Team Fortress Wiki talk:Trivia Wall of Shame/Archive 1

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.

Facepalming character

This is hilarious whoever made this! I was just thinking of creating something like this...when this list gets full enough there will be hours of entertainment to be had. Alsoodani 15:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, also requesting someone place a character from TF2 facepalming, somewhere on the project page. Alsoodani 15:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

We've had worse come by in the IRC channel which you should join~ Also, I agree with the facepalming. Will do it whenever I get back home and remember to do it, unless someone ninja's me to it. — Wind 15:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Worse in the IRC channel? Definitely going to hop in on the IRC, then, to witness that! (I'm a total noob at IRC, but I'll give it a go) - Alsoodani 15:57, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I can get behind this. ~ lhavelund ^{(talk ▪ contrib)} 15:47, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

 Support We need facepalm soldier.::Scurve :: 23:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

 Support This is awesome!!! MR SLIN 23:49, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Bookmarking this page... So good, and soooo needed. CptObvious 17:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I wish i knew about this page a little earlier... I saw lots of stupid trivia lol -- Swordz 12:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

In short: Amusing. Quanyails 04:05, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

This is one of those articles that just sort of puts itself on your watchlist. Turboplant 02:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

This needs a quote

How 'bout:

• "Drink it in, pal. That's how failure tastes."
• "Wassamatter, y'freakin' stupid?"
• "Oh hey! You suck."
• "What the hell is youse guys' problem?"
• "What the hell was that crap?"
• "This is a real frickin' embarrassment."
• "You're a disgrace to the uniform."
• "The burning you feel? It is shame."
• "Stupid, stupid, stupid!"
• "That's what ya get!"
• "That there is just a sad display, boy."
• "Dumber than dirt, ain't'cha?"
• "You're dumb as a box of rocks!"
• "You just ain't doin' it right."
• "Zis, is unacceptable!"
• "You are... schtupid!"
• "You. Are. A. Bloody. Disgrace."
• "Does it hurt when I do that? It does, doesn't it?!"

Toomai Glittershine 18:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

While some trivia might exhibit a total lack of understanding of the guidelines, it's not really right (or in accordance with the wiki rules) to make fun of the efforts of others. To that end, I'd like to propose reducing your list to:

• "This is a real frickin' embarrassment."
• "You just ain't doin' it right."
• "Zis, is unacceptable!"

I realize that's a pretty serious culling, but it's not really fair to those trying to contribute for us to call them names, diminish their contributions, or appear to take pleasure in deleting their work. ::Scurve :: 00:47, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah all right, that makes sense. I was just grabbing a whole bunch of quotes that were both partly applicable and humourous; the general idea of the "stupid" ones is that the trivia itself is stupid, not the people that put it up. I'd like to keep the Heavy's "shame" one in the list though, since after all it is a Wall of Shame. Toomai Glittershine 03:21, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Quotation has been added. — Wind 03:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I want

I want to create Russian version of Wall of Shame. Do you agree? — Laros123 11:31, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

 Support There is a lot of really funny trivias in Russian section of the Wiki. ^{(T | C)} 11:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Jealousy?

I some of the trivia on the wall of shame don't seem to belong on it. Perhaps Jealousy? ex:

Heavy - "The fact that the Heavy wears hats like the Hound Dog and the Football Helmet seems to imply he's interested in American culture."

This on is intresting and may contain some truth. Plus it makes sence. I think it should be re-added.

 Nope.avi We don't cover speculation whereever possible, so we allow readers to make up their own mind regarding what the Heavy may or may not be interested in. -- Pilk _(talk) 11:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Iron Curtain - "The Iron Curtain features a vent on its side from which smoke and light of a flame are visible. This may be a reference to the emphasis on industrialization in Soviet Russia."

While it is phrased rather weird, its true. I think it should be re-worded a little and re-added.

 Maybe Its removal might have been justified (not sure), but I don't think this belongs on the wall of shame. -- Pilk _(talk) 11:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

L'Etranger "This weapon has the highest pitch and least damage of all four of the spy's revolvers."

While the least damage is a given, highest pitch is intresting. I think it should be re-added with just "The L'Etranger has the highest pitch of all four of the Spy's revolvers.

 Nope.avi It's not interesting and can be observed by anyone playing a few rounds in the game. -- Pilk _(talk) 11:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Medic - " The medic is currently one of the only classes not to have a health problem. Ex: The scout has radiation poisoning, the soldier has fractured limbs, pyro probably has abestos in his/her lungs, the demo is an alcoholic and also probably has fractured limbs, the heavy is obese, the engineer is a crippled, the sniper has kidney faliure, and the spy might have lung cancer

Why was this one even removed? Its ture, made sence, and dosen't break any rules.

 Maybe I think this might be covered elsewhere. I find this information interesting, even if it can be regarded as "x of y" trivia. -- Pilk _(talk) 11:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

It's x of y and false/speculation. Can you find even a hint for the fractured limbs, asbestos or lung cancer? Smoking does in no way guarantee lung cancer. Replacing your hand with a fully functional robotical one hardly counts as crippled. Fractured limbs I assume is from explosive jumping? If you include that, you can assume bullet wounds for every single character. --CruelCow ^(talk) 19:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Old Guadalajara - "There was a large gasoline explosion in the city of Guadalajara, supposedly supporting the Pyros destructive nature." Again, intresting and true Theres some others but I'm running out of space. Tacoworld501 11:21, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

 Nope.avi The only thing this has in common with the Pyro is the name of the hat. It doesn't "support" any conclusion. -- Pilk _(talk) 11:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Granary - "A 'Granary' is a location for storing food. As such, the design of the map incorporates silos, mills and storage containers."

Why was this removed? It seems quite intresting... Hilarious Pill 14:22, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I think this page should be deleted

While very, very funny, all it does is serve to isolate inexperienced members, so more experienced editors can point and laugh at them for adding something they thought would be good to have. We really shouldn't publicly humiliate them for their mistakes. Behind closed doors, on the IRC, why not? "Hey guys, check out this trivia I just reverted." "Heh." "Crayons? xD" People do that anyway. A lot of these are really funny! But we're still parading peoples mistakes, slapping their name right on it for all to see.

Heck, maybe just remove the links to the edits? I really would hate to see this page go, but it isn't worth a laugh to humiliate someone new like that for making a mistake to me. --SilverHammer 11:16, 30 July 2011 (PDT)

Yeah, I have to say I agree. Whilst this page is genuinly funny, it sort condtradicts the rule that editors have to obey a rule of politness and treat everyone as equals to have them posting a page ridiculing people effort.MEDUNN 11:35, 30 July 2011 (PDT)

 Neutral Whilst it's embarrassing to see your trivia on the wall of shame, I think people can learn from there mistakes. But than again, it will make them embarrassed and they won't edit the trivia section again as opposed that there trivia will get on the wall of shame again. Violencejr123 11:40, 30 July 2011 (PDT)

 Yes I completely agree, and was intending to start this discussion myself a while ago but I completely forgot. -RJ 11:42, 30 July 2011 (PDT)

@Violencejr123 It might expecially cause them to quit because some of the modderators have been telling them directly that they are on the wall of shame for their edits, hardly likly to make someone want to contribute to a community effort.MEDUNN 11:49, 30 July 2011 (PDT)

Wait, wait, wait. There are moderators who go right up to new, inexperienced contributors and tell them an edit they made is now up on a Wall of Shame? That's not good at all. That, that's bad in fact. --SilverHammer 11:52, 30 July 2011 (PDT)

Medunn that's why I'm neutral. Violencejr123 12:04, 30 July 2011 (PDT)

This page appears to be all in good fun, I think it should be kept. Why so serious? Thenyproject 00:02, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Yes this just says that "your so bad, dont bother editing again". I felt nasty when i added one to the wall, i don't really think this is the most friendly of pages to be really honest. - Lexar - talk 00:04, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

Whoops, just came back to this page after several days and realised I wrote 'moderators' when I meant 'editors'.MEDUNN 10:40, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 No. Don't delete it, but maybe if people agree the links could be removed. seb26 00:10, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Support on removing the links. maggosh 00:12, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Yes Remove the links. This way if the author of said trivia happens upon it on the wall, they can be encouraged to learn from their mistakes, while not being put on display for everyone else with links to the diff page, and consequently, their userpage. MogDog66 00:14, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Support on the removal of the links, it's something that's shameful, not 'cool' to be on there. --_Sp3c^Talk 12:20, 4 August 2011 (PDT)

 Comment Ugh, I know I was the one who said "maybe just delete the links" initally, but I don't think that's a good enough compromise after having given it more than the split second of thought I had originally. I think the links should be removed, the quote REALLY needs to go, and the article name needs to be changed. Some of them are really funny, flat out wrong, and it'd be okay to have them up as a way of saying "this is why you need to follow the style guide, children." See: Yet another reference is that according to studies about evolution, all life on Earth started in the oceans and by evolving slowly went on land. from the Holy Mackeral article... Oh, Holy, I get it... Anyway, others like "Some hats are tradable causing by a glitch on Team Fortress 2 when they find it. When the glitch has been repair, the hats have kept the tradable tool." aren't really good to display. I don't wanna make fun of some French (not stereotyping, I checked) guy who wanted to add something he thought was noteworthy and legit, but didn't totally grasp the English language. Plus, he bought a Monarch! Guy doesn't deserve to be mocked.

This one was proposed to be added to the article on the IRC tonight. "The Demoman may be the only Class able to use the Mask of the Shaman because he is black, and resembles the tribesman of the game From Dust." I can see how people would want it up here, and I don't think any editors were wrong for suggesting it be on here. It just makes you go "what.", it's funny. But when it boils down to it, "because he is black, and resembles the tribesman" is a really insensitive thing to say, and it'd be even more insensitive to feature it on an article of jokes.

Maybe I'm just being hypersensitive. MogDog66 raises a good point, learning from their mistakes. I'd just hate to see new contributors driven away by their edits being featured here, or by seeing something insensitive to them. I'd appreciate it if this block of text was considered before you guys decide what to do. --SilverHammer 00:39, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Nope We should keep that page, maybe delete the links or anything indicating who did it, but this page is used as reference of what not-to-do. It can acts as some kind of "menace" for anyone, knowing that if you make something bad you can end up here, I think you are less incline to make a poor edit and to think twice before adding something. So I agree on removing the links but not the page. Furthermore, everyone makes mistakes, gentlemen learn from their mistakes, if you take this for an insult, than you must not learn a lot in your life. The Wall of Shame is a huge joke here, but with interesting educative power, it shouldn't be deleted, but should be made anonymous (to avoid finger pointing). Tturbo _{( / )} 09:00, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

I agree on removing the links, but not the whole page.  –  Ohyeahcrucz [T][C] 09:04, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Agree It's in bad taste. If someone wants to keep track of bad edits, let them do it on another site. This page is basically ridiculing inexperienced editors. Balladofwindfishes 09:05, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Comment SilverHammer raises some good points. I still stand in my comment that the links should be deleted, and the page not, but perhaps this page also needs to be gone through and some of the less deserving entries removed (e.g Poor grammar simply because English is not their native language). And maybe even a brief notice at the top advising users what constitutes as a "shameful" trivia, and what is not. MogDog66 12:30, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 No. Don't delete it, but remove the links and only add really funny/bad trivia. SackZement (Talk) 13:38, 2 August 2011 (PDT)

 Oppose Don't delete it. I love this page, it's a good place to come if you want a quick laugh. I've shown it to many of my friends and they agree that it's pretty funny. Apart for comical uses, it has educative uses. People can look at this as very bad examples of trivia and thus learn not to post anything like this. However, I must  Agree on the part of removing links. Naming and shaming is a little too harsh. The editors can feel their own private shame in the knowledge that no one else coming to this page will know it was them.

I LOVE this page and think it's hilarious. I would hate to see it go, but perhaps a little trimming is in order. I think most of the examples listed here are suitably absurd or outright BAD. There are a few like the one about L'etranger having "the highest pitch" that are just pointless but not necessarily bad, but it does serve as a guideline about making better trivia. It might be worthwhile to create some sort of "submission" process? Perhaps we could have some sort of page where users can stick up trivia they consider bad, and the admins can pick from it as they see fit? All in all, I think my favorite thing about this wikis is that there is some quality control regarding trivia. I can name tons of wikis that, despite being high-quality otherwise, would ACCEPT stuff like "Ullapool Caber may reference terrorism" as legit trivia. But I get an absolute kick out of bad trivia like this. Evang7 02:27, 4 August 2011 (PDT)

 Scrap it Originally the page was a small jab at just the worst of the worst trivia when we were doing huge purges of crap from the old wiki. Some of it was really just bad and that page was meant to be a sort of "learn from this example" thing. Additionally, the links were all supposed to go to the removal of the item, to prove it existed. Most of the old items couldn't be tracked back to who added them anyway since they came in with the whole page on the first edit. It's spiraled out of control since then and now it's just a "this kinda sucked and made me chuckle" page. It was never meant for every bad piece of trivia to grace the Wiki. A lot these things are added by new members who simply don't know any better and pointing it out and belittling them is not constructive. I believe that since the Trivia Style Guide has been in effect for ages now, it should be all of the warning and example that we need. The wall of shame is ugly and a black spot on an otherwise generally friendly community. -- - _{(talk | contribs)} -- 02:38, 4 August 2011 (PDT)

 Comment Well spoken, Alex2539. --SilverHammer 21:55, 4 August 2011 (PDT)

• Strongly agree Looks like I'm late to the party, but this page is ridiculous. It isn't funny, and serves largely to humiliate users (the Wall of Shame). This entire page should be removed, as most of this "bad trivia" is people misinformed. Looks like the "big guys" don't want this page removed. :/ -Rocket Ship BBQ 16:03, 15 August 2011 (PDT)

 Comment Six supports, four disagrees by my count. --SilverHammer 15:31, 17 August 2011 (PDT)

It's not a vote, it's meant to be a discussion by which the point of it is to establish a consensus one way or the other seb26 14:50, 18 August 2011 (PDT)

Never said it was a vote, merely stating how many supporters and disapprovals there are. --SilverHammer 15:02, 18 August 2011 (PDT)

The countings are wrong though. I am going to presume that you only counted the templates, in which case there were 3 agrees on the complete removal of the page (the others merely wanted the links to have removed), but for example Rock Ship BBQ didn't use a template. So the amount of supporters and dissaprovals are actually different. Just thought I should point that out. -- Hefaistus - talk 15:27, 18 August 2011 (PDT)

I miscounted, but RJackson, ballad, Alex, Rocket Ship, and myself still come to five for scraping it. One off. --SilverHammer 16:18, 18 August 2011 (PDT)

I agreed with you as well up there, that's six.MEDUNN 10:41, 7 September 2011 (PDT)

 Scrap It - I think this page should be removed, mostly for the reason that as the OFFICIAL Wiki to Team Fortress 2, having a page like this seems rather unprofessional. Any mistakes made by a person should not be publicized like this. 16:23, 18 August 2011 (PDT)

 Oppose I'm not sure if this discussion/debate has ended, but this page is a great example of what not to place in the trivia section, builds on the trivia guidelines page by showing more genuine bad trivia, and is hilarious to read. Dragonsbrethren 18:37, 13 November 2011 (PST)

 Heck no! This is one of my favorite pages on the entire wiki. (Next to the IRC Hall of Fame, Wiki Cape, and Demopan.) Why delete it? Its not like anyone will see it unless they are purposely looking for it. Its hilarious, and completly anonymous. It's not like anyone's being singled out. I'll come out and say at least one of my edits resides on this page. --Stevoisiak 18:39, 13 November 2011 (PST)

Re-add the Marty McFly Trivia back to the Chronomancer?

Despite the less than primitive spelling and grammar, I do think that it has its worthy place on the cosmetic's page, especially seeing how relatively empty it is otherwise, especially considering a similar treatment was given to the [{Colossal Cranium]].

I don't know this is just an idea.

--NumberTumberz (talk) 05:14, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

If you can provide proof that the Trivia is factual and not speculation, it will be added back. Having an empty page is no reason to add false trivia.
GrampaSwood (talk) 12:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

The preceding discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.