Team Fortress Wiki:Technical requests

Summary of requests: software enhancements

Two-factor authentication

Extension:OATHAuth is an extension that adds the functionality of two-factor authentication to the Wiki. Would be a nice touch to security and to keep up with the times. Using it would remain optional and nothing would change for the users unless they choose to enable it themselves (disabled by default), so we won't see another Flow-talkpage-bad-please-remove situation here. VasyaTheWizard ^{(talk) • (contributions)} 19:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Upgrade MediaWiki

Greetings! Please update MediaWiki to the latest version (currently 1.35.3 LTS), thanks! — Tark lm(pt-br) 11:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Extension:Cargo

Extension:Cargo This extension would allow for us to use database queries to generate reports/tracking pages and further improve lists. I'm a regular on the Dota 2 Wiki and this is definitely the most useful extension I've had the pleasure of using, please consider. — Tark lm(pt-br) 20:00, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Configuring Extension:ParserFunctions

Extension:ParserFunctions is an already super useful extension. It can be made even more useful by configuring it to set $wgPFEnableStringFunctions to true. This would allow the extension to also utilize many of the features of Extension:StringFunctions with a quick configuration change. ~ Boba 20:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

+1  Wookipan (talk | contribs) 00:23, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Tooltip template on mobile devices

We uses a lot of {{tooltip}} in this Wiki, but you can't see the text on phones and tablets without a mouse. I see there's this thing that could maybe solve this? Or is there other ways to let you tap on the text and show the tooltip? --Alex┋T 15:03, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Better mobile support

MobileFrontend is a good start. See also Manual:Mobiles, tablets and responsive design. — Tark lm(pt-br) 04:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Better search

Implement CirrusSearch (or equivalent) to improve the overall search experience. CirrusSearch is definitely the best option out there, but it does require more work to be implemented. Alternatively, AdvancedSearch would be a great improvement. — Tark 01:32, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Enable StringFunctions

Help:Extension:ParserFunctions#StringFunctions. — Tark 18:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Older

All previous requests

Accepted Upgrades 1.16.0 Could we update to MediaWiki version 1.16.0, please? It contains a number of fixes and also, the new Vector skin which should help with usability. Thanks.  – Smashman (talk) 12:13, 31 August 2010 (UTC) To elaborate further, the Vector skin included in this release was developed as a part of Wikimedia's Usability Initiative. As well as a new refreshed look for all pages (see Wikipedia), it also includes enhancements to the editing toolbar, assisting newer inexperienced users with editing and maintaining articles (see here for an example in further detail). We would really like to see this change implemented if it is possible. seb26 [talk] 11:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC) We were already running 1.16 before I upgraded to 1.20, so this should be under "accepted". :3 -RJ 13:09, 31 May 2013 (PDT) 1.20.5 TF Wiki's installation at the moment is at 1.15.4, which is a little behind – the latest stable release is 1.16.5 (see also release notes). Note that this release branch appears to have some issues regarding HTML titles not functioning properly (DISPLAYTITLE titles not working (particularly important on translated pages), 'Editing Page...' not appearing). This coupled with the fact that most of our JS customizations have not yet been tested with the release may make this release branch a slightly unfavourable candidate at this time. Although these are relatively minor issues compared with other security matters to be taken into consideration, they are being noted here anyway. Just to note about the latest version, but it's now at 1.19.1. --The Happy Flygineer 20:14, 14 July 2012 (PDT) Now at 1.20.0 Darkid (|) 13:58, 29 November 2012 (PST)  Support Obviously I'm behind the idea of keeping the wiki's software up to date. (Can't imagine who wouldn't be.) Blk_Mage_Ctype 17:11, 21 January 2013 (PST)  Done -RJ 13:09, 31 May 2013 (PDT) Minor extensions CategoryTree: Ajax-based category navigation. This is sorely needed as we now have a much more intricate category system that can be impossible to navigate at times (at least, for the majority of our users). Done --JeffLane 21:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC) Configuration Interwiki table additions for some of our 'sister' wikis: the VDC, L4D Wikia, Combine OverWiki and the Portal Wiki. Will be done during the next upgrade cycle. --JeffLane 21:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC) Namespace aliases – some project pages have quite large names that can be hard to remember or type out, so adding the ability to link to them with greater ease will prove to be useful. This is a simple change that will have the added benefit of increasing navigation to many of our non-article pages that can be difficult to locate for most of our users. For the 'Team Fortress Wiki:' namespace (or 'Project' namespace, NS:4): TF, TFW and Wiki Done. --JeffLane 21:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC) Interwiki table addition It would come in handy to have the Valve Developer Community wiki added to the interwiki table, perhaps as vdc:. It would be particularly helpful to the expansion of TF2 mapping articles. seb26 [talk] 07:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC) It may also be useful to add interwiki links for the other wikis in the VWN, such as the L4D Wikia and the Combine OverWiki. seb26 [talk] 20:45, 5 September 2010 (UTC)  Done a long time ago — Wind 13:23, 31 May 2013 (PDT) More file formats Some projects such as the Weapon Demonstration project may benefit from other file types for upload, such as .dem files (Source engine demos) and .cfg (config files). Other file types to look into include .psd, .apng, .webp, .ttf, .otf, .mp3, .ogg, .flac, .diff — Wind 13:27, 31 May 2013 (PDT)  Done — Wind 15:01, 5 June 2013 (PDT) Extensions (seb26) A few suggestions regarding extensions on the wiki: The current extension we use for embedding videos seems to be out of date. EmbedVideo 1.0 embeds videos inline so we can align them in the center, unlike how the current one works (i.e. forcing you to choose left or right and adding a stupid thumbnail description below it). It also supports HD videos which is even better for videos that support it (like the Meet the Team videos). CategoryTree will most definitely come in handy in organising other language pages & categories. It's used on most Wikimedia wikis as well. seb26 (talk) 21:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC) The "newer" version of EmbedVideo is not from the same author -- it's a re-write. We tested it and found it had some issues that made it not a good replacement. --JeffLane 21:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC) The CategoryTree extension can be added. --JeffLane 21:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC) Using this extension, Page Notice, will allow us to better manage other language translation pages by automatically transcluding {{languages}} onto every page. seb26 (talk) 20:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC) Seems reasonable. We'll look into this. --JeffLane 21:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC) Update: this extension (Page Notice) may no longer necessary as we have found a way to provide better accessibility to translated articles through links placed in the sidebar. seb26 [talk] 11:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC) Installed SimpleAntiSpam and SpamBlacklist as an effort to reduce spam. -RJ 13:09, 31 May 2013 (PDT)  Done -RJ 13:09, 31 May 2013 (PDT) Semantic MediaWiki Semantic MediaWiki (on MediaWiki.org) is an elaborate but well known, documented and supported extension that will allow us to have a central location for weapon damage values (and other stats). Defining a property and value for weapon base damage, such as [[ammo loaded::6]] for the Scattergun, will allow us to query that value on other pages. This will primarily increase the accuracy of such values and remove the need to update the values on multiple pages when patches hit, and secondarily assist in outside websites in parsing the information contained in the wiki. In approaching the issue of increasing our data accuracy, this seemed like the best solution rather than using some sort of template/pseudo-namespace or the like to serve as a central space for these values. -- Pilk (talk) 09:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC) Group Permissions GroupPermissions will remove reliance on Valve to modify user group permissions. A couple of changes to user group rights are wanted but will require experimentation so allowing us to do it at our leisure would be the best solution. -- Pilk (talk) 10:32, 18 September 2010 (UTC) File Size Limit The current file size limit is making it difficult to get ultra high-res images on the Wiki, which means file quality generally has to be compromised to get them on the Wiki at all. It's currently set at 2 MB; if this could be increased to 5 MB, that would be incredibly helpful. -- En Ex (talk) 05:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC) StructuredDiscussions mediawikiwiki:Extension:StructuredDiscussions would be a better, less messy discussion system. Especially because it lets people watchlis specific topic instead of the entire talk page. —CreativeC (talk) 19:39, 19 March 2019 (UTC) Note that you can either enable it on all pages, on specific talk namespaces or even as an option for users who wants —CreativeC (talk) 18:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC) Just the other day, Gabrielwoj was complaining about what a pain it is to try to keep up with all of the (English) discussions. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 00:34, 20 March 2019 (UTC) Was I? Well, the only thing I mentioned (that I can remember of) is that the discussions doesn't get much attention, and so, a lot of threads of discussions I did were left unanswered. The StructuredDiscussions could perhaps solve the issue, by having a more intuitive design, perhaps more users could join and give their thoughts on any regarding discussions. - ▪ - 17:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC) It seemed a solution searching for a problem ( that does not exist, IMO). Given the existing evidence that talk Pages were once much more active ( both here and on WP) I do not think the situation is that the participation barrier is too high. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 17:42, 20 March 2019 (UTC) ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @Mikado282 We discussed it on fr.wp and it may be the fact that newcomers are no longer computer-enthusiasts; they comes after the Internet’s democratization and are used to light and user-friendly UI. I really think this the problem -CreativeC (talk) 19:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC) Maybe, I have a different perspective; I became an accomplished technical writer before I got caught in the computer gaming time-suck. As I see it, contributing requires some area of technical competency. I don't say technical competency is required to start, as long as the new editor is committed to learning. I rather see (assume) that there are many more places competing for able editors now; I witnessed the exodus of Overwatch (which freed oxygen for me to Cap, so ... ) M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 00:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC) I've set this up! It'll only kick on for new talk pages however... might have to put some thought into archiving existing talk pages, thoughts? -RJ 07:53, 23 March 2019 (UTC) IMO, existing talk pages are an essential element of late-joiners learning the style and consensus of the wiki. That's how I learned. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 15:33, 23 March 2019 (UTC) I really don't like the new Discussions thing, I can't separate my topics in break lines, as seen here. It looks a mess, and it's hard to read. Is there a way to add break lines or other wikimedia's format to it? While it may be more user-intuitive now, it's perhaps now even worse as a reader perspective. - ▪ - 21:02, 24 March 2019 (UTC) Never mind, it seems that... it fixed itself? Hmm... Now it's looking okay, and properly formatted. - ▪ - 21:04, 24 March 2019 (UTC) Also, it looked like Defiant Spartan already had a discussion before, but when I clicked it, I couldn't see any new ones. Going to History doesn't show anything either, so I believe that, for some reason, was the reason to why the formatting didn't worked on the first minutes of "posting"? - ▪ - 21:10, 24 March 2019 (UTC) I am trying out the new Discussions thing, on a cherry User Talk. Where is the pre-view? If there is something the new editors need, it is preview. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 01:26, 25 March 2019 (UTC) Hmmmm :>> User talk:Sploop. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 01:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC) Hmmmm. The edits seem to take a bit to sink in. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 02:38, 25 March 2019 (UTC) ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @RJ see mediawikiwiki:Extension:StructuredDiscussions#Migrating_existing_pages: The script maintenance/convertNamespaceFromWikitext.php automates this namespace conversion and archiving -CreativeC (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2019 (UTC)  - Tried additional comments on User talk:Sploop#Help:Style guide/Quotes (User talk:Sploop#Help:Style guide/Quotes), twice. Not, showing. If I go to >History< of all places, and click on one comment, the comment can be seen, click on the other comment, nothing. Hmmmmm M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 01:49, 26 March 2019 (UTC) Automatically converting all talkpages to the new format sounds like a bad idea. Some users, such as myself, would like to keep theirs in the old format. VasyaTheWizard (talk) • (contributions) 20:13, 29 March 2019 (UTC) Yeah it's not possible to actually "convert" the existing pages. The conversion described on that extension page is actually a mass-archival, leaving blank talk pages behind for the extension to takeover. What's the call on the extension so far? Are we feeling like we want to keep it around, or roll back? -RJ 10:28, 2 April 2019 (UTC) Personally, I'm for a revert on this. It's just plain confusing imho. VasyaTheWizard (talk) • (contributions) 16:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC) I don't like it. My comments don't show up (at least on my end), the page can't be customized and WelcomeBOT is now useless. — Tark lm(pt-br) 16:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC) I'm also for a revert, like Vasya said it's just confusing me. The previous talk page design was fine as it is. So far I have only encountered problems, mainly that the "uses markup" link does not work and leads to an [page], that there is no "Show Preview" button, that upon saving your edit, you have to first refresh the page to see if your links work (which might confuse new users, so basically remove it because it's too confusing for new editors. Also confuses more experienced editors, example: me), and that it basically adds nothing besides looking fancy. I would like it if these problems would've been resolved, then I would not mind it looking fancier. GrampaSwood (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2019 (UTC) All in all, it's somewhat more user-friendly and adds a neat little way to 'thank' users for their contributions. However, it seems to have caused some issues, one of them being cases of comments that tend to never show up - including talk page-specific edits in the IRC. It also appears that the WelcomeBOT is trying to create new welcome messages but they don't show up either. +1 for rollback . . Wookipan (talk | contribs) 16:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC) The 'thank' button is a completely different extension, it doesn't have anything to do with StructuredDiscussions. VasyaTheWizard (talk) • (contributions) 16:44, 2 April 2019 (UTC) Honestly thought that is was part of the extension. And now I just realized the topic below was about the 'thank' feature. In that case, it'd be best to rollback . . Wookipan (talk | contribs) 16:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC) Thanks mediawikiwiki:Extension:Thanks lef people thank others editions from page history. Great to spread the Wikilove ! —CreativeC (talk) 05:51, 20 March 2019 (UTC) Don't we already have wikichievements for this? VasyaTheWizard (talk) • (contributions) 18:37, 20 March 2019 (UTC) Nah, it is a lighter form of thanks, specific to individual edits. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 00:40, 21 March 2019 (UTC) I have really wanted to apply it the new editor's contributions, especially the ones I have to fix. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 15:39, 23 March 2019 (UTC) Also done! A "thank" button now shows up on history pages :) Would be nice if it shows up on recent changes, but it doesn't seem to do that 🤷‍♂️ -RJ 08:12, 23 March 2019 (UTC) All those extra clicks that it takes to thank through the history page just adds to the sincerity. M I K A D O 282 oOOOOo oo oo (talk) (Help Wanted!) 18:09, 2 April 2019 (UTC) Rejected Below is a list of the denied technical requests. Use of WebAPI Through an extension such as External Data, we can make use of the Steam WebAPI. This will hopefully allow us to automate to a certain degree: Some basic information on items/weapons Loadout stats on items/weapons Possible crafting information items/weapons Backpack information for user pages -- Pilk (talk) 21:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC) We tested this. Unfortunately, the current version of the extension is too limited to make it at all useful for WebAPI queries. --JeffLane 21:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC) Oh. Thank you for looking into it. -- Pilk (talk) 02:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC) Quick Search Any chance of enabling quick search? Would make finding stuff much easier. -Shine[] 21:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC) Removed from MediaWiki as of v. 1.20.0. Just deployed 1.20.5, which negates the need for this as it has a built-in search suggestions. -RJ 13:09, 31 May 2013 (PDT) Dark mode Dark mode extension for a softer look on the eyes. I personally use an extension already because I can't stand editing and when the page reloads and flashbangs me. It's an optional button and you scan switch which elements will be dark and which won't. Might cause trouble with images with 1px borders though. GrampaSwood (talk) 19:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)  Support In support of this, as long as it stays disabled by default. VasyaTheWizard (talk) • (contributions) 04:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)  Nope Not installing an experimental extension for this. The underlying code is fairly simple, you could apply it to yourself via custom CSS and Javascript. Here's some instructions. -RJ 15:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Taking requests for converting talk pages back to regular 'ol wikitext

Hi folks, I've switched off the flow talk page thing for new talk pages. Digging in, it doesn't appear there's an easy way to automatically convert existing talk pages that are using Flow back to regular wiki text. There is a maintenance script to give me the wikitext for a particular page, but it's a manual job to then delete the existing talk page and create a new one with that wiki text. That could be automated but as it involves deletions it'd end up being pretty risky, and hell to clean up if anything goes wrong. I'll spend some time thinking about whether that's worth exploring.

In the mean time, if there are any pages you'd like converting please drop them below. I'll check back regularly (Valve time) and work through them.

Ta, -RJ 15:20, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

I would say to backup the saved data from the current talk system, and restore it back to the regular text. Keep the saved info from the current system somewhere, so we don't lose something important. The current talk system has replaced a ton of talk pages and talk user pages with nothing. We thought it would be a good idea implement it, but it's full of bugs and made things even worse. - ▪ - 16:07, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

god please save my talk page -- Boba 17:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Hope you are still around, please fix my talk page, thanks! --Alex┋T 03:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Howdy! Could you please do something about mine? I wouldn't even mind it using the flow, just want for messages to display there (lol). foxbite ^{(talk) ⨯ (contribs)} 12:11, 12 June 2022 (UTC)