Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Strange item info"

From Team Fortress Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Australium parameter: new section)
Line 5: Line 5:
  
 
We have parameters for Festive and botkiller, why not Australium? [[User:SandalcladPeasant|SandalcladPeasant]] ([[User talk:SandalcladPeasant|talk]]) 15:47, 18 December 2014 (PST)SandalcladPeasant
 
We have parameters for Festive and botkiller, why not Australium? [[User:SandalcladPeasant|SandalcladPeasant]] ([[User talk:SandalcladPeasant|talk]]) 15:47, 18 December 2014 (PST)SandalcladPeasant
 +
 +
:That is a good question, it should be easy enough to add but I am just wondering about the message. Compare with the Festive message - "Available as a Strange [[Festive weapons|Festive]] variant."
 +
:Given that all Australium weapons are Strange is the distinction required here too? e.g. should it be:
 +
:* "Available as a Strange [[Australium weapons|Australium]] variant."
 +
:or just
 +
:* Available as an [[Australium weapons|Australium]] variant."
 +
:I personally lean towards the second one. That being said I will probably go ahead and add it, at the very least if people disagree with my message choice they simply need to change it as opposed to needing to add the thing themselves. - [[User:Tasty Salamanders|Tasty Salamanders]] ([[User talk:Tasty Salamanders|talk]]) 19:18, 11 March 2015 (PDT)
 +
 +
==Double quality items==
 +
While the use of Strangifiers can lead to double quality items, which most would not consider an issue for this template, since the "basic" Strange version of a weapon should be used. However is at least one case where the double quality version IS the basic version: The [[Horseless Headless Horsemann's Headtaker]] where all Strange variants are Strange Unusual, however the [[Horseless Headless Horsemann's Headtaker#Strange variant|Strange variant section]] shows it with the wrong name and colour.
 +
 +
At the moment this is the only weapon possessing this problem (though there is [[Robo-Sandvich|one other weapon]] which could potentially suffer the same problem in the future) so is it even worth fixing? - [[User:Tasty Salamanders|Tasty Salamanders]] ([[User talk:Tasty Salamanders|talk]]) 19:18, 11 March 2015 (PDT)

Revision as of 02:18, 12 March 2015

Ordering

Currently the parts are listed mostly in release order. I think it would make more sense to put them into alphabetical order, or group them by type. Which is a better idea? Toomai Glittershine 19:28, 6 February 2014 (PST)

Australium parameter

We have parameters for Festive and botkiller, why not Australium? SandalcladPeasant (talk) 15:47, 18 December 2014 (PST)SandalcladPeasant

That is a good question, it should be easy enough to add but I am just wondering about the message. Compare with the Festive message - "Available as a Strange Festive variant."
Given that all Australium weapons are Strange is the distinction required here too? e.g. should it be:
or just
I personally lean towards the second one. That being said I will probably go ahead and add it, at the very least if people disagree with my message choice they simply need to change it as opposed to needing to add the thing themselves. - Tasty Salamanders (talk) 19:18, 11 March 2015 (PDT)

Double quality items

While the use of Strangifiers can lead to double quality items, which most would not consider an issue for this template, since the "basic" Strange version of a weapon should be used. However is at least one case where the double quality version IS the basic version: The Horseless Headless Horsemann's Headtaker where all Strange variants are Strange Unusual, however the Strange variant section shows it with the wrong name and colour.

At the moment this is the only weapon possessing this problem (though there is one other weapon which could potentially suffer the same problem in the future) so is it even worth fixing? - Tasty Salamanders (talk) 19:18, 11 March 2015 (PDT)