted to propose was an in-depth class match-ups page. I added class-specific strategies to the Pyro page awhile back (pretty much had to build the entire section from the ground up) because I didn't want to make the match-ups page too convoluted, but looking back at it it could probably fill an entire page by itself. Along the same lines as the Basic Strategy pages, perhaps a separate page for community-contributed class-specific strategies could help keep things neat.

Finally, maybe a separate map-specific strategies section could go a long way to reducing the clutter on the pages. As it is, the map-specific sections probably take up half of the community strategy pages, and much of it is too specific to be of help to newer players. If they're split off into their own pages, it could help to (1) reduce clutter, (2) allow us to remove the Map Strategy sections on the map pages by simply redirecting, and (3) make the community strategy pages more focused on getting better as the class rather than getting better on a certain map.

TLDR version:

• Overhaul Community Strategy pages so that it's not all bullet-point crap, convert some to paragraphs so that it's easier to read
• Make a "screening" page where users can add their tips so that they can be added properly to the Community Strategy page
• New Community Class-specific Strategies section for adding advanced tips on how to deal with other classes
• Split "Map-specific Strategies" sections off into their own pages

Yea, nay? --LordKelvin 18:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I believe you underestimate our good friends in the IRC, who regularly keep an eye on what is altered on the wiki (for english pages anyway). Particularly now they are alerted to the strategies needing work, if they see something repetitive or out of context they will simply alter/remove it. I must admit that some edits will escape this net in place, though, so maybe a screening page is needed. Perhaps the talk page of each strategy should be converted into one?

As for a class-to-class breakdown of strategies, I'm pretty sure we had something like this before; a sort of table with one class in one column and all 9 in the other, which information spread against each matchup. --Focusknock 11:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there are class match-up pages, but I would like to propose that those be kept short-and-sweet, like the Basic Strategy pages, while a longer and more in-depth page be created with the same purpose as the Community Strategy pages, so that more advanced stuff can be placed there. In the case of the class-specific strategy section that I put in the Community Pyro strategy page, it consists of roughly 32,000 characters, almost three times bigger than the basic Pyro match-ups page. And similarly, the map-specific section of the same page is roughly 30,000 characters. Those two sections alone take up about half of the article.

At best, splitting the community strategy pages up into (1) getting better as the class itself, (2) learning how to specifically counter other classes, and (3) getting better on specific maps could significantly help for organization purposes; a map-specific strategy section could also reduce the clutter on the map pages themselves, making them more informative rather than subjective (for example, the 2Fort page has to use an entirely new page for suggested strategies).

I'll try to draw up plans for applying these to all of the community strategy pages, but I would like some more feedback before I actually try to implement any changes. --LordKelvin 20:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Have the "Random Page" button only direct you to pages in your selected language

Seriously guys, this is just lame. Most of the time, the Random Page button brings you to some french page. I think someone should really fix that.

--Vyro 05:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support YES! I'm tired of hitting random page and ending up at like, Floobengorben or some other "other-language" page (not trying to sound like an insensitive jerk or anything). 404 User Not Found 06:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Yeah, it's kind of annoying to switch to the English page when the Wiki could do if for me. Lazyness! It's the American Way! GeminiViRiS Talk Contribs 06:16, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

An extension was written by WindPower to fix this but it was never implemented by Valve. I'll see if we can nudge them about this (and about a few other things) soon. seb26 [talk] 06:18, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Then it is necessary to give the chance to choose in what languages to search. Example: searching in /ru and /pl pages. Rins (talk | contribs) 06:53, 22 February 2011 (UTC) yeah i think the random page button should be in the language your in.~Awesomesauce~ 07:02, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Awesomesauce

Related Achievements

Can we get some sort of guidelines for what qualifies as a related achievement? For instance, on the Spy-checking article, pretty much every achievement that mentions a spy or any of his equipment is listed. The same is true for a lot of other pages as well. GJ 16:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm the one that added most of those achievements. For something as generic as spy-checking, it can get fairly ambiguous about which achievements are related, so I mainly tried to include only the ones that you would get while spy-checking or that would prevent a spy from accomplishing his objectives.

For most of the other related achievements, I guess it would fall into a case of judgment. For weapons, the obvious rule is that it should be an achievement that requires (or at least can be done with) the use of that weapon, you killing an enemy that is specifically using that weapon, or whatnot. --LordKelvin 20:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Update History for classes

(Moved from Talk:Sniper and Talk:Main Page)

Lets settle this once and for all. Should we have update histories for classes, (Sniper, Heavy, Spy, etc) about things like the model changes or the added voice lines? --Stevoisiak 23:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

 Neutral Would be a quite long section on an already-quite-long page. But it would be consistent with the weapon pages, I guess — Wind 23:43, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I like the idea, but it shouldn't take to much space. Maybe foldin it up like meet the team text(the "transcription command"[it's not named like that but i don't know the name]). NWM 23:48, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I believe it would be a good idea, since we could simply collapse it so that it doesn't take up any space, but the problem is: what do you put on it? Do you include all related weapon changes, do you include related videos, what? --LordKelvin 23:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I would not include any weapon changes. Just changes SPECIFIC to a class. If it only affects a single weapon, don't add it. each one would only have a few changes. Also, supporting my own discussion FTW! --Stevoisiak 23:57, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

 Neutral In terms of standardisation between articles, I would agree with the Windy One that the content should remain. That being said, is the Update History really relevant to the average reader? Perhaps a dedicated page for the Update History with a prominent link to from the Class page would be a good idea, as it would not only streamline the page but also remove text that may be of no practical use to the reader. If they were interested in seeking the information out however, it would be readily available. In essence, it seems to come down to an issue of whether or not the information is pertinent to the average Wiki user and should be displayed so prominently. Esquilax 00:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Things that don't fit anywhere else, such as model changes, should go in the class's article. Weapons' changes would simply clutter up the page, and voice responses have their own pages. - LingoSalad _(talk) 00:19, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

A value section on every item's page

Hey there, my suggestion is to put a 'value' section on every item's page. I mean that for example, on the pages of hats, there will be a section just like trivia, stating the item's value. I know that some people don't like this, but it is VERY helpful for players like me. When in trades, a lot of people search the internet for a items value. If this is available on the Team Fortress Wiki, we will have A LOT of visitors. This can also be handy for people who don't have any clue about prices. For example, I saw someone lately who sold his Vintage Procedure Mask for 2 refined. This is very unfair for the seller. I think that my idea could help lots of people.

Oh, and of course I will be editing the items rarity & value on a regular base. I trade a lot, I know how things work.

Cheers! GibsonGold 15:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

This is a no no unfortunately. Value is subjective. There may be 'average market prices' but the value of items is subjective to every person. This has already been added to the trivia guidelines. —Moussekateer·talk 15:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Ahh yes I get your point, but there are enough people who would like a price that is fair for their items, but unfortunately not all people know these. Yes, prices may be subjective, but there are standards. I think that some people like your point, but a extra section on a page, which tells a approx value, is not a bad idea. In fact, lots of people would like it. For example, while they are trading, they can quickly look up the value so they are not making a bad trade. GibsonGold 15:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Like I said there isn't really a thing such as a 'bad trade'. If someone is happy to trade their hat for another hat then that's the end of that. The wiki is here for factual information not subjective. This would be akin to including on every article that 'this hat is better looking then this hat'. —Moussekateer·talk 16:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

 Nope.avi As already stated, value is highly subjective. Some people don't want to take crafting value into account (e.g., how many people use the Powerjack over the Axtinguisher?), some people simply see a weapon as worthless (Dalokohs Bar and Backburner), some people don't think certain class items are worth it because they don't use them that frequently (how many times do you actually headshot someone as a Spy to justify use of an Ambassador?), the list goes on. If you open up a section on each page for this, then everyone and their dog will try to make it say what they personally think it's worth, and we have more than enough of that on the Community Strategy pages. --LordKelvin 17:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Renaming "bugs" section

As pointed out by BalladofWindfishes above, the bugs section of articles is growing to the point where any graphical errors or other problems are being listed, much to the annoyance of some editors. Some of the hostility seems to stem from the fact that these are not 'bugs' in the usual sense of the word; they are minor problems that do not alter gameplay. As such, would it be benefitial to rename the section to a broader title such as 'known issues'?--Focusknock 21:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support I agree. GibsonGold 22:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Makes sense. Clipping issues are of no interest to me. - LingoSalad _(talk) 23:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

 Con Bugs=Programm/Software error, so if "2 bytes" for example hand(1byte) and weapon(1byte) cross each other it is a bug for me, because they shouldn't get through eacht other, so it's a software/programm error = a bug. NWM 23:28, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

• I think it would be better to reduce the scope of the bugs section instead of renaming it ('known issues' isn't really that far off from 'bugs' to warrant a change). And as articles are for readers, they shouldn't be set out to satisfy tastes' of editors. That being said I think that clipping errors should be limited in bugs sections, with only major clipping issues to be listed (using discretion & everyone agreeing on it to determine what's worth noting). seb26 [talk] 23:31, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Damage template

It has come to my attention that the ==damage== section on weapons' articles is fairly un-standardized, for that reason and others, I have begun a basic template to replace the damage section on weapons' articles. It uses {{BASEPAGENAME}} to determine what to produce, and can be found here. Does this look good? I know the formatting's a bit sloppy, I (or someone else) need(s) to come up with some sort of standard, or decide to throw it all into some kind of table, if it looks better. Also, if I could be doing this more efficiently, suggestions are appreciated. - LingoSalad _(talk) 23:39, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I would fully support this, but it seems to still be spitting out errors. Rocket Launcher generates no output at all, while Minigun spits out an expression/operand error. Also, when used on the Flamethrower page it doesn't seem to use bold text as in Scattergun.

Overall, I love the idea since it would make adding new weapon data much easier (put the data into the template, and just put a single line on the weapon page in question), but this would depend on getting the coding right first. --LordKelvin 00:15, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, a further addendum, maybe this could be used to keep the Weapons page and individual weapons pages consistent. A few times I've noticed that someone updated the damage data for a weapon on its individual page, but left it unchanged on the Weapons page. --LordKelvin 00:31, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

This is still a work in progress, so it probably won't work all the time on all pages. - LingoSalad _(talk) 01:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

 Support Anything is better than the list/mini tables people have scattered across the weapon pages. --Focusknock 10:57, 26 February 2011 (UTC)