Talk:Entryway/Archive

license
What about the license? GPL? CC-something? Ducon 11:02, 9 Jan 2005 (PST)


 * GFDL. See Wikicities copyrights. Angela 09:22, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * Thanks, that’s what I thought. And what about that doesn’t work? Ducon 09:30, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * It's a known bug. Special:Statistics doesn't work either. There is a list of reported bugs at . Fredrik 09:36, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * OK. Ducon 09:38, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * 56 to be specific. :) Angela 13:30, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)

Doom3 here?
Can Doom3 be mentioned here? Ducon 09:38, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * Of course. However, I think this wiki should focus on the classic games. If someone wants to get into detail I won't try to stop them, but the info should be labelled appropriately (for example, the Doom 3 monsters should have separate articles, like Doom 3 imp or Imp (Doom 3)). Fredrik 09:42, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)

whew!
well I just organized every article by category. If you want to mess around with my listings, feel free, but I gave a jumpstart for ya :D whew! --Insertwackynamehere 19:27, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)

Front page stuff

 * Should we have a "non-Id people" section on the front page? Fraggle 03:37, 11 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * A better question could be: must we have a "Id-Software employees" section? Personally, I don't think so! Plus, they should be categorized on the "People" section. I made for John Anderson an attempt of double categorization, in order to allow non specialists to find them easily. So, my suggestion is double:
 * 1) should we keep the "Id-Software employees" section?
 * 2) If yes, what about a double categorization for these men? --Jive 02:11, 1 Feb 2005 (PST)

Fraggle: RE non-id people
While categorizing everything, I created a category "People" as a sub-category of "Community" Insertwackynamehere

Well, if we're going to do it that way I think we should have a clean separation on the front page between "Id" related stuff (monster descriptions, original levels, etc. etc.) and community (megawads, etc.) Fraggle 10:01, 11 Jan 2005 (PST)

Are automap images copyrighted?

 * I was wondering if it is okay to upload automap images captured in doombuilder of the levels from doom, doom2, etc...
 * Of course, it's okay! Those maps can be seen on a bunch of sites, and the purpose is not to rip anything but to centralize informations. There is no possible spy activity, as far as the maps can be seen freely within an editor. You can make as many screenshots as you want of games and publish them (for free) everywhere, as long as you put also the origin and the copyright of the game (if there is one) if you publish it on another site unrelated to it. So, here is a site about Doom, and you don't have to recall that it's a copyrighted game. The copyright of a screenshot belongs to its creator!! Which means that we can't use a screenshot ripped to another site, because of this copyright. --Jive 03:47, 1 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * Appearing on "other sites" doesnt make it okay here. Everything on the Doom wiki is supposed to be available under th GFDL.  It is probably okay to display map images under fair use, although we should attach a tag informing the reader that it is copyrighted material. Fraggle 06:42, 1 Feb 2005 (PST)

screenshot template
It says the image is from Doom or Doom II but some screens are from Doom 3, Hexen, Heretic, or Strife.
 * Done, but you can do it yourself too. Ducon 10:03, 11 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * heh i know, I was just nervous about messing with copyright stuff Insertwackynamehere
 * I just deleted the mentions of Doom and Doom II. Ducon 10:32, 11 Jan 2005 (PST)

Master levels
Should the master levels come under "Games" as they are somewhat official? Fraggle 03:43, 12 Jan 2005 (PST)


 * Yeah, probably. -- Fredrik 03:47, 12 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * Yeah, of course! What do you mean by "somewhat"?!? The master levels were officially released on the 25th of December 1995 as a game to buy on a full box, and was distributed by GT Interactive. You can also find it as one of the 3 CDs in "The Depth of Doom Trilogy". You can also buy it as a downloadable product -- Jive 01:58, 31 Jan 2005 (PST)

Doom TNC article not working
What's the deal with Doom: The Next Chapter's page and the error? Check it at Fan-made Doom games.
 * It happens because the doom: prefix is reserved for interwiki links. I can't think of any workaround except to rename the articles. Fredrik 23:05, 20 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * I'd do that but I have no idea how to get to edit the article now that it's blocked by the error. Janizdreg 16:11, 25 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * 61. Angela 04:01, 27 Jan 2005 (PST)

Related wikis
It may be useful to add a related Wikicities section on this wiki. See Wikicities:Category:Gaming and Wikicities:Category:Computing for some which may have a similar theme to this one. Also, see Wikicities:Category:English for other English language Wikicities. Angela 23:38, 27 Jan 2005 (PST)

Divers

 * database error when searching --Insertwackynamehere 08:08, 9 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * You can't search for words less that 4 letters long. It should work otherwise. I'll try to get the error replaced with a more useful message. Angela 09:22, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)

Favicon

 * favicon: I see that all was ready for a favicon ( , but I don't see it on my browser... --Jive 04:05, 1 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * You need to upload one at Image:Favicon.ico. See Creatures:Image:Favicon.ico for a Wikicity that has done this. Angela 08:32, 1 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * it's already done, but Fredrik must decide if he wants to use it...[[Image:Doom_Wiki.ico]] or this one [[Image:Doom_Wiki_favicon.gif]] --Jive 02:15, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * The first one looks better, I think. I dont think you need Fredrik's approval. Fraggle 04:04, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * At the contrary, I think that it should be collectively decided, as far as it will become THE Doom Wiki "favicon.ico", available for everybody. I can't decide by myself that IT WILL BE now THE Doom Wiki favicon! I do a proposal, nothing else. --Jive 04:18, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * I agree. I was just pointing out that it isnt for Fredrik to decide, as he has already said he wants no more power than anyone else :-) Fraggle 04:36, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * Is it possible to do a vote here? The questions: 1) I don't want a favicon. 2) I don't care. 3) I want a favicon, but not this one. 4) I agree with this favicon. That said, it's not important more than that, but... The idea to impose my choice makes me feel bad. The other possibility could be to decide between you, the staff. I think that it will be the best, at least a more simple solution. --Jive 10:57, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * I'd suggest using this one until someone designs a different one. At that stage, you could start a contest, but some favicon is better than none in my opinion. Angela 12:42, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)

Well, I've created a new logo now (and I think everybody can agree that this one is better). I also uploaded a favicon.ico, but it doesn't seem to be working? Fredrik 14:52, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * If you don't see it working, you probably need to bypass the cache, possibly whilst on the image description page, and whilst viewing the favicon. They both work for me. Angela 15:54, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * I cleared the browser cache completely and it's indeed working now. Fredrik 16:25, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * Excellent stuff :-) Fraggle 02:31, 4 Feb 2005 (PST)

Illumination
Should the front page have an illumination? You can see this in this revision.

My personal views on this are:
 * The image itself is of a poor quality.
 * It makes the page harder to read.
 * Illuminations are more appropriate for written material, not websites.
 * Adding an illumination breaks the concept of a Wiki (the first sentence cannot be changed, as it must now start with a 'W'). We cannot change the front page to begin "This is the Doom Wiki", for example.

Fraggle 06:05, 2 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * I agree with your arguments. Fredrik 06:23, 2 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * Jive's answer to The image itself is of a poor quality
 * Huh... I used the "M" of the Doom Wiki picture which is also of a poor quality, if I all understand? Plus, I improved it under PSP7. So, my improvement was of a poor quality also, right? Grrr.... (and I could answer: who decided of the choice of the picture for the frontend?)
 * I could have done a better picture, because I have a bunch of pictures of a hight quality on my computer. But I decided to use this one to have something accorded to the one used for the frontend... --Jive 06:31, 2 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * The logo is of poor quality. Feel free to create a better one. (Note that you can't base it on others' images, as it has to be licensed with the GFDL). Fredrik 06:48, 2 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * It is based on the 'M' from the sidebar image, but it has been badly scaled up. It has also been cropped harshly from the original image; this is visible in the wobbly edges. Finally, the serifs look strange as it is uncommon to place them at the bottom of a 'W'. Fraggle 06:54, 2 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * Thank you for your good comments. Now, I better understand your point of view. A last attempt, and I will stop my proposals:Feel free to edit and to delete what needs to be... --Jive 16:27, 2 Feb 2005 (PST) [[Image:Doom_Wiki_big_icone.gif]] ==>[[Image:Doom_Wiki_big_icone_2.gif]]

People list rewrite
I did a major overhaul on the people list, removed a couple and added a big, big bunch. Here are the ones that I removed in case you honestly think they've got enough merits to be on the list with the more or less legendary folk: Abbs, Baron of Sigma, Cacodemon Leader, Cheb, Dani J666, Graeme Jackson, Hurdler, Lil' white mouse, Slyde - Janizdreg 13:31, 2 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * What?!? I disagree! Just three examples: you deleted Hurdler, but he is the coder of Doom Legacy since the begining, and fully at work on the futur C++ version... Cheb is the creator of the 3D monsters for Jdoom. Sean Gauthier (Cacodemon Leader) is the author of the great conversion "Corridor 7 TC" and a contributor of the "Fredoom" project (between many other projects). Etc... --Jive 16:44, 2 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * I agree. I think at least Hurdler and Lil' white mouse should stay there. I don't think the list should just be reserved for 'legendary' members, but should include those who have made a substantial contribution to the community. - Bloodshedder 09:13, 4 Feb 2005 (PST)

Wow!
Nice job with the main page :)

--Insertwackynamehere 18:33, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * Thanks. Fredrik 18:56, 3 Feb 2005 (PST)

The new logo is great, really. Call me crazy, but I think it should have some transparency, instead of having a plain white, non-transparent background. That way it would look better on pages in different namespaces, such as this one. - Bloodshedder 09:13, 4 Feb 2005 (PST)