Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion

create a new section

Editing big articles

There's a rule about editing articles, that you cannot edit page many times, because it's difficult to work with history. I'd like this rule to be corrected. It's more difficult to edit big articles like "class strategy" in one time, much easier to edit it by parts. Mendel777

HL1 Maps that work in TFC: Delete them?

There's a few articles about Half-Life maps that can be copied over to Team Fortress Classic, and they work: [Boot_camp_(Classic)]], Bounce_(Classic), and Crossfire_(Classic), just to name a few. Are these really worth mentioning? I mean... yeah, they work, but a Garry's Mod or Half-Life 2 Deathmatch map could work in Team Fortress 2 as long as the content (textures and models) is either a) part of the HL2 content that's installed with every Orange Box Source Engine game or b) has the content paked into the BSP. Yet we don't mention HL2DM maps that work in TF2. So: do we axe the TFC maps that are ones copied over from HL and work or not? RagnarHomsar 19:55, 4 September 2011 (PDT)

Unless they're directly related to a specific Team Fortress game, in my opinion, they shouldn't be mentioned. Sven 10:57, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

 Support They are HL maps, not TFC. This wiki is about Team Fortress.  –  Cructo [T][C] 12:06, 18 September 2011 (PDT)

 Support Same as Cructo's reason.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 12:11, 18 September 2011 (PDT)

 Support Get rid of them. Same as Cructo. Balladofwindfishes 12:14, 18 September 2011 (PDT)

 Support Same as Cructo. Very strong support. SiPlus 06:26, 12 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support why have these here? If users want to know more about a map, they should visit the wiki of the game that the map is from, customs were made for tf/tf2, these were just ripped from other valve games, patched up and slapped in which in my opinion is not tf wiki worthy. - Lexar - talk 03:59, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

 Comment I am sertainly sure we had this discussion before, and decided, that HL maps are threatened as custom maps, because they are widely used on TFC servers. DrAkcel ^{(T | C)} 09:28, 21 September 2011 (PDT)

Wasn't this for QTF, where there were no official maps?  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 12:12, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

Why should we cover all of them then? SiPlus 06:26, 12 October 2011 (PDT)

 Disagree I already tried to help save the articles because of how they were greatly used on TFC servers. Therefore, my stance is still the same. The maps were used in TFC, they were a part of the history of this game, and it saddens me greatly to see editors like Sven, Cructo and the rest of you just out to destroy history. When that one editor SiPlus tagged them all for deletion ages ago without discussing it with anyone, I repeatedly reverted his labelling for the very reason of saving pieces of history about the lifetime of the Team Fortress series. Lo and behold, here's SiPlus showing very strong support for getting rid of this stuff. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 10:13, 12 October 2011 (PDT)

 Neutral  ·  Perhaps we should document them as custom maps, in the same way we document custom maps for TF2. They are custom content not native to TFC, after all. i-ghost 10:19, 12 October 2011 (PDT)

 Agree with i-ghost. Indeed. That would be the best route. I already had the Team Fortress 2 Alpha article I created lose half its images of models get deleted because of a certain POV-pushing user (who will remain unnamed) who made the same "It's from HL/HL2" argument, despite me clarifying that the article was for the specific Alpha that had been leaked. I'm frankly tired of the amount of hatred shown to HL/HL2 content on this wiki, especially seeing as how this is part of the VALVE Wiki network. So what if we have HL/HL2 content in small portions on the wiki? Maybe the HL/HL2 Wikis have content pertaining to TF2 on their Wikis. Stop the hatred. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 10:26, 12 October 2011 (PDT)

 Comment 404, your article about TF2 Alpha is actually about Half-Life 2 Beta mod created by Team GabeN, not the actual leaked source code and models. That's why I requested removal of the images. Your Alpha article needs to be rewritten to reflect the real leaked alpha instead of the mod trying to revive it. The only real alpha models leaked are Commando models. And, neither Combine OverWiki nor The Portal Wiki have pages about TF2 maps. SiPlus 03:20, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Comment Your reply would've been better off on my talk page, SiPlus. Regardless, I've got to work tonight, but when I get home I'll be going through all the HL1-maps-that-work-in-TFC and performing the necessary tasks to class them as "Custom Maps/Custom Content", just like i-ghost suggested. Until that time, I'd appreciate if nobody decided to be a vigilante, and labelled the articles for deletion again. In response to SiPlus's hilariously ignorant comment "And, neither Combine OverWiki nor The Portal Wiki have pages about TF2 maps."; Of course the Portal Wiki doesn't have articles for TF2 maps. TF2 maps can't be ported over to Portal/Portal 2. Same goes for the Combine Wiki. Content from TF2 can't be ported over. Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to head off to work. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 12:59, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Comment We don't have custom maps in the same navbox as the official ones, and we don't list custom game modes in List of game modes (we have separate page for them). And, we must not cover HL1 maps. HL1 maps should be covered on Half-Life wiki, since they are intended for Half-Life, and not Team Fortress wiki. And, all the articles about HL1 maps on OTFW are the same except for images in them. We don't need many similar articles. We can say in Trivia section of List of game modes (Classic) that some servers run Half-Life maps (or any other maps) without objectives, but we must not make articles about them. SiPlus 01:18, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

 Comment One more comment. Any map without objectives can be played in "deathmatch mode". Half-Life maps are not only deathmatch maps. Counter-Strike maps are played on servers too, but we don't cover them. And, don't compare Half-Life maps to Quake TF maps, they are different cases. SiPlus 01:38, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

I've un-tagged the articles because tomorrow I will finally have enough time to do what i-ghost told me do, that being create a navbox for the articles in question. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 02:16, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

Oh and to SiPlus, incase you didn't know; i-ghost is an admin. If he says to document them as custom content (in specific, a custom navbox, see his talk page, he told me to make one), then that's what I'm doing. And your argument of "Counter Strike maps are played on servers to". Yeah, after they've been sufficiently modified in Hammer to remove any offending entities and such that only work in CS:S and would otherwise cause issues in TF2 (I'm a mapper too, I know my shit.). Therefore, CS:S maps in use in TF2 are technically no longer CS:S maps. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 02:22, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

I mean CS, not CS:S. I've never seen any server playing CS:S map in TF2. And, these maps are not custom maps, they are Half-Life maps. I don't think we should cover a map on our wiki if it's played on 2-3 servers with retarded admins. And stop making me edit boost. And, this page doesn't describe any maps from Half-Life 2: DM, CS: Source or DoD: Source. Also, we don't even have an article about cp_orange_x, which is alot more popular than all Half-Life maps together, so I see no reason for having articles about them. SiPlus 03:28, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

Then why don't you knock off the biased POV and go and make an article for cp_orange_x, but only if you can find a good source that proves it's popularity. Did the devs talk about cp_orange_x? That would be a good source, and a good reason to start an article. Regardless, the pages are re-labelled and documented as custom content, which is what i-ghost suggested. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 12:17, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

Even though you relabelled them, the discussion is still open. We need a moderator. SiPlus 00:13, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

May I remind you, my friend, that i-ghost is an administrator here. I personally tend to listen to what the administrators say, and do as they say to do. i-ghost suggested documenting them as custom content, which is what I have done. Frankly, I am getting quite tired of listening to your heavily biased opinions on this matter. And your constant attempts to go over everyone's head and quickly label everything for deletion, despite this discussion still being open (your words, not mine), have become a source of amusement for me. On one hand, we have you rushing around, labelling everything for deletion. Perhaps you thought because I work full time, I wouldn't notice your rampant labelling. I noticed. On the other hand, we have you here, preaching about the discussion still being open. If this discussion is still open, then why would you go around labelling all the articles for deletion? I still haven't figured out your modus operandi, but I assure you that I will soon enough. I'll end this pathetic excuse for a discussion with that. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 00:41, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

may i remind YOU that an administrators word is not the only word, the administrators of the wiki go with a general community decision. I do however respect i-ghosts point, what i do not like is that fact that you ignore the wiki community, what they have stated and the opinions they have clearly presented here. - Lexar - talk 00:50, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

You're brave with your assumptions. I'll give you that, my boy. However, I'd like to address one statement you've made, as well as clarify my response to SiPlus a little bit. In response to your statement; "what i do not like is that fact that you ignore the wiki community, what they have stated and the opinions they have clearly presented here.". I have not ignored the community. I really don't like being accused of things I haven't done, you see. But yes, the community overwhelmingly voted to get rid of the articles (and go figure, SiPlus voted to delete them. who'da thunk it?), but an administrator stepped in and suggested the articles be documented. In an effort to keep some content of historical value on this wiki, especially about such popular maps from the days of TFC (most of which I used when I ran a TFC server ages ago), I went with what i-ghost suggested. Now, to clarify/simplify my response to SiPlus. What I'm pointing out is that SiPlus originally labelled all the articles for deletion ages ago without consensus or even talking to anyone about it before doing so. His edits were quickly reverted. Now he's gone and done it again and I reverted his edits and retooled the articles. I stated days ago that I was going to retool them, but seeing as how I work full time, I didn't have spare time to do so until last night, which is when I noticed SiPlus went rogue again. In an effort, which I can only see was to either intimidate me or try to get his biased point of view across, he's stated that despite my reworking of the articles, this discussion is still open. Now wait a minute. Do I detect a hint of hypocrisy? By jove, I think I do! If this discussion is still open, who gave SiPlus the authority/go-ahead to re-label the articles for deletion? The hypocrisy! Oh god, the hypocrisy! It's killing me! 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 01:12, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

As you say it's a community so no one needs to ask before they edit, nor be given 'the go-ahead'. If there are problems with people undoing and edit warring then the mods will take care of it. Again, since it is a community wiki, just because i-ghost or any other mod states an opinion on a topic like this about page content, doesn't suddenly mean it should be accepted as-is. It is just an opinion. That being said, I don't think there are enough opinions here to delete any images or pages yet, since both sides feel quite strongly. seb26 01:25, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

Well thank you for shining some light on that seb. And I apologize if it looked like I thought Lexar was trying to intimidate me or what-have-you. The initial response of "may i remind YOU", with the capitalized YOU seemed like Lexar was either trying to intimidate me or act tough. Anywho, onto the real reason for this post.

This discussion is the perfect example of why this discussion board is useless. Many discussions have gone down the wrong path because not very many people participate in the discussions that are posted here. Look at my discussion about adding collapsibility further down this page. Nobody has responded to it. Same for my Editor Review suggestions. This discussion is travelling down the wrong path because we have 4 people who want to get rid of these articles of historical value to TFC players like myself, and I'm the only one voting against deletion, with i-ghost showing some support against deletion by suggesting the pages be documented as custom content.

I will be starting a new discussion sometime tomorrow about diversifying this discussion board and possibly adding Wikipedia-like discussion boards such as "Articles for Deletion" (or maybe "Content for Deletion" to make the board for categories, templates, pages, etc, instead of just articles). We also need a Dispute Resolution board (again, take notes from Wikipedia), in my opinion.

Any way, to end this reply: I feel that SiPlus jumped the gun when he re-labelled the articles for deletion, especially after I expressed the fact that I would be creating a custom navbox for the articles, and specifically asked that no-one label anything for deletion. I checked the Wiki at work during my break the other day and noticed he went and labelled everything, so when I got home from work that night I had to revert all his labelling again. I'm going to get some sleep now. I'm off today (Wednesday) and Thursday, so expect to hear from me immediately if my name is said. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 02:38, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

Then why don't we have article about de_dust2? It's popular TFC "custom" map. (I'm not going to make it by myself.) SiPlus 05:59, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

Well Pinocchio, if you don't make it by yourself, you're never going to be turned into a real editor by the Blue Wiki Fairy, and Gepetto is going to throw you into the wood chipper. Seriously, if you think the article should be made, start the article up, put as much info in it as you know, and let other people finish it up. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 15:34, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

Paint Pages

Hello everyone. One day I've tried to make a page for every single paint, like this: http://wiki.teamfortress.com/w/index.php?title=Dark_Salmon_Injustice&action=historysubmit&diff=362725&oldid=249546

Why do I want this? I meet people everyday, who found a single paint. They have 8-9 hats and they want to know, what to paint. And here is the problem. Not all the countries has fast internet connection. If I have 1 Scout hat and 1 paint, I have to load 578 pictures of hat. And that's just one class! Now I need to open another class and find there my hats and a single paint. Basic [List of Paintable Items] is cool, when you have only 1 hat and lots of paints, but this is a rare situation. If I found Salmon Injustice, I'd better look at all Salmon hats, instead of all possibilities.

The point is, that there are so many hats, and not so many paints. That page in history is completely unfinished (I've began it in February, without any Wiki editing knowledge). Make [Hide] tablets for classes and here it is: we have comfortable paint system (and trivia about every can, without summarizing).

I hope you will think about it. I have these pages ready on 80%. Paint Can page could be shrink and there will be two lists - one is comfortable for those who have a lot of paint, and those, who have only 1 can. (I'll watch the answers 7 hours later - 2 am here) GordonFrohman 12:16, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

Well this causes a lot of work. Creating the pages and translating every page into every language. But most of all, whenever a new hat is released, you'll have to update every paint + translation. SackZement <Talk> 12:31, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

So difficult... I think I will be able to do it. GordonFrohman 22:53, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

We already have pages that list every hat in whatever paint colour. Click the class icons under the "Paintable item previews" section on the Paint Can page. -RJ 13:24, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

Stop posting that link, I've already told everything about it. It has giant amount of hats and paints I don't have. I have several hats and only 1 paint and don't want to look through 600 hats per class for using 1 paint GordonFrohman 22:53, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

Do many people, let alone people who play and are interested in TF2, have such slow Internet that 40 or so small PNG files take a toll on their speed? Balladofwindfishes 13:57, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

While it certainly looks pretty, I think it's going to be a bit too much trouble for what it's worth, what with all the Translating/Adding in new content things (and since there's a paintable hat added almost every 2 weeks...). It's redundant as well, considering we've got these kinds of pages. Yes, I understand that you said "I have to load 578 pictures of hat", but, like Ballad said, in this day and age of internet, I don't think people who play TF2 worry much about small images loading up. If it's really that much of a concern, then why not just go to the respective hat's page and look at the painted variants there? 15:31, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

And that's what people do. Open every single hat's page is way more comfortable, than use list of paintable items. I am painting every single hat in Lime and Defeat, I've found an extra can I now I am thinking what to paint. I had to look through 4386 pictures of hats, instead of 10. And Lime is in the very beginning of the list. My friend is painting all his hats in Team Spirit. He have to scroll down to every single class and look at all possible color varieties, except the color at the very end. And yeah, in some Russian cities is very slow internet, cause we're not that rich to afford good connection. We can't even fix the roads on the streets, and you're talking about extra-fast inetrnet. I don't think that you know how is it to download TF2 update for whole night. GordonFrohman 22:53, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

Saying you need to load up 578 pictures just to know how to use your paint is ridiculous. The only reason that would possibly happen is if you owned EVERY Scout hat. Most people only have a few hats, some of which aren't even paintable. If you have paint that you want to use, you only ever need to consider the few hats you own. The people that actually feel they absolutely need to see as many painted hats as possible can always direct themselves to the previously mentioned Lists of paintable items. Any other pages would be entirely redundant. -- - _{(talk | contribs)} -- 22:12, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

578 - amount of pictured hats in that Scout List. I want to make dedicated page for every can. You're right, we have few hats, but amount of paint is even less, isn't it? I want to look, what can I do with this paint with some of my hats, neither all other paints nor other hats. Searching for a hat I have in hats list is even more useful, rather than using that Paintable List. (Stop posting links to that list. Didn't you read what I think of it?) GordonFrohman 22:53, 5 September 2011 (PDT)

What I meant is it's not unreasonable to simply open the articles for the hats you want to see painted. The current paint galleries are meant for doing exactly this. I think your initial example of trying to compare 8 or 9 hats is in fact a pretty typical situation, and loading 8 or 9 tabs is not unwieldy at all. Certainly not for anyone that has both a computer and an internet connection both strong enough to play TF2. Adding a page for every colour of paint would mean 27 new pages, all of which would need to be maintained when a new hat is added, all of which would need to be translated and none of which would provide any additional value to the Wiki beyond a minor convenience. I simply don't see pages like this being worth the long term effort. -- - _{(talk | contribs)} -- 01:59, 6 September 2011 (PDT)

I don't think we should be assuming everyone viewing the wiki is also someone who plays TF2, nor that they use the same computer or internet connection to view the wiki at all times. Nevertheless I think creating new separate pages would be time-consuming for limited benefit. It would make sense for a site that can dynamically-generate content and sort it in different ways but trying to recreate that here would be difficult and not worth it. seb26 02:29, 6 September 2011 (PDT)

I suspect that most people wont have all those hats, and even more likely is that they won't want to paint all their hats in one colour. Also, its best to be able to compare different paint jobs when they are right next to each other. So unless someone had a lot of hats and dedicated themselves to one colour it whoulden't be much use and as pointed out, it whould be a lot of work. Mysterious Island 06:16, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

I believe this paint pages idea is great, i hope they use it. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Son Of Bazzar (talk) • (contribs)

Misc. Items 1st Person "Bug"

From the Essential Accessories page:

• Like the Rogue's Col Roule, Purity Fist, and Pip-Boy, the wristbands of the Essential Accessoriese are invisible to the player in first-person view.

Is this REALLY a bug? If it had properly rigged viewmodels and they are supposed to be called but aren't loaded, yeah I'd call it a bug. But there are no viewmodels for any of these weapons. It's not so much a bug as an art mistake/Valve not having enough time for the promos. Should we remove these "bugs"? RagnarHomsar 21:09, 13 September 2011 (PDT)

Well, the Rogue's Col Roule isn't a promo. It was community made, so seeing as Valve didn't try to make anything for them, that's important. However, the Gunslinger and shields all show up in first person. Maybe this is a misc problem, but we should ask Valve first about this. Fyahweather 21:11, 13 September 2011 (PDT)

The only thing I have against this is that the shields and Gunslinger are both weapons, and therefore pretty much have to have viewmodels in order to look right. Like I said, a bug would be if the viewmodels existed and are supposed to be loaded but aren't due to a programming error. This is just a lack of a viewmodel asset. Not really a bug so much as an oversight. RagnarHomsar 21:13, 13 September 2011 (PDT)

The Gunslinger is an entirely different, dedicated arm model with a cloned animation set. This is to aid in Gunslinger/Short Circuit combos, so the Gunslinger isn't actually ever attached like the Targe (whether or not it qualifies as a bug if the Targe doesn't attach with certain items drawn is a different discussion entirely). Go ahead and remove them, they aren't bugs, there are no first person or attachable assets for those cosmetic items. i-ghost 12:14, 2 October 2011 (PDT)

Its a great idea!!! — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Son Of Bazzar (talk) • (contribs)

Naming crate series for stock weapons

I was just wondering, since the introduction of strange weapons, even stock items have been in crates. Instead of saying items are not in crates, could we instead list what crate strange versions of that weapon are in with a footnote (or whatever) saying that it's only available as a strange weapon? DVDV 00:58, 19 September 2011 (PDT)

This is already being accomplished by putting 'Uncrate (#X) (Strange)' in Availability, next to 'Stock', like every Strange weapon. This is located in the item infobox to the left. Shane Alvarado 12:38, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

Reload types for specific weapons

Nixshadow and myself were having a bit of a disagreement over this one. For weapons such as the sniper rifle and the flare gun (And all of their variants), I argue that these weapons should be listed as "no reload" rather than "single", since they don't actually have a clip at all on screen, and the animations are merely cosmetic. That is, you can switch away from these weapons immediately after firing and later on switch back and you won't need to see the reload animation (Unlike say, the crusader's crossbow, whose reload must be seen in full because it has a clip indicator). The issue might be confusing however as this would put it in the same category as the minigun and flamethrower, from a scripting point of view they're the same (save for a much longer delay between shots) but aesthetically they behave quite differently. Opinions? --Manta 01:55, 19 September 2011 (PDT)

I would say they have no reload time, but rather long attack intervals. An example with the rocket launcher, if you fire a rocket and immediately switch to something else for a while then back to the rocket launcher, you can fire another rocket immidiately after weapon switch time is over so long as you still have ammo in your clip. If there is no ammo in your clip, you must reload before you can fire again. Neither the flaregun or sniper rifle require you to reload but you still need to wait for the attack interval before you can shoot again. Another example, the minigun has no reload and picking up ammo lets you use the ammo immidiately. In the case of the rocket launcher or shotgun you still need to reload before you can use it. The huntsman is one of the more confusing weapons, but I think it has a very short reload time. RedMage 02:12, 20 September 2011 (PDT)

I whould also have to agree that they have no reload time, but just to make it clear as posible, there should also be a page explaining that it has no reload time and that the reloading animation is part of the display of an attack interval, and how the reloading annimation is a pure cosmetic feature. Just so people understand that they are the same as the minigun and flamethrower in how ammo is fired. Mysterious Island 02:54, 20 September 2011 (PDT)

Instead of a separate page, wouldn't a single sentence on the relevant articles explaining this be more neat?, e.g. "Whilst visually the weapons is reloaded between each shot, this is merely cosmetic, all that is required to fire the weapon again is a certain length of time to pass (Switching weapons does not influence this length of time)". Maybe a bit long winded.Manta 03:48, 20 September 2011 (PDT)

It really doesn't reload, but I don't believe the word "cosmetic" fits that sentence well. "Although this weapon doesn't reload, it has an attack interval between each shot" would suit better, but somewhat unnecessary, since this characteristic is already noted in the "Damage and function times" table.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 13:18, 20 September 2011 (PDT)

Eh... the weapons sort of reload, it's just that the animation time can be completed even if the weapon is not the current weapon. Where this gets real dicey is with the Huntsman and Crossbow, which don't reload while switched out, despite being single loaded weapons. I think it should be noted on the pages it applies to, but I also think it should be noted on pages where it looks like it could apply, but doesn't (like the Crossbow). Balladofwindfishes 14:14, 20 September 2011 (PDT)

The animation for the sniper rifle and flaregun is for attack intervals, not reloading. To prove my point, touching the supply cabinet effectively removes the need to reload. When you fire say a rocket launcher 4 times then immediately go to a supply cabinet, you don't fire immediately and you still have to wait for the attack intervals, but you skip the animation of the soldier putting rockets in. In the case of the sniper rifle and flaregun, they are both completely unchanged by touching the cabinet; you still need to wait for the pyro to put a flare in and for the sniper to pull the lever before you can shoot. You can "reload" while switching weapons because attack intervals are counting down alongside weapon switch time, which applies to every weapon. Reload time does not count alongside weapon switch time; if you attempt to reload then switch to another weapon before it finishes, the reload time resets. RedMage 00:39, 21 September 2011 (PDT)

So we're agreed that these weapons are no-reload types then? --Manta 01:43, 21 September 2011 (PDT)

Generel Crafting in article?

Just read that the Pilotka and the Stahlhelm is now craftable, but I didn't saw any recipe for it. Then I remembered that this must be a generel recipe for craft with a class token. I just thought that it could be maybe added, because not all people know how to craft a personal class hat. I also know that the chance of getting that hat is really low because there are many other(don't know the exact number), but couldn't it be listed. Maybe someone coult programm it to look like that: Stahlhelm (1/(all hats))% chance of getting, and then if you click you get the list of the other soldier hats you could get. or 1x Stahlhelm / (all hats number) ; and if you click on all hats number you would see all the other hats.

The way it is now it is a bit to uninformational for most of the people, you go strictly to the crafting page but there is not enough attention to the class hat crafting. Hope someone get's my idea. TheDoctor(without a small pic) 04:48, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

So you're suggesting that every hat page list every hat recipe and a chance of obtaining it through individual crafting recipes? seems rather unnecessary. Right now only set hats have this on their pages, because they have specific recipes that almost guarantee you the hat. RedMage 14:52, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

I think he's suggesting that clicking on "craft" in the item infobox under the "Availability" section should lead you to a section on the crafting page which explains this better. » Cooper Kid (blether·contreebs) 14:56, 22 September 2011 (PDT)

Yeah, Cooper Kid is right, can't we make it different for hats to get to class hat crafting then generell? TheDoctor(without a small pic) 02:42, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

I think the fact that if a page doesn't have a crafting blueprint, it should be implied...that it doesn't have a blueprint. You could probably add a tool tip next to crafting (Not on it, as it's a link and that messes up tooltips.) i.e: Crafting (?)

Though I am personally against that and think it should be obvious enough if we don't supply a crafting recipe, that it doesn't have one. - nixshadow (t|c) 02:53, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

If there is no recipe, you can't craft it that's what i think, and if there stands craft it is kinda confusing for new guys. TheDoctor(without a small pic) 03:09, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

Why not make a new page called Random crafting recipes with a list of all possible recipes, just as a reference for new users? » Cooper Kid (blether·contreebs) 03:55, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

Would be good, but is there a well known symbol for random in the world? Maybe like this then: (random symbol) craft! And then a redirect to the page. I would love to see an article only about hats you can't get because there is no specific blueprint. This would help a lot more then the redirect to crafting alone and you get lost. TheDoctor(without a small pic) 04:12, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

How about something like this? » Cooper Kid (blether·contreebs) 04:54, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

I would say: Wow! You put a lot of great work into that and i would love to see this linked to random class hats, instead of generell Crafting. TheDoctor(without a small pic) 15:01, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

Thanks a lot! It shouldn't be too hard to do - we'll just need to edit the links in the infoboxes on each hat page in question. I'll need to talk to someone higher up to make sure my page is ok first though. In the meantime, I'll try and get it finished! » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 03:30, 24 September 2011 (PDT)

Just a note, the Flip-Flops and Lucky 42 are not craftable. Balladofwindfishes 07:28, 24 September 2011 (PDT)

thanks, I've fixed that. The page is pretty much done now, I'll leave it for a bit but if there aren't any objections I'll set the ball rolling sometime tomorrow. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 14:52, 24 September 2011 (PDT)

Unsure: Proof of Purchase where to?

I saw the Meet the Medic video again and in the end you can see the proof of purchase on one dead soldier(3:36). I don't see that mentioned anywhere. Someone could add that in the Proof of Purchase or, or and, in the Meet the Medic article. I'm not sure enough where it could be placed best, hope someone can make that. Thanks in advance. TheDoctor(without a small pic) 19:08, 23 September 2011 (PDT)

The general concensus is that anything you can plainly see isn't worth noting - the same was said of the Soldiers wearing some of the new Uber Update hats in that part of the video as well. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 05:04, 24 September 2011 (PDT)

The new star hat was mentioned, and it is clearly visible. The proof of purchase is shorter seem and smaller. Maybe a picture on the proof of purchase gallery then? TheDoctor(without a small pic) 05:35, 24 September 2011 (PDT)

Here is a picture, and maybe someone thinks that it is noteworthy: Click me i'm a picture link . TheDoctor(without a small pic) 08:52, 24 September 2011 (PDT)

Where is that other hat mentioned? They discussed it on the talk page but decided it wasn't really worth noting. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 13:07, 24 September 2011 (PDT)

You are right. I thought it should be mentioned and totally missed the point. What do you think about this: A picture of it like shown above in the gallery of the proof or purchase then? TheDoctor(without a small pic) 02:28, 25 September 2011 (PDT)

Trivia section? Rolandius 06:11, 27 September 2011 (PDT)

Cleaning up Beta/Unused content

It seems when reading those pages, most of the content is "this item may have been" or "it's likely this weapon did this" however, we just don't know that as a fact, and we shouldn't be stating it as such. I think we need to look at them and revise most of them to not be filled with speculation. The articles should only contain what we know as fact, and not what we assume the weapon's function was. On another note, many of the unused weapon articles have "demonstration videos" which is basically a video of someone's mod who recreated the assumed stats of the weapon. I don't feel like these belong on the wiki, unless we make them ourselves. Balladofwindfishes 16:24, 25 September 2011 (PDT)

 Agreed Assumptions are never okay. As for the videos, unless they are made by us or valve then they really should't be there. 16:34, 25 September 2011 (PDT)

Currently unreleased content medals forgotten?

I just read the ESL article today and wondered over this sentences: "Valve will be offering in-game medals to all participants. You will need to play your matches and finish the season." Then i wanted to know how the medals look like and i moved to the Currently unreleased content article because i didn't saw a link to the medal. And now i'm confused. There is no picture of a medal, and it isn't mentioned at all there. Did Valve refused the ESL request or what happened? TheDoctor(without a small pic) 04:47, 27 September 2011 (PDT)

Valve is really slow with adding medals to the game, with other competitive medals sometimes taking a year before being released. It will be even less likely that they will be added to the game files soon if the competition hasn't ended yet. And as long as Valve doesn't add the models, we can't create images for them either. -- Hefaistus - talk 06:02, 27 September 2011 (PDT)

I remember there being a link in that article to an email from Robin Walker referring to the medals. Check it out. Rolandius 06:08, 27 September 2011 (PDT)

I read more about it and found out that the ESL promised for 2 seasons medals. Also your email only covers highlander. ESL said normal 6vs6 medals. But I get it: Valve Time ; thanks for the Infos. TheDoctor(without a small pic) 23:07, 27 September 2011 (PDT)

Engineer Community Strategy Cleanup

Have a look at This. I can't imagine this being useful to anyone reading the wiki looking for useful information. I'd personally like to gut the entire written content from it and start over because I feel it would be simpler than trying to make sense and order of this wall of text. --Manta 00:52, 28 September 2011 (PDT)

I agree. I've been looking at some of the community strategy pages, and they are very text-heavy with few breaks and also contain a lot of jargon. Perhaps some images may be sourced to both explain some of the more difficult strategies, and also to free up some room? All I know is that these pages are somewhat confusing and intimidating for readers. --Vorsprung 17:49, 22 October 2011 (AEST)

 -Personally, I always thought the Community Strategy pages as an unorganized mass of text to read and hopefully get something out of. Somebody already "cleaned up" the Community Medic Strategy page, and he removed lots of information that I found useful, as his bias of unconventional strategy unfortunately led him to shrinking down the page to about the length of Basic Medic strategy. I, personally, disagree with "starting over", as I have learned much from these pages, but I am neutral for rewriting it/eliminating redundancy. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 08:24, 22 October 2011 (PDT)

Look, I don't think it's about re-writing the pages. Far from it: the information in the pages is useful, but I just think that tweaking the layout or adding some images or diagrams in would solve the problem. Really, the text just needs to be broken up a bit... Give it better reading gravity, you know? To start over would be a waste of time, in my opinion. In short, the info's good, but the layout ain't. --Vorsprung 19:10, 26 October 2011 (AEST)

Clarification of Resupply

This is getting a bit annoying to see. In some instances pages will refer to the spawn cabinets as 'the Resupply Cabinet', yet in other instances it is called 'the Resupply Locker'. Could we get some discussion and voting on what the correct name is? Consistency, after all, is important.--Focusknock 06:01, 28 September 2011 (PDT)

"As a Sniper, the Razorback breaks after being stabbed. Grab a new one from a resupply locker". Thats from STS. -- Keisari 06:05, 28 September 2011 (PDT)

I have found that consistency isn't important to a lot of people as I have run into a lot of circumstances like the one you mentioned. In regards to this subject, I have been told that 'the Resupply locker' is the way to reference it. Rolandius 09:31, 28 September 2011 (PDT)

No point to vote on what the correct name is. Valve refers to it as a couple different things, but I told Rolandius and choose to edit with "Resupply locker" as that is what the file name is for it when you're making a map. Also, the Respawn page gallery lists them all as lockers. Neither one is wrong, and we don't need to make it a this-way-or-no-way thing. SS2R 03:06, 29 September 2011 (PDT)

By the way, what is "STS"? Rolandius 22:33, 12 October 2011 (PDT)

STS stands for Steam Translation Server, where users can sign up to help translate Steam and Valve games into their own language. -- Hefaistus - talk 01:33, 13 October 2011 (PDT)

ÜberCharge rate demonstration

I brought this up yesterday in IRC, in that there is no solid demonstration (akin to the jumping demonstrations, etc) showing damage sources and their relation in building ÜberCharge, stemming from beliefs that I have heard from many players that damage does not help your Medic build ÜberCharge faster, despite it stating otherwise on articles such as the Medigun. This is a myth that has had roots in the TF2 community for a long time. So as a result, here's me as the Heavy, Keisari as the Soldier and the star of the show Cthulhu1992 as the Medic in our bid for a video we think should be posted on the ÜberCharge article as demonstration material: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVw5jbEe0ng

I will upload the source file to my FTP for the TF2 Wiki Youtube account's official use, if desired. However, I noticed there were jumping demonstration videos that are not on the official account and embedded in the jumping article anyway. I'm not 100% sure on protocol regarding this type of stuff. Thoughts? ~Xenaero ( T | C ) 08:22, 28 September 2011 (PDT)

This video would be 100x better and more to the point if you just showed things side by side. On the left, healing with no damage being done, and on the right, healing with damage being done. That will give a live representation of the damage-Uber building up faster MUCH better. Check the Original demonstration video to see what I mean. Side by side is really the way to go. SS2R 03:00, 29 September 2011 (PDT)

Valid suggestion. How is this, then? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXoqX2PauZg ~Xenaero ( T | C ) 17:14, 30 September 2011 (PDT)

Shouldn't you also note that it does not apply during set up time, as set up time causes the maximum rate of uber, or no? Smurfton 17:48, 17 October 2011 (PDT)

beating a dead horse: TF2 Wiki and googlebombing

so when searching for "tf2 wiki" the first site that pops up is tf2wiki.net

we need to fix this. lots of newcomers to tf2 are being directed to an outdated and poorly managed site full of opinion, speculation and misinformation.

i've brought this up before and been told "there's nothing we can do", but that is obviously not true. its called google bombing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_bomb , and it's how you change the results of a google search.

as you can see here: http://www.reddit.com/r/tf2/comments/kzo9u/this_really_bugs_me/ the Team Fortress 2 community is aware of and upset by this fact. at least 1259 people agreed, and this image was number 1 on the tf2 subreddit for a day.

i know it might not be considered important, or maybe people think it's too hard, but it's something we can and should change.

i propose we start a project around googlebombing in order to make this the number 1 result in google for "tf2 wiki"

anyone agree?

I fully agree. Why has this not been fixed already? MaxMan1300 19:20, 4 October 2011 (PDT)

We're currently implementing some search engine optimisations that should help with this. -- Pilk ^(talk) 19:24, 4 October 2011 (PDT)

In the meantime;

   Go to google.com
   Click on the gear icon in the top right and click "search settings"
   Scroll down to the bottom and find where it says "blocked sites"
   Click on "manage blocked sites"
   Type http://tf2wiki.net/ in the textbox and click "block site"

SS2R 01:39, 13 October 2011 (PDT)

Rabscuttle

I noticed we don't have a page for him. If you look at his backpack he has a Vintage Ban Hammer. I find this mysterious. Can we try and gather info and make a page about him or atleast about the ban hammer? MaxMan1300 19:19, 4 October 2011 (PDT)

That's Gabe Newell's steam account. The Ban Hammer is not a real item. -- Pilk ^(talk) 19:21, 4 October 2011 (PDT)

The Ban Hammer item was a joke item added by the guy who created TF2Items.com. When the Mann Conomy update happened, the owner changed its quality to Vintage to keep the joke going. Pages are not needed. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 19:22, 4 October 2011 (PDT)

Yes, 404 is right, it exists only on TF2Items.com. SiPlus 01:30, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

heavy_mongol.tga

Anyone know why there's a TGA file in the GCF, in "tf\materials\models\player\items\heavy"? I just noticed that VTF's exist for this as well, but I don't know what item they are for. Here's the TGA in question, that I've saved into PNG format:

See. What's it for? 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 21:43, 4 October 2011 (PDT)

Look at this. - Painted Magnificent Mongolian E6E6E6 (An Extraordinary Abundance of Tinge ) — VeKoB 03:28, 5 October 2011 (PDT)

Ahh! That explains it!....Somewhat..still doesn't answer why Valve left a TGA in the GCF. Oh well! 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 05:21, 5 October 2011 (PDT)

It's not uncommon for Valve to accidentally leave something behind in the files that isn't supposed to be there. The high five animations, for example, come to mind. -- Hefaistus - talk 08:53, 5 October 2011 (PDT)

Order of names for multiple contributor items

Seems this is something we never really addressed and now is as good of any time to address it. So how should we handle this possibly sensitive ordering of names? I personally think we need consistency with this, and some sort of concrete rule on it (even if it's unwritten). It'll make it easier to avoid any conflicts in the future. I think alphabetically is the best, unbiased way to do it, anyone else agree? Balladofwindfishes 17:03, 5 October 2011 (PDT)

Alphabetic. Ordering by who made which part of the item/map (model, textures, animations, sounds etc) just seems a little bit unnecessary and confusing to me, besides from being harder to achieve.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 17:08, 5 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support As I stated in the IRC, I feel that alphabetical organisation is the most impartial method. As the Wiki is supposed to be factual and display information impartially, it would be inappropriate to adopt a practice of putting the "contributor that did the most work" first, especially because it is not difficult to imagine that such claims might be disputed. If such a dispute were to occur, it would be considerably easier for the Wiki to avoid becoming involved if it adopted this policy, and this would be especially important if one or more item contributors were also Wiki editors. --- Esquilax 17:10, 5 October 2011 (PDT)

Just alphabetise it based on forenames. i-ghost 03:02, 6 October 2011 (PDT)

For maps, just go by how Valve lists the names. Rolandius 06:02, 10 October 2011 (PDT)

Speaking as a contributor, don't order them in any particular way... I really don't see why this is necessary at all. For a start, people go by online alias', all it takes is for someone to pick a name which comes first alphabetically if they feel petty enough, so it has an element of control still in it. Secondly, it's barely noticeable at best. To clarify, my name comes first alphabetically, so this isn't a biased opinion. -- Benjamoose (talk | contribs) 01:39, 28 October 2011 (PDT)

Wikitable Collapsibility - Much needed?

I happen to love the "collapsible" feature that can be added to wiki-tables. As you can see on Advanced Weaponiser, I've added it to all the wiki-tables on the page, and even set some less-important tables to be collapsed on load. The article looks so huge when every table is un-collapsed, but when you collapse them all, it shrinks down in size quite a bit.

Onto the reason why I'm here. I think we should add "collapsible" to the "class=" field on every Wikitable on the entire Wiki (perhaps a good job for a bot?). When it comes to the larger articles here on the Wiki, collapsibility can greatly help reduce the overall size of an article (visually). The only issue I'm finding, and I'm not sure if it's a browser-related issue, is shown on this wikitable on the Team Fortress 2 article. The show/hide button appears in the left-most box, "Evaluation". On the Advanced Weaponiser article however, I simple added a new top header above the existing headers to solve this issue.

What do you guys think? Should we add collapsibility (I don't think I'm spelling collapsibility right lol) to all the Wikitables on the Wiki (except for in cases where the wikitable isn't a table on an article, such as userboxes which I believe are made with wikitables) 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 12:51, 9 October 2011 (PDT)

Images

Seeing the awesome "popup" thing when you click on images on the www.theportalwiki.com makes me wonder, should our wiki have that too? If you don't know what I mean, go to the Portal wiki, and click on an image on a page. -Rocket Ship BBQ 17:47, 9 October 2011 (PDT)

I feel like we discussed this somewhere already "Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion" section. I'll try to see if I can dig it up. Anyways I  Support the idea, but I feel like it might take up a lot of space and make the wikis slow cache slower (as if thats possible). 17:55, 9 October 2011 (PDT)

 Disagree I can't say I'm a fan of it on the P2 Wiki. When I click an image I like going directly to the largest version of the image possible, and also an easy access to the file info and edit history. The P2 method adds an extra step in this process for only a very slight "flashyness" added. Balladofwindfishes 17:57, 9 October 2011 (PDT)

Middle-click on the link :3 — Wind 23:47, 12 October 2011 (PDT)

 Neutral Either way is fine in my opinion.  –  Cructo [T][C] 17:57, 9 October 2011 (PDT)

I can't remember why it was implemented in the Portal Wiki but I do believe my opinion when it was, and my opinion in regards to this discussion is: What ballad said. -RJ 19:39, 9 October 2011 (PDT)

 Disagree We're wiki running on MediaWiki. Clicking an image should open information page. SiPlus 04:52, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support Portal 2 Wiki is also wiki running on MediaWiki. I have no clue what you're trying to say SiPlus, but I do know it makes literally no sense at all. But I support this idea. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 05:41, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

Class arsenal images

The end of each class gallery has an "arsenal" image and a "class card" image. I really don't feel like these are neccessary, at least not the "class card". They feel redundant, considering all the other images in the gallery and the article images. I could see adding the arsenals to the basic informations on the top right, though. Right below speed and above Meet the Team, maybe. Thoughts? --SilverHammer 21:14, 9 October 2011 (PDT)

 Neutral To a point, I agree with you. They aren't terribly informative nor unique in terms of telling readers more about each class. That being said, however, there's no real reason to remove them. Either way, I don't mind. But I guess more information is better... --Vorsprung 19:16, 26 October 2011 (AEST)

Time Zones

A bit of an odd question here - on the Date and Time section in preferences, there are about 700 cities to choose from to set your time offset. There are some fairly obscure ones in there but for some reason Edinburgh, Belfast and Cardiff (the capital cities of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales) aren't on the list. I've listed Isle of Man as my time zone because it's the closest one to me.

By the way, I'm not complaining, just curious. It doesn't really make a difference anyway! » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 05:06, 10 October 2011 (PDT)

I just pick "Fill in from browser" since that list is missing major cities over here too. Rolandius 05:27, 10 October 2011 (PDT)

Yeah, like I said it's not a problem to fill in the time zone manually, I was just wondering why the capital cities of three major countries have been missed out. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 05:34, 10 October 2011 (PDT)

Scotland, N Ireland and Wales are usually considered under the umbrella of the United Kingdom, aren't they? That would make London the capital city of those "countries" Balladofwindfishes 05:36, 10 October 2011 (PDT)

Yes, that's what I thought as well. It just seemed odd that there would be such a comprehensive list of cities and miss them out =( » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 05:50, 10 October 2011 (PDT)

I guess this is a MediaWiki issue; so there's no way for the staff or Valve to fix it. But yeah, it's really strange.  –  Epic Eric (T | C) 10:45, 13 October 2011 (PDT)

Suggestion for all hat/misc pages

I suggest adding the hats each hat/misc fits/does not fit with. In other words, stuff like Nanobalaclava not being able to be worn with Phantom would be listed. (I used it as an example because its one of the less obvious ones.) Cryder 14:41, 15 October 2011 (PDT)

 Nope The wiki should not influence peoples opinions on how items look. 14:44, 15 October 2011 (PDT)

I meant like, you literally CAN'T wear the Party Phantom with Nanobalaclava because VALVe disabled it. I meant showing what hats you just can't wear with what miscs, and vise versa. Cryder 14:53, 15 October 2011 (PDT)

Just needs an expansion/explaination of the equip regions somewhere is all. Tooltip in the infobox template? - Devozade 14:57, 15 October 2011 (PDT)

In my experience, I equipped a fez, phantom, and camera beard successfully when the manniversary update first came out. When the second patch came, I was locked to wear either the fez or phantom. The same goes for conflicted region items like the space chem pin and dueling badge. Definitely could use a tooltip to explain the equip regions. However, making and maintaining a list on every hat and their conflicts may be more work than its worth. RedMage 15:20, 15 October 2011 (PDT)

Misc/hat item pages could show what bodygroup the item belongs/interferes with. (in game files) -Rocket Ship BBQ 15:45, 15 October 2011 (PDT)

Bluprint Template: Possible Results should list names.

I dont know if it is possible to edit the template but i hope it is. I find it not so good that the possible results in other languages list it like this: Buccaneer's_Bicorne/de , this is not helpful for a guy which wants to know the german hat name/s. This is an example from the |Scottish handshake german page. I would love to see a way to list the real name of the hat in the language of the wiki page and shows up when you move the mouse over the picture, instead of an english link(name) with /de on it(link). It links you correctly to the other german page, but doesn't inform you directly. Hope someone has an idea how to update this. TheDoctor(without a small pic) 18:12, 15 October 2011 (PDT)

Suggestion: Editor Review

So while I've been at work for the past few days, I've been reading Wikipedia to pass the time. And I happened upon their Editor Review section. It seems like a good idea to implement here! Editors would be able to create a new section, ask for a review of their edits. Other users check their edits and give them honest feedback on how to improve as an editor, or maybe correct a mistake they may have recently made, etc. I'd love to get some feedback on this suggestion. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 13:07, 16 October 2011 (PDT)

Knives stunned first person images?

I was wondering if we could come to a consensus about whether adding the following images to their respective articles (or to the Razorback article) would be at all useful:

• 

  RED first-person view, stunned.

• 

  BLU first-person view, stunned.

• 

  RED first-person view, stunned.

• 

  BLU first-person view, stunned.

• 

  RED first-person view, stunned.

• 

  BLU first-person view, stunned.

• 

  RED first-person view, stunned.

• 

  BLU first-person view, stunned.

Is this a case of over-documenting, or would at least one pair, or indeed all, of these images be somewhat useful on the Razorback article to demonstrate in principle the first-person stun animation? i-ghost 04:51, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support While these may not look like much, I do think this is worth documenting. SackZement asked in IRC if this was the "ready to stab" animation, which inclines me further to support this if someone with his knowledge of TF2 doesn't know the difference between them, a new player might think that as well. With that being said, I think if these were to be added, they should all go on the Razorback article, as it is the cause of this, and not the knives. SS2R 05:02, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support I fully support these being added to the Razorback article. I believe that the fact that they are similar to the ready to backstab pose only merits them being added more, so that users can compare the images and see the difference. -Mr. Magoolachub 05:10, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support Why weren't these added ages ago? That's my question. 404: User Not Found ^(talk) 05:14, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support Good info to have on the Razorback page. Balladofwindfishes 05:37, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Support It definatly is an information that should be noted in the Gallery. Good Job! T-Wayne 05:42, 21 October 2011 (PDT)

 Neutral If they are identical to the backstab animation after pressing attack (the "stabbing the person" position, not "ready to stab" position), they should probably be added to the individual weapon pages instead. If these animations are unique to the Razorback, then I support. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 00:32, October 22, 2011

 Comment Updated with Wanga Prick images. i-ghost 04:55, 29 October 2011 (PDT)

Achievement Video guides

Just an Idea I had for a series of guides for Various (or all) Achievements, I understand that we have written guides, But I think it would help allot of people to actually see what you have to do, but its just an Idea, so tell me what you think! :) Ihasnotomato

 Nope There are many ways to obtain achievements, and videos simply teach how to get it by farming. Also quite pointless for most of the achievements. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 17:28, 25 October 2011 (PDT)

 Disagree Most of the achievements are pretty self-explaining in how to achieve them and I do not think the big amount of TF2 Players needs Videos to understand them :P  · T-Wayne · Talk 08:02, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

 Disagree It's a nice idea, but it would only result in a lot of work for things that could be easily understood by reading the individual pages. If it were a single video detailing, say, the 10 hardest achievements based on how many players have them, then maybe there would be something there. But as it stands, the video guides would be more trouble than it's worth. --Piemanmoo 08:23, 26 October 2011 (PDT)

Painted Weapons

Although there are very few, and lie in obscurity, I think we should create an article detailing them. There are two known painted weapons in existence, a Mangler painted Balaclavas are Forever, and an obscure Green Painted Vita-Saw that we still know little about. Painted Weapons were a mistake on valves part - a Feature they threw in by mistake, and got rid of minutes later. As short as it is, I still think it's necessary to create an article about it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Natedude (talk) • (contribs) 00:13, October 28, 2011

First of all, you have to have some proof about those things, and not confusing it with some graphics glitch, modded server, or edited image. Secondly, at most, it would only be listed in the bugs section. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 20:45, 27 October 2011 (PDT)

 Disagree Pics or its fake --Stevoisiak 10:55, 29 October 2011 (PDT)

 Disagree I've seen the painted vitasaw, but it's nothing more than a minor bug and doesn't warrant an article or mention. —Moussekateer·talk 10:59, 29 October 2011 (PDT)

Halloween Update Page Revamp

To fit the color scheme of the nav files, I have doe a revamp of the Scream Fortress Update. It redoes all the tables to match the colors used in the nav files. The revamped page can be found here. (Edit: Also revamped Mac Update) Should I apply it to the official page? --Stevoisiak 09:00, 29 October 2011 (PDT)

 Agree To match the navbox.  –  Cructo [T][C] 09:16, 29 October 2011 (PDT)

 Agree Do it maggot. -- OluapPlayer _(t) 09:17, 29 October 2011 (PDT)

{{c|agree} looks nice. —Moussekateer·talk 10:59, 29 October 2011 (PDT)