Talk:Hats
From Team Fortress Wiki
Contents |
Hat of the Month: Keep or No?
There has been debate as to whether we should keep the Hat of the Month template at the start of the page. There is some worry that something like this does not belong on an encyclopedic page. A possible replacement would be what was there before, the Hat magazine image. Thoughts? --
Firestorm 11:57, 10 January 2012 (PST)
- It does look a little out of place. If decided to keep it, I would suggest changing it to Hat of the Week instead of Month btw. -- OluapPlayer (t)
11:59, 10 January 2012 (PST)
Nope Not encyclopedic, not random enough w.r.t. fairness across sections of the list, no obvious point, confusing. Also, needless computation and transclusion for something that really ought to be changed once a month by a bot. – fashnek (talk·c) 12:00, 10 January 2012 (PST)
- If we want this "x of the y" functionality, it should be kept out of the informational articles. Maybe it could go on the front page, as long as only a bot is updating it periodically. If not on the front page, there could be a place for periodic things (it could redundantly list the Featured article, maybe Wiki Cap recipients, etc. as well). Not on articles that are supposed to be encyclopedic in nature. Especially since it's not obvious whether it's actually "of the month", who is deciding it, what significance it has, and what exactly it means to be "item of the month" anyway. – fashnek (talk·c) 12:09, 10 January 2012 (PST)
- Please not the hat magazine image again. The first image people should see when viewing the page should be one of the classes wearing a hat, not this image with the Demoman's fro and two other classes in the dark background from a year and a half ago. This image is fine in the update history section and should not be moved seb26 12:03, 10 January 2012 (PST)
- Is there another image we could use? Perhaps a selection of a few classes wearing hats? We may need to make one. --
Firestorm 12:08, 10 January 2012 (PST)
- I like the hats magazine cover. It talks a lot about hats, and it demonstrates just the kind of emphasis the TF2 team has placed on hats (comedically and seriously). The whole rest of the Wiki is already covered in pictures of classes posing while wearing a hat. – fashnek (talk·c) 12:09, 10 January 2012 (PST)
- Is there another image we could use? Perhaps a selection of a few classes wearing hats? We may need to make one. --
No I think it is a little bit weird to have such a feature on a encyclopedic page. It does not really fit the nature of it, and besides most people who come here can easily look at all the hats and I doubt they need a selected hat everytime to realise it exists. Warlike 12:05, 10 January 2012 (PST)
Yes I'm slightly biased because I've put so much time into the hat and misc of the month sections, but I'll throw in my two cents anyway. Although they may have no encyclopedic value to the wiki we do try to make the articles look good, and I think an image which changes every month helps keep the pages look fresh, which is especially important as the Hats and Misc pages are probably some of the most visited on the wiki! If it's any consolation to those of you have doubts, I'm happy to keep updating them every month, and for anyone who doesn't know I use a random generator to select which item to display, so there is absolutely no bias to any particular item. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 14:18, 10 January 2012 (PST)
Yes Allow me to give my less-biased positive standpoint. I feel that this randomly generated hat/misc keeps pages looking new, as Cooper stated. Many visit the pages and if it's a lesser known hat, like the rarely discussed Superfan, this could help new players learn about hats that they rarely see, other than the commonly known Ghastly Gibus. If Cooper is willing to shoulder the responsibility of updating, and it's not much of a hassle, I say keep this cool-looking HOTM (Hat of the Month, if you didn't deduce).
Fyahweather 16:16, 10 January 2012 (PST)
No I think either the magazine or the towering pillar of hats would work. Lots of pages manage to remain interesting, despite never changing images (notably all the class pages), so I don't really see a point. And we never really could decide a good way to decide the hat of the month Balladofwindfishes 17:11, 10 January 2012 (PST)
No Doesn't really seem fitting to the article at all. I can't see how it can really add to anything in the article, it's just a neat little gadget, like someone mentioned earlier, is more fit somewhere like the Main Page, not on an article. I propose it be moved back to the old "Hat Wearing Mann" magazine cover. While some people have a surprising distaste for it, there is a reason it was on the page for so long. Because it's fitting. MogDog66
18:49, 10 January 2012 (PST)
Yes While the naming is less than amazing, I very much like the Hat of the Month section. The naming isn't fantastic as the choice is random, thus nothing particularly special makes the chosen hat the hat of the month, but I feel it's a nice spotlight section that randomly shares the spotlight around all of Tf2's hats regardless of any community opinion. I'm sure that any community made hats (which, let's face it, is most of them) that are chosen for hat month would be a delight to the creator, their own little hat is getting the big spotlight on what I assume is a very frequently visited page. It serves the article purpose just fine too, it's a picture of a class, wearing a hat, that demonstrates the functionality and usage of hats just fine to me. -Mr. Magoolachub 18:56, 10 January 2012 (PST)
Comment Perhaps the entire debate can be settled with a compromise; the official "Hat of the Month" disappears and is not replaced with the magazine cover. However, the article's image would be a randomly changing and randomly selected image from a hat's article page (e.g This or this etc. could be the Hat article's image [chosen randomly of course]). This way it still satisfies some people's arguments of the outdated magazine, some people's arguments of an unfitting HOTM template, and finally satisfies peoples desire for showcasing a random hat so that users can possibly discover hats they were unaware of, while also making the article look nice as well. MogDog66
20:30, 10 January 2012 (PST)
Comment The magazine cover does not factor into this discussion. Whether that is the best image (or whether any image at all belongs) is another matter than can be resolved completely outside of this. Let's not get it mixed up. Also, again I have to say that if anything "random" is going to be done, this is not the right way to do it. The selection algorithm is not random at all (and is in fact unfair), and it has to run a lot. If there is content that changes like this on such an infrequent interval, it should be handled exclusively by a bot that can enforce some proper constraints (like fairness). – fashnek (talk·c) 20:35, 10 January 2012 (PST)
- As far as I am concerned, the debate is centering on whether or not to keep the Hat of the Month, and if not with what to replace it. Hence why the iniator asked for thoughts regarding not only the possible dissolving of the Hat of the Month, but also on the magazine article image as well ("A possible replacement would be what was there before, the Hat magazine image. Thoughts?"). Therefore my proposition still holds merit in the discussion. MogDog66
20:39, 10 January 2012 (PST)
Comment Fashnek, what makes you say that the selection is unfair? It uses a random generator, which is basically the same method a bot would have to use. I just copy and paste the hat that the generator selects into the Hat of the Month template at the beginning of each month. I like Magoolachub's idea of keeping the section, but removing the name "Hat of the Month" - that solves the problem of it appearing 'un-encyclopedic' and just leaves an image which is changed every month to keep the page looking fresh. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 05:13, 11 January 2012 (PST)
-
Comment If I remember right, a bot can't do it because of cache. Balladofwindfishes 05:39, 11 January 2012 (PST)
-
- As far as I am concerned, the debate is centering on whether or not to keep the Hat of the Month, and if not with what to replace it. Hence why the iniator asked for thoughts regarding not only the possible dissolving of the Hat of the Month, but also on the magazine article image as well ("A possible replacement would be what was there before, the Hat magazine image. Thoughts?"). Therefore my proposition still holds merit in the discussion. MogDog66
Agree I like dis MogDog66 suggestion. -Mr. Magoolachub 20:24, 11 January 2012 (PST)
Yes The image would be replaced with an image of other hat(s) anyways, leading to controversy over which hat(s) is/are the "best" and should belong at the top of the article. This generator keeps it random and regularly changed. —
Rocket Ship BBQ(
•
) 17:40, 11 January 2012 (PST)
Comment So, the general consensus so far is to keep the section, but remove the "Hat of the Month" (and "Misc of the Month") text, leaving it just as an image. Does that sound about right? » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 06:46, 12 January 2012 (PST)
I have changed it so that the hat of the month remains, but is not labelled as such. I propose that we update it weekly or biweekly, just for freshness. --
Firestorm 13:29, 12 January 2012 (PST)
- I'm happy to update it as often as people want, if everyone can agree on a time period. Weekly sounds fine to me. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 14:25, 12 January 2012 (PST)
Done I've modified my generator to change weekly rather than monthly, so I'll now be updating the images every Monday. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 06:49, 17 January 2012 (PST)
Previous Official Hat Desrciptions
Should hats previous descriptions from before Valve's 'Hat Describing Contest' be added as Trivia? I think they should, thoughts? Theharribokid 07:24, 12 March 2012 (PDT)
Nope.avi I think no because it isn't useful anymore.
Hinaomi 07:41, 12 March 2012 (PDT)
- Whilst it isn't helpful, I'd certainly be interested in knowing what they were, as I only joined TF2 last year in September. Taser9001 11:15, 22 May 2012 (PDT)
- Isn't this like one hat? The Gibus? Balladofwindfishes 13:35, 22 May 2012 (PDT)
- No they're were quite a few that were changed, though the only one I can think of off the top of my head is the Ze Goggles atm Theharribokid 20:41, 22 May 2012 (PDT)
- Isn't this like one hat? The Gibus? Balladofwindfishes 13:35, 22 May 2012 (PDT)
- Whilst it isn't helpful, I'd certainly be interested in knowing what they were, as I only joined TF2 last year in September. Taser9001 11:15, 22 May 2012 (PDT)
Vintage Counts
It says there are 106 hats available in vintage quality, when I went to change to 52 (my count at least), it appears it is set on a template... My guess is that the weapons are also included in that count and genuine may be wrong as well. BASEBALLFURIES 02:17, 14 March 2012 (PDT)
- "111 can be obtained in Vintage quality, 147 can be obtained in Genuine quality (see item quality distribution), and 265 of the hats can be painted 29 colors using different varieties of Paint Cans." All of those itemcounts, not just Vintage quality, are for every item. And the miscellaneous item page doesn't go into such detail. Delete/make template? -Tabs 23:58, 24 March 2012 (PDT)
Hat Information Idea
Looking at the individual hat pages, I can see that each one has information such as craft number, how to obtain etc. Do you think it might be a good idea to add whether it can be uncrated as unusual as well? I personally think this would help people like my friend who until I told him has been looking for an Unusual Ellis Cap for quite a while. Taser9001 10:15, 21 May 2012 (PDT)
- We have a list on the unusual page of hats that can be obtained with the unusual quality, if that's what you mean. As for adding it to the articles themselves, I'm not sure if there's been a discussion on that before, but there's probably some reason or other why its not included in the info box for each page. Mozart (talk • contribs) 10:24, 21 May 2012 (PDT)
- Fair point. However, people like myself would go to the hat page, not the quality page. Taser9001 11:07, 21 May 2012 (PDT)
- I'd also like to add that the weapons have a yes/no section for Medieval Mode, which itself already lists all of the allowed weapons anyway. Taser9001 11:13, 21 May 2012 (PDT)
- Adding Unusual: Yes/No has been discussed here before; I can't remember the exact reasoning behind rejecting it, but maybe it is time to re-open the idea for discussion. As far as I can remember it was before we added Strange information to all the weapon pages, and I think this would fall under a similar category as that so it probably should be added. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 12:47, 21 May 2012 (PDT)
- This has been something that always felt like it was missing, especially since the actual place where someone can find this info is never updated in a reasonable time and is hard to get to. It doesn't help that table is also hard to edit anyway. Basically, I think uncrating a hat in unusual quality is just another acquire method (the game ever treats it the same as it would random drop basically). I think it could easily be found in the Availability section, with a note. I don't think it needs its own line in the infobox. @Cooperkid: I don't remember the consensus at all. I don't think it's ever been discussed all the way to action, the discussions just always die. Balladofwindfishes 13:40, 22 May 2012 (PDT)
- Well I think it's about time it was discussed fully. It's nothing major, but Medieval Mode lists which weapons are allowed, and each weapon has a Mediveal yes/no. Also, the strange page lists all of the strange weapons, yet each weapon available as a strange is shown to be on their own page in the Availability slot. Why not do the same with unusuals? Taser9001 02:02, 23 May 2012 (PDT)
- Yep, unusual is just another way the hat is available. Balladofwindfishes 08:27, 23 May 2012 (PDT)
- Well I think it's about time it was discussed fully. It's nothing major, but Medieval Mode lists which weapons are allowed, and each weapon has a Mediveal yes/no. Also, the strange page lists all of the strange weapons, yet each weapon available as a strange is shown to be on their own page in the Availability slot. Why not do the same with unusuals? Taser9001 02:02, 23 May 2012 (PDT)
- This has been something that always felt like it was missing, especially since the actual place where someone can find this info is never updated in a reasonable time and is hard to get to. It doesn't help that table is also hard to edit anyway. Basically, I think uncrating a hat in unusual quality is just another acquire method (the game ever treats it the same as it would random drop basically). I think it could easily be found in the Availability section, with a note. I don't think it needs its own line in the infobox. @Cooperkid: I don't remember the consensus at all. I don't think it's ever been discussed all the way to action, the discussions just always die. Balladofwindfishes 13:40, 22 May 2012 (PDT)
- Adding Unusual: Yes/No has been discussed here before; I can't remember the exact reasoning behind rejecting it, but maybe it is time to re-open the idea for discussion. As far as I can remember it was before we added Strange information to all the weapon pages, and I think this would fall under a similar category as that so it probably should be added. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 12:47, 21 May 2012 (PDT)
- OK, a new discussion has been opened. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 08:44, 23 May 2012 (PDT)
Craftable
Something else I have noticed. Some hat/misc pages have a craftable yes/no (e.g. Sneaky Spats of Sneaking) whereas some don't (e.g. Batter's Helmet). I think we should add it to all of them. Taser9001 01:04, 30 May 2012 (PDT)
-
Support I don't see why not. LiquidFire 01:08, 30 May 2012 (PDT)
We should also make it clear whether it means craftable as in obtainable via crafting (in which case it is not needed at all due to Availability) or usable in crafting. Taser9001 01:25, 30 May 2012 (PDT)
Support Something I've mentioned several times before is this page which I made ages ago, with the intention of adding it to the {{availability}}section on those hats which have no unique recipe. I started a discussion but it kind of died out... » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 02:30, 30 May 2012 (PDT)
Hat Drop Percentage?
Should we add in the chance of a hat dropping randomly? Or has it not been found yet? ---- BattleTouch279 October 14th 2012, 14:56
- I don't think that there is really a certain percentage at when hats drop, so no.
Bruss48 T C
12:09, 14 October 2012 (PDT)
- Confirming previous answer.
Lemonysnicket
14:54, 27 October 2012 (PDT)
- I was under the impression that it was a 1% drop rate. Darkid (
|
) 15:00, 27 October 2012 (PDT)
- I was under the impression that it was a 1% drop rate. Darkid (
- Confirming previous answer.
Retired hats
Make a list here, or on another page? -- Jmudge 17:38, 11 January 2013 (PST)
- List of retired items » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 18:49, 11 January 2013 (PST)
Hats and Misc. list editing
I've noticed that instead of just listing all the hats on the 'Hats' page, and all the Misc. items on the 'Misc.' pages, it now gives you a bunch of links to all the hats/misc of that particular class.
This seems to be a little redundant. I can understand the desire to see the hats & items for only one class, but if I'm on the Hats page, I want to see the hats...not links to more pages. Is there any reason for the change like this? It's going to be cumbersome to see what looks right with a specific paint across multiple classes.
The Lunatic25 12:26, 21 January 2013 (PST)
- See: This for the reason.
COBALT 12:29, 21 January 2013 (PST)
- Ahh, okay. I wasn't even aware of that discussion page. Thank you.The Lunatic25 21:05, 22 January 2013 (PST)
Wiki hat
do I just need to make a random topic to get this hat or do I have to do something more difficult? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Serpha (talk) • (contribs)
- Thousands of editors and readers here. ~100 have it. What do you think? Basically, make yourself useful and give people a reason to think you deserve it. This is not an automated thing, nor is it a "Weee click here to get a free thing!" deal. It's a privilege that requires utmost devotion to the wiki. -- Lagg
15:55, 21 March 2013 (PDT)
- Something just a little more difficult. — Armisael (T · C) 15:50, 21 March 2013 (PDT)