Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion/Archive 21

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Original Weapon stats

One of the things that's interesting to do is to look at how a weapon's stats got changed. However, it is rather hard to find the original weapon's stats. Would it be possible to, in the update history, list what the original stats were? RBGolbat 09:36, 1 August 2012 (PDT)

I have brought this up before in the Weapon Demonstration talk page. In short, I had expressed regret that the only way to view a weapon's original stats (such as the Sandman removing the Scout's double-jump and have the ability to stun Ubercharged enemies, or the Razorback slowing down the Sniper's speed) was to comb through the Update History (which is mostly updated by hand) and infer the stats from when Valve changed them.

As such there is little record of a definitive list of a weapon's original or changed attributes besides the current stats.

I had hoped that there would be a video archive of a weapon's original stats (as it is much easier to experience how a weapon functioned and looked), but it was deemed to be redundant and not particularly high on the priority list in the midst of re-doing the melee demonstrations. The videos are deleted anyway after they have been updated.

Thus, there is little chance to view how a weapon actually functioned or looked prior to the current demonstration unless the original creator/uploader kept a copy such as here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YgirY6n-vc

As you go further back, it becomes difficult if not impossible to obtain a meaningful demonstration without fiddling around in the game files yourself. Perhaps you can ask i-ghost for tips such as from the videos he has here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgixryQEcO8

18:05, 1 August 2012 (PDT)

What about the pages that announced their release? Don't those have them? And for the ones more recent, aren't they in the edit history?

Yes, but there remains the problem of trawling through this data, and probably not moving it outside the version history section, and what good does that really do in the end? Darkid (|) 20:40, 1 August 2012 (PDT)

Also, some of the original weapon announcement pages did not include a list of attributes; such as the Force-a-Nature. It used to be much easier to deal knockback. 02:59, 3 August 2012 (PDT)

Promotional items Template v2 Discussion

Because the last discussion ended in nothing, i wanted to renew it. I want to make a language switched template for it. It will seperate the promos into years, and will be alphabetical. I want opinions before i start with it. I think it is the same as the item timeline and should be done soon. Objections? δ³Σx² 07:46, 3 August 2012 (PDT)

Is this template anything like what you were planning to do? It is not year-categorized, but it does look the same. JerryPL ^Maggots! 07:56, 3 August 2012 (PDT)

No it is this page: [[Promotional items made as a language switched template. The reason behind it to stay up to date on every language. And to make it easier to read with the seperation into years. δ³Σx² 12:08, 3 August 2012 (PDT)

Ahh, alright, I getcha. I'll get on that ASAP. JerryPL ^Maggots! 13:58, 8 August 2012 (PDT)

Zodiac-based update idea?

I had a good idea for a future update. I was thinking Valve could introduce Zodiac-themed weapons and headgear. For example, a new meelee weapon for the Scout named "The Capricorn Club". Or a Knife for the Spy named "The Scorpio's Tail". Or even a peice of headgear that allows players to breath underwater, like "The Pisces's Periscope"! Thoughts and/or extra ideas? DemoKnight28 10:36, 5 August 2012 (PDT)

Interesting, but this isn't really the appropriate forum for game ideas, these pages are for discussion about the wiki. You should check out the Steam forums instead. —Moussekateer·talk 10:50, 5 August 2012 (PDT)

Weapon overlinking

Many weapon articles, Beggar's Bazooka for example, contain links to every weapon that takes up the same slot in the "See also" section. I'm really not excited about this. It's unnecessary, doesn't look good. Can we just standardize it so that we only link to the stock weapon that takes up the same slot? --SilverHammer 17:42, 10 August 2012 (PDT)

Go ahead and remove any instances you see of this. There's no point in the "See also" section repeating the nav which is directly underneath it. The "See also" section should be about closely related weapons (attribute-wise) or the weapon that it sub-classes from, and related strategy articles or other points of interest, not about every other weapon that fits into the same weapon class. i-ghost 09:02, 11 August 2012 (PDT)

Indeed, there was a discussion on the IRC awhile ago, agreeing that it's pointless. It creates a stupidly long list, as well as an eyesore that can be avoided easily. I was planning on removing them during my Article Reviews but go ahead anyway ^^ 11:00, 11 August 2012 (PDT)

Wiki-time?

What's the matter with the time of edits on the wiki? Examples:

• 2 edits. The last must be the first but... it's the last.
• I made a huge update on article Blood Brothers/ru and after that i did a minor update but it was marked as previous change. So currently it looks like i undid my minor update but it stay in the article correctly.

So wtf? --askarmuk, C? 17:27, 12 August 2012 (PDT)

Bug is still here. --askarmuk, C? 17:35, 13 August 2012 (PDT)

Promotional item list new time order?

It is such a huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge list, so i thought why shouldnt we list the promos in years? 2012,2011,2010 etc. It would make it easier to spot the new promos and would also seperate the years and wouldnt give you one huge "sh*tlist" which you lose track of very soon. Smaller list for every year means in my opinion more readable for all persons. Soooo someone against or for it????? δ³Σx² 12:11, 13 August 2012 (PDT)

 Support The list is very long now. Too long. Splitting it up in this way makes it easier to find games (since most know when games were released) and definitely removes some of that scroll bar lengthening ridiculousness. 14:41, 14 August 2012 (PDT)

teamf6rtress.com Link?

I'm not sure where to put this, and if it's stupid then simply ignore me. The Left 4 Dead Blog posted a link to the MVM Web page (http://www.l4d.com/blog/post.php?id=8648), but the link said "teamf6rtress" instead of the actual URL. The whole URL, www.teamf6rtress.com/mvm/, redirected to the real MVM page, as I mentioned, however when I typed teamf6rtress.com it redirected to a fake Steam Community Profile of a user playing "Half-Life 3: Indev." The URL was http://sybolt.com/mvm/, as in Mann Vs. Machine. I also was sent once to http://sybolt.com/wvw/ but when I refreshed the page I received an Error 404. Is this some kind of sign of just a mistake? Is it just me being a total noob? Nintos 14:26, 15 August 2012 (PDT)

That domain is not owned by Valve; the owner can redirect it to any page they want. It's best to just ignore it. i-ghost 10:25, 23 August 2012 (PDT)

MvM Weapon Upgrade / Class Upgrade plan?

So is there a general plan for how the possible upgrades for each weapon will be handled? Maybe like a section on each weapon's page in the same style of Strange Parts information block? --Org 02:57, 16 August 2012 (PDT)

I have scrapped up a prototype of an upgrade table over here. Have a look and see if it's good enough. -- JerryPL ^Maggots! 03:25, 16 August 2012 (PDT)

I like the vertical one for two reasons. It would fit on smaller screens better and rows are much easier to templateize than columns. --Org 07:41, 16 August 2012 (PDT)

However, it fails to figure out how we would list exceptions to the upgrades. Would that be a different table? Darkid (|) 14:16, 21 August 2012 (PDT)

I made up some thoughts and i think the best way to have every robot avaiable on every robot page is a class nav bar. What is required? One sentry buster picture and one giant picture, and a general addition for the robots. My tryout for this here: User:TheDoctor/Robot_Nav_Bar . I think this would be nice. δ³Σx² 18:24, 21 August 2012 (PDT)

English pages in search results to come first?

Is there any way to make english pages appear in search results first? It's rather annoying to scroll down through all the translated pages before you find one in english. ErroR 05:16, 20 August 2012 (PDT)

Please use the add section button next time. This issue has been brought up several times before, and there has been no fix for it. It is not a fix that is really needed, either. rZ 05:19, 20 August 2012 (PDT)

Sorry about that, still need to get get used to the formatting. ErroR 07:07, 20 August 2012 (PDT)

I disagree, there is a solution to get rid of all the pages in the wrong language: replace the entire translation system with what wikipedia does: real language specific wikis that have links between them in the sidebar. It fixes all the bugs, but requires separate mediawiki installs and is a lot of work to change to.--Henke37 14:42, 22 August 2012 (PDT)

That "lot of work" would involve changing the location of every page that's been translated, ever. And, since the english page needs updating too, it would thus include every page in the wiki. That's completely unreasonable, and considering the benefit, pointless. Darkid (|) 16:06, 22 August 2012 (PDT)

Yeah, I understated the impact. And I do agree, it just isn't worth it. Not even if it was automated.--Henke37 17:48, 22 August 2012 (PDT)

Developer wiki link in the sidebar

I think that the sidebar should include a link to the official developer wiki along with the other cross wiki links.--Henke37 13:53, 22 August 2012 (PDT)

You'd need to ask Valve to link back to here and the other Wikis first, and all the Wikis would need to agree on it. Valve administer the VDC directly; non-employees can not modify the site. i-ghost 10:25, 23 August 2012 (PDT)

Are you saying that the link must be bidirectional? Also, the developer wiki is editable by anyone who bothers to register for an account (like myself).--Henke37 19:28, 24 August 2012 (PDT)

Correct, the linking must be mutual. And by administer I meant modifying the site interface, which includes the sidebar; only Valve employees can modify that on the VDC. i-ghost 19:58, 24 August 2012 (PDT)

Welcome Team

Prior to being on the TFWiki, I was part of another Wiki where they had a "welcoming committee" that seemed to be very successful. It was very easy to speak to other users, and new members would get help almost immediately. Indeed, there were less issues regarding newer members not reading rules, and misunderstanding them, and there was a real sense of community cohesion.

I'd like to be able to bring my own take on a welcoming committee to the TF Wiki, which is why I'm back (again) with the Welcome Team. The page I have created has information for existing members, who can simply become part of the team by signing their name on the respective table, as well as a section for new users to put any questions they may have which can be answered by anyone across the Wiki, be they team members or regular Wiki members. Indeed, having a userbox to show that you're a part of the team would definitely help newer members identify who they can turn to. There is also an example question I put just so you can see how I hope the Q&A section would be used in future. Remember, the more questions answered the better this page becomes in terms of handling new member's questions.

It might not sound very different to simply putting a welcome template on a users talk page and be done with it, but I think the page definitely would explain more (I hope) than what I'm trying to explain over here, so please take a look at it for yourselves and give me your opinions, regarding should this be pushed out or forgotten, different subtopics for Q&As, anything! Thanks in advance! 09:45, 23 August 2012 (PDT)

Welcoming users does not need to be formalised. It should happen naturally, however I've noticed that people just use the welcome template without really addressing the new user's specific needs, and in some cases include warnings (like show preview) in addition to the welcome template, which is confusing and contradictory. New users can use this discussion page or hop into the IRC to ask questions. Your proposal complicates what should be a simple and personalised task. If you see a new user who needs help, just post on their talk page to reassure them that help is available. It really is that simple. i-ghost 10:25, 23 August 2012 (PDT)

Ah, I understand. I was hoping to make the process perhaps more accessible, but I completely understand what you're saying. Maybe I am lengthening it rather than shortening it... 08:31, 24 August 2012 (PDT)

Project Feature Length - part 2

Note: See previous discussion above

I have started a very rough draft of a project page here. Please use this discussion to either voice your opinions on the idea, or to suggest changes to the page. rZ 10:46, 23 August 2012 (PDT)

If you substitute step one with "Post the page to here, the IRC channel, or here", you'd realise that you're trying to reinvent the wheel. i-ghost 10:54, 23 August 2012 (PDT)

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I believe this will be helpful to the community. rZ 11:02, 23 August 2012 (PDT)

Note sections on cosmetic articles and beyond

Recently, I decided to implement a section titled "Notes" to every article. My reasoning for this is, there's a lot of bad trivia out there. A lot of observations under trivia that, while interesting to read, don't fit in the article under the trivia guidelines. The addition of the Notes section solves that problem. It's a little like a trivia section, but a bit looser. The difference being that the Trivia section contains a neat or interesting story about the item itself, the production of the item, the history of the item, basically the item is the focus.

The Notes section, however, addresses the somewhat more meta facts.

The winners of the Hat Describing Contest were moved to their respective articles notes sections, for example. I felt this was an important fact to mention in the article, but not important enough to put in the top. Frankly, it felt tacked on and just didn't look good. Now it has a snug little place to go. Same goes for the few hats that appear in Portal 2.

The Batter's Helmet article featured a bit of trivia observing that the hat is worn by a couple of robots in MvM mode. I felt this wasn't worth having under the trivia section, but I really wanted to keep it so the Batter's Helmet article could link to the MvM pages. It fit perfectly in the note section.

As of right now, I've gotten all of the hats included in the Hat Describing Contest done, as well as all of the items found in Fall Crates. My intention was to finish all of the other cosmetics over the course of the next couple days, and then move on to weapons and classes.

I've been seeing my changes reverted offhandedly, one by one, by other editors who don't realize that I'm personally implementing this mass layout change. I understand why that's happening, as I didn't exactly give any warning. It also may not be as appealing as the current layout to some editors.

So go ahead and let me know what you guys think? If more people seem to disagree than agree, I'll go ahead and revert my changes. --SilverHammer 06:29, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

Notes sections aren't a new thing. People just don't use them enough. Also you should consider moving from trivia to notes a promotion rather than demotion. Trivia is for possibly interesting pieces of information. Notes are for things that are, well, noteworthy. I'm guessing that your edits are getting undone mostly because people aren't paying attention to the nature of the edit, it probably didn't help that you waited until just now to make a talk line about it. I personally am okay with someone doing this. Especially as far as the contributor credits and secondary but mostly irrelevant information like the item's original name are concerned. It's definitely respectable to give someone credit but the fact is that it isn't a high priority part of the page layout and should be arranged as such. -- Lagg 06:38, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

I think mass changes to formats need to be discussed more than this before being implemented. I don't like the notes section, it just adds an extra layer to the pages and the differences between notes and trivia are going to be hard for us to maintain, while we had easy to understand and simple rules regarding where contributor stuff goes. Right now I'm looking at the Red-Tape and half the notes seem like trivia, the other seem like they were one line fine in the opening paragraph. It seems to just be another layer of things we have to check on pages, versus a system that was working fine previously. I feel the notes section will just become a glorified pre-2010 trivia section, as it already seems to be. Balladofwindfishes 07:28, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

No need 'Notes' in da articles. 'Trivia' section is enough.

The Notes section, however, addresses the somewhat more meta facts - trivia rules need to be updated to that 'meta facts'. --askarmuk, C? 12:33, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

I understand the redundancy in having the workshop links and images on every single page. That does seem like something that is a little badly formatted, but a new section doesn't seem needed. What if we added an extra piece at the bottom of the Infobox with the workshop submission image, and a link to the submission itself and the name it was submitted with (even if the name is the same as the item in the game). Like this quick mock-up [1] . Balladofwindfishes 13:58, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

It's later in the day, and I believe I'll expand a bit on why I think the approach of a notes section isn't quite the best solution. Adding a notes section means that every single page, in every language, now has to be updated and have a new section maintained. With this new section, new rules need to be drafted up for the section and implemented, and these rules need to take awhile for people to get the feel for. It's a new section for editors to mess up editing in, being confused on what goes there, versus trivia, leading to more work for everyone. I see it now, as some people begin to try and implement your notes section by just changing the trivia section to now read "notes" which isn't really what would happen at all, and I think that confusion would continue for a long time (especially with no formal style guide), versus a system we have now that works fairly well. Further, I think an item infobox based solution would be more suited, if we're in need of a solution. This would mean they wouldn't have to be translated entirely to be added to pages, it would mean workshop thumbnails would not need to be manually added to pages in a gallery, and it would be a lot easier to maintain as item infoboxes are not things new editors usually edit, and they're not as confusing as a new section, as their purpose is very clear. The item infobox is already also where users look for this information, it's where contributor info is held, equip regions, etc, more "out of game" info. Not sure where to go with the descriptions. I think it's important information to preserve, since it's not easy to find this info elsewhere, and it does mean those people are connected to those items. But you're right, it is a little awkward there, same for kill icon submissions. Honestly, that might be fair game for adding right to the trivia section, as it's interesting information that's not an easy observation. Sure it'd add trivia sections to many pages that don't have them, but trivia sections are pretty stable these days as far as maintenance goes. I hope you understand where I'm coming from, this seems like a big solution for a little problem. Balladofwindfishes 20:34, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

This is not a good idea at all. For the first thing that I need to point out is that "Notes" is mainly used to point out things thats not involving the following: The Item was contributed via Steam Workshop under the name *******, The item desc was submitted by ****** for the Hat Describing Contest and other following things. That is half information/ half trivia, and it should be placed up as it's usually applied in (The Description section). Items involving in the P2 Crossover, Steam Workshop etc. should stay as they are. Or we might just need to move Halloween item description about the full moon effect to this Notes thing too, which is as mentioned a meta fact.

That counts also with the Pyroland assist descriptions. Another thing is that this will require a rewriting on other languages and that is from what I can say, is a waste of time for translators like myself. Im not saying this to be lazy, but this will be needed to be applied for every language. And some have only afew translators who are possibly stressed enough by keeping up with the Wiki articles that needs to be done as it is. For further more, that will not also mess up with previous work, but confuse the users who works on a translation and they will go like "What is this?". They will soon find out about that and will eventually getting frustrated (like I first did when I saw this for the first time) and possibly lay off editing at all. This will lead to a rewriting on guidelines also possibly and fuck up existing users way to edit. But by any means, go ahead and apply this. I will do as it's printed on the /en to keep up with current articles. I can spend some hours on fixing things, and not in a pitty way of saying. Take this up with the administration and/or staff and until then, I won't translate until this is settled with.

TNS 05:17, 10 September 2012 (PDT)

Adding a Workshop section to the right section of an article seems like a good idea, but facts like Description writers, Portal 2, and Contribution! page information will still be tacked on. What can be done about that? --SilverHammer 20:25, 10 September 2012 (PDT)

Requires modifying on the itembox template. TNS 22:43, 10 September 2012 (PDT)

If someone wants to give me access, I'd like to get right on that.--SilverHammer 23:57, 10 September 2012 (PDT)

That will need to be taken up with the administration/mods before anything like that would be approved. TNS 04:34, 11 September 2012 (PDT)

You should test it on your sandbox page. That way, you can just show the changes you made to an admin and they can push them through. Darkid (|) 09:09, 11 September 2012 (PDT)

"This melee weapon's Critical Hit animation is..."

Some Melee Weapon articles have this bit of info and some don't. Should all melee weapon articles have this, or in light of the melee weapon demonstration makeovers, should they all be removed?

Useful? Useless? What's the general consensus? 11:33, 12 September 2012 (PDT)

I'd say remove it, as you said the new demonstrations show that information anyway. We don't have a paragraph explaining exactly how the weapon animation looks; there's just no point. » Cooper Kid (blether) • (contreebs) 11:46, 12 September 2012 (PDT)

Agreed, the new Weapon Demos are capable of showing it far better than text (obviously). 11:52, 12 September 2012 (PDT)

I support the removal. ~Sven~ 15:31, 12 September 2012 (PDT)

Remove it, it's kind of pointless to state and the weapon demo shows it anyway Balladofwindfishes 16:54, 20 September 2012 (PDT)

MvM Mission Pages -- Legend needed

I am under the opinion that the templates generated for the mission breakdowns of the MvM maps (IE, Crash Course (mission)) could benefit from a legend explaining how the banding works, what's the difference between a weave and a sub wave, etc. I figured it out by staring at it for a bit but the information as it stands is not the clearest format it could be expressed in, in my opinion. --Org 00:01, 15 September 2012 (PDT)

New Patner!

Hey guys! I have a new partner that I recently told about the wiki. ( Sorry for bad grammar ) Anyways, he said it would be great if we could be well known, he loves blogs and it just seems fun

• Actual quote from him*

His name is Waffles1092, admin of Organization XII, ( Me to ) Tolerates anyone, has good trades, and is reliable, he would be great in the wiki This is all I have to say for now, I'll post more later! — The preceding unsigned comment was added by TTPNColgate (talk) • (contribs)

Tell your partner I said hello. --Piemanmoo 16:08, 20 September 2012 (PDT)

Anybody can edit the wiki, we don't do "partnerships" with specific individuals. rZ 16:37, 20 September 2012 (PDT)

'See Also' section - what's supposed to be in it?

As Hinaomi has just started 'cleaning up' all of the weapon pages, removing links to similar weapons, I wonder what is actually supposed to go into this section. After a brief discussion on IRC, we couldn't come to real general consensus. I had ideas that the see also section should be possibly used for:

• Visually similar items
• The same type of weapon (although there is the weapon nav right below)
• Having some other link, like promotional items linking to the game which they were from (although this should be explained in the opening paragraph)

Wikipedia states that the see also section is 'ultimately a matter of editorial judgment and common sense' So, what do you think should be in here? Pigophone 18:32, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

I think weapon in similar type should not add because nav box can access and easier to see. Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 18:33, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

Then again, two weapons from two different classes could be very similar, and the nav wouldn't show that - the user might want to know that there are other items like it. For example, Mad Milk linking to Jarate and vise-sersa. Pigophone 18:39, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

It should add if different class but if same class, I think nope. Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 18:43, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

In my think I think See Also section should have

• The same type weapon of different class
• The game that was Promotional (If have)
• Weapon Strategy

That's all in my think. Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 18:50, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

I miss similar items. I mean the horific headsplitter which has a cleaver and also the flying guillotine. It should be at least linked to it. Also we are not speed dating so take your time with each edit. δ³Σx² > Add + or - skills for me 19:00, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

It was removed on the horific headsplitter page (I added it by myself but someone removed it) Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 19:33, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

Everyone can remove or add links, that doesnt make it always right or wrong. I still think it deserves to stay because of the similarity with the item. δ³Σx² > Add + or - skills for me 19:50, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

So I make it in short that See Also section should have

• The same type weapon of different class
• The game that was Promotional (If have)
• The similar items
• Weapon Strategy

Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 20:16, 21 September 2012 (PDT)

To clarify, as I'm sorry your english is not entirely understandable, we are to list:

• Reskins of this weapon (i.e. identical damage weapons)
• The source game (for promotional items)
• Weapon Strategy
• Visually similar items

Am I correct? Darkid (|) 18:19, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

Identical weapons would be displayed in the damage box, so I don't think that its necessary to show that. Pigophone 18:23, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

Although the Robo-Sandvich, for example, as it's a quite special weapon, is most likely ok to be in the see also section for Sandvich Pigophone 19:01, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

I didn't mean reskin, I mean the same type weapon of different class (e.g. Mad milk and Jarate). And reskin should not go there because most reskin weapon is the same class weapon (e.g. Robo-Sandvich is reskin of Sandvich, Maul is reskin of Homewrecker) Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 18:58, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

I feel that 'See also' should include: Further reading, or possible confusions. Thus, visually similar items (Headsplitter and Flying Guillotine) along with reskins (Pistol and Lugermorph). It would be excessive for, say, the pyro to have 7 'see also' links for his/her melee weapons for three reasons: 1, those items are in the weapons nav box. 2, those items are in the crafting guide box. 3, it clogs the space. Reskins are limited in number and seem to me to be a related article, thus ideal for 'see also'. Darkid (|) 19:17, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

I think reskins should be listed, except in the case where the reskin is for lots of classes (so the Saxxy for example wouldn't be listed on every stock page, but the Black Rose should be listed on the knife page). It is so of redundant, but the weapons list is both huge and auto-collapsed, so finding it is not easy. And also the nav doesn't really note the item is a reskin. Balladofwindfishes 19:18, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

I think reskin should add only special (e.g. Robo-Sandvich that can earned by open box only) Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 19:25, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

I can only see that ending in arguments. "No, I think this should be on the page, it's an important reskin!" "Well no, it isn't sorry" and so on. What defines "special" specifically, so that there won't be any problems with editors adding or removing it to have it undone by a different opinion. Balladofwindfishes 20:55, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

As I recall, the word 'reskin' does that all on it's own - no qualifiers necessary. — Armisael (T · C) 20:56, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

I still shudder at the memories of the argument on the reskin page itself. Balladofwindfishes 21:00, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

All those opinions, like little edits full of concrete, but still vulnerable. It's funny isnt it? What should stay there forever or only for a limited time? In the end, you die on the moon wondering if your bowels will let go, so bottom line is instead of turning the wiki into glass by doing a sh*tstorm of edits on the see also area we should just listen to our mind(s), and dig deep. After that Professor Black ist at your service and is gonna tell you how the wiki will work from this day on.
Rule #0: Weapon strategy always at first or last no middle.
Rule #1: Reskins of Weapons are not needed in the see also area (already link in "damage and function times" and in the "nav bar")
Rule #2: Link to the Game for the promo item (always even if the item only drops the history must be there)
Rule #3: Visually similar items as a link are needed because there is no visual or name reference to see for yourself. ; Dr. Black at your service. Viva reality. Why do we need a link from mad milk to jarate? Doesn't make sense to me, and i know all this little tf2 secrets. There are 2xthrowable liquid weapons, okay. Still different, very different, function itself. Similarity is only the throw(?) and slot. If we werent be Paralytic with giddiness we could update the nav bars into reskins and normal weapons, which would be very nice and good, but whatever. Ta mates. δ³Σx² > Add + or - skills for me 21:08, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

Kinda agree, except the strategy should on the first only, not last. Hinaomi (talk) • (contributions) 21:16, 22 September 2012 (PDT)

Blue weapon images

For most (all?) of the weapons, there are blue versions of the images, e.g. File:BLU Powerjack.png. These files are not used anywhere, should they be deleted? Darkid (|) 09:30, 23 September 2012 (PDT)

These are uploaded for the sake of completion, and for when somebody bothers to add buttons to {{Item infobox}} to swap between the two images if the 3D image can't be loaded/isn't available. i-ghost 06:38, 27 September 2012 (PDT)

Full Moon on Main Page doesn't change

Can someone change the Moon to a Full Moon on the main page- Megamannn — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Megamann (talk) • (contribs) 05:10, 30 September 2012

The preceding discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.