Talk:Team Fortress 2

Map page names
The map page names have been changed to reflect the names given in the Table of Contents at the time. However, it seems the actual map names in the game itself may be the same as the original page names, e.g. things like ctf_2fort. On the one hand it is nice to have page names reflect the accurate map name from the game, and on the other it is nice to have properly capitalized, full words as page names. Here is where you say which is better for the guide. - najzere T 21:01, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I think the issue may be a bit deeper than just Team Fortress 2. For example, games such as Doom, Quake, UT and other similar games may be more easily referenced along the lines "E1M1"; but looks unfriendly when shown as such in the TOC.  The alternative of typing out a friendly name may make things more difficult when a player is used to searching by map name.  This never applied to games that are names Half-Life style for some reason or other, as the map names are not directly accessible to the user.
 * In either case, this should be clarified or updated in the style guide (after discussion). If this turns out to be allowed, a short description on   and   could help a bit in these custom cases. --Sigma 7 02:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with a map name like "E1M1" since the first letter is capitalized. I think the difference here is that something like ctf_2fort and 2Fort (CTF) are equally as recognizable to a reader. If you wanted to call the E1M1 map something descriptive like Green Canyon (I'm just making something up) no one would have any idea what it was. Likewise, if the map name is "e1m1" I think "E1M1" would be as recognizable.


 * In my opinion (since I forgot to actually give one), I'd rather see page names conform to the style of the wiki. The names of the pages should be descriptive insomuch as someone can understand what may be contained in them. We do this already by naming a page, perhaps "The beginning," then having a walkthrough for "Section 1," "Section 2," and "Section 3" instead of naming the page "Section 1, Section 2, Section 3" or "Sections 1 - 3." I don't feel too strongly about it though, and I think adhering to the actual in-game level or map names would be fine too. More people need to weigh in though. - najzere T 04:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * For this particular guide, I think the way it was before would be better, possibly with changes like "CTF 2fort" to get rid of the lowercase and underscore (the in-game text is in all caps anyway). I say that because by putting the gamemode as an addendum after the map name, it's possible that new players could look at "Hydro (TC)" and think there's another map named Hydro but under a different game mode. The old format avoids this. With maps like Well, where there actually are CP and CTF versions sharing the name, this isn't a problem, but with others it could be misleading. But then, this isn't a huge issue, and if there were other reasons that made the new format more feasible, then I say go for it. Bae  jung92  (talk) 04:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

The map names should be whatever the games says they are ingame, not shortforms, or internal filenames. We try to stick to whatever the designers want it to be called (or something like that). Also, if the names are commonly used and searched for, even if not shown ingame, it should be included on the page somewhere. -- Prod (Talk) 21:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC)