Template talk:CentralDiscussion

From Team Fortress Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Recent Changes

Can we use this template on the Recent changes page? --Picard lm(de) 21:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)


It's currently running into {{Updates}} on Special:RecentChanges for me, so could we make it 50% wide. Also add the Scout rush and Rush merge. And change the Community postal to review rather than move. -- Smashman... (ts) 23:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

They still clash together, make it 50% width please. And you didn't add the merges, darn do it. -- Smashman... (ts) 23:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
50% width is ugly and what do you mean by merges? I added moves? :S seb26 [talk] 01:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Well having everything jamming together looks worse. Just make it 50%. And I mean the Scout rush to Rush merge. I said it at the top. -- Smashman... (ts) 01:07, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I'm somewhat confused now. By making the width 50% won't it jam everything together? There's no width restriction now, and everything looks fine... ??? seb26 [talk] 01:22, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Golden Wrench Event

I believe the deletion of the Golden Wrenches on August 31st for the Golden Charity is worth putting on the "Curent Events" board. --Stevoisiak 18:29, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree -- iKnow 01:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd say so as well, and the amount of wrenches is also relevant. -- Christopher Walken 16:13, 12 September 2012 (PDT)

Proposing some guidelines.

It seems to me that once things are stuck on the Central Discussion, they're just being left there for somebody to do something about them. For example, Talk:Medigun and Talk:Übersaw have been going for over a month now, no consensus has been reached so I think they should just be left as they are, have the merge tag removed and removed from Central Discussion. File:Heavypunchout.png has been marked as to-be-deleted for 1 week, no action has been taken nor has any discussion.

The Central Discussion template should be used to list active discussions, and then take action accordingly. Things shouldn't sit there for days undiscussed.

Proposed Guidelines

  • Items should always link to the talk page of an item (to the section created in relation to why it's been added to central discussion).
  • The first line of a discussion should contain the date the discussion was created and it's expiry date.
  • The standard length of a discussion should be 1 week. (i.e. the expiry date should be 1 week from the start of the discussion).
  • Once an expiry date has been reached, the discussion closes and the item remains on Central Discussion until it is complete.
  • Where possible, an item should be dealt with on the same day it expires.
  • Items can be dealt with prior to the expiration date if a consensus is reached by an appropriate amount of people, decided per discussion by the Wiki staff.

The way to deal with items:

  • If there is a consensus, take appropriate action in accordance to that consensus.
  • If there is no consensus:
    • Minor items should be left as is.
    • Major items should be extended for a maximum of 1 week. If no consensus is reached by then, the item should be left as is.

Now, clearly these guidelines refer to items about decision-making as opposed to organisation, so things like Polycount organisation would of course be exempt.

So, what do you guys think? -RJ 13:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

This is a heartily agreeable idea. Bravo RJackson.  – Smashman (talk) 13:09, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Should the current events really be in red?

I don't think it's a very good idea, as it could easily be confused with a redlink of some sort. - Boba (talk) 16:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)