Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion/Archive 15
2021, 2022 & 2023 discussions January 2023 — September 2023 July 2021 — December 2022 January — June |
2019 & 2020 discussions April 2020 — December 2020 January 2019 — February 2020 |
2017 & 2018 discussions January 2017 — October 2018 |
2015 & 2016 discussion January 2016 — December 2016 January 2015 — November 2015 |
2014 discussion July — December January — June |
2010 discussion December November October August — September June — July |
Contents
- 1 beating a dead horse: TF2 Wiki and googlebombing
- 2 Rabscuttle
- 3 heavy_mongol.tga
- 4 Order of names for multiple contributor items
- 5 Wikitable Collapsibility - Much needed?
- 6 Images
- 7 Class arsenal images
- 8 Time Zones
- 9 Suggestion for all hat/misc pages
- 10 Bluprint Template: Possible Results should list names.
- 11 Suggestion: Editor Review
- 12 Knives stunned first person images?
- 13 Achievement Video guides
- 14 Painted Weapons
- 15 Halloween Update Page Revamp
- 16 Hat images
- 17 "Frontline Engineer"
- 18 Wanga Prick in Saharan Spy
- 19 Items that appear in community events as trivia
- 20 Content for Deletion Noticeboard - A suggestion/discussion
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 lots of newcomers to tf2 are being directed to an outdated and poorly managed site full of opinion, speculation and misinformation.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?--— The preceding unsigned comment was added by DJLO (talk) • (contribs)
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)
- Has Google been contacted on the matter? Additionally the other website is simply an advert money scheme which should persuade Google if they are informed. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 22:05, 3 November 2011 (PDT)
I would really love this to be changed, TF2Wiki seems outdated and I hate how the official Wiki is overshadowed by it. BillyMays 20:06, 3 November 2011
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)
- 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)
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)
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)
- 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)
- 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)
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)
- Just needs an expansion/explaination of the equip regions somewhere is all. Tooltip in the infobox template? - Devozade 14:57, 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)
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:
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)
- Wrong, Moussekateer. The Cow Mangler was made paintable for a few minutes in the Manniversary, painted Cow Manglers are not results of bugs. – Cructo [T][C] 11:02, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- Backpack link or it didn't happen. --Stevoisiak 11:05, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- http://tf2b.com/item/76561197976184869/533008537 – Cructo [T][C] 11:07, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- Painted Cow Manglers are available in the beta. Doesn't mean we need an article about it. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 11:28, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- http://tf2b.com/item/76561197976184869/533008537 – Cructo [T][C] 11:07, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- Backpack link or it didn't happen. --Stevoisiak 11:05, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- Wrong, Moussekateer. The Cow Mangler was made paintable for a few minutes in the Manniversary, painted Cow Manglers are not results of bugs. – Cructo [T][C] 11:02, 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)
- Obscure Green painted Vita-Saw? I did some detective work, and found this post on Reddit, submitted by Smashman. He links to this guy's Steam Inventory. Sadly, the painted Vita-Saw is missing. I then remembered that TF2Items.com keeps historical archives of your backpack, so I got back to detectiving. On October 14th, he had no painted Vita-Saw. On October 15th, he had a painted Vita-Saw on page 3 of his backpack. Then on October 16th, he no longer had a painted Vita-Saw. According to the historical records of the painted Vita-Saw, it was traded to this person. And it appears he still has the painted Vita-Saw on page 2 of his backpack. Mystery solved. 404: User Not Found (talk) 22:07, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- Whoop-de-doo. Trivia or bug? Or not mentioning it? —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 22:12, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- No need for the attitude. I was just responding with my findings regarding the "obscure painted vita saw" comment.
I can tell by your previous comments that you have some sort of anger/ego problem, so I'll just be on my way. 404: User Not Found (talk) 22:15, 31 October 2011 (PDT)- Haha, I wasn't mad. But, yeah, I honestly don't find it too important to be listed. Just one single item in existence. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 22:17, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- Alrighty, well I apologize for what I said above. I'll strike it out. But it's actually two painted items in existence. The Balacalava-painted Cow Mangler, and the whatever-damn-color-that-is painted Vita-Saw. 404: User Not Found (talk) 22:29, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- Yeah, oops. Honestly, though, I think it's not worthy enough of being trivia, and far too minor to be noted as a bug. If we put it as trivia most likely somebody will sweep it away, calling it "bad trivia". —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 22:48, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- Alrighty, well I apologize for what I said above. I'll strike it out. But it's actually two painted items in existence. The Balacalava-painted Cow Mangler, and the whatever-damn-color-that-is painted Vita-Saw. 404: User Not Found (talk) 22:29, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- Haha, I wasn't mad. But, yeah, I honestly don't find it too important to be listed. Just one single item in existence. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 22:17, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- No need for the attitude. I was just responding with my findings regarding the "obscure painted vita saw" comment.
- Whoop-de-doo. Trivia or bug? Or not mentioning it? —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 22:12, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- We don't record the existence of bugged qualities (such as the vintage Bill and Earbuds) either, so I see no reason why we should record this. -- Hefaistus - talk 23:11, 31 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)
- Agree looks nice. —Moussekateer·talk 10:59, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- Neutral Are we going to apply this to all other update pages? Cause I'll start rolling this out. ---- No-oneSpecial (talk | contribs) 01:27, 1 November 2011 (PDT)
- Why not? As long as it doesn't look ugleh, why not put it on all the pages. --Stevoisiak 20:38, 1 November 2011 (PDT)
Hat images
I think hat images should all be updated to match the style of the weapon images. I understand that the whole "pose" thing is sort of a hallmark, but a lot of uploaders are putting the pose of the character above the ability to actually see the hat or misc well. The article is about the item itself, and it'd seem better to get a good 360 degree view of the item, you know? Image makers can still produce unique poses and whatnot in the gallery, but the standard set by the main article image is a lot nicer, in my opinion. --SilverHammer 13:55, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- I think that's already under way. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 14:38, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
- 3D hats would be cool but I think they should not replace the character pose seb26 14:40, 29 October 2011 (PDT)
"Frontline Engineer"
I have a strategy for engi it called frontline engie: You need frontier justice , gunslinger and pistol (lugarmorph). You will go to the frontiline and place your sentry and wait for the enemies your mini sentry will kill 1 or 2 enemies (on smart places more) if your mini sentry is destroyt you have crits. Don t use this crits only when it is neccesary (or you have less metal) if you think their is a invisble spy arount shoot with your pistol in rounds the spy wil get uncloaked for a few seconds you can see the spy so you know were he is so you can kill him. You can also profite from your +25 health bonus from the gunslinger always handy. This is my strategy. By: DarkFQ — The preceding unsigned comment was added by DarkFQ (talk) • (contribs) 14:15, October 30, 2011
- Moved to Talk:Community Engineer strategy. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 16:57, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
Wanga Prick in Saharan Spy
Does someone know of the new spy knife part is from the saharan spy. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by DarkFQ (talk) • (contribs) 14:12, October 30, 2011
- Moved to Talk:Wanga Prick. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 16:57, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
Items that appear in community events as trivia
As community updates that showcase items become more and more common, I'm seeing more and more people putting "This item was featured in an unrelated fan update" in the trivia section more often. Can we set a standard for this? Should this be mentioned in the trivia section, or at all? I don't think so. The article is about the item. The trivia section is for neat fact about the item. While an item may have appeared in a fan update... What might that have to do with the item itself? I can see both sides, but it just doesn't seem like good trivia to me. Doesn't seem worth mentioning. --SilverHammer 20:48, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- You answered your own question. It's a neat fact. – Smashman (talk) 21:01, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- But they're unofficial, so I really don't think they're worth mentioning. --SilverHammer 21:20, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- Unofficial? You mean the updates? So? It's still an interesting fact about the item. – Smashman (talk) 21:28, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- Well, they are where the weapon originated from. Quite well worth noting. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 23:23, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- Agree with Smashman. -Mr. Magoolachub 23:25, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- Well, they are where the weapon originated from. Quite well worth noting. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 23:23, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- Unofficial? You mean the updates? So? It's still an interesting fact about the item. – Smashman (talk) 21:28, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
- But they're unofficial, so I really don't think they're worth mentioning. --SilverHammer 21:20, 30 October 2011 (PDT)
Content for Deletion Noticeboard - A suggestion/discussion
Allow me to start this discussion off by saying that I feel this discussion board is useless and should not be used for reaching a consensus on whether or not to delete something. That of course is simply my opinion. This board is not the proper place to be starting discussions about whether or not to delete content from the Wiki. Many deletion consensus discussions have gone horrible awry on this board, due to a few specific reasons which include:
- Nobody ever really reads this board. This is due in part to the fact that the board isn't properly linked anywhere. I suggest adding a link to this page on the sidebar, possibly under "Toolbox".
- There is often not enough people taking part in a deletion consensus discussion to properly close the discussion. You can't try to reach a consensus with like 4 people voting for deletion, and 1 or 2 people voting against it. This almost always ends in a stalemate or some other weird situation.
Therefore, I propose we add a new discussion board, similar to Wikipedia's "Articles for Deletion" board. In this case, to cover everything, it should be called "Content for Deletion" or the "Content for Deletion Discussion Board". Archiving would obviously be done once the page gets full to a certain point, or after a certain amount of time. All discussions would follow a strict format (for which we could potentially design a template for). I'm thinking something like this:
== Article Name == [[Article]] Nominator: ~~~~ Reason for Labelling: Why should this content be deleted?
Then for the comments:
=== Support === {{c|Support}} Reason for supporting ~~~~ === Oppose === {{c|Oppose}} Reason for opposing ~~~~ === Comments === Hey, I have a comment! ~~~~ : Hey, I'm replying to you! ~~~~
Discussions would be active for a certain period of time, let's say 20 days. After the 20 days are up, votes are tallied and consensus is reached. If a discussion fails to get a certain amount of voters/votes in total (let's say 10), the discussion is closed and labelled as "Did not reach consensus". If the discussion fails to reach consensus, it cannot be re-created immediately. After 5 days, the discussion may then be re-created to try to come to consensus again. Of course, those are just hypothetical time periods and such, and it's obviously up to the admins to figure out proper time periods and such if they choose to implement this.
I'd love to get some feedback on this suggestion, because I still believe that this discussion board is the wrong place to try to reach a consensus on whether or not to delete something. 404: User Not Found (talk) 00:51, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- Unfortunately creating a new page/board isn't going to help the lack of users taking part in the discussion. Additionally, it isn't like there will always be a page that is wanted to be deleted, further dimishing the users visiting that page. —Rocket Ship BBQ(•) 01:16, 31 October 2011 (PDT)
- Hmm...you have a bit of a point there...still, if someone wants to delete a certain page/template/category/what-have-you, and it could potentially create some form of controversy, a separate board for this type of thing would be nice. I've seen a lot of discussions on this board go south because of the lack of people voting for/against something. But I think the reason that this page isn't visited a whole lot is because it's so damned hard to find. Adding a link to this board on the sidebar like I suggested above could greatly remedy the lack of people visiting this board. Oh wait, I found a link to this board on the main page! Right in the top right corner in the "Welcome to the TF2 Wiki" header!. Never noticed that there before. Not really an area that a normal user would think to look in. 404: User Not Found (talk) 01:26, 31 October 2011 (PDT)