Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion

create a new section

Will TF2 have the new valve intro?

Y'all know,that one from DotA 2 beta.Just asking. TheGuy299

We (wiki staff) don't receive any sort of information with regards to the content of upcoming patches, so we can't give an answer. I would presume not as it has no effect on gameplay and there is no benefit to updating it. -RJ 11:05, 6 February 2012 (PST)

Unboxable as Unusual in hat infobox

Under "Availability." It seems like information we would have, just simply state "Unbox(Unusual)" in the infobox for the hats that can be. Because it's not something we have very well documented, and the unusual table we have doesn't get updated nearly enough and is tricky for people to edit anyway. With it in the infobox its right there, easy for the user to see if the item they want can be unsuaul. And also it's a way to get the hat, so it's missing from Availability anyway because that's a method of getting the hat. Balladofwindfishes 16:24, 6 February 2012 (PST)

So few general players are bothered about Unusuals anyway that I'm not convinced it's important enough to be listed on each page - though you make a good point about it belonging in the "Availability" section. As for the Unusual Quality table, I've actually made a simpler version that should be easier to update - it's right here. I thought the current one was a bit too complicated as well. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 17:00, 6 February 2012 (PST)

I mean... it's a method to get the hat. I don't see it much different than listing a hat as promotional. If you can get the hat that way, it needs to be listed. Balladofwindfishes 17:32, 6 February 2012 (PST)

 Support You've convinced me. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 10:17, 7 February 2012 (PST)

Is Valve poking fun at us?

Given that we're the only ones who care about this stuff, I just think it's interesting to note that the recent slew of patches contain a line that mocks the language and wording of the patch itself. That is all. Upgrade 19:00, 9 February 2012 (PST)

Mocking? I don't think they're mocking us at all, it's just a tongue-in-cheek reference to how we have consistently documented localization changes in the undocumented changes section. I think they're sort of just waving a friendly "hello". Also, I am unsure if this discussion belongs on this page. -Mr. Magoolachub 19:05, 9 February 2012 (PST)

[citation needed]– fashnek _(talk·c) 19:26, 9 February 2012 (PST)

New template(s) proposal

Hi all, I've not made any edits for a month or so, mainly because it's been pretty quiet and I'm loathe to make work for work's sake. However, I saw this thread on SPUF, and decided to help the guy out and improve the wiki at the same time.

The almost-finished (item name links need improving) template is here, and it uses a base layout, which is seperate from the data to allow for easier editing.

The base template also uses a new User:Rebmcr/qualitycheck template (thanks to EpicEric), which could be used in place of Template:canbeunusual, if it's considered a good idea.

I need to write a Usage section for these 3 new templates tonight, but I just wanted to start getting opinions on this now. rebmcr 03:34, 14 February 2012 (PST)