Talk:List of Wiki Cap owners

Colour

It would be useful to document the colour of the caps as well, no? --Focusknock s 18:09, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

 Comment I'm not really sure if this is really useful. What if people re-paint their hats? Or remove paint? It'll be hell to check constantly. ~ lhavelund ^{(talk ▪ contrib)} 18:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

...then again, I'm sure people will rush to update the table themselves. ~ lhavelund ^{(talk ▪ contrib)} 18:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

This is what the item link is for. -- Lagg 18:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Lagg, the backpack link is sufficient for that. I can't think of any instance in which the colour a recipient has painted their hats would be notable information. -RJ 18:14, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

WIKI HAT

I dont know but i think that you do mthis to get a wiki hat? well if not i believ that it will get me one step closer to knowing --The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chrislikespie (talk) • contribs)

see this. ~ lhavelund ^{(talk ▪ contrib)} 18:57, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Please remember to sign all your posts, using 4 tildes: ~~~~ This adds your name and the time and date to the end of your post. You can read the Wiki Cap guidelines here. -- En Ex _(talk) 18:58, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Where's Neo?

Um. Shouldn't NeoDement have his name on this list, I mean, he did create the Wiki Cap. Corkscrew 03:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks. -RJ 03:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Move list to template

Currently whenever a new person gets the cap, every single translated page needs to be updated. Wouldn't it make more sense to move the table into a template and use translation-switching to name the columns? --CruelCow ^(talk) 01:48, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

 Support Great idea. I've been the one who has been updating the tables each time a Wiki Cap drops, and it's getting tedious. FlotsamX 01:51, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

“not encyclopedic”

”This article is a list documenting the current owners of Wiki Caps. It is therefore meant as a reference, even though it is not encyclopedic in nature.”

Why does this article mention not being encyclopedic? Is there a “Be like Wikipedia an encyclopedia” policy that I haven't found? —KPReid 04:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Y'know...

I woulda figured this list to be longer... Turboplant 01:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

That list only shows who fits the criteria... It's been longer before when a lot of people were old enough and with enough edits... Its size really depends on how many users are eligible. Tturbo _(T/C) 01:33, 19 May 2011 (UTC)