Difference between revisions of "Doom Wiki:Central Processing"

From DoomWiki.org

m (Thing data tables)
(Coordination)
 
(244 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
{{Central Processing archives}}
 
{{Central Processing archives}}
  
== Doomsday Wiki ==
+
== Broken links to doomedsda.us ==
 +
 
 +
We don't know the exact volume (Wayback Machine scrapes files [[Timer#External links|occasionally]]) but {{dwforumsp|id=2217790|title=anecdotal evidence}} is discouraging.  [[MAP01: Kukloppe (10 Sectors)#Current records|Here]], for example, 8 of 8 links have expired.
 +
 
 +
AIUI a complete solution requires further web development, but here are some band-aid ideas.  I will be glad to implement them if people agree, excepting #4 which might be too large:
 +
 
 +
# Temporarily invoke [[Template:Frozenlink]] within [[Template:Dsdaftp]], with hover text directing readers to the generic DSDA item in "External links"
 +
# When [[Template:Dsdauser]] and [[Template:Dsda2user]] are used together, and the first represents 100% redundant content, remove it ([[Dean Joseph (deathz0r)#External links|example]])
 +
# Hope that archive.org re-enables deeplinking when their bandwidth issues subside, and retarget certain links there ([[Going Down#External links|example]]).  While not {{dwforumsp|id=2227812|title=my primary goal}}, that feature WAS WORKING the day I tested it
 +
# Peripheral mass edits to reduce 404s:
 +
#: (a) Replace [[User:Xymph/List of templatable links|bare links to zip files]] with [[Template:Dsdaftp]], so any remediation propagates automatically
 +
#: (b) Update links of the form '''{{c|<nowiki>[http://doomedsda.us Doomed Speed Demos Archive]</nowiki>}}''' above map record tables
 +
#: (c) Remove the dummy string '''{{c|<nowiki>{{competnftp|**|**}}</nowiki>}}'''.&nbsp; Now that pwad records have rolled out, such links are vanishingly unlikely to be used
 +
#: (d) List invalid Wayback Machine links generated by [[Template:Dsda]], [[Template:Dsdauser]], and [[Template:Dsdauserp]] ([[Seongbae Park (antares031)#External links|example]])
 +
#: (e) List usages of [[Template:Archived link]] containing bare links to doomedsda.us
 +
 
 +
P.S.&nbsp; None of this was caused by the automated tasks in [[#Speedrunning record tables|the above section]], which look great in my limited review so far.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; Any feedback or additional proposals appreciated!&nbsp; Thanks, [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 16:14, 3 January 2021 (CST)
 +
 
 +
:Didn't reply sooner but have been working on this in tandem with the [[#DSDA records tables|map/WAD records]] since last year, and I think everything is sufficiently cleaned up.
 +
:# Templates [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Dsdauser|Dsdauser]] and [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Dsdauserp|Dsdauserp]] have archive links and are only left on user articles when the user has a reasonable number of demos on the old site (typically only [[FDA]] entries) that aren't on the new site, and a user profile (which the new site doesn't support). This covers item 2 above.
 +
:# [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Dsdaftp|Dsdaftp]] (with archive link) is only still in use for the [[Plutonia 2]] FDA demos. This negates the need for item 1.
 +
:# All direct file links to old/new sites [[User:Xymph/List of templatable links|have been templated]] (item 4a). This also includes the old [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=ftp%3A%2F%2F.zip&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch ftp://.zip stub] and [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=http%3A%2F%2Fcompetn.doom2.net%2F&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch competn.doom2.net links]. And also almost all Compet-n links, btw.
 +
:# Item 4b was covered by the scripted updates, no more [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=http%3A%2F%2Fdoomedsda.us&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch external links].
 +
:# 4c ditto, though there is no working query to confirm that because of the asterisks.
 +
:In my experience with archive.org links, there is no need for further effort on items 3, 4d, and 4e. Please let me know of any stragglers. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 11:08, 29 July 2022 (CDT)
  
The Doomsday Engine Wiki ({{deleted|https://dengine.net/dew/}}) is no more, replaced by a Doomsday Engine Manual (https://manual.dengine.net/). It's not just an address change, it's the entire thing rewritten from scratch with a different organization, so there's no 1-to-1 mapping between DEW articles and DEM articles. That means we have to find and update every dengine.net/dew links on our wiki. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 13:39, 13 December 2018 (CST)
+
== UAC Handbook ==
: Sounds like a plan. Make it so. :) --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:01, 15 December 2018 (CST)
 
  
'''Update:''' I believe I have fixed this.&nbsp; Please somebody check my [[Special:Log/interwiki|interwiki changes]], which affect WikiNode and the template, probably the two most important cases.
+
Hi there. I own a copy of the UAC Handbook second-hand. Not sure where it originates from, but I'm assuming a promo pack for DOOM (2016). As it is a rarity, and as it doesn't appear to be transcribed elsewhere, would it be allowed to be transcribed on this wiki (copyright infringement barring)?
  
I'm far from an expert but it seems our IRC conversation was correct: the number of existing links was small to begin with.&nbsp; Hopefully that changes someday; there are certainly people in the community who considered it the best port, and even modded for it.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 09:19, 5 April 2019 (CDT)
+
If so, I'd be more than happy to help contribute to a page if one were to be created and initially set up (I'm not entirely sure about the creation and formatting procedures). Also, whilst I don't have the means to scan the booklet, I can take reasonable-quality images if required.\
  
==2019==
+
P.S.: just found [https://www.videogameshelf.com/?p=5446 this article] which may be a good reference to link to in a potential page created on this wiki.
Happy New Year everybody! --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 00:13, 1 January 2019 (CST)
 
  
==competn==
+
--[[User:Rezalon|Rezalon]] ([[User talk:Rezalon|talk]]) 03:05, 25 May 2021 (CDT)
Hi all, I see you managed to pull script for competn demos. Very nice! :) If you need some help in any kind I'll be pleased to help and give you info how to get info. I can even provide direct sql reads to database if anyone is interested for example to show only current records per wad/map/etc. --[[User:Fx|Fx]]
 
  
: Hi, not sure why you think "pull script" applies to demos tables. To my knowledge, they were all created/updated manually over the years.<br/>Anyway, scripting XymphBot updates of that information is on my [[User:Xymph#Done .2F To-Do|to-do list]] and received [[Doom_Wiki:Central Processing/2017#Updating.2Fadding demo links|prior discussion]] already (and for [[User_talk:Eris Falling#DSDA table updates|DSADA too]]). Your kind offer of direct SQL access (or just a, say, weekly export that I can load and process locally) would ease one major part of that project considerably. But currently two non-wiki projects serve as my time sink ;-) so it will be quite a long time before I would be able to turn my attention to this project. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:05, 23 January 2019 (CST)
+
: That's very interesting and I wasn't even aware it existed prior to this. However as you deduced we can't transcribe the entire booklet due to copyright. We can however describe it thoroughly in text and provide front/back pictures. A full description would be something like [[Doom instruction manual]], or something less in-detail is also of course acceptable. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 07:26, 25 May 2021 (CDT)
  
:: I was thinking about "External links" category where you made auto linking like this: * {{competnmap|2|201|MAP01}} which is rather cool. There is incoming log file that can be parsed https://www.doom.com.hr/public/compet-n/admin/incoming.log but there can be multiple wrong uploads. In the end query to latest record is possible as I have column just for that (current_record). Anyway, if I could help you somehow, feel free to ask whatever is on your mind. --[[User:Fx|Fx]] ([[User talk:Fx|talk]]) 18:02, 23 January 2019 (CST)
+
:: Done the basics [[UAC handbook|here]]. Someone else should be able to provide categories and other stuff I'm not fully aware how of adding. --[[User:Rezalon|Rezalon]] ([[User talk:Rezalon|talk]]) 22:41, 25 May 2021 (CDT)
  
::: Ah yes, those IDs are part of XymphBot's .ini system and the links are generated by the [[User:XymphBot#demolinkBot.php|demolinkBot script]]. Thanks for the offer, once my plate is sufficiently cleared of ongoing and unfinished projects (wiki and otherwise), I intend to return to this topic. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:02, 23 January 2019 (CST)
+
== Should we replace the old Cacoward image with the one seen on Cacoward 2018? ==
  
== Influence of certain maps ==
+
While browsing Cacoward 2020 looking for "mini mod safari" to search some cool stuff from ZDoom forum, I noticed something different, it seems they replace (or remake) the gold Caco image. So, I go to the previous Cacoward and notice the new Caco was first use in 2018. So should we replace the old Caco with the new one? Because Doom Wiki still use the old one {{unsigned|Lokbustam257}}
 +
: With links, this is easier to follow: our [[:File:Cacoward.png|award image]], used in the {{tl|wad}} template, originated [https://www.doomworld.com/24years/images/cacoward.png here]; the new image is [https://static.doomworld.com/pages_media/6_cacoward.png here]. I'd say that yes, we can update to the current version. Or even, get fancy in the template and use it only from 2018 onwards. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:08, 8 June 2021 (CDT)
 +
:: With no further discussion or objection, this is done. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:03, 23 November 2021 (CST)
  
Would anyone be in favour of adding more info to certain map pages showing which other maps they have inspired as I have done for [[MAP24: Post Mortem (Hell Revealed)|MAP24: Post Mortem]]? I think it would be good addition and would prevent the map pages becoming just a bunch of walkthroughs and map stats.
+
== How to get article name changed? ==
  
Off the top of my head other ones that could be added are:
+
I'm assuming only admins can do this at the moment. If so please hmu on my talk page pls but i'll probs contact an admin [[User:Kuresed|Kuresed]] ([[User talk:Kuresed|talk]]) 02:41, 30 October 2021 (CDT)
* [[MAP12: Darkdome (Eternal Doom)|MAP12: Darkdome]] inspiring {{maplinkgen|MAP28|Ogdoad|Epic 2}}
+
: If Relic can send me a private message on Doomworld to confirm this is not someone pulling a prank, I can take care of it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:12, 30 October 2021 (CDT)
* [[MAP22: Resistance is Futile (Hell Revealed)|MAP22: Resistance is Futile]] inspiring [[MAP32: No Guts No Glory (Alien Vendetta)|MAP32: No Guts No Glory]]
 
* Maybe a page on Dead Simple clones
 
  
Let me know if there are any more examples of this. {{unsigned|Rootof2}}
+
:: Reverted, for no response in two weeks. Either this was a prank by an unknown nickname, or it is entirely unimportant to the real Relic, and the rename wasn't necessary after all. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:50, 13 November 2021 (CST)
  
: Could be interesting. Only issue is maybe making sure we don't stray too far into speculation. An example I know of right off the bat is [[MAP21: Slayer (The Plutonia Experiment)]], which is obviously a "hard type" version of MAP11 from Doom II. Then in turn, many Plutonia 2 maps expand directly on the theme of a map from Plutonia. Sometimes this is mentioned and other times it is not. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 11:19, 31 January 2019 (CST)
+
== DSDA records tables ==
  
:: I agree we should not stray too far into speculation but I think with the examples you and I have provided direct comparisons between the maps can be made. I think overall though it would provide valuable information to the reader about the history of mapmaking and how it has changed over time. --[[User:Rootof2|Rootof2]] ([[User talk:Rootof2|talk]]) 11:30, 31 January 2019 (CST)
+
Previous discussions [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing/2017#Updating.2Fadding_demo_links|here]], [[User_talk:Eris_Falling#DSDA_table_updates|here]], [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing/2020#Speedrunning_record_tables|here]] and [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing#Broken_links_to_doomedsda.us|here]]; starting a new topic in case the 2019/2020 topics ever get archived.
  
: I like this.&nbsp; Any topic benefits IMO by showing interconnections between individual events, and mappers are always saying they study the best of others' releases to learn from them.
+
After covering Compet-n last year, I (finally) have time/energy/inspiration to turn some long-desired attention to DSDA -- partly prompted by Gauss' recent heroic efforts to manually update/verify map records. The initial version of dsdaMapBot.php [[Special:Diff/279178|is]] [[Special:Diff/279181|working]], but I figured I'd bring up a few choices and caveats before plowing ahead full steam.
 +
# In the table header category column, [[Template:Compet-n runs|Compet-n tables]] use "Run", while the [[Special:Diff/279138|skeleton]] (as generated by [[DMMPST]]) used "Style". I will be using "Run" from now on.
 +
# Based on [[User:Eris_Falling/Sandbox#Speedrunning|Eris Falling's sandbox]] I'll include NoMo as a main category. Further DSDA categories NoMo 100S, Stroller and Collector go into the Miscellaneous demos section/table if present, otherwise that entire section is omitted. We could also make a different choice, e.g.: include all 12 categories in the main table. Or include the original 8 categories, and the newer 4 only if present. What do you think?
 +
# Category 'Other' is ignored, it's just not practical to do anything scripted with that. I am using the {{dwforums|106189|only available API endpoint}} to fetch the record in each category which returns one entry for Other anyway. Further API development is not expected {{dwforumsp|2217827|anytime soon}}.
 +
# This also means any manually constructed tables [[E1M1:_Hangar_(Doom)#Miscellaneous_demos|like for Doom E1M1]] cannot easily be preserved (unless all categories go into the main table and the Misc section can be left alone). Those are very rare so it's not going to be a problem anyway, as all bot-edits are viewed and manually approved anyway. And see the next point too.
 +
# For the [[Template:Compet-n|11 WADs covered]] by Compet-n, it might make sense to also include DSDA tables, but then we need to decide how to structure the (sub)sections for script-wise edits to remain practical, and the 'verified' datestamp unambiguous. So for now I won't be touching these.
 +
# The bot updates will also address some of the broken link issues [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing#Broken_links_to_doomedsda.us|listed above]], like the DSDA title, old DSDA templates/bare links, and dummy competnftp templates.
 +
# The current script already omits NM100S if the map article's Secrets section has no #-bullet entries, but auto-omitting rows in other situations -- like proposed by Eris Falling -- <s>is going to be difficult.</s> can be accomplished with per-map configuration flags in the .ini files, a variant on the one already in place for maps with secret exits. 
 +
# The API call does not return any notes, so we could chose to discard the Notes column. Not sure how much existing info we'd lose that way; Gauss recently made a point of noting [[Z1M1:_Hangar_(Knee-Deep_in_ZDoom)#Current_records|v1.2 usage for KDiZD demos]], but since that is the latest version I'd say this can safely be dropped. There may be more, and useful, examples, but I'll only encounter them once I start crunching WADs.
 +
Any input/votes/opinions? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:06, 23 November 2021 (CST)
 +
: Some thoughts, I might have more later:
 +
:* Regarding point #2, I've seen a few NoMo demos but none from the other categories (at least based on the few WADs I've gone through), so I'd support the suggestion to make NoMo a main category (I imagine with a link to [[no monsters mode]]) and leave the others in miscellaneous.
 +
:* Regarding point #8, demos can have notes attached to them (see MAP21 from {{dsda2|wad=1klinecp|title=1klinecp|linkonly=1}} as an example) but I don't know how those are added in. Also, this particular demo is in the Other category.
 +
:* As an aside, I never include records that have been flagged as dubious. If they are to be added, I feel they should be noted as such in the Notes column. [[User:Gauss|Gauss]] ([[User talk:Gauss|talk]]) 16:45, 23 November 2021 (CST)
  
: Some speculation may be unavoidable, especially for older maps where the development documentation is gone, and there wasn't this community compulsion to give everyone proper credit like there is now.&nbsp; Moreover, creative people may imitate without even realizing it, because the prior author's work affected them so much, and some of course try to keep it secret, thinking you won't download otherwise.&nbsp; I agree with Quasar that it can get out of hand (our "music inspirations" threads/sections were such a lightning rod that eventually admins just started erasing content), so you'll need to be patient and perhaps try not to attract attention&nbsp; :>&nbsp; until you have a sense of where the balance lies.&nbsp; FWIW, [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 14:13, 1 February 2019 (CST)
+
:: The NoMo link is already in, see the 1klinecp map01 example link above. There are notes on non-Other demos too {{dsda2|wad=doom|map=E1M1|title=sometimes|linkonly=1}}, but we'd have to find one that is the record to see if it gets returned in the API result before I will be able to include the correct field in the table. And the API returns "the" record for a category so I'd expect dubious ones to be skipped.
 +
:: Re. #2, I'm leaning towards including everything in the main table, the 4 new categories only if they exist. On DSDA they are all together in the categories list, no distinguishing in two groups, so why should we? And on the wiki, the Misc. demos section can then be used for highlighting manually selected demos that are not a record, like with E1M1. So by default the section would not be present, which reduces stubbiness in map articles. And it solves the scripting trickiness of updating or preserving the Misc section. The datestamp then goes below the main table in "Current records", like for Compet-n. Actually, I can also update those tables to [http://compet-n.gamers.org/index.php?page=compet-n_database&cndb=&wad_id=&category_id=9&map_id=&player_id=&sort=&order= include NoMo] if it exists. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:39, 24 November 2021 (CST)
  
==OpenGraphMeta SEO additions==
+
:: Some exploring shows that not only the IWADs but also several PWADs like [[Icarus: Alien Vanguard]], [[Plutonia 2]] and [[Hell Revealed II]] have maps with Misc.demos sections that were manually compiled (e.g. [[TAS]] entries). So the approach outlined above is necessary to permit scripted updates that leave those sections alone, and I'm moving forward on that premise.
I've added some new features to our customized OpenGraphMeta extension:
+
:: Meanwhile the script can do a few more useful things, as illustrated by the latest [[Special:Diff/279181/280095|test]] [[Special:Diff/280097|updates]].
* Articles now have schema.org-compliant JSON-LD metadata - supposed to be good for SEO.
+
::* Records can be returned by the API because {{dwforumsp|2418404|they are cross-listed}} from another category even if they are not visible in DSDA's default view. The script detects this and adds a note, so now there is a use for that column as yet. The row could be italicized like on DSDA, but that seems excessive here.
** Also ties the wiki to corresponding social media profile(s).
+
::* Players without a wiki page are linked to their DSDA demos list.
* Can define custom meta keywords on the page (will probably make a template for this and do some limited deployment eventually).
+
::* NoMo, NoMo 100S, Stroller and Collector categories are listed only if there's a record, and the first (or only) occurrence of NoMo is wikilinked.
** The default meta keywords are now defined on the wiki (message seo-default-keywords) instead of inside our LocalSettings.php file.
+
::* If the main table remains empty, 'data' in "The data was last verified..." refers to nothing, which is a bit odd. In that case, the string becomes "The (absence of) data was last verified..."
* Support for meta itemprop tags in the page header (of limited use thus far).
+
::* The "Miscellaneous demos" section is removed if it contains only empty row(s). If it contains a row now moved into the main table, it will have to be deleted manually. If preserved with other manual data, "Demos" in the header is lowercased if necessary, and direct links to the old DSDA site are replaced with {{tl|dsdaftp}} (which itself should eventually point to archive.org, I guess).
Most of the code for this stuff came from Curse, which I found out open sourced their stuff under GPL not very long ago.
+
:: I'll probably make further tweaks as I encounter new situations not yet taken into account. Any feedback so far? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:33, 26 November 2021 (CST)
--[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 03:07, 28 March 2019 (CDT)
 
  
== Category for maps with extra monsters in co-op? ==
+
::: I've looked at the linked test updates and I like what I see! I don't really have anything to add to the approach already outlined (which I agree entirely with), just a minor suggestion: list [[NM100S]] on the table as NM 100S, to better match the style for the other non-[[No monsters mode|NoMo]] categories ([[skill level]] and name of the category separated by a space).
 +
::: To clarify one doubt that has been raised, I believe dubious/cheated records are not returned by the API, as evidenced by the difference between the [https://dsdarchive.com/wads/italo?level=Map+14 default view] and the [https://dsdarchive.com/wads/italo/leaderboard?category=UV+Max&level=Map+14 leaderboard view], for example. --[[User:Andromeda|Andromeda]] ([[User talk:Andromeda|talk]]) 07:42, 27 November 2021 (CST)
  
A little while ago a category was made for maps with a deathmatch area separate from everything else. I thought maybe if it's worth having that then it might be worth having this too. Is there an easy way of finding maps that fit the criteria? - [[User:SiFi270|SiFi270]] ([[User talk:SiFi270|talk]]) 11:00, 28 March 2019 (CDT)
+
:::: Space added (in the script). It was a Compet-n convention, but I found it a tiny bit jarring in DSDA context too.<br>Yes, the [https://dsdarchive.com/api/demos/records?wad=italo&level=Map+14&category=UV+Max API call] returns the Nevanos entry. Thanks. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 07:55, 27 November 2021 (CST)
  
: If there is support for this idea, then I could write a XymphBot script to accomplish it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:52, 31 March 2019 (CDT)
+
::::: Home stretch: Heretic and Hexen support were added, as well as skipping NM 100S if there are no secrets, and everything except UV speed/pacifist if there are no monsters either. For maps with secret exits the second occurrence of the relevant categories (UV speed, NM speed, Pacifist, NoMo, Stroller, and the Heretic/Hexen skills) is not wikilinked  -- also added to the Compet-n script.<br>For the WADs added today, the demo tables have already been generated along with Heretic's [[City of the Damned|first episode]], and everything looks ready to (rock 'n) roll. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 15:32, 28 November 2021 (CST)
  
: Unlike some recent proposals, this one admits to an algorithm, so I'd support XymphBot carrying it out if resources allow.&nbsp; I can see it being relevant to co-op devotees (FWIW given I'm not one, except in Gauntlet).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 10:49, 31 March 2019 (CDT)
+
:::::: A feature I'd like to see in the future would be tables for movie runs, like on the [[Hell Revealed#Current Compet-n records|Hell Revealed]] page. Nonetheless it's nice to see this being rolled out for the level pages at long last, thanks for the effort in automating this! --[[User:Andromeda|Andromeda]] ([[User talk:Andromeda|talk]]) 09:31, 19 December 2021 (CST)
  
:: I've added the functionality to [[DMMPST]] to list the [[thing]]s where extra items occur in coop compared to single-player. This is generalized so the list(s) can be produced not just for monsters but also weapons, ammo, items, etc. The list(s) in turn will be used in a XymphBot script that modifies map articles to add the new {{cat|Levels with extra monsters in co-op|category}}.
+
← ← ←<br>
:: But before I move on to that, this raises the question whether an additional category, e.g. "Levels with extra equipment in co-op", would be worth adding too? [[MAP01: Outpost (Memento Mori II)]] has some extra monsters but also an extra shotgun. [[MAP17: No One (Memento Mori II)]] has heaps of extra monsters, weapons/ammo, health & armor.
+
The initial pass to update map pages is complete (I think), apart from the 11 WADs that already have Compet-n record tables. Here a second, DSDA section can be added as was already done manually long ago for [[MAP30: Fire and Ice (Scythe)#Speedrunning|one map]]. From the perspective of sections within the page, it would then make sense to rename "Current records" to "Current Compet-n records". However, that requires also updating the anchors in the map links on [[Aleksey Kamenev (4shockblast)#Current Compet-n records|mapper pages]]. While all this can be mostly done script-wise, it's still quite a lot of work for [[:Category:Compet-n players|118 compet-n players]]. So, any agreement/disagreement about this approach?
:: Caveat is that on maps with a separate deathmatch arena with piles of stuff, such as [[MAP07: Frustration (Memento Mori II)]], DMMPST cannot determine which items are extra specifically to coop. (The DM things table on such articles was generated from a separate, specially cropped version of the WAD/map.)
 
:: And the second question raised is whether the extra item counts should actually be listed in a table in the article? And if so, where/how? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 16:33, 9 May 2019 (CDT)
 
  
::: IMO the equipment category is good; if we're already adding the monster category, we might as well be thorough (easy for me to say of course&nbsp; :>
+
After that, adding episode/DxAll runs to WAD pages is also on my to-do list, but it may take a (long) while before I'll get around to it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:24, 22 February 2022 (CST)
::: I'm mightily undecided about tables.&nbsp; In theory, presenting more data is helpful, but based on previous thing table discussions, there seems to be a tipping point where the layout becomes cumbersome to read.&nbsp; One could imagine alternate approaches, e.g. a co-op strategy subsection following the deathmatch part, where the important pickups would be pointed out within that narrative.&nbsp; OTOH contributors aren't exactly lining up to do such writing and testing, and if they did, the table wouldn't prevent it.
 
::: This may be recentism, but my impression is that people just play with item respawning anyway, because they want to be able to choose any map with co-op starts, not just the tiny subset where co-op is integrated into the entire design.&nbsp; HTH.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 08:53, 19 May 2019 (CDT)
 
  
← ← ← ←<br/>
+
: DSDA records were added yesterday to all map pages for the 11 Compet-n WADs, and the Compet-n headers/anchors updated. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:57, 25 February 2022 (CST)
This little project is completed, except of course for map articles not yet covered by .ini files because [[User:XymphBot#Custom things mapping|help is needed]]. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:08, 10 June 2019 (CDT)
 
  
== Hell Guard editor ==
+
← ← ←<br>
Hi! I'm Shotgun2016, I just joined, and I religiously play DOOM 2016. I edited the Hell Guard page and many others before joining, and I'm looking for some feedback. I've took an oath to log in at least once a week, so I'll reply quickly to any feedback. — {{unsigned|Shotgun2016}}
+
Daily wiki activity finally slowed down enough again to resume and finish development of the movie run records script, and all WAD articles for which they exist have now been updated with the table. Please let me know if you find any errors. This applies in particular for non-standard Doom II episodes. Normally, episodes 1/2/3 contains MAPs 01-10/11-20/21-30 but sometimes a WAD defines its own (smaller) episodes, and then the DSDA episode records cover those smaller map ranges. So far I've found this to be true for [[The Alfonzone]], [[Judgment]], [[Scythe X]], and [[Valiant]]. If I missed any, please let me know as well so the script can be improved.
  
== Attribution question ==
+
One more note about map records: some maps have one secret that is "impossible to miss" (e.g. the [[MAP01: The Combine (Master Levels)#Secrets|first]] or [[MAP10: Chambers of War (Hell Revealed)#Secrets|last]] sector the player has to move through). This implies categories NM 100S and NoMo 100S are identical to NM speed and NoMo, respectively. But I don't know if DSDA considers the categories equivalent in such cases, and drops one (presumable the latter). So this is not handled automatically in the dsdaMapBot script, like it drops NM 100S if there are no secrets. This may change upon feedback. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:46, 29 July 2022 (CDT)
  
: ''Moved from [[Special:Diff/155275/195490|here]]. &mdash;&nbsp;[[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 16:33, 11 April 2019 (CDT)''
+
== Essentials of a map page? ==
  
I am a new user, and edited articles before creating an account, such as the Hell Guard. How do I identify these as being my works? {{Unsigned|Shotgun2016}}
+
I was wondering if there are any special requirements needed to be able to ''fill'' a page on a map and have it removed from the map stubs category. One of my long term goals is to populate/expand the pages of my favorite maps (especially 1994 WADs) and I was wondering what is considered necessary for a page to not be a stub. When I write for a map stub, I tend to focus on: 1. walkthroughs 2. gallery and 3. descriptions. Thanks to the monumental efforts of Getsu Fune, a good number of maps already have their secrets completed; adding the secrets plus the points I mentioned is what I, personally, would consider as a well filled page. - [[User:Endless01|Endless01]] ([[User talk:Endless01|talk]]) 03:50, 7 February 2022 (CST)
 +
:I also consider the walkthrough to be vital for "de-stubbing", not least because it puts the other parts of the article (points of interest, secrets, screenshots) in context. [[User:Gauss|Gauss]] ([[User talk:Gauss|talk]]) 04:59, 7 February 2022 (CST)
 +
:I'm using the rules enforced by the [[User:XymphBot#destubMaps.php|destubMaps]] and restubMaps bot scripts, which I run occasionally (as they take a long time). So you don't need to actively worry about forgetting to destub sometimes. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:54, 7 February 2022 (CST)
  
: You could edit the unregistered "user page" to state this, with a link to your registered name.&nbsp; At least, that's been done before (I can think of more drastic approaches requiring admin assistance, but I have no idea if they would work, or be acceptable to the community).
+
== Mapping themes ==
  
: Remember that the wiki database [[Doom Wiki:Privacy policy#Publicly Visible Information|already considers you identified by your IP address]].&nbsp; It was your choice whether to create an account first, you decided not to, and the software respects that decision for increased transparency.&nbsp; HTH.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 10:24, 12 April 2019 (CDT)
+
I was thinking about some ideas for future articles around Mapping themes. Now that we have a few, it's a great start that and, I think, helps readers tremendously, especially when the maps are categorized correctly with their specific theme. It's often a bit difficult to find ''specific'' maps, so this is a great way to organize maps.
  
Thanks. I apologize for my amateur wiki abilities; I hope to compensate for this by having a good knowledge of DOOM 2016. --Shotgun2016
+
I was thinking in the future, we could create articles for the following topics:
== latest archive.org wiki dump available ==
 
  
I do this roughly annually, this is the third dump. https://archive.org/details/wiki-doomwiki.org-20190408 -- [[User:Shambler|Shambler]] ([[User talk:Shambler|talk]]) 07:52, 15 April 2019 (CDT)
+
* Outdoors/Nature/Landscape map (I'm not sure which term is more suitable, so I put those three for the moment).
 +
* Horror map
 +
* Winter/Snow map
 +
* Desert map
 +
* Cyberpunk map
 +
* Space map
 +
* Castle/Fortress map
 +
* Industrial map
 +
* Heaven map
 +
* Surreal map
 +
* Plutonia-esque/Plutonia styled map
  
Here's  the dump for 2020: https://archive.org/details/wiki-doomwiki.org-20200703 -- [[User:Shambler|Shambler]] ([[User talk:Shambler|talk]]) 08:58, 13 August 2020 (CDT)
+
Of course, some of these could be considered subtropes. For example snowy and desert can be part of outdoors/nature/landscape, and this can also have more subtropes, like the [[Egyptian map]] being a subtrope of the Desert map, etc.
  
Here's 2021's dump. For the curious, the images (zipped) in 2017 came to 1.7G, and in 2021 they come to 3.9G. https://archive.org/details/wiki-doomwiki.org-20210705 -- [[User:Jdowland|Jdowland]] ([[User talk:Jdowland|talk]]) 04:29, 6 July 2021 (CDT)
+
This, of course, would be a long term goal with contributions from anyone here.
  
: Thanks. Yeah, new map views and screenshots galore. :) --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:34, 6 July 2021 (CDT)
+
Oh, and I was also planning to create a main article for Mapping themes, and put some concepts about it, design tips and the list of themes. That way users can search for the main article in the searchbar, and fall into the rabbit hole of mapping themes ;)
  
==FlaggedRevs configuration change proposal==
+
What do you think? What other themes could be added? - [[User:Endless01|Endless01]] ([[User talk:Endless01|talk]]) 01:07, 23 March 2022 (CDT)
Dissatisfaction with the settings for autopromotion have been expressed since go-live back in 2011 but I never really figured out what to do with it. My current suggestion: cut the page edit requirements roughly in half:
+
:The themes I was thinking of doing to round things up are:
{| {{prettytable}}
+
*E3 style (just because there are E1, E2, and E4 styles)
|-
+
*Gothic map (think Gothic DM, Crucified Dreams, and perhaps also stuff like Crusades and maybe also some of Hexen)
! Variable          !! Current !! Target
+
*Medieval map (think Heretic E1 towns and anything else that seeks to depict a medieval Europeanish aesthetic -- by opposition to Egyptian/Mesoamerica themes or the modern look of City maps)
|-
+
*Space map (Vrack & co, anything set up on a spaceship or space station)
| edits            || 250    || 125
+
Other themes that may work are:
|-
+
*Asian (or East-Asian) map. For stuff with a Chinese/Japanese/Korean aesthetic, like Japanese Valentines for example.
| totalContentEdits || 300    || 150
+
*Cyberspace map. Stuff that emulates visiting a cybernetic environment, like some of the Hacx maps but also {{ml|VR: The Internet Machine (Reelism)}} or {{ml|MAP31: Cyberwar 7734 (Valiant)}}.
|-
+
*Flesh map/Meat map (think Cyb's Freaky Colonoscopy, or {{ml|MAP20: The Mouth of Madness (Going Down)}} and its followups)
| totalCheckedEdits || 200    || 100
+
*Scaled map/shrunken player map: maps that depict gigantic versions of normally smaller objects. Like rat solitaire or some of the maps from [[Mandrill Ass Project]].
|-
+
*Plutonia style (to go along with the episode styles, and it's a popular one -- more than TNT style)
| benchmarks        || 14      || 7
+
--[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 09:55, 23 March 2022 (CDT)
|}
 
These feel like they give more than enough time, along with the other requirements like using unique edit summaries, having a max 3% rollback/revert rate, etc, to determine if somebody is trustable enough to get autochecks. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 21:53, 5 May 2019 (CDT)
 
  
: To see what all the variables mean, go [https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki-extensions-FlaggedRevs/blob/master/FlaggedRevs.php here] and search for '''{{c|wgFlaggedRevsAutopromote}}'''.
+
== Doom 3 screenshots ==
  
: ''Established'' community members should never be obstructed by this, because [[Help:User groups#Editors|any admin can confer the permissions manually]].&nbsp; I promoted three people in 2012 to address the backlog, with zero drama (though none had time to help either sadly).&nbsp; I can't judge in this case, as I don't recall any previous interaction, although one more contributor who knows disassembly can't be bad!&nbsp; :>
+
Some screenshots from Doom 3 are of a low quality and resolution. Two questions:
  
: Still thinking about whether a config change is worth the effort.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 17:45, 6 May 2019 (CDT)
+
* Is this a copyright issue or something similar, or can those screenshots be replaced with better ones?
 +
* Is it okay to use BFG Edition screenshots when the difference is minimal? (For example, in weapon pages.)  
  
:: There is no effort, it's literally 4 lines to add in our LocalSettings.php. What I need ultimately is your opinion on the reasonableness of the amount of edits required. Manual promotion is neither really "here" nor "there" with respect to changing this. If what you're saying is that you'd prefer there be ''no'' autopromotion, then we can just disable it. But then people have to be on top of determining who gets it and when at all times. Currently I don't see that has been happening. If 2012 was the last time it was used, it's definitely not. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 09:17, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
--[[User:Kyano|Kyano]] ([[User talk:Kyano|talk]]) 17:10, 10 April 2022 (CDT)
 +
: Which ones, for example? Define 'low' and 'better'?
 +
: There are [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Images|some guidelines]] re. image quality, but I see plenty 640x480 Doom 3 screens in our archive, and that is not too low, if that's what you mean. Their purpose is to illustrate encyclopedic information about games, not to show off stuff in glorious 2560x1440 or what have you. Such screens merely take up more disk space than necessary (and we're starting to run low). I'd limit replacements to something like 800x600 - 1440x900.
 +
: But yes, a screenshot can be replaced by a similar scene under the same {{tl|Doom 3 screenshot}} license. A different scene is probably better added as a new screenshot. As for the BFG Edition, I don't know. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:26, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
 +
::For example [[:File:Chainsaw_d3.jpg]] is of a very low resolution and has dark lighting, making the details of the weapon very hard to see. I have seen several images that are similar in quality. Also, I disagree that low resolution screenshots are good enough for Doom 3; because of the dark setting of the game, many things are hard to make out at low resolutions. Doom screenshots on the other hand usually have high contrast and weapons, monsters, etc are much easier to see. I am not saying that we should be uploading 4K png files for the reasons that you have mentioned, but 1080p screenshots should be acceptable.
 +
::I asked about BFG Edition because it works better on modern machines and it would make it easier for me and others to take screenshots. --[[User:Kyano|Kyano]] ([[User talk:Kyano|talk]]) 05:40, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
 +
::: Yeah, that one and similar tiny shots can be replaced. I suppose there is precedent for 1920x1080 too, as long as reasonably sized (but smaller) shots aren't replaced just for the sake of that resolution (which take up 800-1500 KB each). Lack of disk space ''will'' become a real problem eventually, given the {{dwforumsp|2222381|absence of response}} to calls for a Linux admin to help Quasar with server maintenance and (eventually) migration.
 +
::: If BFG/original edition differences are minimal, I guess such shots are acceptable, but I'd really punt this topic to someone more knowledgeable about it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:46, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
  
::: I've opposed autopromotion in the past, which IIRC was on two grounds.&nbsp; (1) User rights changed systematically without consensus or even announcement.&nbsp; I suppose that's water under the bridge, and [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2015#Openings for new admins|low overall participation]] is the most pressing issue, so having more (potential) reviewers can only help us.&nbsp; (2) The filter can be, and has been, fooled by edits that are borderline helpful but also self-aggrandizing, plagiarized, full of markup errors, etc.&nbsp; This is exacerbated by reviewers who interrupt their current task to "complete" the edit rather than reverting, thus decreasing the revert percentage.&nbsp; In hindsight, however, such situations are too rare to build process around.
+
== Question about protocol for editing a page that's about me ==
  
::: Your argument on IRC about the "fairness" of an automatic approach is persuasive &mdash; many community members are wary of subjectivity and groupthink in admin decisions &mdash; and you may have convinced me.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 22:45, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
Hi!  I used to go by a different handle and noticed that there is a page about me that uses my old handle and I would like to update it.  The problem is, someone else has also used this handle and a couple maps are included on the page that were by that other person.  The page in question is https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Nomad
  
: What is the objective of this system? Curb vandalism so it doesn't show up automatically? Have editors fact check stuff added in new edits? Have editors review the style of new edits? A mixture of the three? If it's mostly the first one, then the requirements can be cut even more. Also, someone who is not familiar with how this site operates might think that edits are rejected often and then be reluctant to contribute. --[[User:Kyano|Kyano]] ([[User talk:Kyano|talk]]) 07:24, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
I contributed to all of the projects mentioned except the two maps in A.L.T., and was not the Nomad involved in "Clan [B0S]." but otherwise the information is accurate.  As I noted, I'd like to update this with my new information (as well as potentially some new map contributions) but I don't want to just erase the other Nomad's information. What should I do in this situation?  [[User:Annunakitty|Annunakitty]] ([[User talk:Annunakitty|talk]]) 16:51, 18 May 2022 (CDT)
 +
: The correct and simple solution is a new [[Annunakitty|mapper article]] with your works. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 11:27, 19 May 2022 (CDT)
 +
:: Yo! Thanks so much!  I see you added my ASS maps too, thanks again :) [[User:Annunakitty|Annunakitty]] ([[User talk:Annunakitty|talk]]) 12:36, 19 May 2022 (CDT)
  
:: All of the above. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 09:17, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
== What about gkrellflynn? ==
  
::: 2nd is especially dangerous: it means that some edits will never be approved for fear of them being wrong. Fact checking whether Doom was made by either "id software" or "Sun Microsystems" is easy, fact checking whether a certain projectile in some obscure dehacked mod does 32 damage instead of 40 is hard. Many editors will avoid that kind of responsibility. --[[User:Kyano|Kyano]] ([[User talk:Kyano|talk]]) 16:22, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
It’s a [https://github.com/cmj/gkrellflynn/ krell] for gkrellm (a graphical side monitor) that show Flynn’s head. The more the processors work, the more Flynn’s head is injured.
 +
Where should be categorized an article about it? [[User:Ducon|Ducon]] ([[User talk:Ducon|talk]]) 13:26, 26 July 2022 (CDT)
  
:::: In practice we haven't let it become that level of an obstacle. It did at one time, with trying to verify the hashes relevant to the Xbox and PS3 versions of IWADs, but we went ahead and accepted those eventually with the understanding that they are correct as far as anybody can reasonably know, and always subject to further adjustment in the future.
+
== Playtester category ==
  
:::: I feel like this is more a debate on the merits of the extension than on my suggestion to halve the autopromotion requirements. Unfortunately with regulatory things being the way they are now (SESTA, namely) that I'd prefer by far to keep things as they are right now. Having the ability to review content before it can be broadcasted out to search engines is critical at this point. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 19:54, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
Some playtesters in the Doom community do a lot of work to ensure maps are decently balanced and playable.  While their portfolio of work may not be to the same degree as mappers, modders or source port authors, I feel that there should be a place where prominent playtesters could be added, in recognition of their contributions. {{unsigned|FUNKYGIBBON}}
 +
: You may want to sign yourself, Gibbon ;) But ill just repeat what i said on Discord. I agree, some playtesters do a lot of good and useful work in the community. But if this is your only credit, it is a little bit thin, in my opinion. --[[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 17:15, 12 August 2022 (CDT)
 +
: I think the main distinction is that mappers, artists, coders ''create'' something, while play/code-testers "merely" help them to improve/debug those creations. Their contributions are of value to projects, sure, but I feel that there is little value to the wiki in listing these contributions here too. The projects' documentation should do that, and wiki cannot and should not need to completely cover every little detail too. Notability, however hard to define, remains an important factor for the wiki.
 +
: Also, given the wide variety of completeness and formatting in said documentation, and in the release process of many projects, it is already challenging enough to track mapping/artist/etc work on the wiki. So whatever the outcome of this discussion, personally I won't be investing any effort into tracking testing work too. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:43, 19 August 2022 (CDT)
  
:: ''(edit conflict)'' We don't know why so few contribute, but yes, I'd guess delays don't help.&nbsp; New content is visible instantly on forums, social media, even Wikipedia where newbies are cannon fodder.&nbsp; Last I looked, the most common complaint is not rejection, but an edit sitting in limbo for days until someone has time to verify all content, all technical data, all style rules, proper use of templates, disambiguation, page title conventions, cross-referencing, and oh yeah it's not spam or vandalism.&nbsp; This is IMO not how the tool is meant to be used, and I plan to address that in a future proposal.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 16:26, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
== Thing data tables ==
  
::: It's been a long time since there was a review delay that long. I check the site multiple times per day when it's physically possible to do so. If you haven't seen me do it in a day or two, it's because my work is pile driving me into the ground. Darn day jobs. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 20:10, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
This is a follow-up to the [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2016#Thing data tables|original topic in 2016]]. The welcome slow pace w.r.t. new PWADs in recent weeks finally allowed me to resume development of my [[Frans P. de Vries (Xymph)#Utilities|INFO.c tools]]. The planned implementation of generating the information in wiki-ready tables (using the same templating approach as in [[DMMPST]]) now works for DMINFO, and various samples are [[User:Xymph/Thing data|collected here]]. In comparison with the existing tables you'll notice some fields don't have a value, that is because some cannot be determined from the INFO.c and related data (alone), but the tool takes creating the tables for monsters, weapons, and items as far as it'll go automatically. The remainder will have to be added manually, as usual, and thus no additions/updates will happen via a XymphBot script.
  
: TLDR: My gut feeling is that this is an improvement and should happen, but I don't have a sense of the exact number.
+
The same is planned for the Heretic one (HTINFO), and then for Hexen and Strife where plenty thing data tables don't exist yet. I'll certainly encounter some unexpected situations there (because of the variety in weapon and monster behavior/data) but bridges can be crossed one at a time.
  
: New users arrive with huge variation in how ready they are for a collaborative project.&nbsp; [[User:Goyuken]] and [[User:Shidou]] were patient, thorough, and open to discussion from day one.&nbsp; Conversely, I made about 2000 edits before I had a clue (some say I still don't).&nbsp; Applying one value across the board is a judgement call as to which type of newbie should be harmed least, and whatever choice is made, edge cases will still need individual correction.
+
Changes versus the existing tables:
 +
# The layout of the three monster tables/columns is now done with standard col templates instead of the custom table that made the whole thing more complex to edit manually.
 +
# The thing type, mobj/enum, appears-in fields are now consistently present in that order, usually first in the table. Only for weapons they are, as before, preceded by the weapon-specific data. Should the three rows go first there too?
 +
# In 2016 we discussed showing the flags field in hex and/or decimal, and it (finally) occurred to me that the simple solution is to list both on separate lines in that cell (not [[Special:PermanentLink/117478#Data|comma-separated in one line]]).
 +
# I've merged the flags list table for monsters into the main table as I didn't see a real need to keep it a separate table, and the layout is cleaner this way. [[User:Xymph/INFO.C|Description lengths]] vary, but it shouldn't be problem to have in them the right column of the main table.
 +
# The flags field/list are now included in the weapon/item tables too. Is that okay?
 +
# The weapon Sound row moved below the Sprite row, that seems a more logical order.
 +
Please share your answers/feedback on the above. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:38, 11 September 2022 (CDT)
  
: One argument for a lower number is that, in practice, harmful behavior is clear immediately rather than erupting suddenly after scores of good edits.&nbsp; A high threshold alienates more good-faith newbies and increases Editor workload without really affecting security.
+
The silence is deafening. Anyone? Anyone? Gez? ;-)
  
: One argument for a higher number is that edit count is a very blunt instrument, compared to consultation with an experienced human moderator.&nbsp; Therefore, if we use an algorithm, it should be somewhat conservative to prevent skilled trolls, hucksters, codependents, etc., who don't provoke immediate suspicion, from being promoted quickly.&nbsp; (It already happened once at 300 edits!)&nbsp; Also, permissions tend to be added to groups over time, so in effect we're evaluating users now for the more powerful "Editor" toolkit a decade hence.
+
All four tools are now ready to emit templated tables; samples of various thing types [[User:Xymph/Thing_data|are here]]. Data may be incomplete (or even incorrect) because not everything can be determined from static data tables alone. More complex monster/boss/weapon behavior will always need manual work to describe completely.
  
: Frankly I'm hoping we hear from more non-admins, who actually deal with these restrictions day after day.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 22:45, 7 May 2019 (CDT)
+
I am still undecided on how detailed the Appears-in field should become. Since Hexen's DDC expansion is a separate IWAD (as are both parts of Final Doom), the current approach is to treat the extra maps/episodes not in the original registered/commercial release for the other series as separate expansions too. This was done by saving Ultimate E4, SSR E4-5, the D64 LL and VetEd maps into separate 'IWAD' files. The result is in the [[User:Xymph/Thing_data#Appearances|appearances table]], and in the INFO tools this was easy to code.
  
== Replace /idgames/ links with Doomworld download links ==
+
For Doom in particular that means a lot of lines. So the second row there is a manual summary in fewer lines. The series sections below that table list single-player occurrences of all things in those (I)WADs, but in many cases a thing that occurs in the original release also occurs in the corresponding expansion. However, it would be the exceptions that make coding correct summaries more complex. E.g. Doom's lite goggles are not in Plutonia, so the "Doom II/Final Doom" should become "Doom II/TNT". For other game series more exceptions exist.
  
Should we consider changing all of the /idgames links to Doomworld Downloads? I assume the entire point of the Downloads is to eventually supersede /idgames entirely, and although it still seems to be a WIP it might be good to get people used to using them instead. Don't know how fast it would be to change each link though...
+
So what do you think, is it meaningful to detail occurrences in expansions separate from the original release like currently done? Or is it worth additional effort to condense the entries from the perspective of better presentation of information?
[[User:Death Egg|Death Egg]] ([[User talk:Death Egg|talk]]) 18:14, 28 June 2019 (CDT)
 
  
: Very, very, very slow.&nbsp; It's a good question though, since the legacy pages could vanish overnight (again) and we'd like to have a plan for that.
+
Also, any feedback on the included fields, their ordering, and formatting? One little change since my initial post above is the use of the {{tl|c}} template around the Flags hex/dec values. It seems excessive to do that with, for example, all sprite/sound lump names or Enum strings though.
  
: IMO we should keep the gamers.org path format because it doesn't tie us to one front end with a unique URL scheme.&nbsp; The path format allows a user to download from any mirror if DW is down, or too far away to be reliable, or the user's connectivity is so slow that any Invision site is unbrowsable.&nbsp; It's useful to show the reviews and readmes as advance information also, but not as a substitute for a {{Dwforumsp|id=1926031|title=stable file link}}.
+
This is a kind of "speak now or hold your peace forever" week, for once I start updating tables I would hate to retread and change something as yet. After the summer of 2016 this will be second time to make pass over all thing data tables, and I do intend it to be my last one. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:44, 19 September 2022 (CDT)
 +
:Well, I don't have much to say.
 +
# fine. It's not like I could think of reasons not to use the standard col templates.
 +
# Yeah, it might be more consistent? Of course there are special cases such as weapons that don't have a thing type (e.g. fists), weapons that have three thing types (Hexen ultimates), weapons that share a thing type (Heretic normal/powered up, or Strife crossbow/grenade launcher/mauler) and the Sigil is a mess. Might make sense, then, to have weapon data in a separate table, just lik monsters have a separate table for their ranged attack.
 +
# Is the decimal value useful for DEHACKED? I suppose it is, otherwise I don't see the point of having it at all, but I suppose it doesn't hurt.
 +
# That makes sense.
 +
# That is okay but see #2.
 +
# That's fine.
 +
:Finally, looking at the appearance table for Heretic, it seems the only difference between the episode 2-3 column and the episode 4-5 column is D'Sparil and his teleport spots, <s>which by the way is my prog rock band name</s> so maybe making this distinction is not very useful. But again, I guess it doesn't hurt and Doom gets to have a whopping eight columns so Heretic would look sad if it was reduced to two columns. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 16:39, 20 September 2022 (CDT)
  
: Once Linguica completes the reorganizations in progress, perhaps he would be willing (or accept code from someone who is) to implement URL redirection as was done for thread IDs.&nbsp; Speaking as a non-programmer, this ''seems'' reasonable because the rendered page for each file already includes download links with paths.&nbsp; The crosswalk exists, it only needs inversion.&nbsp; But it's his choice and if he decides {{Dwforumsp|id=1991011|title=not to be wiki-friendly}}, I would rather obfuscate reviews than create 10,000+ links which might break with the next upgrade and require manual revision (we already have [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2016#Idgames template zoo|too many of those]]).
+
:: Re. split weapon table, that thought crossed my mind some time ago, but then I forgot to explore it. Makes a lot sense now that I updated the samples. For non-projectile attacks, the right table will be shorter, but it is still worthwhile. I even added the flags for spawned Mobjs, but that may be overkill. What do you think? For more complex weapons, multiple tables in the right column will be needed; bridges to cross...
 +
:: Re. decimal flags, yes, see the original 2016 discussion, where Quasar wrote: "The original logic behind decimal flags values is because of how DeHackEd displayed them, yes. I would rather have the value in both bases".
 +
:: Earlier I made a subtle change to the frames with square brackets around the animation letters, to stand apart from the parenthesized state string. Hmm, regrouping these two rows into a separate table would probably be clearer. Will explore that.
 +
:: In the weapon data, the changed order of shots/min, velocity, damage follows a more logical action/effect flow.
 +
:: Re. appearances, for Hexen too everything except Korax, Reiver and a few keys occurs in the expansion too. So I feel it is better to summarize the rows for Doom and both H's. Only Strife has more significant diffs between VetEd and original game, so there the distinction still makes sense.
 +
:: Any further questions/remarks/suggestions? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 14:09, 21 September 2022 (CDT)
  
: If someone thinks I'm totally wrong and has their heart set on implementing this, may I at least suggest waiting until the {{Dwforums|id=102828|title=domain migration}}?&nbsp; For all we know, the URLs will change again.
+
::: Previously the weapon tables mixed weapon attributes into the ranged attack table. That has now been remedied, and the state/sprite/frame data is presented much clearer in its own table. Quite happy with how this turned out.
 +
::: So again, any (final) questions/remarks/suggestions? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 11:06, 22 September 2022 (CDT)
 +
::: The other day I chatted on [[Doomwiki (IRC channel)|#doomwiki]] with Quasar, who is also okay with the updates to the data tables. So, off I go... --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 07:13, 26 September 2022 (CDT)
  
: Thanks to Xymph (on IRC) for helping me sound less dumb.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; HTH.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 17:27, 29 June 2019 (CDT)
+
:::: And two months later, I think I got everything for the four main games (phew). There are a few loose ends, such as the player speed that is [[Player#Doom player data|elaborately defined]] for Doom, and which for the other three games I'll happily leave to a specialist. I'm also unsure how the [[maulotaur]] charge damage is calculated, so left the existing values. Otherwise, hope I didn't make any mistakes, but they can be addressed the normal wiki way when they are discovered. I'm still planning a brief afterburner for the unique Doom 64 things using relevant parts of the the [https://github.com/Erick194/DOOM64-RE DOOM64-RE codebase]. (Shouldn't that get its own wiki article, Redneckerz?). But apart from that, it's a wrap. :-) --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:49, 28 November 2022 (CST)
  
:: The "new" download system on Doomworld is extremely broken and has been suffering from database corruption for several years now. I do not see it becoming a reliable replacement for the old idgames database any time soon. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 20:09, 29 June 2019 (CDT)
+
== What does the ''type='' parameter do? ==
  
== Deletion tracking, followup ==
+
Hi there. I wanted to create a new article but i don't know enough about the syntax used for editing. Specifically, what does the ''type='' parameter do? I couldn't find any documentation about that on the Mediawiki page. I've seen type=e, type=m & type=l all used in the source code for most articles on wads in the section relating to the titlepic at the very beginning, but they seem to have no effect on the displayed page itself. {{unsigned|Gregor}}
  
I would like to implement [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2018#Deletion tracking?|this proposal]] at last.&nbsp; The plan goes beyond what we discussed IMO, so I'll post it here first:
+
: Selects the primary categorization. For example "e" equals {{cat|Episode WADs}}, "m" equals {{cat|Megawads}}. I do not know the full list of values myself as I did not design the template. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 22:00, 12 October 2022 (CDT)
  
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Review [[:Category:Talk pages without articles|the current category]] and note any threads that look "routine", but don't edit them yet.
+
: Looking deeper, the full list of values is on the page - {{tl|Wad}}, listed under "type: General type. The template will attempt to auto-categorize based on this; the default is a general PWAD without maps." --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 22:02, 12 October 2022 (CDT)
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Create category ''Deletion precedents'', a subcategory of ''Talk pages without articles'' (which describes the database situation only, irrespective of thread content) and ''Article management'' (analogous to the resolved RFCs category).
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Change [[Template:Vfd-deleted|the archiving template]] to point to the new category unless an optional parameter, '''{{c|trivial{{=}}}}''', is true.
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Update the template instructions.
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Wait 24 hours for the backlog to enter the new category.
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;When a talk page has no article, and the article has never existed, don't categorize it.&nbsp; This is a corner case, but if information is so incomplete or uncertain that even a sub-stub benefits from consultation, so be it.<ul><li>'''''EDIT:&nbsp;''''' &#x2714;&nbsp;6a. When a talk page has an article, don't categorize it.&nbsp; Also a corner case but can occur, e.g. a term with multiple meanings exhumed as a redirect.&nbsp; 17:27, 23 October 2019 (CDT)</li></ul>
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Find uncategorized talk pages of deleted articles, and tag them with '''{{c|trivial{{=}}yes}}'''.&nbsp; Note in passing any threads that do indeed appear substantive.
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Update [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Deletion|the admin procedure]] for future threads.
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Wait 24 hours for the parent category to re-populate.
 
# &#x2714;&nbsp;Perform the tweaks in #1 and #7 (i.e. separated from the mass edit), and link them here in case anyone wants to double-check.
 
  
A thread can constitute a precedent even if the article was kept or later recreated (not sure why I didn't include that earlier).&nbsp; I'll mention those cases in the documentation and categorize pages I remember, but filling in the backlog systematically is another matter; many older nominations didn't use templates at all.
+
: To clarify the distinction, ''type='' therefore is not basic MediaWiki syntax, but part of a template. {{cat|Templates}} are extensively used here to ensure consistency, avoid repetition of basic wiki code, and make our lives easier. Most templates come with explanations/instructions. In the edit window, the list of templates used in the page/section is shown below the Preview/Save buttons. When previewing an edit, any categories (explicit ones or generated by templates) are at the bottom of the page. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:06, 13 October 2022 (CDT)
  
Categorization tasks are never as simple as they appear!&nbsp; :D&nbsp; HTH.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 22:17, 22 October 2019 (CDT)
+
:: Thanks for the clarification! [[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]])
  
I had forgotten that redirects were an exception to #6a, as described [[Special:PermaLink/30335|here]].&nbsp; IIRC they are rare, but my spreadsheet treated them as full-size pages, so I'll have to do an additional pass at the end.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 17:39, 30 November 2019 (CST)
+
==Gamepedia links==
 +
Since the Hell-site bought out Gamepedia we have a ton of lingering links to formerly decent sites that still haven't been addressed. I think we should try searching/finding all these and re-evaluate which are really needed and what can be purged or replaced. While we're at it we could do the same for any remaining w:c: interwikis, which I'm starting to sour on the idea of having any of those left either (a few exceptions were made, especially for Chex Quest, previously during the migration cleanup). --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 19:09, 19 October 2022 (CDT)
  
: I haven't followed this process in detail, but in view of the "manually triaging 4000+ redirects" remark: would you need bot script assistance with that?
+
: I'm in, [[User:Xymph/List of Interwiki links|this list]] (two entries already fixed) helps a little. Scripted searches, including direct database queries ([[User:XymphBot#rmUTF8marks.php|like here]]), can do a lot more. I'd need to know which patterns to search for besides 'w:c:'. An initial script for the latter is done and produces [[User:Xymph/List of bad Interwikis|50 hits in all namespaces]]. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:48, 20 October 2022 (CDT)
: Btw, in item 7 above, instead of "=yes" you used "trivial=1" so far. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:11, 8 December 2019 (CST)
+
::I haven't seen any Gamepedia entry in the [[Special:Interwiki|Interwiki list]]. So any gamepedia link we have is not an interwiki link but a hard link. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 18:00, 20 October 2022 (CDT)
 +
:::A couple of them became redirected domain names; this was the case for the Zelda Wiki - when they moved to Gamepedia, they sold their domain name to Gamepedia. Bad move since it now belongs to the Hell-site! They're using a new one now, which is the one to which I changed it over. Not sure how to find these other than going down the list and manually looking for them. ''grimaces'' --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 14:26, 21 October 2022 (CDT)
  
:: The offer is appreciated, but no, spreadsheet functions should handle it easily.&nbsp; If any on-wiki task could ever be urgent enough that a script was required to bypass category links lag, this isn't it. :>
+
==New affiliate==
 +
I was contacted by the folks at the new Independent Fallout Wiki which is currently in register-only "early access" and will be going full public soon and they want to do the full affiliate thing like we have w/NIWA and Quake Wiki. They've already got things setup on their end to my satisfaction (Wiki Node style affiliates page with our logo and link, and footer links on community pages). I'll be adding them to our Node, main page footer (may require some retooling yet again), and setting up an interwiki. We definitely have some places that Fallout links are appropriate, with the Easter eggs in Doom '16 and the extensive Doom references in FSO (which they're also sending me some resources regarding so I can possibly add more info about that). --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 20:52, 29 October 2022 (CDT)
 +
: I happened to be around in #doomwiki two days ago when one of their (presumably) admins came looking for contact info. We had a pleasant chat and I was able to point them in your general direction. Good that they liberated themselves. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:50, 30 October 2022 (CDT)
 +
:There's also a couple of "Creation Club" content for FO4 mentioned in [[Doom references in other games]] that it would be nice to turn into links if they have dedicated articles. Just out of laziness, I'd rather have the template named <nowiki>{{fowiki}} or {{fallout}} instead of {{falloutwiki}}</nowiki>, though. :p --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 18:26, 30 October 2022 (CDT)
 +
:: I changed that, good time for it since it's not used quite yet. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 14:22, 31 October 2022 (CDT)
  
:: These steps may have been posted before actually looking up which boolean formats are supported currently.&nbsp; 0 and 1 are always safest.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 14:47, 8 December 2019 (CST)
+
==New funding method==
 +
Adding to excitement Manc dropped a new Patreon as he wants to get the finances fully in order before we move forward with server migrations/upgrades. The left-hand column has thus grown a bit with a new option. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 14:20, 31 October 2022 (CDT)
  
This should now be complete.&nbsp; As noted above, here are my non-algorithmic taggings &mdash; the new parameter is often a judgement call, so I'm collecting these for easy review.
+
==Info on monsters' states==
 +
Recently wiki pages on monsters and adjacent expanded to cover things like animation frames. However one of the most important data pieces, duration is missing. Things like how long does it take for monster to fire aren't covered at all, and neither is info on how long does every step take (Although at least that one specifies speed in units per second). Should this perhaps be specified? --[[User:ViolentBeetle|ViolentBeetle]] ([[User talk:ViolentBeetle|talk]]) 14:49, 17 November 2022 (CST)
 +
: See [[#Thing_data_tables|Thing_data_tables]], "speak now or hold your peace forever" week happened in September. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 15:07, 17 November 2022 (CST)
  
* Move threads from non-trivial to trivial category (step 1): [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Ryan_W&offset=20191207191100&limit=26&target=Ryan+W]
+
:: I wouldn't object forever to addition of more information but it would have to be universally applied consistently and proven correct beforehand. For various reasons I don't feel like attack state durations would fit here very well though because they can rely on things like action functions calling P_Random etc. If someone wanted I'd be more ready to support them creating a separate table with that kind of information. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 10:07, 18 November 2022 (CST)
* Move threads from trivial to non-trivial category (step 7): [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Ryan_W&offset=20191207201000&limit=27&target=Ryan+W] [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Ryan_W&offset=20191208002200&limit=2&target=Ryan+W] [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Ryan_W&offset=20191209045300&limit=15&target=Ryan+W]
 
* Tag non-trivial threads where the page was kept or later recreated (step 6a): [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Ryan_W&offset=20191208010000&limit=46&target=Ryan+W] [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Robocop&diff=prev&oldid=208595]
 
  
A very small number of cases were skipped because
+
::: When I wrote that I was a little miffed at process changes being proposed while 90% of the process was already done. But I also wrote it somewhat provocatively, knowing full well it isn't the "wiki way" to stifle discussion. So I'm not surprised someone kicked in on that aspect. ;-) But I was primarily referring to my last paragraph of September 19, in that I really don't want to go over several hundred pages (or dozens if just the monsters) for a third time. Also, to me the original post was too vague about exactly what info to add where in which layout. But if that would be hashed out in further discussion, I certainly wouldn't be stifling it - just perhaps staying away from it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:39, 18 November 2022 (CST)
  
* the talk posts were so vague/tentative that I couldn't tell whether a change was seriously proposed;
+
:::: Def understandable :) --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 12:42, 18 November 2022 (CST)
* only placeholder items like [[File talk:Enter the Fire Dragon Nation.jpeg|this]] were present, their fate having been decided elsewhere; or
 
* they were in user space, where it's generally more trouble than it is worth to intervene.&nbsp; (That said, the log seems to show every case to date being an obvious speedy anyway.)
 
  
I occasionally stumbled over case sensitivity and non-ASCII characters (which I don't recall being issues previously), so it's possible I didn't locate 100.00% of the threads, especially for redirects.
+
== Map links don't autogenerate map stubs ==
  
To be clear, this is a one-time job; I don't intend to chase everyone around waving the template.&nbsp; For one thing that's irritating&nbsp; :>&nbsp; and quite far from mission-critical.&nbsp; More importantly, people who close discussions are trusted to know the applicable process, even when they intend to deviate from it to serve common sense.
+
I was just wondering why the map links in the [[Knee-Deep in Knee-Deep in ZDoom]] article as of yet haven't auto-generated the usual map stubs? The article is out for a while and the wad contains quite a lot changes to the layout of the original KDiZD plus different secret locations, so separate map articles are very much justified. I'm just curious if there's a problem with data extracting process. {{unsigned|Gregor}}
  
HTH/KUTGW everyone.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 00:48, 9 December 2019 (CST)
+
: It's not a fully automated process as far as I'm aware. I'm sure it's on somebody's radar. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 22:03, 21 November 2022 (CST)
  
== Idgames template zoo, followup ==
+
: There's nothing autonomous about [[User:XymphBot|XymphBot]], not sure why people keep thinking that. It is a bot account so its many edits do not clutter Recent Changes (unless you choose to Show them), but especially map articles creation takes a lot of human preparation/time on the .ini file, map views, and the actual script runs. I [[Special:Diff/361943|backburned]] KDiKDiZD because:
 +
:# with four builds (oh, a fifth one came out since the article was created) it is evidently in a state of flux. Projects shouldn't be added to the wiki until they are '''[[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#WADs|released]]'''. Originally that meant an [[idgames archive]] release, but with so many forum-only releases picking up Cacowards in the past decade, that was loosened to include release candidates (RC) and other releases that have at least been stable for months. Creating map articles and then having to regenerate thing tables and map views upon further betas/builds/fixes/re-releases, is a pain I have had to go through way too many times already.
 +
:# Projects with custom things should have a mapping table before things tables can be generated. Yes, stable projects [[Special:Diff/362327|can get]] map articles without things tables, but that just means I'll have to revisit them later (more double work). There are [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&ns1=1&search=custom+things+mapping nearly 200 examples]. Dynamo did fantastic work on a metric ton of TSVs this year, but is currently unavailable.
 +
: So there. What you or Sena ''could'' do, is to fix the map paths on all the co-author pages, like [[Special:Diff/361888|Gez did]] in the main article. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:09, 22 November 2022 (CST)
  
I am starting to think about [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2016#Idgames template zoo|this task]].&nbsp; My first brainstorm is to leave IRC because it engenders rash promises.&nbsp; :>
+
:: I guess it's a roundabout compliment that you've made this place so efficient at covering new mods that people think it happens magically now ;) --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 08:38, 24 November 2022 (CST)
  
We currently have:
+
From this conversation I get the impression that if I want to make WAD article, I would just need to make a page for wad and eventually you will fire up a bot to auto-generate pages. Is there a specific template I should follow if I get around making one, or just copy the layout over? --[[User:ViolentBeetle|ViolentBeetle]] ([[User talk:ViolentBeetle|talk]]) 16:00, 29 November 2022 (CST)
* [[Template:Idgames]] (883 transclusions, 11 links)
 
* [[Template:Ig]] (1117 transclusions, 4 links)
 
* <s>{{Deleted|Template:Ig2}} (2 transclusions, 5 links)</s> ''Marked as deprecated in 2016.&nbsp; Functionality is a subset of Template:Idgames.&nbsp; Therefore, should be completely safe to replace.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]]''
 
:* <s>''(redirect)'' {{Deleted|Template:Idgames2}} (no transclusions, 2 links)</s> ''This one is no longer used, so it can be a normal speedy deletion.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]]''
 
* <s>{{Deleted|Template:Idftp}} (4 transclusions, 1 link)</s>
 
* <s>{{Deleted|Template:Idftp2}} (2 transclusions, 1 link)</s>
 
* <s>{{Deleted|Template:Idgamesmm}} (6 transclusions, 3 links)</s>
 
* <s>{{Deleted|Template:Igmm2}} (3 transclusions, 3 links)</s> ''Replaced all four of these per Gez's assertions below, which no one seemed to dispute.&nbsp; In passing, fixed a few 404s arising from treating DW's front end as a full mirror and appending extensions to the '''file=''' parameter, which doesn't work anymore if it ever did.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]]''
 
  
I don't have a proposal yet, but (per Death Egg's thread above) I tentatively believe that
+
: There is no template for WAD overview pages, but of course hundreds of examples exist, so pick a similar one. As noted above however, it needs to have a stable release before I'd start working on it, and, for projects with more than a few custom things, a TSV list. Also, speedmapping projects will not get individual map articles for [[Talk:PUSS I: September Under the Sea#Individual pages|several]] [[User talk:Endless01#Speedmapping series|reasons]]. And while the wiki could cover any released WAD, just because it was released doesn't mean it ''has'' to get coverage. Some measure of notability would be helpful, although that is notoriously hard to define. [[Talk:List of notable WADs|See here]] for some past discussions. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:44, 30 November 2022 (CST)
* a single template could support all features, using parameters like '''{{c|<nowiki>linkonly=</nowiki>}}'''
 
* some mass edits will be slightly too large to do manually
 
* we should excise Doomworld's ID numbers while we're here
 
:* listing affected pages is relatively easy with a maintenance category
 
:* any spidering must be heavily throttled to avoid pissing the webmaster off
 
* <u>after</u> Doomworld's domain migration, the new template could be expanded to allow a front end URL (assuming those continue) and maybe even a /newstuff parameter
 
* script development is a finite resource, so if it's not available right now, that's completely fine
 
  
Other contributors use these links far more often than I do, so hopefully they will share their thoughts here.&nbsp; Thanks, [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 23:51, 20 December 2019 (CST)
+
== Fraction? ==
  
:The first step should be to eliminate the little-used ones -- basically, everything that's not {{tl|idgames}} or {{tl|ig}}. This can be done manually, as there aren't that many of them. The <nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{Deleted|Template:idftp|idftp}}}} templates lost their reason to exist separately when the id FTP server went offline.
+
How do i type fractions? The normal way, "<nowiki>1{{frac|1|2}}</nowiki>", doesn't seem to be supported by Doomwiki, nor does <nowiki>1{{frac|1|1|2}}</nowiki> or <nowiki>1{{1/2}}</nowiki>. {{unsigned|Gregor}}
:The second step would be to normalize on either idgames or ig. Since ig is the most used, I'd suggest using it as the baseline to shave off ~230 edits. This task would have to be made by a bot. Things to watch out for are the different default link text (pagename for idgames, "Doomworld/idgames" for ig), this behavior could be made conditional on the value of the linkonly parameter (if true, assume the default is dw/ig, if false, assume pn). --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 03:29, 23 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
: Quasar listed [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2016#Idgames template zoo|some cons to IDs]], which I agree are valid concerns, but having worked with the templates and their id=/file= parameters a lot, I feel some pros of IDs were underexposed.
+
: I presume you're looking for output similar to 1½ ? I'll try looking up what those template(s) do elsewhere. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 23:35, 28 November 2022 (CST)
: Foremost is that ordering by ID results in ''approximate'' chronological order of files' initial releases. Approximate because this is not exactly by date, but when compiling Body of Work lists it does certainly help. And when a file is updated keeping the same name in the archive or with a version increment in its name, then its unchanged ID helps to keep it in order of original release &ndash; at the time of generating or verifying a works-list &ndash; while its updated timestamp does not. Conversely, a version increment in a name requires the file= parameter to be updated every time (as I do for every DMMPST release), which is less convenient than the static ID. These advantages are the reason I added the ID lookup in my [[User:XymphBot#listigf|listigf]] script rather than directly used the file paths.
 
: But I can imagine that consensus is reached on the cons outweighing the pros. So if IDs are to be replaced then it would be helpful to keep some ordering ability with the alternative &ndash; although I have no idea how.
 
: Anyway, id= parameters are (and were historically) used far more frequently than file=, and updates are thus needed on the majority of both idgames and ig template transclusions. To a script that processes both lists, if only to verify that some ''don't'' need updating, the number of entries is then the same. So I would suggest to use as template name the one that is the most general and clear. In that sense, I think idgames is a better choice than the somewhat cryptic ig (although there are the {{tl|lc}} and {{tl|wp}} precedents).
 
: Ryan, what do you mean with "a /newstuff parameter"? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 11:15, 23 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
:::: Ouch, please disregard /newstuff for now.&nbsp; Structured data it is not.&nbsp; :>
+
: I've added {{tl|fraction}} which works the same as it does on wikipedia. There's no frac shorthand redirect though because I don't see the point of adding that here as it's older/deprecated on wp. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 00:20, 29 November 2022 (CST)
 +
::Yes, that was just what i was looking for. Thank you very much! --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 00:45, 29 November 2022 (CST)
  
:::: For chronological order, {{Dwforums|id=62581|title=query the}} {{Dwforums|id=110890|title=date field}} perhaps?&nbsp; If it still works, it should be far more accurate, especially for old maps originally hosted elsewhere.
+
== When to use "MIDI rendition of" in soundtrack info ==
  
:::: Short template names arose, at least in part, to reduce keystrokes during mass edits by humans.&nbsp; Whether you agree or disagree with that goal, be aware it may be discussed again.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 14:50, 28 December 2019 (CST)
+
I just wanna check before i go any further with this. I've seen a lot of articles that clarify a midi as a "MIDI rendition of " only if the original is a proper recording. If it is from a video game soundtrack, especially from the 90s or 16-bit, then the name is just listed as is, somewhat suggesting that the game actually used midi compositions or that the WAD included mp3 or vorbis ogg recordings of these tracks in their original form. Of course, that is almost never the case, and also would be highly illegal in many cases. So is it ok to just let this bit of ambiguity stand? Or should a "MIDI rendition of" be used as a default whenever the track listed is in fact originally not a midi?
  
::For the ID parameter, I'd be tempted to keep it. I believe the template already prefers the file parameter if you give both, so the id parameter can remain as a historical note. Furthermore, ironically, the "modern" Doomworld interface uses it. For example, the [[Plutonia 2]] path for the modern interface is <https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/15550-plutonia-2/> and, not coincidentally, that same number 15550 is its id in the old interface <https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/?id=15550>. Finally, there's the whole "/idgames protocol" thing, which again is based on numbers, and Plutonia 2's URL with that protocol is unsurprinsingly <idgames://15550>.
+
As an example: in the [[Sunlust]] article, a track from {{wp|Streets of Rage 2}} was listed as a "MIDI rendition of..." but a track from {{wp|Secret of Evermore}} was listed without that info. Both are tracks from 16-bit consoles that don't use MIDI. I added "MIDI rendition of" for all tracks in question for that article just for consistency but i'm not sure whether it would not be better to rather just remove that info for all tracks instead of cluttering the text with repetition of the same phrase over and over, even though it would technically be correct to do so.  
::While we should definitely strive to put the real path in these templates, the numbers can be handy if we decide to update the output of the templates. For example, if we want to generate URLs for the "modern" Doomworld interface (perhaps as a consequence of the removal of the "legacy" interface). --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 06:50, 24 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
::: I tried it and file= indeed takes precedence if both parameters are present (in both templates), so that works for me too. Combining them in scripted updates should be pretty trivial.
+
The [[Pleiades]] article also highlighted a case where it is useful to clarify a MIDI rendition for pieces which are in the public domain and so could be included as proper recordings (depending on the recording in question of course).  
::: Regarding "different default link text" which "could be made conditional on the value of the linkonly parameter", I don't think it's that easy. The two templates produce the following output on these parameter combos:
 
{| {{prettytable}}
 
|-
 
!          !! idgames w/o linkonly !! idgames linkonly=1 !! ig
 
|-
 
| title    || title at DW/IG      || title              || title
 
|-
 
| no title || PAGENAME at DW/IG    || PAGENAME          || DW/IG
 
|}
 
::: I'm not sure idgames linkonly=1 is ever used without a title parameter though. If not then emitting DW/IG in place of PAGENAME works, or if a few times then we could resolve those manually. If the PAGENAME output of idgames linkonly=1 w/o title parameter should remain available, then to incorporate the "no title" effect of ig, an archname=1 parameter could be used. Not very elegant, but anyway... food for thought? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:52, 28 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
::: A first incarnation of the idgamesLinks.php script written yesterday (on 1356 links in 884 pages) confirmed that idgames linkonly=1 is only used ''with'' a title (parameter). So the above table can be condensed to:
+
So what's the stance on that? --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 09:22, 7 December 2022 (CST)
{| {{prettytable}}
 
|-
 
!          !! idgames w/o linkonly !! idgames linkonly=1
 
|-
 
| title    || title at DW/IG      || title
 
|-
 
| no title || PAGENAME at DW/IG    || DW/IG
 
|}
 
::: to combine both templates per Gez's original proposal. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:37, 30 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
:::: I can revise conditional logic as needed, so please don't treat it as a design constraint.&nbsp; ;>&nbsp; I'm proceeding gradually because I want full backward compatibility, and for the script's actions to be deterministic.&nbsp; It will take time to work through all cases, so I created this thread first, to ensure I didn't overlook essential ''conceptual'' points.
+
: I guess I [[Special:Diff/364163|opened]] a can of worms. :) I know little about old discussion/choices made in this area, but just noticed something that seemed inconsistent. Please also keep in mind that WAD soundtrack lists are not as tightly defined as map lists or many other parts of the wiki, not in the least because they are often not tightly defined (if at all) in the source documentation, i.e. the WAD's .txt/credits file(s).
 +
: That said, it seems to me that previously released rock/pop/film/etc. music are always MIDI renditions, unless indeed stored in MP3/Ogg formats. But for music from other, especially older, games that can vary, and I don't know how to treat those. Personally I only verify soundtrack lists to the point of having valid links and reasonable formatting, and otherwise pay little attention to them. And the Pleiades mess immediately cured me from one attempt trying anything more. ;-)
 +
: Given limited time/energy I would shy away from prefixing MIDI tracks with the 'rendition' phrase on loads of existing WAD/map pages. There are plenty areas in the wiki that should have higher priority. But I can't really address your policy/stance questions. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 11:06, 7 December 2022 (CST)
  
:::: Regarding ID numbers: When the domain moves, ideally it should take [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2015#Possibility that doomworld.com will change domains|at most one edit to unbreak all links]].&nbsp; That isn't possible with IDs alone if the legacy front end is dropped, as in 2017, so I agree with Gez about populating paths.&nbsp; "Beta" URLs must be optional for the same reason: we can't expect to know their final format until they go live, and unless Ling shares his algorithm, I would be nervous about generating them automatically as Gez suggests.
+
:: AS far as I'm concerned, MIDI rendition / MIDI sequence / whatever you wanna call it ought to be specified every time a music track like that is utilized, because then you can have cases like [[DUMP 2]] where they're using .spc files and such instead of .midi files - they are simply different compositions you can think as covers. But obviously, midi sequence is not necessary to specify if the tracks in question were originally midis to begin with. The reason there's so much inconsistency simply comes down to different authors being involved for different pages - the way of the wiki, as it goes. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 15:10, 7 December 2022 (CST)
  
:::: I'm still pondering whether link format should have one parameter or several.&nbsp; Multiple parameters would avoid conflations of logic like [[Template talk:Map#Sorting of unnamed maps, March 2018|this]], but might seem cumbersome to editors who use templates rarely.
+
::: I don't think that the "MIDI rendition of" phrase needs be used as the default way for non-MIDI soundtrack sources. As long as the usage is consistent within the article it's ok. It does make sense to include it where it helps to avoid ambiguity. In the Pleiades article the listed classical pieces ''could'' have been included as proper recordings (since they are all in the public domain), especially given that it is a mod for ZDoom, though i don't know if even ZDoom supported none-MIDI formats as early as 2000. In this case, the added "rendition" phrase helps to clarify what kind of version of the pieces you actually gonna find inside the wad.<br> What i do consider problematic is if an article is inconsistent in its usage, like the [[DBP37: AUGER;ZENITH]] article, where it lists some songs with the MIDI rendition prefix and others without, even though all except two tracks have none-MIDI sources and so would qualify for the prefix. Either use it for all or don't use for any of them. That's my stance on this. So that's the one case where i think it should be "corrected". --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 13:17, 19 April 2023 (CDT)
  
:::: FWIW, and thanks for spending some time with this.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 14:50, 28 December 2019 (CST)
+
::: Just to add to the above. Like I posted on the [[Talk:Sunlust|Talk:Sunlust page]], I think it makes more sense to assume MIDI as the default format for most Doom soundtracks and point out exceptions where the included track is not in MIDI format rather than the other way around, so as to avoid cluttering the soundtrack list with "MIDI rendition of" before every entry. There are exceptions of course where non-MIDI formats are the default instead but these are most likely GZDoom-exclusive mods and even then it's the exception rather than the norm to have the majority of the soundtrack not in the MIDI format.<br>As a compromise, one could clarify the file format by prefacing the soundtrack list with a line like "All music tracks inside the WAD/PK3 are in MIDI format (except where noted otherwise)". That way information about the file format for each track is included while avoiding any visual clutter. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 13:23, 6 August 2023 (CDT)
:::::"''That isn't possible with IDs alone if the legacy front end is dropped, as in 2017''" &ndash; I don't get that concern. Consider what happens if you visit <https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/15550-nuts/>, <https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/15550-my-neighbor-totoro/>, or <https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/15550--/>. As far as I can tell, all that's needed to make a valid URL is a number, a separator dash, and then any other character. The server looks at the number part and redirects you to the "proper" address. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 05:49, 29 December 2019 (CST)
 
:::::: That's true today, but immediately following the upgrade {{zdforums|p=984318|it was not}}.&nbsp; Only after massive backlash were the alternate links {{Zdforums|p=984696|enabled}}.&nbsp; The webmaster is on record elsewhere as not prioritizing history preservation ({{Dwforumsp|id=1767290|title=example}}), so IMO we should plan for the next relaunch moving irreversibly to new URLs.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 06:50, 29 December 2019 (CST)&nbsp; <small>Obviously I'd love to be wrong, and if you (or another with community standing) is feeling generous, you could end speculation by inquiring with the root users directly.&nbsp; For most of us that's {{Dwforumsp|id=1726094|title=not an option}} and we have to treat browser output as a black box.&nbsp; HTH.</small>
 
::::::: What was broken was the old paths, but not the id. Knowing the id of a file and having only the modern interface lets you access it reliably, as I just demonstrated. The name doesn't matter for the new interface, only the id. For the id to no longer be valid, it'd take a nuking of the Doomworld database, in which case then yeah, they would become useless, but then the idgames would have to point directly to one of the mirrors instead of any Doomworld interface. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 10:33, 29 December 2019 (CST)
 
:::::::: Definitely agree on the last part.&nbsp; Time permitting (which is for Xymph to decide of course), and after normalizing on one template, I suppose the bot could do something like:
 
::::::::* If '''{{c|id{{=}}}}''' is populated and '''{{c|file{{=}}}}''' is not, retrieve the file path from the API and add it.&nbsp; Then put the path back into the API to get the ID, and if it doesn't match, or if either call failed, set a parameter in the template to invoke a maintenance category for human review.
 
::::::::* Same thing if '''{{c|file{{=}}}}''' is populated and '''{{c|id{{=}}}}''' is not.
 
::::::::* If both are populated, put each into the API, and if both calls succeed and the returned values match, do nothing.&nbsp; Otherwise, invoke the maintenance category (because a human must compare the package contents to the article's description).
 
::::::::* Stipulating that the IDs have now been validated, follow redirects of the form '''{{c|<nowiki>https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/12345--/</nowiki>}}''' to retrieve the beta URL for each reviews page, and populate that in the template call also (another new parameter).
 
::::::::* Repeat all steps once a year in case of database hiccups, per the 2016 thread.
 
:::::::: Regarding the future, again I hope you're right about everything, as you usually are.&nbsp; The DSDA migration changed its backend and stopped assigning IDs to new mods.&nbsp; Just saying.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 17:23, 29 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
::::::::: That should be feasible, except the part "to retrieve the beta URL for each reviews page, and populate that in the template call also". How do you mean this? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:37, 30 December 2019 (CST)
+
== Linking ZDoom forum ==
  
&larr;&larr;&larr;&larr;&nbsp; At the risk of being pedantic, here's [[Special:PermaLink/204875#External links|a real example]]:
+
Is there a template for the ZDoom wiki like there is for wikipedia? --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 22:51, 15 December 2022 (CST)
: '''{{c|<nowiki>* {{idgames|file=levels/doom2/a-c/cct}}</nowiki>}}'''
+
: We have a large {{cat|Templates}} arsenal, including lots of {{cat|External link templates}} with several ZDoom-related ones. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 01:57, 16 December 2022 (CST)
From the API, the ID comes back as
 
: '''{{c|<nowiki>11694</nowiki>}}'''
 
(the documentation doesn't mention that ".zip" must be explicitly appended).&nbsp; Per Gez above, it deterministically becomes
 
: '''{{c|<nowiki>https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/11694--/</nowiki>}}'''
 
The bot pastes this into an imaginary browser location bar (it's possible in bash so I tend to assume a library exists :>&nbsp; and observes it turn into
 
: '''{{c|<nowiki>https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/11694-congestion-control/</nowiki>}}'''
 
therefore the current link is replaced by something like
 
: '''{{c|<nowiki>* {{idgames3|file=levels/doom2/a-c/cct|id=11694|xaserurl=https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/11694-congestion-control/}}</nowiki>}}'''
 
which would possibly render as
 
:* <span class="plainlinks">[http://ftp.mancubus.net/pub/idgames/levels/doom2/a-c/cct.zip Congestion Control] ([https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/11694-congestion-control/ user reviews]) at [https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/ Doomworld/idgames]</span>
 
Please don't feel you need to implement anything until a proposal is posted and undergoes [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2017#Map screenshots gallery dimensions|a comment period]].&nbsp; For all I know, people consider the new URLs too tentative or redundant or navelgazing to include.&nbsp; I am undoubtedly forgetting how to handle the first link intelligently (i.e. not sending all traffic to the same mirror).&nbsp; Also the format in "body of work" lists is different and the regular contributors might want it to remain different after this update &mdash; apologies for totally overlooking that situation in the OP.&nbsp; FWIW everyone.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 05:30, 30 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
:: No worries, wasn't planning on steamrolling ahead until a good plan has been hashed out. :)
+
== Possible For MoonMan mod to be here ==
:: Re. your example, several observations/questions:
 
::# I don't think a direct download link to any particular mirror (especially not one that died earlier this year) should be used. Even though the list of mirrors on the old interface site is outdated, at least it provides multiple working options.
 
::# The old interface site shows the file path (here '''levels/doom2/a-c/cct.zip''') as a string that can be directly copy/pasted on a file system level. Not sure how valuable that is to anyone else, but this field is invaluable to me because on my own Linux system I run a backup of gamers.org and thus an idgames mirror. I frequently use the direct path in commands like zipinfo/unzip and cat of the .txt file. On the new beta interface this Filename field is absent.
 
::# The file= path should ''not'' have .zip appended, because that redirects to the {{dwforumsp|1991011|legacy server with expired cert}}.
 
::# What's Xaser's involvement with the new beta interface?
 
::# Given that a properly constructed URL with ID already gets redirected, wouldn't it be easier to not require a parameter (like xaserurl) but just have the template produce the second link automagically? At least when manually using the template to make it less elaborate for the casual wiki contributor.
 
:: E.g. '''{{c|<nowiki>* {{idgames4|file=levels/doom2/a-c/cct|id=11694}}</nowiki>}}'''
 
:: which would possibly render as
 
::* <span class="plainlinks">[https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/levels/doom2/a-c/cct Congestion Control] ([https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/11694--/ user reviews]) at [https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/ Doomworld/idgames]</span>
 
:: For scripted updates to existing template invocations, the processed URL could indeed be included to show the official URL when hovering over, and save a redirect on the DW server. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 16:27, 30 December 2019 (CST)
 
  
::: (2) Wiki contributors have always been asked to template any external link that can be templated, so yes, that's just you.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; If those paths disappear during the domain move and we can't find an easy workaround, you will have to discuss it with the DW staff.
+
well [[User:ThL2|ThL2]] ([[User talk:ThL2|talk]])
::: (4) (5) The parameter name was mostly a joke; I endorse the "automagic" approach for improved usability.&nbsp; At the time, I interpreted statements such as {{Dwforumsp|id=1826973|title=this}} to mean Xaser had some authority over the URL changes.
 
::: (1) (3) These also sound like improvements.&nbsp; I guess if I assume without direct evidence that arbitrary changes could occur during the domain move, it's equally valid to assume there is no timetable to start the move, thus we can fairly design our templates around the current setup for now.&nbsp; (I wasn't suggesting ".zip" could be included in <s>template calls</s> idgames transclusions, as indeed it was never designed to be, only in API queries.)
 
::: HTH / KUTGW.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 12:20, 18 January 2020 (CST)
 
  
::: P.S.&nbsp; ''the processed URL could indeed be included to show the official URL when hovering over''&nbsp;&nbsp;&mdash; This seems of limited use to the reader if they can't follow the link without editing the page (but maybe with a modern mobile browser such things are easier).&nbsp; It's also technical debt if the URLs again change non-deterministically.&nbsp; But I don't feel strongly; if you really want hover text, I'll implement it.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 12:30, 18 January 2020 (CST)
+
: We're not interested in that kind of content, no. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 07:54, 15 January 2023 (CST)
  
Please see [[Special:PermaLink/211552|merge logic (first draft)]].&nbsp; It isn't finished: it only covers Quasar's initial request, without any of the refinements above.&nbsp; I continue to assume that, before the bot does anything, I'll have to revise [[Template:Idgames]] to support one or more new options without corrupting any existing links.&nbsp; Still thinking about how to do so.&nbsp; Thanks, [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 19:41, 22 January 2020 (CST)
+
If Hdoom can be allowed so can MooN Mod too? How about the Kek Doom mod {{unsigned|ThL2}}
  
:The more I think about it, the less I like the idea of merging ig and idgames. Looking at some of the examples on that first draft, worry for the size of a link-template-intensive page like [[list of notable WADs]]. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 10:51, 23 January 2020 (CST)
+
== The year of release for projects that have a year in the name ==
  
:: ig has only 16 uses there; the other links are generated by [[Template:Notable]] and thus need no markup updates.&nbsp; If such "alternate" links are intended to occupy a standard position, you could even replace most/all with optional parameters to Template:Notable (thereby changing the page's {{wp|Wikipedia:Template limits|nesting depth}}, which has a greater effect than byte count alone).
+
Hello everyone! I am now in the process of cleaning Doomworld Mega Project articles and one big thing that I see is that most of these articles have wrong year of release listed. Example: DMP2013 is listed as 2013 WAD, but its first version was actually released in early 2014. When I asked Xymph about it, he mentioned [[User talk:Eris Falling#Release year|the exception]] implemented by Eris Falling. I want to discuss this topic. I'm okay with exceptions like this, but I think that they should be part of wiki rules or listed somewhere publicly available, not on the certain user's personal talk page. So, two questions are: should we keep this exception for year-numbered projects, and if so, how can we make this exception publicly available? --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 01:52, 19 March 2023 (CDT)
 +
: I didn't reply so far because I don't really have an opinion either way. I was kind of hoping Eris Falling would chime in with more discussion how this came about, but it looks like Eris isn't regularly active, at least not here in Central Processing. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:23, 15 April 2023 (CDT)
  
:: Regarding more typical cases like [[Paul Corfiatis|this]], in a vacuum I agree that code shouldn't get longer and longer over time.&nbsp; But we aren't in a vacuum because each scripted task has a specific goal: forcing every possible upstream data set into the same uniform rendered format.&nbsp; My reading of Wikipedia's template history suggests that [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/03/23/strategy-letter-iv-bloatware-and-the-8020-myth/ the inverse 80/20 rule] is occurring: the more real events we document, the more the logic must expand to accept the associated diversity of input.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 18:43, 23 January 2020 (CST)
+
== Gaming Wiki Network ==
  
: Hi. I've only been peripherally aware of this and that's a lot of reading above so apologies if this has already been brought up. I'm in favour of keeping file IDs since as Xymph noted it's useful for approximating a chronological order of WAD releases on mapper articles and the like, however... Doomworld's beta interface was introduced in March 2017, files uploaded before then have the same ID on the beta interface as the legacy one, but that is not the case for files uploaded since. For example: [[MAYhem 2018|MAYhem Purple]], uploaded in November 2018 has ID 19233 on legacy, but 19249 on the beta. --[[User:Eris Falling|Eris Falling]] ([[User talk:Eris Falling|talk]]) 15:49, 23 January 2020 (CST)  
+
I just found out about the [https://gamingwikinetwork.org/  Gaming Wiki Network] and I figure it might be of interest here. A couple of our [[Doom Wiki:WikiNode|affiliates and network links]] are also affiliates or members over there (IFW, SEIWA). --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 07:01, 19 March 2023 (CDT)
 +
: Looks to be a worthwhile initiative. Perhaps Doom Wiki should sign up there? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:23, 15 April 2023 (CDT)
  
:: Ewwwwwwww!&nbsp; I thought that had been fixed for a year.&nbsp; It seems like a serious issue when such links are added by humans, because the bot won't know which interface they had copypasted from.&nbsp; For the scripted links, I don't suppose there's some computation to map one ID value to the other, which Ling doesn't want you to talk about for security reasons?&nbsp; :7&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 18:54, 23 January 2020 (CST)
+
== Extquote template issues ==
  
==== Bypassing front end? ====
+
When i use the extquote template '''<nowiki>{{Extquote|quote|attribution|source}}</nowiki>''' for sources outside the wiki it doesn't seem to work correctly. I insert the source as a url behind the attribution and have the ref section at the bottom of the page. But it doesn't display the source over the attribution as i understand it should do; instead it just ignores the source and renders it like no source was given. How do i use it correctly? The wiki page doesn't go into a lot of detail in what exact format the source should be given.
  
The functionality of the "id Software FTP" templates is not duplicated by the main templates, because the former hotlink to a file at a specific mirror, rather than a landing page with a selection of mirrors.&nbsp; A live example is [[The Ultimate Doom#External links|here]].
+
Also, is there a way i can keep the "Articles with unsourced quotes" category from being automatically added to an article that uses either the quote or extquote without filling the source field? I understand that this kinda defeats the point of having such a category, but it makes it look like the quote is lacking essential information, even though it is intentionally left unsourced (since the source is already provided through the author field for instance or by a separate citation). --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 19:10, 21 May 2023 (CDT)
 +
:Alright, i figured out the problem. For the source field in the [[template:extquote]], you have to use the <nowiki>{{cite web text|...}}</nowiki> template rather than <nowiki>{{cite web|...}}</nowiki> for it to function correctly, otherwise it will produce a citation within the citation, resulting in an empty ref entry. I don't know why the template behaves this way, maybe its a custom change to this wiki? But whatever. At least this way it works as intended. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 11:44, 24 May 2023 (CDT)
 +
::To answer my second question, with the quote template one can use the {{c|<nowiki>nosource=true</nowiki>}} command in place of the source field text to prevent the article from being listed under the "Articles with unsourced quotes" category. As a result, the <nowiki>{{cite web}}</nowiki> template can be used in the attribution field (following the author/source) to achieve the same effect as if placing it in the source field using the <nowiki>{{cite web text}}</nowiki>, so long as the {{c|<nowiki>nosource=true</nowiki>}} command is provided in the source field. However, the extquote template will ignore this command, so a source has to be provided to prevent the article from being categorized as an "Articles with unsourced quotes".<br>I think it would be helpful for future reference if this information about the {{c|<nowiki>nosource=true</nowiki>}} command and the idiosyncrasies in the usage of the <nowiki>{{cite web}}</nowiki> template would be included in the articles for the quote and extquote template. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 13:45, 24 May 2023 (CDT)
  
Discussion so far (including previous threads) suggests to me that the landing page is superior, despite the extra click:
+
== Problems with all-caps filter ==
* Any individual mirror can experience downtime, or may be too distant (via network topology) from the reader.
 
* The archived reviews provide additional insight about the file which would be too "chatty" for our article.
 
* For backward compatibility, the main template would have to begin supporting the hotlinking and the choice of mirror.&nbsp; The link counts above imply this would be considerable effort for a rarely used feature.&nbsp; After implementation, it would be tedious to keep all transclusions updated each time a server moved or died or lost its certificate or whatever.
 
* The FTP protocol itself is deprecated [https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/chrome-and-firefox-developers-aim-to-remove-support-for-ftp/].&nbsp; Even if some mirrors retained it, hotlinks would eventually break for readers with newer browsers, and might harm our search rank by being non-secure.
 
  
I've never used these templates, so I don't want to unilaterally dump them.&nbsp; Does anyone definitely agree or disagree?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 23:47, 18 January 2020 (CST)
+
I had to junk the soundtrack section in a WAD article that I recently created, as some of the song titles were in all caps, as were a couple of lump names from songs found in other WADs who's names I could not immediately source. The abuse filter prevented me from creating the page. I know I could always create an account, but I perfer to work semi-anonymously on this wiki for various reasons. I get why the filter exists, but in this case it seemed to be a bit overzealous. [[Special:Contributions/23.251.65.173|23.251.65.173]] 01:54, 23 May 2023 (CDT)
:IMO they can be safely dumped. As noted, they originally served to link to an archive that no longer exists. There's no reason anymore to preserve this link to the past, they can use the same {{tl|ig}} template as the others. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 09:03, 20 January 2020 (CST)
+
: Not sure why soundtracks would cause a problem unless they contain specific profanities. There is no generic restriction on all-caps words, there are plenty places with those around the wiki. Just lowercase/capitalize them and try again. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:18, 23 May 2023 (CDT)
  
==Codex entries==
+
== Guideline regarding capitalization of map names ==
So do we break down and keep these, or go through and paraphrase them all into prose about the levels? They do contain a lot of information that we are currently missing in any form so I'm certainly not just wiping out the revisions immediately. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 19:23, 12 February 2020 (CST)
 
  
: I have paraphrased or disbursed info from all of these as of this evening. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 21:47, 16 March 2020 (CDT)
+
Throughout this wiki {{wp|Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles of works#Capital_letters|title case}} is enforced for map names. So first and last word are always capitalized, as well as verbs, adverbs, adjectives, pronouns and long prepositions (five or more letters), etc; while articles and short prepositions, and coordinating conjunctions (but, and, or) are always lowercase. The exact definitions are actually pretty numerous.
 +
However, the use of title case is not mentioned anywhere in the [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines]] section as far as i can see. I think that should be added. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 16:17, 3 June 2023 (CDT)
 +
: Just saw the same topic was already opened on the [[Doom Wiki talk:Policies and guidelines]] page earlier this day. It's more appropriate to discuss this there. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 16:24, 3 June 2023 (CDT)
  
==Problem edits 20200303==
+
== Limit removing ==
The following edits are verbatim copyvio and based on leaked information from unintended early publication of the Dark Horse book, ''The Art of Doom Eternal'':
+
I recently noticed that the article for [[limit removing]] WADs does not have a hyphen in its title, as is the case for [[:Category:Limit removing source ports]], whereas there is a hyphen in the category [[:Category:Limit-removing WADs]]. Would it be a good idea to move the first two pages so they are hyphenated, or should I wait for discussion/consensus first? [[User:Sena|Sena]] ([[User talk:Sena|talk]]) 18:13, 8 June 2023 (CDT)
* Maykr: [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Maykr&curid=40325&diff=213542&oldid=212351]
+
: Better wait. Moving a category leaves a redirect that remains in use on all pages in the category, and is rendered in italics. That is rather undesirable. As for the dash/no-dash inconsistency, I don't know how what came about and just got used to it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:07, 9 June 2023 (CDT)
* Dread knight: [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Dread_knight&oldid=212234&diff=cur]
 
* Arch-vile (Doom Eternal): [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Arch-vile_(Doom_Eternal)&oldid=213516&diff=cur]
 
* Marauder: [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Marauder&type=revision&diff=213557&oldid=213272]
 
* Gladiator: [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Gladiator&oldid=211362&diff=cur]
 
* Revenant (Doom Eternal): [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Revenant_%28Doom_Eternal%29&type=revision&diff=213562&oldid=213222]
 
--[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 07:24, 3 March 2020 (CST)
 
:We can (and should) remove the offending bits. Does anything else need to be done first? --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 09:56, 3 March 2020 (CST)
 
  
==Review backlog==
+
== Heretic/Hexen capitalization issues ==
For those that are curious I'm quite busy trying to enjoy Eternal while still having duties at my job. This is why the review backlog is getting very large. Note that many of the currently unreviewed revisions contain verbatim copyvio from codex entries. All of this needs to be rewritten. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 03:17, 27 March 2020 (CDT)
 
  
== Carlos filter ==
+
I've noticed that most of the Heretic/Hexen pages don't follow the DoomWiki's capitalization rules. So here's a table with my renaming suggestions. I also showed how, IMO, these names should be used in the text of the articles.
 +
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%; width: auto||
 +
!width="192" colspan="4"|Heretic/Hexen renaming suggestions
 +
|-
 +
|'''Current name'''||'''New name'''||'''Use in text'''
 +
|-
 +
||[[Dragon Claw]]||Dragon claw||dragon claw
 +
|-
 +
||[[Elven Wand]]||Elven wand||Elven wand
 +
|-
 +
||[[Ethereal Crossbow]]||Ethereal crossbow||ethereal crossbow
 +
|-
 +
||[[Phoenix Rod]]||Phoenix rod||phoenix rod
 +
|-
 +
||[[Quartz Flask]]||Quartz flask||quartz flask
 +
|-
 +
||[[Mystic Urn]]||Mystic urn||mystic urn
 +
|-
 +
||[[Silver Shield]]||Silver shield||silver shield
 +
|-
 +
||[[Enchanted Shield]]||Enchanted shield||enchanted shield
 +
|-
 +
||[[Chaos Device]]||Chaos device||chaos device
 +
|-
 +
||[[Frost Shards]]||Frost shards||frost shards
 +
|-
 +
||[[Sapphire Wand]]||Sapphire wand||sapphire wand
 +
|-
 +
||[[Serpent Staff]]||Serpent staff||serpent staff
 +
|-
 +
||[[Banishment Device]]||Banishment device||banishment device
 +
|-
 +
||[[Dark Servant]]||Dark servant||dark servant
 +
|-
 +
||[[Dragonskin Bracers]]||Dragonskin bracers||dragonskin bracers
 +
|-
 +
||[[Falcon Shield]]||Falcon shield||falcon shield
 +
|-
 +
||[[Mesh Armor]]||Mesh armor||mesh armor
 +
|-
 +
||[[Mystic Ambit Incant]]||Mystic ambit incant||mystic ambit incant
 +
|-
 +
||[[Platinum Helm]]||Platinum helm||platinum helm
 +
|-
 +
||[[Claw Orb]]||Claw orb||claw orb
 +
|-
 +
||[[Crystal Geode]]||Crystal geode||crystal geode
 +
|-
 +
||[[Energy Orb]]||Energy orb||energy orb
 +
|-
 +
||[[Ethereal Arrows]]||Ethereal arrows||ethereal arrows
 +
|-
 +
||[[Flame Orb]]||Flame orb||flame orb
 +
|-
 +
||[[Greater Runes]]||Greater runes||greater runes
 +
|-
 +
||[[Inferno Orb]]||Inferno orb||Inferno orb
 +
|-
 +
||[[Lesser Runes]]||Lesser runes||lesser runes
 +
|-
 +
||[[Mace Spheres]]||Mace spheres||mace spheres
 +
|-
 +
||[[Pile of Mace Spheres]]||Pile of mace spheres||pile of mace spheres
 +
|-
 +
||[[Quiver of Ethereal Arrows]]||Quiver of ethereal arrows||quiver of ethereal arrows
 +
|-
 +
||[[Wand Crystal]]||Wand crystal||wand crystal
 +
|}
 +
I haven't included artifacts such as the Tome of Power or the Mace of Contrition because there are two options: all caps (like the {{wp|One Ring}}) or no caps at all (like the {{wp|philosopher's stone}}). Let's discuss! --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 11:13, 12 June 2023 (CDT)
 +
 
 +
: Decided to open a can of worms, did you? :) And the above table doesn't even include Heretic ammo, Hexen keys, etc. When starting at the wiki in 2016, I wondered a bit about the different convention but figured there would be good(?) historical reasons for it. Perhaps old-timers like Ryan W, Fraggle or Quasar can fill us in. From a convention viewpoint I could understand changing to the new names, but from a practical viewpoint I'd be ''very'' reluctant of the humongous amount of work (even with the assistance of [[User:XymphBot#pregreplGen.php|pregreplGen.php]] and DMMPST, which is not a given). So this discussion should not be rushed into a conclusion. But if the conclusion is to rename, then the current articles should be moved (not new redirects created to the existing articles) in order to preserve their edit histories at the (new) canonical paths. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:36, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
 +
 
 +
::Well, I can't stop my perfectionism, it's taking over. :( I've added Heretic ammo to the table (I worked on it prior to your message). I see some strange inconsistency in names, examples: [[Crystal vial]], [[Map scroll]] and [[:Category:Hexen ammo|Hexen ammo]]. And sorry for all the redlinks. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 03:48, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
 +
::There's another variant - presume current state as a rule and fix only the exceptions. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 04:07, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
 +
 
 +
: Timon's Axe should remain capitalized. The name implies a specific, legendary axe; so it's used as a proper noun. It does not mean "the axe of this dude called Timon that we found in his shed, he wasn't there so we nicked it." We are talking about the kind of axe here where thunder roars and lightning strikes when you lift it above your head.<br>I think the same could be argued for the Mystic Ambit Incant. That's not a generic item name like "flame orb" or "silver shield." Sounds like the name of an ancient magical scroll, full of arcane writings. The fact that it appears multiple time in the game could be chalked up to video game logic. Not sure about the Ethereal Crossbow and Phoenix Rod. Again, if we're talking about specific, legendary weapons, so not a generic name for a class of crossbows that the elves from Heretic liked to use, but rather a unique, magical crossbow given to the Chosen one in the temple of yada, yada, yada. Same could be argued for the Serpent Staff and Sapphire Wand, though i'd say the names imply a somewhat more generic nature of these items. Kind of a grey area there. But Timon's Axe is a pretty solid case in favor of capitalization.  --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 21:13, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
  
[[Special:AbuseLog/1971|These]] [[Special:AbuseLog/1972|edit]] [[Special:AbuseLog/1973|attempts]] triggered the abuse filter to block an IP address and warn another. I've reverted the block because I don't see any vandalism in these contributions. I'm not sure on which word the filter tripped. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 10:11, 30 March 2020 (CDT)
+
:: Agreed on Timon's Axe. I've removed it from table. About Incant - yes, it sounds like a special thing, but I'm not sure. About crossbow, I see an analogy here: plasma rifle is a futuristic rifle that shoots plasma, ethereal crossbow is a fantasy crossbow that shoots ethereal arrows. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 11:15, 20 June 2023 (CDT)
  
: The "ass" in Carcass appears to trigger it but it was supposed to require another profanity on the line as well. I've axed that part of the rule entirely since I can't figure out my own logic any more at this point. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 12:37, 30 March 2020 (CDT)
+
::: Ok, i checked the manuals for both Heretic and Hexen to get to the bottom of this, since according to the guidelines the author's intent when it comes to naming things should be respected wherever possible. The names of all the weapons and most items in Hexen are used as proper nouns including Serpent Staff, Sapphire Wand, Frost Shards, Mesh Armor, Platinum Helm, Dark Servant, Quartz Flask, Mystic Urn, Flechette, Chaos Device, Banishment Device, Dragonskin Bracers and Falcon Shield. "Torch", "Crystal vial" and "Mystic Ambit Incant" are the only ones that are left unclear. I'd argue that a torch is a torch is a torch..., but who knows.<br>For Heretic, Dragon Claw, Phoenix Rod and Enchanted Shield are all clearly capitalized. Curiously, the manual calls it "Elvenwand" rather than written as two separate words. The manual also lists both the Ethereal Crossbow and the Gauntlets of the Necromancer as simply "crossbow" and "gauntlets," but it is clear that the gauntlets' full name as it appears in-game is a proper noun, so again, it doesn't make sense that Ethereal Crossbow would be the one weapon with a fancy name that isn't meant to be a proper noun. The "Staff" could be the only real exception here, since it isn't capitalized in the manual and also is only weapon without a epithet like "ethereal" or "elven." It seems to be nothing more than a simple staff. Couldn't find any official documentation for Mystic Ambit Incant, Greater Runes and Lesser Runes, but i think, given the evidence, there is a clear desire from the developers of both games to have these weapons and items be seen as legendary stuff with unique names from the days of yore. So I'd say these should also be capitalized for the same reasons.<br>Finally, the ammo for the Heretic weapons is still a bit of a grey area since the second word at least, like in Claw Orb, could be seen as nothing more than a common descriptor, so it could be rendered as Claw orb instead. But if that's all it comes down to, i think we can simply leave as it is. The only things that may be worth changing would be the capitalization for "Staff" and "Torch" and changing "Elven Wand" to "Elvenwand" instead. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 20:20, 20 June 2023 (CDT)
  
==Discord==
+
:::: Well, if you check [https://archive.org/details/ultimate-doom-the-english-french-italian-spanish-thy-flesh-consumed/page/10/mode/2up HERE] the manual for the Ultimate Doom (starting at page 11), you can see that everything is also capitalized (Plasma Rifle, Ammo Box, Radiation Suit, Health Potion, Former Human Sergeant etc). Another thing is this: in Heretic if you pick up any item the message is shown in the upper part of the screen and it's written in all lowercase no matter what item you take. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 02:33, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
Hello everyone, I am CIA391, most well known from a wiki called [https://www.halopedia.org/Main_Page Halopedia]. I am here to propose [https://discordapp.com/ Discord] for use with the wiki as I believe it may be very beneficial to the progress of the Doom wiki, and be easier for new users to use and discuss stuff with other users and admins.
 
  
In my experience on Halopedia, Discord has really helped the wiki shine over the last few years. Getting in new editors, discussing projects fast, and well in general just building a community round the wiki and the franchise we love the information on. I also find its very accessible compared to IRC, users when given the chance chose Discord over the existing IRC channel we had set up.
+
Commercial Games Generally Like To Gratuitously Capitalize Everything, so we haven't always gone with author's intent for those. Otherwise we'd never write "Doom", but only "DOOM" in all-caps and it'd get old fast. Also yes, the in-game styling is affected by game fonts not having proper caps support; Doom's is all in upper-case while Heretic's and Hexen's is all in lowercase. So the way things appear in-game is not a valid indication of intent, and so the text strings from the code aren't either. That said, the Gratuitous Caps in Heretic and Hexen do kinda fit with the general Ye Olde Medieval Fantasy aesthetics, though. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 08:25, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
  
This is a few discords that have done quite well for being wiki discords just to show a few that have had benefited to the discords existing. This is merely me showing that discords based on Wikis can work. And well there is many more.
+
I personally think it would be good to standardize the capitalization in these to be more in line with Doom stuff, but that's just me. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 08:32, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
*[https://www.halopedia.org/Halopedia:Discord_Server Halopedia Discord Server Basics]
 
*[https://runescape.wiki/w/RuneScape:Off-site/Discord Runescape wiki Discord basics]
 
*[https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Minecraft_Wiki:Discord Minecraft wiki Discord basics]
 
*[https://www.mariowiki.com/MarioWiki:Discord_servers Mario wiki Discord basics]
 
  
And well I found a few folks are really finding Discord to be a great place to discuss Doom at the moment, so I just thought it would be a great chance to get a Doom Wiki Discord started. Regardless thanks for reading my suggestion.-[[User:CIA391|CIA391]] ([[User talk:CIA391|talk]]) 10:25, 1 April 2020 (CDT)
+
:: Well, we had a discussion connected to this topic over [[Doom_Wiki_talk:Policies_and_guidelines#Capitalization_of_mods.2Fmaps|here]] on the guideline's talk page a couple of weeks ago regarding map titles, where i argued for a more uniform approach across the wiki with using title case for all map names, independent from their styling in the documentation, apart from special exceptions where deemed appropriate. Quasar summed up his stance on the matter like this: <p> "''So the only rule I'm going to support is that the capitalization used is the one used by the author of the mod in its official announcements or documentation''."</p> Even though it is not the exact same topic, i do think it has relevance for this discussion as well. Because if that's the rule/guideline (from now on?), then i think the fact that the manual capitalizes these items does matter. The way Doom monster and weapon names are handled should perhaps be considered the exception to the rule rather than the rule for everything else to follow;  an example of "accepted usage." --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 09:45, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
: Hi there CIA, and thanks for stopping by the Wiki. I agree that Discord is a great tool for discussing things over. That being said, DoomWiki at the moment does not use one, nor does it use IRC - Reason being is that many users have their own time tables, being spread all over the world. The users with full editorial rights are only a bunchful, and DoomWiki tries to adher to the Wikipedia standards for a lot of the time - Mostly in terms of presenting encyclopedic knowledge. I hope this helps! -- [[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 16:23, 12 May 2020 (CET)
 
  
:: Actually, #doomwiki is actively used, albeit in fits and spurts. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:57, 12 May 2020 (CDT)
+
::: Here's Heretic's level designer Michael Raymond-Judy's opinion about the manual: ''"...some [ideas for the world, creatures and background story], sadly, was made up by the people who later wrote the manual/hint book. I say sadly because they pretty much made things up as they wanted without asking anyone here, and a lot of what they made up just didn't fit with the "reality" we had created behind the game. Like the second Highlander movie, I just try to pretend it never happened..."'' [https://archive.is/pfWpW#selection-307.14-307.21 (LINK)] It looks like the manual was made by some outside people not connected to developers. Manual itself states in credits: "Package/manual design: The Richards Group/R&D". --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 10:05, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
  
::: Perhaps the fact this is news for one of our recent heavy contributors explains why [[Doomwiki (IRC channel)|#doomwiki]] is so quiet…
+
: Just to weigh in on this from an old-timer perspective many of the Heretic and Hexen items were considered legendary or mystical in nature given the fantasy bent of the series so we never made a call on which should be capped or not and just kept them all that way. Reminder that the current lowercase consensus for Doom evolved over time and that early on there was pure chaos with no consistent styling. I'd suspect at one point caps for Doom items were more common than lowercase but I never ran statistics on that. I have no real issue with this changing now so long as the items that are clearly legendary items remain capped, as that is in fact a style rule in English writing in general and not specific to this wiki. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 23:00, 24 September 2023 (CDT)
::: FWIW, I'd probably, reluctantly, connect to a Doomwiki Discord if someone created one. But I'm a grumpy old person and I'm quite happy with IRC.
 
::: — [[User:Shambler|Shambler]] ([[User talk:Shambler|talk]]) 09:02, 13 August 2020 (CDT)
 
 
:Personally I never liked things like IRC or AIM, and Discord just seems to me to be the same thing but as a proprietary format hosted on a corporation's own servers. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 19:08, 12 May 2020 (CDT)
 
  
: Hi CIA391, welcome to the site.
+
=== Restart ===
 +
I've thought a lot and want to restart this thread. I've gained some information from last time, and am also better prepared in terms of the rationale behind the renamings.
  
: The idea that Discord needs promotion seems odd to me.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; Hasn't it been the fastest-growing outlet for several years?&nbsp; Nowadays, I would think anyone seeking a fan community would look for social media feeds first, before a forum or wiki.
+
'''Heretic weapons and ammo:'''
  
: Regarding Doom specifically, I mostly agree with Redneckerz and Gez.&nbsp; The wiki is not ''primarily'' about building a community &mdash; we had preexisting locations for that, such as doomworld.com and iddqd.ru &mdash; it is about the final published product, about research and accuracy.&nbsp; '''Responding to anything in real time is usually harmful''', a form of {{wp|technical debt}}.&nbsp; It's always better to think and investigate before posting, sometimes extensively, to ensure another user doesn't have to repeat the work later.&nbsp; As said above, some wiki editors use IRC regularly, but many do not, and it doesn't seem to hinder anything (excepting rare cases where some urgency can exist, e.g. server downtime, harassment complaints).
+
I think that all articles about weapons and ammo from Heretic should be renamed and written in lowercase letters, i.e. [[dragon claw]], [[ethereal crossbow]], [[firemace]], [[phoenix rod]], [[staff]], [[wand crystal]], [[crystal geode]], [[ethereal arrows]], [[quiver of ethereal arrows]], [[claw orb]], [[energy orb]], [[lesser runes]], [[greater runes]], [[flame orb]], [[mace spheres]], [[pile of mace spheres]]. My rationale: none of these weapons are considered special, they can be found everywhere. Phoenix rod is simply shaped like a phoenix, and the same goes for dragon claw. Ethereal arrows are just a kind of fantasy ammo, similar to Doom's sci-fi plasma cells. None of these weapons can be considered unique, with the exception of the firemace (because it is rare), but it has a very generic and uninteresting name.
  
: More broadly, many active doomwiki.org contributors are also free content adherents.&nbsp; Some don't even use Windows.&nbsp; The accessibility you mention is arguably a bad sign, because it means there's lots of money for software development, and where do you suppose that comes from?
+
I see four possible exceptions:
 +
* [[Hellstaff]] - must be capitalized because it contains the word "Hell";
 +
* [[Inferno orb]] - same goes here, "Inferno" should be written with a capital letter (but "orb" should not);
 +
* [[Elven wand]] - "Elven" should be capitalized because it is a race (but "wand" should not);
 +
* [[Gauntlets of the Necromancer]] - sounds like something special (typical fantasy ''X of the Y'' thing), although they can be found at almost any level. I'm not sure about this one, but inclined to not capitalize.
  
: All that said, I have heard of successful Discord projects within the Doom community (Joy of Mapping, DSDA3).&nbsp; For instance, gameplay content and walkthroughs for our newer games still have a lot of holes, and I suspect those players tend to use the wiki less often than our retrogamers do.&nbsp; If someone wanted to coordinate that content addition, it would be a substantial tangible benefit to doomwiki.org.&nbsp; Just don't expect to receive any sort of linking or other formal approval in return, for the reasons given above.&nbsp; HTH. [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 13:32, 5 June 2020 (CDT)
+
'''Heretic items:'''
  
== ZDoomGL (v1)? ZDoomGL (Kokak)? - Seperating the two versions ==
+
These can be divided into ordinary items and artifacts. The former ones should all be renamed, and the latter ones should continue to be capitalized. My rationale is the following: by "artifact" I mean everything that was written with a special "addition" in the manual, apparently indicating the person who created/used them (for example ''Darchala's'' Chaos Device). These additions make items special (but, as I wrote in the previous discussion, some of the information in the manual was made up by its authors, who did not consult with folks at Raven).
 +
* Rename or write in lowercase: <nowiki>[[bag of holding]]</nowiki>, [[crystal vial]] (renamed in 2005), [[enchanted shield]], [[map scroll]], [[mystic urn]], [[quartz flask]], [[shadowsphere]], [[silver shield]], [[torch]].
 +
* Keep: [[Chaos Device]], [[Morph Ovum]], [[Ring of Invincibility]], [[Timebomb of the Ancients]], [[Tome of Power]], [[Wings of Wrath]].
  
I am about to overhaul the [[ZDoomGL (v1)]] page before starting on Timmie's version. Because that will involve creating a new page, i like to ensure which terminology is considered ''acceptable'' Therefore i present this in a general page first, seeking other editor's opinions.
+
'''Hexen weapons:'''
  
A talk page was created yesterday here - [[Talk:ZDoomGL (v1)|ZDoomGL talk]] after i changed the ZDoomGL page to ZDoomGL (v1). Despite doubts, i pushed this forward without prior discussion, resulting in the above page discussion. I should have made a Talk page first.
+
This is a special case because many of Hexen's weapons can be considered special. List:
 +
* [[spiked gauntlets]] - article was actually [[Special:Diff/163047|renamed]] by Ryan W on March 18, 2018. And I completely agree - these are just gauntlets;
 +
* [[sapphire wand]] and [[serpent staff]] - for me they're closer to Heretic's ordinary weapons (like Elven wand) than to something special. Rename;
 +
* spells are IMHO nothing special and should be renamed/written in lowercase: [[frost shards]], [[arc of death]] ([[Special:Diff/112363|renamed]] by Quasar on April 18, 2016), [[firestorm]];
 +
* [[Hammer of Retribution]], [[Mace of Contrition]] and [[Timon's Axe]] sound special and should be kept;
 +
* ultimate weapons are obviously unique and should be kept: [[Bloodscourge]], [[Quietus]], [[Wraithverge]].
  
My intent was (and is) on providing clarity through the introduction of the (v1) (in brackets) and (v2) monikers, despite such not being historically 100% accurate See the Talk page for more info as to why i prefer (v1) and (v2).
+
'''Hexen items:'''
 +
* ordinary items that should be renamed/written lowercase (pretty obvious cases): <nowiki>[[amulet of warding]]</nowiki>, [[dragonskin bracers]], [[falcon shield]], [[fléchette]], [[mesh armor]], [[platinum helm]];
 +
* not-so-ordinary items but that IMO should be renamed/written lowercase: <nowiki>[[boots of speed]]</nowiki>, <nowiki>[[dark servant]]</nowiki>, <nowiki>[[disc of repulsion]]</nowiki>, <nowiki>[[krater of might]]</nowiki> (same as mystic urn);
 +
* artifacts that should be capitalized: [[Banishment Device]] (same as Chaos Device), [[Icon of the Defender]] (same as Ring of Invincibility), [[Mystic Ambit Incant]], [[Porkalator]] (same as Morph Ovum).
  
'''Summary:'''
+
Please share your thoughts! --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 12:46, 5 December 2023 (CST)
* I derived at the given name by the following: Kokak's version targets ZDoom 1.x, Timmies ZDoom 2.x. So naturally, v1 would be a good reference (For us) that its based on ZDoom 1.x. It should be short as to not detract too much from the name, and functional - so v1 to me was the natural deduction. To make it more distinct, i felt the brackets made the most sense there. I felt this was the most elegant way of labeling them with the least amount of harm done.
+
: Just caught up with this, all seems fine and in good order to me, but perhaps some people who are more directly involved with Heretic/Hexen work on the wiki (if any) can weigh in? From me though, the only words are, "yes please". --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 10:03, 16 December 2023 (CST)
* [[User:Gez|Gez]] suggested to differentiate the two as ZDoomGL (Kokak) and ZDoomGL (Timmie).
 
* One compromise would be to reference it as ''ZDoomGL (Kokak) | ZDoomGL'' so that it still shows as ZDoomGL in the text. On the mainpage, it would obviously be ZDoomGL (Kokak).
 
  
If this has to be discussed in the Talk page instead, then i apologize for bringing it here.  
+
: I also meant to follow up on this when it was quiet enough. While I kinda like Ye Olde Medieval Fantasy aesthetics for names, as a wikipedian I understand the desire for consistent styling. And from that angle, I think this new scheme and rationale are more solid than the first proposal. So while I'm not strongly in favor (because of the amount of work in updating everything), I'm not against it on principle either. The only change I'd make is to lowercase "inferno orb": as the large ammo type its connection to the meaning of "{{wp|Inferno|large uncontrolled fire}}" is much stronger than to a Hell-ish location. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:36, 16 December 2023 (CST)
  
Open to hear opinions. -- [[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 11:10, 12 May 2020 (CET)
+
:: I largely agree with Nockson's list above, but also share Xymph's view that "inferno orb" should be lowercase. That item is not unique. [[User:Gauss|Gauss]] ([[User talk:Gauss|talk]]) 07:09, 17 December 2023 (CST)
  
== Speedrunning record tables ==
+
:: I think these are mostly fine too, but I do disagree about the styling of Bag of Holding and the items "Boots of Speed", "Disc of Repulsion", and "Krater of Might". In my opinion these all imply unique and special items that are correctly capitalized. It would be something different entirely if they were called "speed boots", "repulsion disc", and "mighty krater". That would describe generic items. But written in the form "X of Y" emphasizes their unique nature. It's not just any krater we're talking about. It's the "Krater of Might". Same with the "Boots of Speed". One can imagine another, similar item being called "Boots of Power" (thunderclap!). But whether the attribute is speed, might, or power shouldn't matter. What matters is the implied legendary nature of the items.<br>And under the same rationale, the "Bag of Holding" should also remain capitalized. Yes, in the end it's just a medieval-sounding name for backpack, but the styling does imply unique, legendary status. So the same rule should apply, just like for Timebomb of the Ancients, Ring of Invincibility, Tome of Power, Krater of Might, Disc of Repulsion, and Boots of Speed. Talk about consistency. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 16:46, 16 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::: I have to disagree about the discs. Sometimes you can find several disks placed in a row at the same time, which hardly makes them unique. Krater and Boots seem pretty rare, so I OK with keeping them, but bag IMO should not be capitalized. It's just a bag with supplies, nothing special here, simply a backpack reskin. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 03:38, 17 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::: I don't think its useful to argue about whether or not an item is special or generic based on how frequently it can be found in the game, since all items can be found more than once. This is about consistency first and foremost. In my opinion, basically all items and weapons that use the "X of Y" form should remain capitalized, excluding any generic descriptor like "quiver of ethereal arrows" and "pile of mace spheres". But I don't see why the name Bag of Holding or Amulet of Warding implies less uniqueness than a Krater of Might or a Tome of Power. These are all deliberately formal stylings of the names for these items, and I think that's what matters, not the specific function of the item they describe.<p></p>Sure, the Bag of Holding is just a fancy name for a backpack, and they could have just named it "supply bag", in which case no-one would argue about it being written in lowercase. But it was written in this overly formal style, obviously a bit tongue-in-cheek, and part of the joke is that it now implies this legendary item, even though it's just a bag with some supplies. And the fact that the Disc of Repulsion can be found all over the place, can simply be put down to video game logic, where good game mechanics and balancing is far more important than logically consistent world building and storylines. Again, IMO it's more about the form the name is written in and the nature of the item thus implied than the function or the availability of the item itself. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 04:34, 17 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::::: The legendary angle appeals to me too. (And Nockson hinted at it for Gauntlets of the Necromancer above as well.) It seems to me we're in consensus about ammo/armor/health objects going all lowercase, and only are debating whether some special items get changed. Perhaps it helps to see all of them together in the new style, so I [[Special:Diff/430226|updated]] the [[DMMPST/All classes and things|DMMPST tables]]. I like this (intermediate?) result for the most part, just am not sure about lowercasing dark servant and dragonskin bracers, as those seem just as legendary in nature as the "X of Y" objects. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:41, 18 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::::: Looking good! Though I must admit consistency is definitely a problem. Now I agree with Gregor. Looks like we should capitalize anything that has ''X of the Y'' or ''X of Y'' construction. And I'm still not sure about the Arc of death spell. I want it to remain lowercase but consistency... --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 04:30, 19 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::::::: I agree with all these except for bag of holding, I don't think holding counts as anything legendary, it's just another way of writing holding bag, I think. It is a minor thing either way. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 05:07, 19 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::::::: I still don't quite see why "Bag of Holding" cannot be considered a legendary item. Again, it's the naming formula more than the pure function that implies its legendary status. Yes, it's another way of writing holding bag, but the two terms are not identical in meaning, because they imply a difference in nature of the item; and the developer deliberately chose to go with "Bag of Holding" because it gives the item a more legendary feel. If we are in agreement that the legendary nature of an item determines whether or not it should be capitalized, and that the "X of Y" form does imply such a nature, then "Bag of Holding" as well as "Amulet of Warding" should both be capitalized. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 07:26, 19 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::::::::: Lowercasing bag of holding just like all other ammo items is fine with me, keeping it capitalized as a legendary item too. But can legendary status be inferred without the "X of Y" construct too? Dragonskin Bracers could be viewed as Bracers of Dragonskin, not just any average material but Dragonskin(!), and unlike the other Hexen armor items it isn't used immediately but carried in the inventory. Dark Servant is so special it summons one of the tallest, heaviest monsters in the game. If Bag of Holding and Amulet of Warding are legendary because of naming convention, then I'd say the other two are too due to the special power they grant the player. In other words, most items in class 5 then remain capitalized, except map scroll, quartz flask, and mystic urn. And if the inventory aspect is taken into account, at least the latter could remain capitalized too as it is fairly rare and...<drum roll> Mystic(!). Okay, I guess this isn't making things much easier... should we take a vote on the items of contention? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 15:16, 19 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::::::::: I would prefer we figured this out logically instead of just basing it on whatever gets more votes from among the four or five of us. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 15:26, 19 December 2023 (CST)
  
Previous discussions [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing/2017#Updating.2Fadding_demo_links|here]], [[User_talk:Eris_Falling#DSDA_table_updates|here]] and [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing#competn|here]]; starting a new topic in case the 2019 topics ever get archived.
+
:::::::::: I am of the opinion, as I stated above, that the form of the name is the decisive mark, not the function of the item. Not because I think that names are more important than the function, but because it seems to me that that is what the developers wanted to imply by making use of the pseudo epic-sounding "X of Y" form for certain items. So it's not that a Bag of Holding is more special or powerful, but that the name, rather than being a plain descriptor of its nature, has this epic, if somewhat tongue-in-cheek, tone to it that IMO warrants capitalization. Having said that, a Dark Servant being capitalized makes sense too, if this term is seen as a proper noun rather than a generic one. Dragonskin bracers on the other hand seem generic to me. They ''could have'' been styled as "Bracers of the Skin of the Dragon", but they weren't. Just like a holding bag would have essential meant the same thing as "Bag of Holding", but it would have lacked the implied high-fantasy epic tone of a "Bag of Holding" ("I bestow upon thee this Bag of Holding! May it lighten your burden, brave youth, as thou ventureth forth into darkness on your path of valor, etc."). --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 16:06, 19 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::::::::::: Alright. That leaves Arc of death vs Arc of Death - the former is how it's styled in the article. But in use it's a spell and the arc is just the effect, not a physical object like the Mace/Hammer. So it could just as well be fully lowercased, like frost shards and firestorm. And regarding weapons, I think hellstaff can also be lowercased. The word Hell is not a separate, proper noun here and in the article it is already written lowercase in quite a few places. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:48, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::::::::::: I agree on both. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 03:43, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::::::::::: I agree on hellstaff. With "Arc of Death" vs "Arc of death" I would have to argue that for the sake of consistency it should also be styled like the other "X of Y" terms (apart from the generic descriptors like "pile of maze spheres"). It doesn't really make much sense to capitalize "Boots of Speed" but not "Arc of Death". Besides, the name doesn't imply a short circuit, not just a deadly arc, but the "Arc of Death". --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 08:45, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::::::::::::: Fair point on the boots comparison. Okay, if that was the last item under discussion (I don't recall any others), then the renaming can be put into effect. I've updated DMMPST and will re-do Thing tables all over. Perhaps Nockson would like the honor of moving/updating the pertaining articles, since it was your project to begin with? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:39, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::::::::::::: Hell yeah! Gonna do it soon! --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 10:11, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:::::::::::::: I'm done with renaming! I hope I haven't forgotten anything. Gonna fix the pages today and tomorrow. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 10:50, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::::::::::::::: <s>You forgot to change "Arc of Death".</s> --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 10:53, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::::::::::::::: My mistake. All good. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 10:55, 20 December 2023 (CST)
  
I've commenced work on scripting speedrunning info and record tables from [[Compet-n]] and [[DSDA]]. Focusing on the former now, as a sufficiently usable and documented {{dwforums|106189|API for the latter}} appears to be still some ways off.
+
=== Wrap-up ===
 +
To recap, we agreed on the following changes (partly reusing & expanding Nockson' original table):
  
Planned phases:
+
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%; width: auto||
# <s>Add/update speedrunner (stub-)pages for linking from record tables (mostly completed)</s>.
+
!width="192" colspan="4"|Heretic/Hexen renaming consensus
# <s>Update the [[Template:Compet-n runs|category tables]] for the IWADs (completed).</s><br>Since Compet-N allows only seven PWADs, it seems sensible to compile the same tables for those too. But that would result in huge articles with gazillions of links, which may be unwise from usability and/or technical viewpoints. '''Any suggestions''' on how to structure them; perhaps into separate articles per category? perhaps collapse them by default, like on [[Linedef type]]? &ndash; or confirmation that it's no problem?
+
|-
# <s>Update record tables for [[Template:Compet-n|the WADs]] as whole (completed)</s>.
+
|'''Current name'''||'''New name'''||'''Use in text'''
# <s>Update record tables for all individual maps (completed).</s>
+
|-
# <s>Update record tables for all pertaining speedrunners.</s>
+
|colspan="3" style="text-align: center;"|''Heretic weapons''
 +
|-
 +
|[[Staff]]||Staff||[[staff]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Elven Wand]]||Elven wand||[[Elven wand]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Ethereal Crossbow]]||Ethereal crossbow||[[ethereal crossbow]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Dragon Claw]]||Dragon claw||[[dragon claw]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Hellstaff]]||Hellstaff||[[hellstaff]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Phoenix Rod]]||Phoenix rod||[[phoenix rod]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Firemace]]||Firemace||[[firemace]]
 +
|-
 +
|colspan="3" style="text-align: center;"|''Heretic ammo''
 +
|-
 +
|[[Wand Crystal]]||Wand crystal||[[wand crystal]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Crystal Geode]]||Crystal geode||[[crystal geode]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Ethereal Arrows]]||Ethereal arrows||[[ethereal arrows]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Quiver of Ethereal Arrows]]||Quiver of ethereal arrows||[[quiver of ethereal arrows]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Claw Orb]]||Claw orb||[[claw orb]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Energy Orb]]||Energy orb||[[energy orb]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Lesser Runes]]||Lesser runes||[[lesser runes]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Greater Runes]]||Greater runes||[[greater runes]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Flame Orb]]||Flame orb||[[flame orb]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Inferno Orb]]||Inferno orb||[[inferno orb]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Mace Spheres]]||Mace spheres||[[mace spheres]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Pile of Mace Spheres]]||Pile of mace spheres||[[pile of mace spheres]]
 +
|-
 +
|colspan="3" style="text-align: center;"|''Heretic/Hexen items''
 +
|-
 +
|[[Crystal Vial]]||Crystal vial||[[crystal vial]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Enchanted Shield]]||Enchanted shield||[[enchanted shield]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Silver Shield]]||Silver shield||[[silver shield]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Map Scroll]]||Map scroll||[[map scroll]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Mystic Urn]]||Mystic urn||[[mystic urn]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Quartz Flask]]||Quartz flask||[[quartz flask]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Shadowsphere]]||Shadowsphere||[[shadowsphere]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Torch]]||Torch||[[torch]]
 +
|-
 +
|colspan="3" style="text-align: center;"|''Hexen weapons''
 +
|-
 +
|[[Spiked Gauntlets]]||Spiked gauntlets||[[spiked gauntlets]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Sapphire Wand]]||Sapphire wand||[[sapphire wand]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Serpent Staff]]||Serpent staff||[[serpent staff]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Firestorm]]||Firestorm||[[firestorm]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Frost Shards]]||Frost shards||[[frost shards]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Arc of death]]||Arc of Death||[[Arc of Death]]
 +
|-
 +
|colspan="3" style="text-align: center;"|''Hexen items''
 +
|-
 +
|[[Falcon Shield]]||Falcon shield||[[falcon shield]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Mesh Armor]]||Mesh armor||[[mesh armor]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Platinum Helm]]||Platinum helm||[[platinum helm]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Dragonskin Bracers]]||Dragonskin bracers||[[dragonskin bracers]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Clock Gear]]||Clock gear||[[clock gear]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Emerald Planet]]||Emerald planet||[[emerald planet]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Ruby Planet]]||Ruby planet||[[ruby planet]]
 +
|-
 +
|[[Sapphire Planet]]||Sapphire planet||[[sapphire planet]]
 +
|}
 +
Hope I didn't miss any, feel free to augment. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:57, 20 December 2023 (CST)
 +
: Gauss was right, added two more. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 16:23, 20 December 2023 (CST)
  
Feedback welcome. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:31, 8 June 2020 (CDT)
+
← ← ←<br>
 +
I think we need to take a few final steps in this discussion: 1) names of parts of ultimate (4th) weapons in Hexen shouldn't be capitalized (for example: Quietus (Hilt) -> Quietus (hilt)); 2) all of the Hexen keys should be written lowercase in text (for example: Emerald Key -> emerald key); 3) caps in Hexen puzzle items - planets and gears all lowercase inside text (for example: Clock Gear (Steel in Bronze) -> clock gear (steel in bronze)), some IMO must be changed (Flame Mask -> flame mask, Yorick's Skull -> Yorick's skull, Glaive Seal -> glaive seal, Holy Relic -> holy relic), all others should be kept as they are; 4) for the sake of consistency I think that spike's subtypes should be written in lowercase in the things tables (i.e. Spike Down/Up -> Spike down/up). --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 15:14, 28 December 2023 (CST)
 +
: I was already wondering when you'd bring these up. ;-)
 +
# Agreed.
 +
# Agreed. And while we're here, so should the [[Strife keys]].
 +
# All puzzle items are unique, occurring once in the game. So all could be considered proper nouns. But indeed not the multiple gears and planets. So lowercase those but I'd prefer to keep all others unchanged, as they are ''the'' Codex, ''the'' Relic, ''the'' Seal, etc.
 +
# Sure.
 +
: Updated [[DMMPST/All classes and things|DMMPST thing tables]] per current proposal. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 07:24, 29 December 2023 (CST)
 +
:: Thanks! I agree with your point on #3. Also, is there a possibility that the results of this discussion could become part of the Wiki's guidelines? So that new editors know how to write correctly. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 14:27, 29 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::: Done. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 08:38, 1 January 2024 (CST)
 +
← ← ←<br>
 +
It's a shame, but I missed one more thing that we need to discuss - ''Hexen classes'' - I assumed (by looking through existing pages) that they should be capitalized in text (example: "...for the Fighter it is...") and I've already fixed half of Hexen level pages this way before thinking that I need to ask this here. Should we keep it that way? My personal opinion is that classes should not be capitalized. I don't see anything special in these names. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 14:05, 12 January 2024 (CST)
 +
: It makes sense to capitalize the classes since they are part of a name - [[Baratus|Baratus the Fighter]]. When you're using the classes by itself, you are still implying that name, just in a shortened form, instead of a generic class of "fighter". So in my opinion it therefore needs to be capitalized as well. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 16:35, 12 January 2024 (CST)
 +
:: Works for me. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:19, 13 January 2024 (CST)
 +
:: Forgot to answer here. I'm 100% agree and will continue with my caps fixing then. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 11:47, 17 January 2024 (CST)
  
: Full support from me &mdash; should greatly improve an underdocumented area.&nbsp; These phases appear exhaustive of the data we've ever seriously considered adding.&nbsp; I endorse {{Dwforumsp|id=1986689|title=Eris's remark}} that map automation is a victim of its own success: any other procedural update ''must'' become automated, because humans can't keep pace.&nbsp; :D
+
== Capitalization of custom names for weapons and monsters ==
  
: It sounds like #3 and #4 are two steps each, because COMPET-N vs DSDA output will be disjoint.&nbsp; A vaguely related thread is [[Talk:Speedrun#Bringing this page into modernity|here]].
+
Ok, since we've been having fun recently around here opening up a bunch of metaphorical cans, I'd like to take the opportunity to open up a particularly large one myself that has been on my mind for a while now and I need some clarification going forward.
  
: Is #2 even worth doing?&nbsp; I'm not a fan of articles simply parroting another site without adding any original insights or integration, which we then have to keep synced forever.&nbsp; The lists were created in January 2005 when our scope was still totally unclear; we aren't normally bound by [[Special:PermaLink/6263|nebulous precedents from that period]].&nbsp; IMO the long-term goal should be replacing each with an explication of routing principles, any tactics specific to the style, and a historical summary including key innovators and landmark runs.
+
A good example to illustrate my point is from the PS1 game {{wp|Soul Reaver}}. I don't know if anyone remembers this one—Nosgoth, vampires, Kain, Raziel, The Elder God, etc. It's not really important. It's about the name Soul Reaver and what it is used for. You might refer to the title of the game itself or by extension the series—in this case it is obviously capitalized. But you could also refer to the protagonist Raziel, who The Elder God turned into a literal reaver of souls, his soul reaver, which then of course must be written in lowercase. However, there is also Raziel's spectral sword that is central to the plot, which is called Soul Reaver as well, but here is must be capitalized because it is the name of this specific sword. While the name also describes the function of the blade, it is first and foremost the name of that specific weapon and therefore a proper noun.
  
: If we must have lists, there should be no technical issue regarding size.&nbsp; [[List of WADs|This]] still loads OK with templated links at varying levels of recursion (which these won't have) and many more rows.&nbsp; Others will need to say how many views/searches the pages receive in their current condition, and whether Google interprets hundreds of similar links as a parked domain.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 13:16, 8 June 2020 (CDT)
+
Returning to the Doom universe, for a weapon like the Wraithverge from Hexen, we are not describing its class or type, it's a proper name as well, just like the Soul Reaver. Think of Anduril or Narsil from the Lord of the Rings, or the Peacemaker from {{wp|Jak II}}. These are all weapons that have a proper name. Unlike the [[rocket launcher]] or [[plasma gun]], where the name is simply a descriptor of their generic nature and function, just as with 'soul reaver' when used to describe Raziel as a literal reaver of souls. Same for the super shotgun since it is just an alternate way of saying "very powerful shotgun". But a Waithverge is not a verge of wraith, it's not a class of weapons, it's the specific weapon the player finds that has been given this name, a sort of demonic BFG. So it's the name for this specific demonic BFG, the Wraithverge.
  
:: Yes, #3/4/5 will have separate tables per demo repo. #5 would probably remain limited to the IWADs, like [[Adam Hegyi#Current Compet-n records|they are now]].<br>Your goal for #2 sounds worthwhile, but could be a long way off. Meanwhile, if there are lists, they might as well be updated after all these years. For me they would be a good target to learn and understand how the Compet-n database tables fit together, and to get my scripts and queries correct. If and when the category articles get rewritten per your proposal, the record tables could always be moved into [[Thing types by number|adjacent]] or [[The ZDoom Community Map Project "Take 2"/Walkthrough|hierarchical]] subpages. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:21, 10 June 2020 (CDT)
+
Now, for monster names the situation is more complicated. Again, a monster like the devil, or super imp, from Valiant is not an actual devil. It's an imp variant with a fancy name. So you could argue that the name is used as a proper noun here as well. The name of the diabolist from Ante Mortem is not meant to imply that he's a literal devil-worshipper (he's a demon after all, so it's a bit of a given). What he is is a type of arch-vile. The name "diabolist" doesn't describe its nature or function. Same with monsters like the "death incarnate". They are not literally death incarnate, it's just a descriptive name chosen by the creator of the monster. They are called Death Incarnate. Could have just as well been named Hellraiser or Doominator. You get the idea.
  
::: Fair point &mdash; I hadn't thought about the instructional aspect.&nbsp; :>
+
Of course you could also argue that the rule doesn't apply here because there is more than one death incarnate, diabolist or devil. So it's the name of a species of demons rather than a specific demon given a name. So then it's not a proper noun anymore and case closed. BUT. It is nonetheless confusing as hell to the reader to refer to something as death incarnate when you're not actually wanting to imply death incarnate. I want to refer to a custom monster named death incarnate not literal death incarnate. But how can i distinguish the two terms visually on the page if i can't capitalize the name of the monster? Can we put quotes around it, "death incarnate", or quotes plus caps as in "Death Incarnate?"
  
::: Limiting #5 to IWADs would have been controversial a decade ago.&nbsp; I guess we'll find out whether that departed with Win9x.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; To first approximation, I'd agree with people who say IWAD records are far more impressive due to the larger player pool.&nbsp; OTOH a few were still submitting PWAD improvements last I looked.&nbsp; HTH / KUTGW.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 11:31, 10 June 2020 (CDT)
+
But to summarize: for custom weapons with fancy names it seems pretty clear that they should be capitalized since they are used as names for a specific, unique weapon, not a generic descriptor of a weapon type like a rocket launcher, pistol, or chaingun. The same i think holds true for boss enemies. It's the Icon of Sin, so it's also the Behemoth when we're talking about one specific monster given this title (see the Archangelus of [[Eviternity]]). For species of demons it's more of a grey area. I personally would prefer to capitalized them as well unless the name serves as a literal descriptor of their nature or body. It's a fact that most mod authors capitalize the names of their custom monsters in their official documentation, so there is a clear desire from the author's side to have these names visually emphasized and distinguished from the literal nouns that are used. But it obviously clashes with the guidelines of this wiki and would open up a HUGE can of worms in regards to the vanilla bestiary. So, yeah.
  
&#8592; &#8592; &#8592;<br/>
+
Anyways, that's all I had to say. Is my assessment correct, right on the money, way off, utter nonsense, kinda right but not quite? Let me know. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 20:39, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
Step 2 is ready for deployment, pending the outcome of some data discrepancy checks by Fx, so I proceeded with #3 first. The script for #4 is nearly ready too, but meanwhile I'd like to solicit input on the [[Adam Hegyi#Current Compet-n records|table style for #5]]. Invented by Jartapran it uses layout/styling/coloring that I can reproduce in the next script, but if there is to be any discussion about refining (or even overhauling) it, then I would rather have that now before I program something that needs to be changed soon after. Personally I'm fine with maintaining this table style, but if anyone isn't then this is a sort of "speak now or forever hold your peace" moment. ;) --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 07:42, 21 June 2020 (CDT)
 
  
: More progress already!&nbsp; Regarding #3, the bot has already passed all the unit tests I could find in my old notes, so I guess I approve?&nbsp; (People should examine my original implementation [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?oldid=108817&diff=111086] before deciding I know what I'm talking about.&nbsp; :7
+
: I don't see what the actual issue here is? Names of specific individuals are proper nouns and proper nouns are capitalized in English always, period. There is sometimes debate at most over whether a phrase constitutes a proper noun or not. "Spider mastermind" is the best example of this to come out of classic Doom because while it seems to have been thought of as such at first, there are later many "spider masterminds" so it loses its uniqueness quickly. That being said however it is again treated as a proper noun for the singular Spider Mastermind of Doom (2016) and Eternal's continuity. So now it's not even consistent across the series which is lovely. At any rate your decision on the matter should be based on the rules of the English language and whatever context is available to indicate if something is or is not a proper noun. The generic names of species are not proper nouns, which is why a word like "imp" is NOT capitalized. A diabolist may just be a type of demon, or it could be a specific group of demons calling themselves "the Diabolists", see the difference? --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 23:08, 24 September 2023 (CDT)
  
: Regarding #5, other related suggestions are [[User talk:Jartapran#Speedrunner record lists|here]], [[User talk:Gez#Compression data edit / Speedrunners' achievements|here]], [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2017#Separate page for Compet-n demos recorded by notable Doom speedrunners|here]] <s>, and [[Talk:Knee-Deep in the Dead#Compet-n in external links|here]]</s> .&nbsp; Arguably they are irrelevant now that a solid prototype exists.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; Still thinking about the layout details though.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 10:01, 21 June 2020 (CDT)
+
== Where to request page? ==
  
: I'm fine with the table style (FWIW &mdash; definitely no graphic designer), and I dimly remember a consensus forming for this layout among users actually helping with tabulations back then.&nbsp; With that said, some miniscule suggestions:
+
Hi, I wanted to know where page requests were handled. I've wanted a page on "Mars 3D/Mars: The Ultimate Warrior", a low-budget Taiwanese FPS released in 1997 that uses several graphics from Doom, Heretic and Hexen, along with a modified version of the .WAD format known as .MAD. Where do I request this? [[User:MargaretThatcher|MargaretThatcher]] ([[User talk:MargaretThatcher|talk]]) 13:53, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
:* New COMPET-N presents episode runs and movies as "map slots", rather than entire distinct categories as {{archived link|http://www.doom2.net/compet-n/index.cgi?action{{=}}faq|implied previously|https://web.archive.org/web/20220627193400/http://www.doom2.net/compet-n/index.cgi?action{{=}}faq|archive.org}}.&nbsp; Would it therefore make sense to tack those records on to the bottom where present? [https://www.doom.com.hr/index.php?page=compet-n_database&cndb=&wad_id=2&category_id=1&map_id=&player_id=&sort=&order=]
+
:There's no place to request a page directly (at least not to my knowledge), but rather, [[Special:WantedPages]] lists the 'most wanted', based on the pages that have the highest number of redlinks. But the best guaranteed method of getting an article made is to just make it yourself. [[User:Sena|Sena]] ([[User talk:Sena|talk]]) 20:04, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
:* Should an "all time" column be added to the summary table?&nbsp; It feels misleading in some cases to simply report a zero, e.g. Yonatan Donner.
 
:* The tables are unevenly spaced in some skins.&nbsp; (Ignore this one if it's my calcified browser acting up.)
 
:* Change ''runs'' &rarr; ''styles'' in the footnote.
 
: HTH, and thanks again.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 17:13, 22 June 2020 (CDT)
 
::I'm not sure about the coloring -- when I see tables with green, orange, and red elements in them I just intuitively read the colors to mean "good, average, bad" which isn't really the theme going for here. It'd help if each of the IWAD had a strong connection to one color, but all the [[title screen]]s are dominated by the color red while level color themes are all over the place. That said I'm not personally interested in the speedrunning side of things, so feel free to ignore this objection. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 04:19, 23 June 2020 (CDT)
 
  
::: I see your point. With the script [[Special:Diff/226037|advanced far enough]] the generate tables &ndash; more work is needed to make it update player articles &ndash; it is very easy to produce [[User:Xymph/Speedrunners#Color schemes|color scheme variations]], thanks to schemecolor.com. Since the original scheme is somewhat pastel-like, I searched for similar schemes, and also collected some via the site's Related feature. Please everyone (not only Gez) review and let me know what you like/dislike. Colors from different schemes can be combined into a new one, in new orders. If you want me to try them, list the four color values and I'll add them to the page. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 08:01, 10 July 2020 (CDT)
+
== Citing wikia pages ==
  
::: Given the deafening silence I compiled a scheme with the following "rules": no red/yellow hues; each of the four colors sufficiently distinct from the others and from the gray header and white totals footer, without jumping out of the page; the same group for Doom1&2 and another for Final Doom, with the latter (more difficult?) title in each group having the darker hue. [[User:Xymph/Speedrunners#New|The resulting scheme]] uses green and blue. One or more colors may be insufficiently distinct for viewers with some form of colorblindness, but that is a [[User_talk:Xymph#Crazy_idea_.232|separate topic]].
+
So Nockson removed a citation to the metroid.fandom wiki i posted from the [[Attack on IO]] article. I understand that linking to pages of the doom wikia is a no-go for obvious reasons. But there are plenty of wikis on that site, some of which are the go-to places for their respective communities with a wealth of info regarding those titles. Are we not allowed to use that info in citations just because it's posted on the "wrong" wiki? Sounds like politics to me. I think the fact that the info is accurate should be the decisive point, no? Or are we just gonna categorically dismiss all of the info over there as worthless or untrustworthy just because fans of those games posted it on a site that the Doom wiki has had a past with? The guidelines say you're not allowed to link to sites whose primary purpose is advertisement, but i don't think you can categorize the metroid wiki as being primarily ads. <s>Fact is, the page I linked to on the metroid wiki contains no visible ads at all.</s> So in this case, I'd say the link and the info is valid and should be reinstated. Opinions? --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 13:34, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
::: If no objections pop up soon, I'll be using this scheme for all speedrunners (with records on the IWADs). I've also dropped the spaces from the category totals ("4/1/0/4") so they fit without wrapping. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:47, 13 July 2020 (CDT)  
+
: There's actually [https://www.metroidwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page a free Metroid wiki]. Unfortunately it isn't as thorough as that other one. The ads on fandom sites are pretty aggressive, pop up windows, auto play videos and stuff. That's why I only enter these sites with AdBlock on. And yeah, I saw some useful info about Heretic and Hexen there recently, but I won't link that and will try to find another source. P.S. What's the point of providing sources for the music? It's the first time I saw that here. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 13:51, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
 +
:: Ok, I have to admit I forgot that I have adblock on at all times, so I have no popups as a result. The situation is different with it turned off... Still, the info is valid. And it's not an External link for further reading, but only for people that want to confirm the source of the info, and for those cases I think it's still fine. You're not catching a virus off that site or anything if you visit.<br>With regards to the use of citations for the composers: the soundtrack for both Super Metroid and Castlevania is credited to two composers in most sources but the individual pieces weren't written as collaborations (like Lennon/McCartney were always credited together even though most Beatles songs were written by either one of them alone), the publisher/developer simply didn't care to give specific credit to who wrote what, so those information for each track are often difficult to find credible sources for on the net (and for Castlevania III such info simply isn't available at all). But i want to list the composer for each track whenever possible, so in order to justify the fact that I left out the second composer of the OST that is normally listed alongside the actual composer of the piece in question, I wanted to provide a source that identifies them as the composer of that specific track. And yeah, i looked at the other metroid wiki as well, but like you saw for yourself, that wiki is unfortunately not nearly as comprehensive when it comes to info on things like soundtrack. So I chose the more in-depth source. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 14:47, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
  
::::Hi, Xymph! Seeing that you're in the process of automating this stuff, I wanted to point out that there was an addition in the charts of [[Jim Leonard (Xit Vono)]]. The total amounts of current records are listed below the heading (UV speed 17, NM speed 41 etc.). If people find that feature useful, I guess you might want to add it to the script. Whatever you do, thank you for your work on this area! :) (If this thing has been brought up already, my apologies. I haven't had much time to follow the wiki lately.) --[[User:Jartapran|Jartapran]] ([[User talk:Jartapran|talk]]) 13:03, 13 July 2020 (CDT)  
+
I can replace the link in the [[Attack on IO]] article with another source I found, it's about the official soundtrack album that the wikia article is using as a source because that one has the individual song credits in it. But more generally, are the guidelines excluding any fandom.com wiki from being linked to in any shape or form on this wiki? Or is it more of a case-by-case situation with some leeway? That's really the core question here for me. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 15:13, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
  
:::::Hey, thanks for the heads-up! While I had looked at that article, so far I glanced over that one additional total per category, given that Adam Williamson('s records table) is my primary guinea pig. :) I would eventually have noticed when updating/diffing Xit Vono's tables with my script output, but it's better to take into account now already. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 14:12, 13 July 2020 (CDT)
+
: Apparently using AdBlock has been [https://twitter.com/doomwiki/status/678113586770665472 against their ToS] for a long time, but nevermind that. ;) I can't find where he said it but ISTR that Quasar is against adding new fandom links and in favor of using alternate sources whenever possible. There are [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=*.fandom.com&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch no fandom links left], and [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=*.wikia.com&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch almost all wikia links] are in old discussions, not main space. I suppose Quasar's opinion does not equate formal wiki policy, but one specific reason for that is to [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing/2017#Doom_Wikia|not help improve their SEO]], as they don't deserve that. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 16:15, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
  
When the fastest posted demo on COMPET-N is from Competition Doom, do you intend to link that in place of a DOS demo?&nbsp; It's such a rare situation that I assumed "yes" because you'd otherwise be generating an entire parallel set of tables.&nbsp; But that's only an assumption until I ask.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; HTH.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 09:07, 28 June 2020 (CDT)
+
:: Ok, I didn't have the full picture, thanks for providing a bit more context. So fandom/wikia sites are just generally off limits. Gotcha. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 17:15, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
  
: CnDoom is a separate database, so I wasn't considering it until now. I do have access to it and see it holds only 105 rows. Queries can't stretch across databases but I could combine entries in the script(s), although it would be a bit awkward. However, I have no idea whether that would make sense, due to unfamiliarity with the whole competition scene. So I'd like to see more input and have to consult with Fx before attempting that. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:27, 28 June 2020 (CDT)
+
I remembered I had already done some scripted work to find all such links, and this actually stemmed from a [[Doomwiki (IRC channel)|#doomwiki discussion]], hence I couldn't find a link for Quasar's comments. Also, [[Special:LinkSearch|LinkSearch]] uses http: as default protocol if unspecified, so the above two paths are not the complete story for existing links: a [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=https%3A%2F%2F*.fandom.com&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch small dozen fandom ones] do exist too (and conversely, no https: entries for wikia). Additionally, a variety of interwiki paths are used as well. So [[User:Xymph/List_of_bad_Interwikis|these entries]], at least the main space ones, are to be replaced by equivalent free wiki sources, if possible. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:11, 3 July 2023 (CDT)
  
:: Fx let me know (but seems too shy to post himself ;) ) that he's not in favor of mixing CnDoom in with Compet-n, is concerned that it might confuse people. So I am not investing further time/energy into this for now. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:25, 18 July 2020 (CDT)
+
== Doom Wiki feature for Indie Wiki Buddy ==
  
The "uncompleted" footnote becomes inaccurate when extended to multi-map recordings.&nbsp; I see the view that '''{{c|category rules}}''' &otimes; '''{{c|maps exited}}''' are independent data dimensions, and in fact on DSDA3 they are, but in COMPET-N they aren't (and weren't under AdamH).&nbsp; So I propose changing it to
+
Hey all. I'm the creator of [https://getindie.wiki/ Indie Wiki Buddy], a browser extension that helps redirect people from Fandom and Fextralife wikis to their independent counterparts (including, of course, Doom Wiki). I'd like to start featuring some wikis on the homepage, promotional banners, etc. (example image [https://i.imgur.com/4BZtrTo.png here]). I'd love to include Doom Wiki, as a shining example of a long-lived independent wiki. Let me know if that'd be all right. Thanks, '''~[[User:SuperHamster|''<span style="color:#07517C;">Super</span>''<span style="color:#6FA23B;">Hamster</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:SuperHamster|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/SuperHamster|Contribs]]</small> 22:56, 26 July 2023 (CDT)
  
: ''No qualifying run verified and published, as of the most recent Compet-n database update.''
+
: Should be fine. We're extremely pro-working-together when it comes to the wiki scene. I spearheaded efforts in the past that resulted in our affiliates section existing on the homepage for example. If you need to make use of any logos etc. they are all licensed under dual CC-BY-SA 2.0 and GFDL. Our preferred way to be mentioned is as "The Doom Wiki at DoomWiki.org" --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 23:00, 26 July 2023 (CDT)
  
If the same footnote is to be used for both databases, then even this is misleading because DSDA verification is largely crowdsourced.&nbsp; Webmasters perform some basic validations, but then an apparently acceptable demo can circulate for years before becoming contested.&nbsp; Whatever text we do adopt for DSDA records, it should be [[Template:Map spots|templated]], so the bot need not roll out future tweaks.&nbsp; :>
+
::Excellent, thanks. Speaking of working together, I also happen to be NIWA's current Coordinator - so if you ever need to chat about anything related to NIWA or its members, feel free to reach out to me. '''~[[User:SuperHamster|''<span style="color:#07517C;">Super</span>''<span style="color:#6FA23B;">Hamster</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:SuperHamster|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/SuperHamster|Contribs]]</small> 23:05, 26 July 2023 (CDT)
  
Assuming this overall premise is valid, I don't have a strong opinion on whether you should actually omit the additional rows.&nbsp; If the required booleans are in a SQL table, the bot can incorporate them automatically, but if not, I'd understand if you didn't want to maintain them yourself (I'm not even sure how human users are notified of updates, aside from seeing a new forum thread on doom.com.hr).&nbsp; And because fx02 has the final decision on said flags, nothing stops him from sanctioning the other categories someday, if enough runners participate.&nbsp; :>
+
== Map with 27 co-authors ==
  
P.S. Thank you for retaining the Final Doom complevels footnotes also &mdash; that still confuses people, 20+ years later, and heaven help anyone whose connectivity is too slow to post questions to social media.&nbsp; HTH / KUTGW!&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 10:46, 28 June 2020 (CDT)
+
Today, Tribute Quilt was uploaded to idgames, and I'd like to put credits on whoever's pages, but considering the map is made by 28 different people, it seems a bit impractical to post the list on every page --[[User:ViolentBeetle|ViolentBeetle]] ([[User talk:ViolentBeetle|talk]]) 02:40, 9 August 2023 (CDT)
 +
: A one-liner "title (ig template)" suffices, no co-authors. Like for all these {{tl|patchwork maps}}. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:55, 9 August 2023 (CDT)
  
'''\o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/''' [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=MAP20%3A_Misri_Halek_%28Alien_Vendetta%29&type=revision&diff=225766&oldid=218576]&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 13:48, 6 July 2020 (CDT)
+
== Page for "Can It Run Doom?"? ==
  
: Thanks. A nice side-effect of the scripts were two-way consistency checks: not only did the scripts update various manual data entry slip-ups on the wiki (like swapped digits or MM/DD), but they also revealed some inconsistencies and data mishaps in the main database, which Fx fixed last week(end). --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 08:01, 10 July 2020 (CDT)
+
The question/phenomena of "[[Can it run Doom?]]" is certainly a ''Doom'' related topic, but there doesn't appear to be a page for it here. Can someone make a page for it, covering its history and notable things that have run (or displayed) ''Doom''? --[[User:Nanashi|Nanashi]] ([[User talk:Nanashi|talk]]) 13:17, 20 August 2023 (CDT)
  
← ← ←<br/>
+
== Buildup of pending changes ==
To allow further review of the current state of the script, I've updated [[Adam Williamson#Current Compet-n records|the test article]]. The proposed color scheme is in full effect, including the initial totals table to visually link up those numbers of the listed records. The totals per category are added above each column per Jartapran above. And the new PWADs subsection contains a brief summary of a player's other records.
+
I've recently made some changes that I understand as placing more burden on the approver than when I add a bug to some pwad map article. Given that my first of these odd pending changes, an edit to change the target source port for [[Sacrament]], is steadily racking up weeks of age, I'm wondering what the process is, and why I haven't been hollered at to discuss any of it. The changes aren't that important, but I'm getting to be disappointed with the radio silence while my minor contributions get handled within a few hours. Did I miss anything in the FAQ? Are you hoping someone else deals with it? Is there a secret panel of experts being consulted? Is it a passive-aggressive way of telling me to keep working on a bad change until it no longer sucks? I'm just left wondering to myself with nothing to go on. In any case, thanks for taking the extra time with inexperienced wiki users like myself when we're being a piece of work. [[User:Inuk|Inuk]] ([[User talk:Inuk|talk]]) 13:35, 3 September 2023 (CDT)
 +
:I personally did not see them, in August I was really busy doing a large batch of edits myself, and even when I visited the Sacrament page a few days ago I failed to spot there were pending changes - they display automatically for registered users so I already saw it was Boom-compatible without realizing it was an unapproved edit. I'll go through them now and check. None of it was meant to be passive-aggressive, please understand that the wiki's pace can at times be glacial, as it is ultimately a hobby, and a few people who also approve content were I'm guessing on vacation for August and July. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 03:02, 4 September 2023 (CDT)
 +
::Alright, the last thing to cross my mind was that nobody saw what was only coincidentally icky changes. I always imagined that there's a backlog page for approvers, but if the recent changes page is the tool they have then it makes good sense. [[User:Inuk|Inuk]] ([[User talk:Inuk|talk]]) 04:34, 4 September 2023 (CDT)
  
Naturally it's possible to generate a complete table layout (with 7 colors) like for the IWADs, but for some speedrunners (especially Xit Vono, with 249 entries here) that would make for a very long section. Given concerns that the wiki should not completely reproduce the data/statistics of another site, I thought a brief summary may be a suitable compromise, but I'm open to reading other ideas. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 15:47, 13 July 2020 (CDT)
+
: Process is a big word for a small ragtag group of editors looking (ir)regularly at [[Special:PendingChanges|pending changes]]. Each has topic areas they are familiar with, and others they are uncomfortable with. I check almost every edit in recent changes, but feel unqualified to approve some, and when nobody else touches them either, then the pending changes list slowly builds up. The current backlog isn't even so bad, there were times it had dozens of entries pending for many weeks or even months. Eventually it's Quasar who clears the backlog a few times per year, but he hasn't be active much in the past 1-2 months. And besides that list, there are also the [[Special:UnreviewedPages|new (or sometimes ancient) but unreviewed pages]] where progress can be even more glacial. Such is wiki life. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:15, 4 September 2023 (CDT)
  
: Additions and updates to record tables for Compet-n players are completed, which wraps up the bulk of this project (until DSDA's API emerges, anyway). I see I missed some suggestions/questions by RyanW from June 22:
+
== Featured screenshot for levels ==
:# "Compet-n presents episode runs and movies...tack those records on to the bottom where present" - I summarized those in an "Other records" section analog to the PWADs records summary.
 
:# "Should an 'all time' column be added" - I see your point but have no idea how to collect all-time ''records'', distinct from the number of submitted demos.
 
:# "tables are unevenly spaced" - I saw that spacing depends on the window width: the wider the more evenly spaced they are. Not sure what, if anything, can be done here.
 
:# "''runs'' → ''styles'' in the footnote" - Flew under my radar but now updated in the script, so it'll be used in the next update sweep (whenever that'll be).
 
: --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:25, 18 July 2020 (CDT)
 
  
== Changing [[Template:Cite web]] ==
+
When I've played through a WAD, I like to go back to its Doomwiki entry some time later and go through the levels on there. Just for fun and to remind myself of the great time I had playing it :) Now, I don't usually remember map names and sometimes it's a bit difficult for me to bring to mind a level from its wiki entry, especially if there is no screenshot. I would like to see a screenshot of the level featured more prominently on a level's page. Maybe at the same place as the title screen image on a WAD's wiki entry (e.g. [[Speed of Doom]]). Perhaps a good image could be the starting point of the map, or the most notible section of a map. I think it should gives a level's wiki level a bit more soul instead of "just another level". Maybe this is just me though! :) --[[User:Ecotip|Ecotip]] ([[User talk:Ecotip|talk]]) 10:04, 22 September 2023 (CDT)
 +
: I'm sorry, but can you be a bit more specific? You want more level pages to have screenshots? Plenty of editors have added some, but understandably due to the nature of the work involved, quite a few wads don't have them yet. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 11:30, 22 September 2023 (CDT)
 +
:: I'm suggesting a more prominent presentation of a screenshot of a level, presented in the right sidepane of the level's page. Not sure if I have permission to do so, but I could try it for a page and see if people like it. --[[User:Ecotip|Ecotip]] ([[User talk:Ecotip|talk]]) 11:50, 10 October 2023 (CDT)
 +
::: Single-level PWADs already have the {{tl|wad}} template with that easy screenshot option, but a title screen takes precedence if present. Map pages that are part of a multi-level PWAD however need the navbox in the top-right corner and the map view image at the start of the Walkthrough section. There is little or no vertical space between those on the right side (remember the navbox can vary [[HUBMAP: RAMP Nexus (Rabbit's All-comers Mapping Project 2023)|hugely]] in height), hence screenshots are best placed in the Screenshots gallery. The actual page width (depending on browser window or device screen width) also affects vertical placement of elements on the same side. What could look good for you doesn't always look good for a lot of other visitors, so it's better not to overload the right side. But perhaps you have another idea than I'm thinking, so yeah you can experiment - it can always be reverted. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:30, 10 October 2023 (CDT)
  
We have these fantastic [[Special:PrefixIndex/Template:Cite web|templates]] which organize and format information about online sources.&nbsp; I'm trying to extend the functionality as shown [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Cite_web/test&action=history here] (hopefully that's clear).&nbsp; All four can take a bare URL as a parameter, so this should apply to all four.&nbsp; The test template is being used [[Special:Diff/223550|here]].
+
== Correct license for gameplay mod logos ==
  
This might seem too minor for Central Processing, but I didn't create these and haven't used them often, so I'm announcing it for two reasons:<ul>
+
I wanted to add the mod logo to the [[Æons of Death]] article but I realized that I don't know under which license. For a gameplay mod it seems I can't just choose the "Other PWAD" option under Screenshot that I would use for a WAD's TITLEPIC lump. Although technically speaking a titlepic is not a screenshot either but in most cases either original artwork or a modification of someone else's original artwork or a photo of some kind combined with either original or modified artwork. As far as I can see, uploaded logos to wiki use either the "Other Fair Use" options, one of the other more specific copyright options—like I did for the Voxel Doom logo where it was clearly id Software's copyrighted Doom logo with some simple text overlayed—a GPL license (why would you release artwork under a software license??), Creative Commons, etc. How do I know which one to use? Do I need to contact the creator of the image or is there a fallback solution? --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 12:02, 24 September 2023 (CDT)
<li>If I screw up, this could mass-create 404s which aren't immediately noticed.&nbsp; I don't think I have screwed up (thanks to [[Special:ExpandTemplates|ExpandTemplates]]) and don't demand anyone drop what they're doing to test it, but if you agree about the risk, then I encourage you to examine my version.&nbsp; I won't bring it live unless there's feedback or loud silence.&nbsp; :></li>
 
<li>Templating these links may be incorrect journalism.&nbsp; Style guides tell us to cite the link we actually used, not an intermediary or container (e.g. URL shortener, media embedded in a tweet).&nbsp; If a domain moves, then the link shown in the article will differ from what was accessed on the date given.&nbsp; I can see both sides of this but [[Special:Diff/146889/193102|precedents]] exist, and we have had so many headaches with link rot that I must support modularization.&nbsp; If someday we need the absolute URL at the time of insertion, we can recover it from the corresponding template revision in 99.9% of cases.</li>
 
</ul>So yeah, let me know if I'm worrying about nothing.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; Thanks, [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 05:54, 8 June 2020 (CDT)
 
  
: Seems good to me. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 13:20, 25 June 2020 (CDT)
+
: Almost all mods are going to be fair use. If there's no license published with the mod, then it's fair use only as everything is, by default, copyrighted. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 22:51, 24 September 2023 (CDT)
  
Update: This is now live.&nbsp; Unable to visualize the entire "phase space" of citation styles plus combinations of incomplete parameter calls, I tested further with [[Special:PermaLink/224249|individual articles]] already using these templates heavily.&nbsp; To my astonishment, it seemed to work.
+
== wiki dumps ==
  
'''If anyone's references begin outputting broken links or other strangeness, just revert me and we'll figure it out later.''' [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Cite_web&action=edit&oldid=193126] [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Cite_web_archived&action=edit&oldid=193128] [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Cite_web_text&action=edit&oldid=193127] [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Cite_web_text_archived&action=edit&oldid=193129]&nbsp; Thanks.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 16:22, 28 June 2020 (CDT)
+
I've completed my annual dump of the wiki for archive.org: https://archive.org/details/wiki-doomwiki.org-20231010
 +
The number of images on the wiki is now so large it's proving interesting :-) For practical reasons I zip them up for archive.org and only upload one file (images.zip): for the 2023 dump, this is now 6.1GiB. -- [[User:Jdowland|Jdowland]] ([[User talk:Jdowland|talk]]) 07:51, 11 October 2023 (CDT)
  
==Handling BTSX release as official add-on==
+
== Creating category page ==
For the {{cat|Official add-ons}} release of [[BTSX]], the mod's name was shortened to "BTSX" and all of the level names were changed. I am going to strongly suggest that we create redirects for (and appropriately document) these names and not separate articles, as they are not new maps, they were just renamed&mdash;for that release only&mdash;to avoid legal issues. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 13:23, 25 June 2020 (CDT)
 
:Redirects created; documentation added. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 17:43, 25 June 2020 (CDT)
 
:: Thanks a ton. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 17:55, 25 June 2020 (CDT)
 
  
== "Marked spots on the map" not displaying on wiki? ==
+
I recently added a category for {{cat|Platforming WADs|platforming}}, but it didn't function correctly at first after I created it. Is there something to observe other than just create the page? It also took quite a bit of time before a lot of the linked articles I added were listed in there afterwards. Do these type of pages just need longer to update or is there another reason for this behavior? Also, what are the rules for what categories have to be added to them? I just went with PWADs because it is listed in most category pages (at least the ones I checked). But it was really just a stab in the dark... --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 17:10, 16 October 2023 (CDT)
 +
: Category updates (and various [[mw:Manual:Job queue|other background jobs]]) happen every 15 minutes via [[mw:Manual:runJobs.php|runJobs.php]] from cron.
 +
: Categories should be added to at least one parent category that makes sense, but normally not to a subcat that is under the same cat to which you already added the new one. See also the [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Article format|guidelines]] and [[Special:CategoryTree]]. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:17, 17 October 2023 (CDT)
  
Hi all,
+
== Titlepic license and public domain images ==
  
I'm not sure if it's my browser or I'm just blind, but on the pages for the Doom II levels, the letters which are supposed to display on the maps (and are referred to in the walkthroughs) are not actually there on the map.
+
Not to open a can of worms, but why exactly is it standard to pick the <nowiki>{{Screenshot-pwad}}</nowiki> license for titlepics? These images are almost never actual in-game screenshots and often don't even include any id Software owned artwork - most of them are either original artwork or modified artwork of some sort, or a combinations of the two. So what's the reason for this modus operandi?
  
For example, here is the map for level 13 of Doom 2: [https://doomwiki.org/w/images/7/7c/MAP13_map.png]. I don't see any letters there, even though the walkthrough makes explicit reference to them when discussing the secrets.
+
Also what do I do when the reproduced image is in the public domain, like with the titlepic for [[Four Perfectly Fine Lemons]], which uses a rendition of {{wp|File:Vassily Kandinsky, 1926 - Several Circles, Gugg 0910 25.jpg|Several Circles}} by Kandinsky? None of the available option for public domain images seem to work for this case since I'm not the creator of this painting (so I'm not releasing it into the pd), neither is the mod author nor did Kandinsky release the image into the public domain himself. It naturally entered the public domain because of the time that elapsed since the creator's death. Maybe an option for such a scenario could be added? Something simple like "This image is in the public domain." --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 11:54, 18 October 2023 (CDT)
 +
: This is just my opinion, but when you're uploading an image and you have to choose what type of file you're uploading, the drop-down menu doesn't have an option for titlepics. The closest I saw was "Screenshot", which will pick {{tl|screenshot-doom}} or a similar template. Plus it's not always easy to verify if a titlepic is copyrighted or public domain, so I think you have to err on the side of caution in those cases.
 +
: As to your second question, would {{tl|PD-Art-100}} be of any help here? I know it's not exactly what you're looking for. [[User:Gauss|Gauss]] ([[User talk:Gauss|talk]]) 13:08, 18 October 2023 (CDT)
 +
:: I'm just saying that it is an odd choice to license [[title screen]] images as screenshots, when they are very much not, instead of as fair use images. I just want to understand the rationale behind it, since a lot of the time the titlepics reproduce copyrighted artwork from another party entirely unconnected to id Software, like the titlepic for [[Altars of Madness]], which reproduces part of the album cover art from the {{wp|Altars of Madness|album of the same name}} by Morbid Angel.<p></p> The public domain template you posted could actually work for the Kandinsky image, since the painting by Kandinsky hasn't really been altered in any significant way apart from what is necessary due to the limitations of the Doom picture format, specifically change of aspect ratio, lower resolution and reduced color depth; but for a public domain image that shouldn't really matter since there is no copyright holder anyways. I would prefer that the license included these kind of modifications as well though. Otherwise it sounds like it needs to be an actual photograph (which wouldn't work in most source ports) to qualify for that license. But it's curious that this template (along with several other I didn't know were available) isn't accessible from the dropdown menu but can only be found through the {{cat|Copyright and image templates}} category page. That's good to know.<p></p> But in general, is there a reason other than accepted practice to upload title screen images under the {{tl|Screenshot-pwad}} license instead of deciding on a case by case basis what is the most appropriate license for each image? And also, isn't there a potential legal risk in falsely applying the screenshot license indiscriminately to all these titlepics? --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 21:25, 18 October 2023 (CDT)
  
By contrast, the Hangar map has obvious letters on the image matching the walkthrough text: [https://doomwiki.org/w/images/2/2e/E1M1_walkthrough.png]
+
== Self-promotion ==
 +
Recent attempts at self-promotion by various Doom people have led me to the following thoughts:
 +
* The practice of not-yet-notable mappers listing their work on their user pages should be prohibited in rules. The user page is for Wiki activity only. If a person doesn't meet the notability criteria (which are currently very loose), they should not have a Wiki page, regardless of whether it is located in the main or user space.
 +
* Attempts at self-promotion while simultaneously failing to meet the notability criteria should be a valid reason for speedy deletion. I propose to create a special criterion for this case or add a special quick voting mechanism so that the votes of at least 3 active editors are sufficient for deletion.
 +
What do you think? --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 15:38, 22 October 2023 (CDT)
 +
:I don't see anything wrong with people talking about what they've done on their user page. A user page (i.e., User:WikiUserName) is not an article page. And notability is always a thorny issue. You'd get a situation where some people are allowed to talk about their works and others aren't, based entirely on whether a jury deems them notable? Nah, that doesn't sound good. I agree that self-promotion can be annoying, but one person's own user page is specifically where it's harmless. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 03:00, 23 October 2023 (CDT)
  
Were new images uploaded and the next just never updated to match, or anything like that? Obviously it's not that much of a big deal since I can figure out where the secrets are by just using noclip and process of elimination, but it is strange.
+
:: I agree with Gez concerning your first proposal - I feel like a user's Talk page is pretty much their turf and they can post whatever they want (apart from grossly offensive or discriminatory content, etc).<p>But I do agree with the second proposal - self-promotion isn't nearly as much of a grey area as notability. If a mapper is creating an article about their own work that isn't especially well-known/received, then they are self-promoting. If this was allowed in the past, that doesn't mean we have to continue to allow it going forward. If we don't want self-promotion on the wiki, then we should think about adopting a (near) zero-tolerance policy toward it - map makers should simply not create their own articles, neither about themselves nor about their work—unless their work is already clearly notable (a mention somewhere in the Cacowards is always a good marker everybody can agree on).</p>Now, with regards to notability, we do have the [[Doom_Wiki:FAQ#Can_I_write_an_article_about_my_mod.3F|definition of notability]] in the FAQ that lists three criteria for it: popularity, acclaim, and historical value. And I think these are good, valid points to use as a baseline in any decision making about determining notability. I would personally like to add a fourth criterion here that a WAD can also qualify as notable for by being ''significant'' within the context of a specific genre or category of Doom gameplay or modding. For example, I recently created a {{cat|Platforming WADs}} category and added articles for some WADs that are specifically notable from within the context of [[jumping|platforming]] in Doom, though not necessarily notable outside of it. But of course, notability can't be defined exactly (let alone numerically) and there will (and should) always be a healthy margin for interpretation when it comes to something so subjective. However, that does not mean that no guidelines for notability should be applied at all and the only criterion for inclusion we are left with is whether or not a WAD has a stable release. I don't know how far things listed in the FAQ are counted as official guidelines (I was under the assumption that they do count), but given that there is a desire from the editors' side to have some form of notability standard be applied for the creation of wiki articles and the fact that notability is already rather neatly defined in the FAQ, I don't see why these points can't be officially adopted and, as a result, enforced. They are also not in disagreement with the existing rule under [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Things that may have articles|guidelines]] that states: "If a game, WAD, editor, or utility exists only in source/demo/beta form, but is available to the general public and meets all the criteria below, then it can be included." The emphasis here is on ''can'', not ''must'' or ''should''. So if a work does not meet any notability threshold, it can be excluded based on these guidelines. And finally, in the case where a WAD very clearly does not meet any notability threshold AND also constitutes a very obvious case of self-promotion, I think the situation is rather straightforward and a speedy deletion vote as proposed by Nockson is called for. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 06:25, 23 October 2023 (CDT)
 +
::: Okay, I've looked through the guidelines again. The only line (that I was able to find) related to contents of a user page is this: ''"Your User: page can say anything you wish, subject to server performance and applicable law."'' I think this should be corrected ASAP. You see, most people who have never edited any wiki will not see the difference between pages in main and user space. I've seen some people linking from the main space to their user page or adding categories such as "Mappers" there. I believe that self-promotion must be fought wherever it occurs. These people don't care about the Wiki. They're here because they think having a DoomWiki page will make them notable, when in reality it's the other way around.
 +
::: Getting back to the point - we can use Wikipedia's {{wp|Wikipedia:User pages|guidelines on user pages}}: ''"User pages are pages for organizing the work users do on Wikipedia, as well as speaking to other users. ... Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal website. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project."'' Imagine if someone used their user page as a pseudo-article about their first map? Something clearly needs to be done about this. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 12:46, 23 October 2023 (CDT)
 +
:::: The current guidelines [[Doom_Wiki:Policies_and_guidelines#Referring_to_people|do have a thing]] against linking to user page from the main namespace. Any such inappropriate link can therefore be removed. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 13:35, 23 October 2023 (CDT)
  
[[Special:Contributions/70.30.107.183|70.30.107.183]] 14:20, 3 August 2020 (CDT)
+
← ← ←<br>
 +
(Gregor wrote: "...a user's Talk page..."  Small correction: this is not about talk pages (used to communicate) but the main User page.)
  
: Nothing's wrong with browser or eyes. Walkthrough, i.e. spotted, maps have been created for nearly two dozen maps (Doom E1, E2M1-5, E2M9, E4M1, Heretic E4M1-5, [[MAP01: Staging Area (Doom 64)|Doom64 MAP01]], and [[Oniria]]), using various approaches. It's a very time-consuming process of which so far no part has been automated, although an investigation into those possibilities is still on my to-do list. So this continues to be a human effort which, in this particular aspect of the wiki, happens to occur few and far between. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 15:13, 3 August 2020 (CDT)
+
In a few recent instances where a new contributor created their own person page in main space with few or mostly unnotable works, this was promptly moved or copied to their User page. The body-of-work type list was preserved, not as explicit approval of this kind of usage for their user page but so as not to be completely unwelcoming to such newcomers.  But any links from main to user space and people categories on the user page were immediately removed per the guidelines. In fact on October 11, I did a clean-up pass on old redirects from user pages to main space, which are also against the rules (simple wikilinks are okay). And that was also why I needed to fix {{tl|Competnuser}} the other day, as I belatedly noticed my [[User:Xymph/Speedrunners|speedrunners]] page showed up in {{cat|Compet-n players}}.
  
== Voodoo dolls listed under statistic things for deathmatch mode ==
+
We are not responsible for other people not seeing the difference between person pages in main vs. user space, or outside links to them.  Within the wiki everything meets the current guidelines or can be quickly resolved under them.  Nockson does have a fair point that wiki's are not general websites and that a few users may believe that having a wiki page makes them notable. The Doom Wiki is however a core part of the wider Doom community, so the question is whether a user page can cover a person's community activities or should be restricted to wiki activities like on Wikipedia. In many areas Wikipedia is understandably more strict than the Doom Wiki, but like others above I'm relucant to apply similar limitations here -- as judged by which jury?
  
Example article: [[MAP02: Down Through (Sunlust)#Things|MAP02: Down Through (Sunlust)]]
+
Currently [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=Search&search=%22body+of+work%22&ns2=1&profile=advanced half a dozen pages] with a body-of-work list exist, where the first three ([[Mrchris]], [[Matador]], [[Kaapeli47]]) also have a very similar main space article. So this is really about the three person pages created this month (quickly moved to user space) and which did indeed have a whiff of self-promotion, especially in connection with the WAD articles two of them created ([[The I.M.P. Act]], {{deleted|OVERLOAD}}).
  
This may be grasping at straws, but for the generated level stat tables I noticed the "Voodoo doll" row can appear in the Deathmatch table. Should this be excluded given Doom doesn't use the player 1-to-4 starts in deathmatch mode? i.e., [[Voodoo script]]s and [[crusher]] / [[barrel]] instadeaths don't work.
+
In short, I don't see body-of-work lists on user pages as harmful to the wiki, and if (per Nockson's example) a user page is written up into a map article, then this can be addressed via {{tl|SpeedyDelete}} reason 8 "Inappropriate use of user pages" or the page can be moved to a [[Doom Wiki:FAQ#Where can I experiment with or draft a page.3F Is there a sandbox.3F|sandbox path]] below the user page.
  
I noticed the "Cooperative start" row only appears in the Cooperative table so excluding "Voodoo doll" in Deathmatch table makes sense.
+
For mods I second Gregor's reasoning and am okay with adding the fourth, context criterion. Got a proposal how to word it?
  
... unless a source port exists that allows voodoo dolls to work when the {{c|-deathmatch}} parameter is enabled? I'm not aware of any. --[[User:Afterglow|Afterglow]] ([[User talk:Afterglow|talk]]) 20:31, 15 August 2020 (CDT)
+
The guidelines against self-promotion should however be easier to find. It had been so long since I read the FAQ that I had forgotten it already had relevant entries on this. Linking the FAQ from the people and WAD criteria is a suitable way to improve visibility without duplicating rules. So that's what I did just now, hope this is okay with (uber-)admins.
  
: Hello.&nbsp; Sounds like a reasonable question, given that keys are already omitted.&nbsp; Is [[User talk:Xymph/DMMPST#Misc. things and player starts|this]] the original discussion?&nbsp; Maybe nobody thought of it at the time.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 13:00, 17 August 2020 (CDT)
+
To deal with clear violations of either guideline, I agree on adding a speedy delete option. How about "17 = Clear self-promotion of person or their mod."? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:44, 25 October 2023 (CDT)
  
: No, I don't think that ever came up during development & discussion. But it makes sense, so implemented and tested now. Will update all pertaining map pages. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:38, 20 August 2020 (CDT)
+
: ''"...this was promptly moved or copied to their User page."'' - Sorry, but I think it was a mistake. The correct solution, IMO, would be to move this content to the user's '''sandbox''' and place a link to it on their page. This will make the user's page more difficult to confuse with the real article. It would also be a good idea to import {{wp|Template:User page|this template}} from Wikipedia and place it on similar user pages.
 +
: ''"...as judged by which jury?"'' - According to the rules that need to be updated. I'll come up with some ideas in a few days and post them here.
 +
: ''"...this can be addressed via SpeedyDelete..."'' - I don't understand what the difference is between turning a user's page into a map page or an article about a person? Why are you ready to tolerate the latter and at the same time propose to speedy delete the former? Currently, the rules allow the user to do almost anything with their page. This is why I suggest using Wikipedia's rules about user pages.
 +
: I also fully agree with the new speedy deletion criteria. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 14:01, 25 October 2023 (CDT)
  
==New category suggestion==
+
←←←<br>
I am thinking about adding Weapons by type under Weapons, and then creating subcategories there such as Pistols, Rifles, Shotguns, Rocket launchers, Crossbows, etc. The already-existing Demonic weapons would also move under that subcat. Any feedback? --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 03:35, 31 August 2020 (CDT)
+
(Xymph wrote: "For mods I second Gregor's reasoning and am okay with adding the fourth, context criterion. Got a proposal how to word it?")<br>In keeping with the wording of the other three criteria, how about something like "contextually significant ([[Jumpmaze X]], [[Doomer Boards Projects]])"?
:Sounds fine. So the category would work across games, e.g. the crossbow category would include Heretic's ethereal crossbow, Strife's electric/poison crossbow, and perhaps DE's ballista? I think the same idea could also be applied to monsters. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 04:50, 1 September 2020 (CDT)
+
Besides that, I also agree with the new speedy deletion criterion. Seems useful and reasonable. I don't know how quickly something like this can be implemented. If it can be done relatively quickly I would hold off on opening a deletion vote for OVERLORD as it would very clearly qualify for the new criterion. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 14:40, 25 October 2023 (CDT)
:: Yeah that's the gist of the idea. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 05:42, 1 September 2020 (CDT)
+
: Speaking about the notability criteria, the first one should also perhaps be revised not to be quite so demanding in its definition of popularity. "Incredibly popular" is a bit much to expect, I think. That would really only allow for seminal works like Valiant, Brutal Doom, Eviternity, and MyHouse to have their own articles. I understand that these criteria were formulated in the early days of the wiki when the landscape still looked different in terms of the sheer number of significant wads being created every year. So one could get away with being a bit more picky about what qualified as popular. Nowadays though, a "hugely popular" or even a simple "very popular" probably better describes the practical threshold for inclusion based on this criterion. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 15:06, 25 October 2023 (CDT)
: If there are enough articles, sure.&nbsp; I guess there's a small chance they attract paragraphs of headcanon.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; Would existing subcats move to "Weapons by game"? &nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 11:17, 2 September 2020 (CDT)
 
: No problems there. Will add a level of additional granularity. May take some time to get right but if things have to be moved i can always take a look at that. --[[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 14:25, 2 September 2020 (CDT)
 
  
Let's see what we have to work with:
+
The volume of text makes it impractical for me to answer to everything but I would like to add a few thoughts:
{| {{prettytable}}
+
* While I agree that self promotion is not desirable and should be discouraged, at the same time I think we shouldn't conflate the desire to self-promote with the somewhat naive enthusiasm that a few newcomers to the community have, where I think they legitimately thought they were helping.
! Game !! Pages in weapons category
+
* In terms of self-promotion, the worst example on the wiki is likely [[Mike MacDee (Impie)]]'s works: not only are some of them excessively detailed (such as [[Project Einherjar]] having multiple pages for its episodes in a way that literally no other mod does), but the notability threshold was barely ever met for some of them as they are mostly of dubious quality and significance. The author even went out of his way to promote [[The Plutonia Experiment (Series)|his own fanfic]] on the wiki for some reason. If there ever was a target in need of cleanup for notability, I would say the extra episodes for Project Einherjar would definitely qualify. It's maybe too late now to remove some of the less notable works which have pages and everything, but I am bringing this up because Impie is [[User:Xymph/Mappers ranked by map count|ranked second in terms of mapping output on this wiki]] for no reason other than self-promotion, when other very prolific mappers have comparatively very few pages on their works for the simple reason that they didn't self-promote and making so many pages was felt to be excessive. And I think that's just unfair.
|-
+
* I would like to place a strong emphasis on historical significance, particularly when it comes to WADs from the 90s and early 2000s. A WAD that would be good to fantastic in 1994 would not make much of a splash today, which is why its release date should count towards the notability. But I think everyone already agrees on this part.
| Doom || BFG9000 Chaingun Chainsaw Fist Pistol Plasma gun Rocket launcher Shotgun Super shotgun
+
* I feel much less strongly about self-promotions on ''user pages''. For one thing, they are not parsed by the regular search function, making their usefulness as self-promotion a lot more dubious (even though I suppose they would show up on google). I am of the opinion that anyone can do whatever they want on their user page, and I have a neutral stance on whether that information should go to the sandbox section instead.
|-
+
* Regarding the proposed fourth addition to notability, how about expanding it to being notable also to a particular sub-community? A lot of [[Skulltag]] or [[ZDaemon]] mods for example would fall into such a category. [[Odamex CTF]] by itself is not a particularly notable WAD in Doom modding in general or even compared to some other CTF WADs, but it is an extremely notable WAD within the context of Odamex and thus worth covering for that reason alone. [[Willem Sitters]]'s maps (even though articles don't exist yet, but will soon) are not that well known in the broader Doom community but are extremely important for the [[Risen3D]] scene. And so on and so forth.
| Canceled || Assault rifle (Doom) Dark claw Machine gun (Doom) Probjectile Spray rifle Unmaker
+
* Also, another thing that is maybe obvious but bears specifying: I indeed oppose the idea of modders creating pages for themselves or their own work, but I am not opposed to the idea of them ''expanding'' said articles with more detail, because after all, in a niche community such as Doom, who would know these works better than the creators themselves? So I think we should treat these two aspects very differently and encourage the latter.
|-
+
* I fully agree with the new speedy delete proposal, perhaps an admin i.e. Gez would like to weigh in on this?
| Dooom 64 || Demon Key Unmaker
+
* Regarding Wikipedia, that website needs to use different and more stringent rules owing to its much greater and general scope, I don't think it should serve as an example to follow in every situation, we can afford to be slightly more loose and lenient if we so choose. I say this as someone who is also an extremely active Wikipedia editor, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Dynamo128&target=Dynamo128&offset=&limit=500 with over 1,000 edits there], so I would say I'm familiar enough with the place to be able to comment on this aspect.
|-
+
I'll add more thoughts if they come to mind but hopefully this is helpful to iron out a few of the details being discussed here. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 04:19, 26 October 2023 (CDT)
| Doom RPG || Axe Dog collar Fire extinguisher
 
|-
 
| Doom 3 || BFG 9000 (Doom 3) Chaingun (Doom 3) Chainsaw (Doom 3) Double barrel shotgun (Doom 3) Fists (Doom 3) Flashlight Grenade Ionized Plasma Levitator Machine gun Pistol (Doom 3) Plasma gun (Doom 3) Rocket launcher (Doom 3) Shotgun (Doom 3) Soul Cube The Artifact
 
|-
 
| Doom 2016 || BFG-9000 (Doom 2016) Burst rifle Chaingun (Doom 2016) Chainsaw (Doom 2016) Combat shotgun Demon control grenade EMG Mark V pistol Fist (Doom 2016) Frag grenade Gauss cannon Grenade launcher (Doom 2016) Heavy assault rifle Hellshot Kinetic mine Lightning gun Pistol (Doom 2016) Plasma rifle (Doom 2016) Reaper (weapon) Rocket launcher (Doom 2016) Siphon grenade Static cannon Super shotgun (Doom 2016) Tesla rocket Vortex rifle Weapon modification Weapon upgrade
 
|-
 
| Doom VFR || BFG grenade launcher Grenade launcher (Doom 2016)
 
|-
 
| Doom Eternal || Ballista BFG-9000 (Doom Eternal) Blood punch Chaingun (Doom Eternal) Chainsaw (Doom Eternal) Combat shotgun (Doom Eternal) Crucible (Doom Eternal) Doomblade Flame belch Frag grenade (Doom Eternal) Heavy cannon Ice bomb Pistol (Doom Eternal) Plasma rifle (Doom Eternal) Rocket launcher (Doom Eternal) Super shotgun (Doom Eternal) Unmaykr Weapon modification Weapon upgrade
 
|-
 
| Hacx || Cryogun Hoig Reznator Kick Nuker Photon 'zooka Pistol (Hacx) Stick Tazer Uzi
 
|-
 
| Heretic || Dragon Claw Elven Wand Ethereal Crossbow Firemace Gauntlets of the Necromancer Hellstaff Phoenix Rod Staff
 
|-
 
| Hexen || Arc of death Bloodscourge Firestorm Frost Shards Hammer of Retribution Mace of Contrition Quietus Sapphire Wand Serpent Staff Spiked gauntlets Timon's Axe Wraithverge
 
|-
 
| Strife || Assault rifle Crossbow Flamethrower Grenade launcher Mauler Mini-missile launcher Punch dagger The Sigil of the One God
 
|}
 
So besides the already added pistols, shotguns, double-barreled shotguns, and demonic weapons categories, here's what else we could have:
 
* Utility weapons: Probjectile, Flashlight, Ionized Plasma Levitator , Fire extinguisher
 
* Improvised weapons: Flashlight, Fire extinguisher, Dog collar
 
* Melee weapons: Fist, Axe, Fists (Doom 3), Fist (Doom 2016), Blood punch, Crucible (Doom Eternal), Doomblade, Kick, Staff, Mace of Contrition, Spiked gauntlets, Hammer of Retribution, Timon's Axe, Punch dagger, Hoig Reznator
 
* Rocket launchers: the many Doom variants, and Mini-missile launcher
 
* Grenades: Grenade, Frag grenade, Siphon Grenade, Demon control grenade, Kinetic mine, Tesla rocket, Frag grenade (Doom Eternal), Ice bomb
 
* Grenade launchers: Grenade launcher (2016), BFG Grenade Launcher, Grenade launcher
 
* Plasma weapons: the plasma guns/rifles, Stick
 
* Electric weapons: Static cannon, Hoig Reznator, Tazer, Arc of Death, Crossbow
 
* BFG: BFG9000, BFG 9000 (Doom 3), BFG-9000 (Doom 2016), BFG Grenade Launcher, BFG-9000 (Doom Eternal)
 
* Flamethrowers: Flame belch, Flamethrower
 
* Crossbows: Ethereal crossbow, Crossbow
 
* Magical staves: Hellstaff, Phoenix Rod, Serpent Staff
 
* Magical wands: Elven Wand, Sapphire Wand, Bloodscourge, Wraithverge
 
* Magical gloves: Dragon Claw, Gauntlets of the Necromancer
 
* Magical swords: Crucible (Doom Eternal) (arguably), Quietus
 
* Spells: Firestorm, Frost Shards, Arc of Death
 
...
 
I'm not entirely sure what to do with the various rifles/machine guns/chainguns. Light automatic weapons and heavy automatic weapons? Also I kind of feel like the Soul Cube, Unmaykr, and Sigil of the One God could have a category for them, "alien super-weapons" maybe? I don't like that name but they're not demonic. Also I don't know what to do with most of Hacx's weapons. They're various kinds of ill-explained energy weapons (photon zooka shoots photons? So it's just a torchlight?) --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 04:52, 3 September 2020 (CDT)
 
: If we were to go by the taxonomy of real-world weaponry (which is not necessarily a serious suggestion, but let's see where it leads), the various semi- and fully-automatic weapons would fall into the following categories:
 
<div class="dw-div-dl">
 
* Long guns (this would actually by definition also include shotguns)
 
** Machine guns (definition: fully automatic)
 
*** Rotary cannons / Gatling guns
 
**** All chainguns
 
*** Submachine guns (fully automatic; using pistol-calibre ammo IRL)
 
**** Machine gun (Doom)
 
**** Machine gun (Doom 3) - Based on IRL classification of corresponding similar RL weapon {{wp|FN P90}}
 
**** Machine pistols
 
***** Uzi
 
** Rifles
 
*** Selective-fire rifles (multiple firing modes)
 
**** Carbines (short barrel)
 
***** Heavy assault rifle
 
***** Heavy cannon
 
**** Assault rifle (Doom) - NB: technically. You can let off for one round that's more accurate, or hold down for auto.
 
**** Assault rifle (Strife) - Similar. Burst fire or automatic.
 
**** Burst rifle - Explicitly calls itself this accurately
 
</div>
 
: Well you can see one problem of course is that Doom has never actually contained a {{wp|chain gun}}. So that might confuse people. There is also a confusing border, even in IRL, between machine guns and selective-fire rifles at times, to where the categorization might become vague or a topic of conflict. None of this is to mention the dreaded classification of "assault rifle" which is all over the place. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 08:26, 3 September 2020 (CDT)
 
  
==Codex material final straw==
+
:With regards to the point Dynamo raised concerning the scope of a potential fourth criterion, I just want to point out that I think the wording I proposed—"contextually significant"—already allows for sub-communities to be covered by it. Something that's important within the Skulltag community for instance would qualify as contextually significant. However, I would add one condition to it, that the genre or sub-community for which the mod in question is significant should itself qualify as notable first. If a mod X is to be considered notable for being part of Y, then Y itself must also be notable to allow for that rationale to make sense. In particular, Y should meet one of the other three criteria for notability (popularity, acclaim, historical value) to qualify as notable. I think this way it works quite well as a criterion—not too lenient but also flexible enough to be useful.<p></p> The other point I wanted to bring up is in relation to mod authors creating their own articles versus contributing to existing ones. I think that notability is again the key factor here. Because otherwise a mod author could just create an article under a different account name, or have a friend create the article for them and then expand it. That would circumvent the self-promotion restriction but still be self-promotion, just in a less obvious way. If on the other hand, all articles that are created must meet at least one of the notability criteria, while that doesn't solve all potential problems connected with self-promotion, as an author might still contribute to an existing article with the express intent to self-promote, at least the existence of the article itself isn't in question at this point and makes sense from the perspective of the wiki. It becomes a problem about the quality and intent of the content—not whether the article should exist at all. Long-winded way of saying, I agree that authors can contribute to existing articles that cover their work as long as their work meets at least one notability threshold—otherwise the article in question shouldn't exist in the first place. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 10:58, 27 October 2023 (CDT)
So I'm busy for a couple of days and I come back to the entirety of the '16 and Eternal codex contents having been up since the 8th, and not a single one has even been flagged for speedy delete on copyvio grounds, let alone anything done about it. I've really had it with this. I can't put up with it, it is an unacceptable risk to me personally. This is a warning to all mods that I require support with moderation of contents on these grounds, or else there are going to be major changes required to how this site works with respect to new or unregistered contributors. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 16:59, 11 September 2020 (CDT)
 
  
: Special thanks to [[User:TheGreenHerring]] for stepping up to help with cleanup. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 17:19, 11 September 2020 (CDT)
+
:: I agree with all of Dynamo's comments. The "contextually significant" entry to notability in the FAQ is fine, but I don't feel like that needs to be fenced off very strictly. Every sub-genre or -culture is part of a bigger one, and recursively requiring a context to be notable itself can make things more complicated than necessary. Every article can still be debated for its own merits. The [[Special:Diff/421200|entry]] has been added.
 +
:: Re. Impie, the fact that his covered mods have map pages is not only due to him starting to cover some maps, but also due to me completing all such series via normal XymphBot processes, for consistency's sake if nothing else. This is probably a factor not mentioned so far: guidelines for covering mods according to notability were adhered to more strongly a decade or so ago, simply because of the excessive human effort required to cover map series if the bar were lowered too much. With the automation progress made there after 2016, the wiki can cover a wider array of mods influenced also by practical aspects (server resources, my time/energy) and not just strict principles. I don't think pragmatism is a wrong direction as such (and I have already drawn some practical lines myself) and this comprehensive mod coverage also distinguishes us from the 'other' wiki (which doesn't even have real Cacowards coverage after 2014 or so) as the community wiki par excellence. But I'm no fan of removing long-established articles with good information like English Wikipedia is doing, so pruning the episode articles for Project Einherjar and [[Strange Aeons]] would be a bridge crossed too long ago IMO.
 +
:: Btw, early this month [[Talk:Outpost Outbreak|I opened]] a discussion/deletion vote on one such article that is waiting for participants. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:06, 30 October 2023 (CDT)
  
: Note - I was super frustrated when I made the above post; please don't take it too seriously. I appreciate everybody and apologize for letting myself get too worked up over something that was fixable w/o a major fuss. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 20:48, 16 September 2020 (CDT)
+
← ← ←<br>
 +
So I've been asked to chime in again. On the issue of people creating pages for their own works -- while I agree it can go too far (fanfiction isn't really in this wiki's focus AFAIK), I'm reticent to ban it outright. Thing is, a wiki only contains what its contributors put in, and sometimes nobody gets around to fill in notable works. If it's the author who ends up doing it, is it bad just because it's the author? For the new speedy delete category, I'm not against it in principle, but hope it'll be used responsibly, only for truly egregious cases. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 15:16, 29 October 2023 (CDT)
  
==Page merges in light of The Ancient Gods, Part One==
+
Just to chime in myself, I am not in favor of any additional restrictions on user page content. Listing things you've done there whether or not the wiki considers them notable has always been fine and I don't see any possible issues. A User page cannot be cited, it cannot be linked from mainspace except in the most rare situations, and it is absolutely not suitable for use as evidence of notability because anyone can make them and they are not held to the accuracy standards of mainspace. I don't see  any need for more strict policy in mainspace either. What we've had for years is working fine. Self-creation of pages is ''heavily discouraged'' but it is not ''disallowed'' for reasons already mentioned here, such as consistent overlooking of works otherwise considered notable in the community. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 22:12, 29 October 2023 (CDT)
Given that the DLC confirms beyond all doubt that Samuel Hayden and the Seraphim (as well as VEGA and the Father) are the same person, should we merge their pages together accordingly or allow them to remain as separate pages? I'm not sure which course of action is preferable, given how much of the pages will need to be rewritten either way.--[[User:Newlydoomed|Newlydoomed]] ([[User talk:Newlydoomed|talk]]) 14:21, 20 October 2020 (CDT)
 
:And having seen several of the Codex entries as well as some confusion on my part after learning that "Seraphim" is the name of a species rather than an individual, I've had to go back and do significant rewrites to several articles. Any help that could be given would be greatly appreciated. --[[User:Newlydoomed|Newlydoomed]] ([[User talk:Newlydoomed|talk]]) 12:30, 22 October 2020 (CDT)
 
  
: I am personally opposed to this because of the narrative complexity and the already sufficient length of each article involved. If someone has come to the wiki curious about Samuel Hayden, having played Doom '16 only, then they will simply be confused if they arrive at Samur Maykr and will have to put in serious effort to try to separate the two subjects. This isn't even getting into the real-life elements of characterization that are a bit inconsistent either. Some things clearly changed during Eternal's writing phase from what was originally intended. This is best captured if the article takes what '16 says about Hayden at face value and doesn't try to reinterpret it into the lens of what is added later. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 05:37, 26 October 2020 (CDT)
+
: Okay, the template [[Special:Diff/421199|has been expanded]] but should primarily be used for the obvious cases of mod self-promotion, not for the notable mods that would be covered anyway and that its author just happened to beat another editor to. Most participants above are against restricting or labeling user page content. Self-promotional person pages in main space could be speedy-deleted or moved to the pertaining User area (depending on the circumstances) so as not to stifle their "somewhat naive enthusiasm", as Dynamo put it and as I did a few times this month. I hope this correctly summarizes the gist of the above discussion. (Note that the speedy-delete process allows anyone to raise a discussion and call for a normal vote as yet.) --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:06, 30 October 2023 (CDT)
  
== wiki upgrade ==
+
:: I did not agree that this is a suitable reason for speedy deletion either. That's a complete circumvention of the usual process of determining consensus about what is or is not notable. By having this as a speedy deletion reason you are saying there is no need to ever debate ''any'' notability dispute, in effect. That's what we want?? This is completely unprecedented in the history of the wiki's administration and sounds like the kind of thing that was used to scaremonger about us moving off of Wikia back in 2011 by comparison to previous policy. I can see if it's going to be restricted to the utmost painfully obvious and egregious examples of bad content, but the first time I see this applied to something worthy at all of debate I'm going to feel vindicated in asserting that it's a slippery slope to admin overreach. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 10:53, 2 November 2023 (CDT)
  
this wiki lacks various useful templates such as the mention and notification template found in wikipedia i think.[[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 07:22, 1 December 2020 (CST)
+
::: Not to belabor the point, but the added reason for speedy deletion is self-promotion, ''not'' lack of notability. So a lack of notability alone only allows for the normal deletion vote. And a speedy deletion call can always be downgraded to a normal deletion vote if there's disagreement. In fact, the way Xymph phrased it above, only the combination of blatant self-promotion AND a clear lack of notability will qualify for the new criterion. Also, the added context threshold for notability makes it easier to argue for the notability of an article. So I don't think this will lead to notable work being deleted without discussion. What it does, is allow for those truly egregious cases to be removed more quickly and with less hassle. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 16:09, 2 November 2023 (CDT)
  
: Hello!&nbsp; It's usually possible to fork a Wikipedia template in some form, but it might not remain useful if it relies on specific characteristics of Wikipedia, such as MediaWiki extensions, categorization rules, or a huge editor base with many active admins and bots.&nbsp; Do you have specific examples in mind?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 18:50, 2 December 2020 (CST)
+
:::: Given that until now speedy deletion was only for the utmost trivial of issues where discussion is pointless entirely because they are effectively routine maintenance tasks, this is a dramatic expansion of the power of the utility. It runs counter to the terms under which speedy deletion as a policy was accepted in the first place, if you care to go back and read the discussions on that at the time. It was only adopted under an agreement that it would not, in fact, be expanded to cover any type of content where discussion, even if minimal, might be warranted. To me this seems to be based not only on a false assertion - that we are apparently overrun with such content to the point that it's an administrative issue - but is reaching toward giving power users more influence by-proxy, so that they can tag certain things they happen to not personally like as speedy delete and then get an admin to do it for them without any thought given. I don't see that as appropriate, it's not how things have been done here in general ever before. Speedy delete is precisely dangerous because it doesn't provide for a necessary chance for there to be any disagreement. Speedy delete means that, if I as a singular admin look at the page and, even if I know nothing personally about the situation, decide I also don't care for it, then it's gone, period. If nobody got to weigh in yet well, too bad. I need to see all these supposed cases where the normal deletion process did not already work for such articles before I'm going to agree that speedy delete is even valid for this purpose. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 21:53, 2 November 2023 (CDT)
: [[Ryan W]] the <nowiki>{{ping}}</nowiki> template also known as <nowiki>{{u}}</nowiki> template[[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 06:29, 3 December 2020 (CST)
 
::Those seem to be discussion utilities and that's not the primary purpose of this wiki. Editing someone's talk page already gives them a notification, by the way. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 07:51, 3 December 2020 (CST)
 
:::On Wikipedia, "notification" implies the added features of the [[mediawikiwiki:Notifications|Echo extension]] which we don't have.&nbsp; So <nowiki>{{ping}}</nowiki> wouldn't function, and <nowiki>{{u}}</nowiki> would create a link without pinging, which seems pedantic to me, but certainly not against any rules.
 
:::Technical limitations can be overcome if someone throws enough code/cash at them, but I agree with Gez that the issue is qualitative.&nbsp; On-topic discussion is good.&nbsp; ''Rapid'' discussion, and pushing ''specific'' users to follow a thread, are social media conventions not aligned with this site's philosophy.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 11:48, 3 December 2020 (CST)
 
  
== Mediafire ==
+
::::: Some very good points here. After reading up on it, I understand Quasar's reluctance to agree to the new speedy deletion criterion. The bottom line for me is that articles of non-notable work (→not meeting any notability threshold + subjective margin) that constitute a clear case of blatant self-promotion should be deleted. Whether this happens through a normal deletion vote or speedy deletion is secondary to me. The normal deletion vote however can sometimes drag on for a long time and end without sufficient people voting on it, creating a deadlock in certain cases. I think the idea was to add the criterion to avoid exactly those types of situations where the case is clear but not enough people vote on it. Maybe the alternative proposal by Nockson to an additional speedy deletion criterion in the OP is a better solution. "I propose to create a special criterion for this case or add a special quick voting mechanism so that the votes of at least 3 active editors are sufficient for deletion." --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 14:37, 3 November 2023 (CDT)
  
So apparently for the coming new year, Mediafire's resolution is to delete all the old files. We have a few links to content hosted on Mediafire, this content is going to be dead links soon. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 08:21, 19 December 2020 (CST)
+
::::: In Quasar's Oct 29 response, he did not comment on the speedy delete topic, which I took as a "no objection", and went ahead as five other editors agreed (with the stated reservations about its use). So I was a little surprised by his Nov 2 (10:53) follow-up in the opposite direction. The 21:53 response helped me understand that stance better, as did reading up on the [[Doom Wiki talk:Criteria for speedy deletion|policy talk page]]. The thing is, in practice "speedy delete" meant to me ''not'' that the actual delete happened any faster than after a normal deletion vote, but only simpler, without being blocked by a lack of discussion and votes. In recent years I had grown accustomed to few (or sometimes no) admins looking after pending (speedy-)delete nominations regularly or timely. That is why I would prune speedy-deleted pages/files (via XymphBot) after at least three (often more) months of "no discussion/objection" (see the [[Special:Log/delete|Delete log]]). This way most nominations didn't drag on for many months or several years (a few did as I don't review the queue that frequently either), while still offering ample time for occasional passers-by to raise questions or change the speedy delete template into a regular one. The fact that an admin can swing by and delete such a page within days of its nomination simply hadn't occurred to me (until Quasar pruned the image with that absurd filename on Nov 2).
: Okay, I found [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch 10] and [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch 7] links to them, with some overlap and in one case (AIRSTRIP.ZIP) a mirror of a file still available elsewhere. Two (EtD1Setup.exe and resurge_map15_redkey.lmp) are already missing, I downloaded the others for safe-keeping. What would be a suitable hosting solution for the unique ones? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 08:49, 19 December 2020 (CST)
+
::::: For examples where the normal delete process drags on a year, see the [[:Category:Delete|two templates]] and [[File talk:Doomkid.jpg|this image]]. I understand and agree with Quasar's point that the speedy-delete process should be used only for trivial maintenance tasks, and that the wiki should operate by consensus as much as possible, also noted in the policy and its discussion. The question then comes back to whether user and mod pages created by the pertaining user themselves are to be viewed as (blatant? subtle? how can you tell?) self-promotion and whether dealing with that is trivial maintenance, or should still always be debated. I can see Quasar's slippery slope too, but if there is a regular discussion and vote, what turnout is required at minimum? 3 editors? 5 regular users? Something in between, or more? Conversely, Quasar, the mod that prompted this topic is [[OVERLOAD]] (along with person page moved to user space [[User:EPICALLL]]) - how do you feel about this being nominated for speedy delete under that new criterion?
::AIRSTRIK being mirrored on "redarchive" makes me think we might ask Redneckerz to host them? --[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 10:36, 19 December 2020 (CST)
+
::::: And all you other active editors, please review the [[:Category:Delete|delete nominations]] and chime in. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 07:59, 9 November 2023 (CST)
::: I covered AIRSTRIK on the DRD Team mirror primarily because of its rarity, so if the Mediafire mirror goes into flames - Well, there is a back up. Same for The Stick Figure which i believe i have backed up aswell. As for the other Mediafire links: Ill be glad to re-host them on DRD Team/RedArchive. I can put them in a special ''DoomWiki'' map for that purpose. Is there anything else required besides re-hosting and re-linking? --[[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 12:06, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 
:::: That would be great. Can't think of anything else, that should suffice. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:49, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 
::::: Just checking them out, those PlayStation Doom files are going to be troubling with several 100 megabytes a pop. My little DRD Team is/was used for rather files - Rather 20-30 megabytes at most instead of 200-300. I am not sure if that holds up - I have to check my limitations. Ill download them eitherway so i can always upload them but those files might be a problem given their size.--[[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 13:00, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 
:::::: Some of the others are large too, their combined size is 1.9 GB. So if your server is that limited, it would be a problem, yeah. Then you could cover just the other files and we'll look for another solution for those 6 psx ones. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:16, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 
::::::: It should be alright. I just saved them all and ill sync them on the FTP somewhere tomorrow. Ill let you know here if this succeeded. If i have to be frank, the PSXDoom stuff does come from a group whose works, impressive as it is, isn't the most organized, to say the least.--[[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 15:59, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 
:::::::: Mirroring and replacement of affected links is now complete. --[[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 14:23, 20 December 2020 (CST)
 
::::::::: Wow, thanks all!&nbsp; This is how wiki collaboration is ''supposed'' to work &mdash; matching up resources with issues.&nbsp; [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 14:56, 20 December 2020 (CST)
 
  
==Copyright vios round 2==
+
:::::: As an admin if I find that a speedy-delete nomination fits the suggested category, I can delete things ''instantly''. That's how it essentially works. There's no mandated delay or need for discussion. The fact it usually happens slower than that, particularly where I'm involved, is that I'm an anti-deletionist in general. I tend to think things might have a use and want to determine that isn't the case first. My opinion is still that speedy delete is not justified in the case you point out. A regular deletion template has been used for cases of non-notable works, and it didn't matter who created it. I don't understand the sudden concern with ''who'' is creating an article. "Don't self promote" is a rule of thumb not a rule of law here, according to the policies and guidelines. I didn't see that those were being amended. I didn't comment on it before because I missed it and didn't realize it was a suggestion. I only just have limited time for this lately. Super-long conversations are going to fly by me. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 16:29, 12 November 2023 (CST)
I have fully returned. It may be no secret that I was growing frustrated with the rate of incoming contributions that were not carefully sourced. I am currently auditing the backlog of things that need my review and as a result I have identified a few images that require handling ASAP. These are especially some full-page (or near) scans from the Dark Horse Books ''Art of Doom Eternal''; it's a minor miracle I have not received a takedown notice for these. Another I suspect comes from there but have not confirmed; either way the image is unsourced and thus doesn't meet our policy requirements. Round 3 will come if needed and will be added here as I continue reviews. Sorry in advance to anyone who might feel I'm being a "bad guy" by doing this; laws are only getting more draconian by the day&mdash;the US Congress just rammed through a bill that can let people sue you for up to $30k just for uploading images like these&mdash;and we cannot risk the entire site over some book scans. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 23:43, 27 December 2020 (CST)
 
  
===Current problem articles/files===
+
::::::: Alright, the template text "If you disagree with the speedy deletion nomination..." suggests there should be a window of opportunity to raise concerns, but I suppose with the trivial maintenance type of deletes that wasn't an important factor. The sudden concern arose from three user and two mod articles being created by those pertaining users in October, but indeed this was quite rare in preceding months/years. So I think wrapping up this extended discussion is best accomplished by revoking the new speedy delete criterion and starting a normal delete process on that one mod. It may take a long time but I also don't feel like this wiki needs a new, third delete-voting process. If the other editors participating in the above discussion can live with this outcome, then I will soon revert the SD template and initiate the normal delete. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:31, 13 November 2023 (CST)
* {{deleted|File:VariationsPalma.png}}
 
* {{deleted|File:ConceptPraetor.png}}
 
* {{deleted|File:DoomSlayerConceptArt.jpg}}
 
:All three images deleted, per the reasoning given. &mdash;[[User:TheGreenHerring|<font color="#007700">'''The Green Herring'''</font>]]<sup>([[User_talk:TheGreenHerring|<font color="#007700">''talk''</font>]])</sup> 00:28, 28 December 2020 (CST)
 
  
== Broken links to doomedsda.us ==
+
:::::::: As I stated above, it doesn't matter much to me whether the SD or normal deletion process is used as long it leads to a decision, not a stalemate. Having said that, I still think Nockson had a valid point for initiating this discussion in order to push for an update on the deletion voting process. I think it would be useful to have some clarification on that matter before wrapping up this discussion. That's also something I was wondering about myself. What's the minimum number of votes that are necessary to complete a discussion on a deletion? What constitutes consensus? And shouldn't there be a timeframe established for it? Any other form of voting in society is bound to a specific time period after which the vote is closed, whether you voted on it or not. Xymph mentioned to me that he normally waits three months before deleting SD requests. I think that's a pretty healthy timeframe for active editors to read up on the topic and make up their mind on whether they want to chime in or not. No vote to me means no objections, and the deletion can then go ahead after a set amount of time has passed. I don't see much benefit in a deletion vote that can take years to "complete". Especially, if at the end, we're still left with the issue of admin overreach if it's just down to an admin to decide when a discussion is closed.<p></p>With regards to OVERLOAD, I just like to point out that we already had the discussion about it on EPICFALLL's talk page and the consensus was that the mod does not meet any notability threshold and constitutes a very clear case of self-promotion. I don't think there's any disagreement on this. I don't see any reason therefore for another discussion that "may take a long time" as Xymph suggested. I'd say anybody with an opinion on it already voiced it, so there's no reason to wait much longer in this specific case. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 23:21, 13 November 2023 (CST)
  
We don't know the exact volume (Wayback Machine scrapes files [[Timer#External links|occasionally]]) but {{dwforumsp|id=2217790|title=anecdotal evidence}} is discouraging.&nbsp; [[MAP01: Kukloppe (10 Sectors)#Current records|Here]], for example, 8 of 8 links have expired.
+
::::::::: On [[Doomwiki (IRC channel)|#doomwiki]] Quasar provided a quick answer about the voting turnout, majority, timeframe: "there's never been a firm definition of those things, as there isn't on the wikipedia model that it adapts; a "reasonable" number, amount, etc". So there. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 15:06, 20 November 2023 (CST)
  
AIUI a complete solution requires further web development, but here are some band-aid ideas.&nbsp; I will be glad to implement them if people agree, excepting #4 which might be too large:
+
== Levels by editor ==
  
# Temporarily invoke [[Template:Frozenlink]] within [[Template:Dsdaftp]], with hover text directing readers to the generic DSDA item in "External links"
+
I came up with a "new" way to categorize levels/WADs - by the editor used. Does anyone else think this is a good idea and actually useful? If yes, what is the correct name for it: ''"Levels by editor"'' or ''"Levels by editing utility"''? --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 14:05, 30 October 2023 (CDT)
# When [[Template:Dsdauser]] and [[Template:Dsda2user]] are used together, and the first represents 100% redundant content, remove it ([[Dean Joseph (deathz0r)#External links|example]])
+
: Don't find that particularly useful or interesting: the result and how it's used (e.g. which port) matters, not how a mapper arrived there. Also, while for single-author projects the editor may often be documented, in CPs lots of mappers may use a variety of tools but this is usually not documented per map. And even then, would wiki visitors select levels/WADs because they were built in one editor and ignore those built in others? Seems unlikely to me. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 18:26, 30 October 2023 (CDT)
# Hope that archive.org re-enables deeplinking when their bandwidth issues subside, and retarget certain links there ([[Going Down#External links|example]]).&nbsp; While not {{dwforumsp|id=2227812|title=my primary goal}}, that feature WAS WORKING the day I tested it
 
# Peripheral mass edits to reduce 404s:
 
#: (a) Replace [[User:Xymph/List of templatable links|bare links to zip files]] with [[Template:Dsdaftp]], so any remediation propagates automatically
 
#: (b) Update links of the form '''{{c|<nowiki>[http://doomedsda.us Doomed Speed Demos Archive]</nowiki>}}''' above map record tables
 
#: (c) Remove the dummy string '''{{c|<nowiki>{{competnftp|**|**}}</nowiki>}}'''.&nbsp; Now that pwad records have rolled out, such links are vanishingly unlikely to be used
 
#: (d) List invalid Wayback Machine links generated by [[Template:Dsda]], [[Template:Dsdauser]], and [[Template:Dsdauserp]] ([[Seongbae Park (antares031)#External links|example]])
 
#: (e) List usages of [[Template:Archived link]] containing bare links to doomedsda.us
 
  
P.S.&nbsp; None of this was caused by the automated tasks in [[#Speedrunning record tables|the above section]], which look great in my limited review so far.&nbsp; :>&nbsp; Any feedback or additional proposals appreciated!&nbsp; Thanks, [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 16:14, 3 January 2021 (CST)
+
== Page Suggestion: Elemental Damage ==
  
:Didn't reply sooner but have been working on this in tandem with the [[#DSDA records tables|map/WAD records]] since last year, and I think everything is sufficiently cleaned up.
+
This page would cover the following elements.
:# Templates [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Dsdauser|Dsdauser]] and [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Dsdauserp|Dsdauserp]] have archive links and are only left on user articles when the user has a reasonable number of demos on the old site (typically only [[FDA]] entries) that aren't on the new site, and a user profile (which the new site doesn't support). This covers item 2 above.
 
:# [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Dsdaftp|Dsdaftp]] (with archive link) is only still in use for the [[Plutonia 2]] FDA demos. This negates the need for item 1.
 
:# All direct file links to old/new sites [[User:Xymph/List of templatable links|have been templated]] (item 4a). This also includes the old [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=ftp%3A%2F%2F.zip&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch ftp://.zip stub] and [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=http%3A%2F%2Fcompetn.doom2.net%2F&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch competn.doom2.net links]. And also almost all Compet-n links, btw.
 
:# Item 4b was covered by the scripted updates, no more [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=http%3A%2F%2Fdoomedsda.us&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch external links].
 
:# 4c ditto, though there is no working query to confirm that because of the asterisks.
 
:In my experience with archive.org links, there is no need for further effort on items 3, 4d, and 4e. Please let me know of any stragglers. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 11:08, 29 July 2022 (CDT)
 
  
== UAC Handbook ==
+
'''Heretic/Hexen:'''
  
Hi there. I own a copy of the UAC Handbook second-hand. Not sure where it originates from, but I'm assuming a promo pack for DOOM (2016). As it is a rarity, and as it doesn't appear to be transcribed elsewhere, would it be allowed to be transcribed on this wiki (copyright infringement barring)?
+
* Electric (Used by Arc of Death)
 +
* Fire Damage ([https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=%2216%3A+Fire+damage%22&go=1&x=0&y=0 Examples])
 +
* Ice Damage ([https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&fulltext=Search&search=%2229%3A+Does+ice+damage%22 Examples])
 +
* Poison (Inflicted by Serpent Staff and gas clouds from the [[Flechette|Cleric's Flechette]] or [[Mushroom]]s)
  
If so, I'd be more than happy to help contribute to a page if one were to be created and initially set up (I'm not entirely sure about the creation and formatting procedures). Also, whilst I don't have the means to scan the booklet, I can take reasonable-quality images if required.\
+
'''Strife:'''
  
P.S.: just found [https://www.videogameshelf.com/?p=5446 this article] which may be a good reference to link to in a potential page created on this wiki.
+
* Disintegration (Inflicted by [[Mauler]] and [[Sentinel]] projectiles)
 +
* Fire (Inflicted by [[Grenade launcher|Phosphorous grenades]] and [[Flamethrower]] puffs)
 +
* Poison (Already covered in [[Poison bolt]])
 +
* Spectral (Inflicted by [[The Sigil of the One God|Sigil's projectiles]]. Enemies with this element are [[Spectre_(Strife)|Spectres]], [[Entity|The Entity]] & its sub-entities, and [[Macil]] after you retake the castle)
  
--[[User:Rezalon|Rezalon]] ([[User talk:Rezalon|talk]]) 03:05, 25 May 2021 (CDT)
+
Would be a convenient crossroads page. [[User:MargaretThatcher|MargaretThatcher]] ([[User talk:MargaretThatcher|talk]]) 22:52, 14 November 2023 (CST)
 +
: I don't think the page is needed considering said information already works well in the articles related to such topics. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 04:08, 15 November 2023 (CST)
  
: That's very interesting and I wasn't even aware it existed prior to this. However as you deduced we can't transcribe the entire booklet due to copyright. We can however describe it thoroughly in text and provide front/back pictures. A full description would be something like [[Doom instruction manual]], or something less in-detail is also of course acceptable. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 07:26, 25 May 2021 (CDT)
+
== Hotlinks to files hosted on Discord's CDN will eventually become ephemeral and rot ==
  
:: Done the basics [[UAC handbook|here]]. Someone else should be able to provide categories and other stuff I'm not fully aware how of adding. --[[User:Rezalon|Rezalon]] ([[User talk:Rezalon|talk]]) 22:41, 25 May 2021 (CDT)
+
As far as I am aware, many people within the community use Discord and its CDN to host archives, WAD files, screenshots, and so on, whilst hotlinking them elsewhere.
  
== Should we replace the old Cacoward image with the one seen on Cacoward 2018? ==
+
Unfortunately, this practice is on borrowed time, thanks to the gradual implementation and enforcement of three new parameters (they have already existed since September or so) in the URLs.
  
While browsing Cacoward 2020 looking for "mini mod safari" to search some cool stuff from ZDoom forum, I noticed something different, it seems they replace (or remake) the gold Caco image. So, I go to the previous Cacoward and notice the new Caco was first use in 2018. So should we replace the old Caco with the new one? Because Doom Wiki still use the old one {{unsigned|Lokbustam257}}
+
https://i.imgur.com/mY9VYnZ.png https://i.imgur.com/zNbhyTN.png https://i.imgur.com/fzqyUit.png
: With links, this is easier to follow: our [[:File:Cacoward.png|award image]], used in the {{tl|wad}} template, originated [https://www.doomworld.com/24years/images/cacoward.png here]; the new image is [https://static.doomworld.com/pages_media/6_cacoward.png here]. I'd say that yes, we can update to the current version. Or even, get fancy in the template and use it only from 2018 onwards. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:08, 8 June 2021 (CDT)
 
:: With no further discussion or objection, this is done. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:03, 23 November 2021 (CST)
 
  
== How to get article name changed? ==
+
Fortunately, there exists only one affected page on the wiki.
  
I'm assuming only admins can do this at the moment. If so please hmu on my talk page pls but i'll probs contact an admin [[User:Kuresed|Kuresed]] ([[User talk:Kuresed|talk]]) 02:41, 30 October 2021 (CDT)
+
https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.discordapp.com&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch
: If Relic can send me a private message on Doomworld to confirm this is not someone pulling a prank, I can take care of it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:12, 30 October 2021 (CDT)
 
  
:: Reverted, for no response in two weeks. Either this was a prank by an unknown nickname, or it is entirely unimportant to the real Relic, and the rename wasn't necessary after all. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:50, 13 November 2021 (CST)
+
--[[User:Pringao friki chalado|Pringao friki chalado]] ([[User talk:Pringao friki chalado|talk]]) 09:27, 22 November 2023 (CST)
  
== DSDA records tables ==
+
: Thanks for the heads-up, we should then be disallowing such temporary links in the future. As for the [[Final Doomer#Miscellaneous|one patch link]] copied from the {{zdforums|p=973066|release post}}, that can be removed from the wiki, or replaced if someone comes up with a new location. (Hint: download while you can and upload to another service?) --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:52, 22 November 2023 (CST)
 +
:: Done. I didn't even know a single Discord link existed on the wiki until now, so I am at least not surprised to see it was just one. I've always seen Discord as disposable hosting for quickly sending files and nothing more than that. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 11:00, 22 November 2023 (CST)
  
Previous discussions [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing/2017#Updating.2Fadding_demo_links|here]], [[User_talk:Eris_Falling#DSDA_table_updates|here]], [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing#Speedrunning_record_tables|here]] and [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing#Broken_links_to_doomedsda.us|here]]; starting a new topic in case the 2019/2020 topics ever get archived.
+
== Suggestion: "On this day" section on the front page ==
  
After covering Compet-n last year, I (finally) have time/energy/inspiration to turn some long-desired attention to DSDA -- partly prompted by Gauss' recent heroic efforts to manually update/verify map records. The initial version of dsdaMapBot.php [[Special:Diff/279178|is]] [[Special:Diff/279181|working]], but I figured I'd bring up a few choices and caveats before plowing ahead full steam.
+
Was looking at Wikipedia and realized how much I enjoy reading the "On this day" section (where it tells you some historical events that happened today). I propose we do something similar. I have a few suggestions:
# In the table header category column, [[Template:Compet-n runs|Compet-n tables]] use "Run", while the [[Special:Diff/279138|skeleton]] (as generated by [[DMMPST]]) used "Style". I will be using "Run" from now on.
 
# Based on [[User:Eris_Falling/Sandbox#Speedrunning|Eris Falling's sandbox]] I'll include NoMo as a main category. Further DSDA categories NoMo 100S, Stroller and Collector go into the Miscellaneous demos section/table if present, otherwise that entire section is omitted. We could also make a different choice, e.g.: include all 12 categories in the main table. Or include the original 8 categories, and the newer 4 only if present. What do you think?
 
# Category 'Other' is ignored, it's just not practical to do anything scripted with that. I am using the {{dwforums|106189|only available API endpoint}} to fetch the record in each category which returns one entry for Other anyway. Further API development is not expected {{dwforumsp|2217827|anytime soon}}.
 
# This also means any manually constructed tables [[E1M1:_Hangar_(Doom)#Miscellaneous_demos|like for Doom E1M1]] cannot easily be preserved (unless all categories go into the main table and the Misc section can be left alone). Those are very rare so it's not going to be a problem anyway, as all bot-edits are viewed and manually approved anyway. And see the next point too.
 
# For the [[Template:Compet-n|11 WADs covered]] by Compet-n, it might make sense to also include DSDA tables, but then we need to decide how to structure the (sub)sections for script-wise edits to remain practical, and the 'verified' datestamp unambiguous. So for now I won't be touching these.
 
# The bot updates will also address some of the broken link issues [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing#Broken_links_to_doomedsda.us|listed above]], like the DSDA title, old DSDA templates/bare links, and dummy competnftp templates.
 
# The current script already omits NM100S if the map article's Secrets section has no #-bullet entries, but auto-omitting rows in other situations -- like proposed by Eris Falling -- <s>is going to be difficult.</s> can be accomplished with per-map configuration flags in the .ini files, a variant on the one already in place for maps with secret exits. 
 
# The API call does not return any notes, so we could chose to discard the Notes column. Not sure how much existing info we'd lose that way; Gauss recently made a point of noting [[Z1M1:_Hangar_(Knee-Deep_in_ZDoom)#Current_records|v1.2 usage for KDiZD demos]], but since that is the latest version I'd say this can safely be dropped. There may be more, and useful, examples, but I'll only encounter them once I start crunching WADs.
 
Any input/votes/opinions? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 13:06, 23 November 2021 (CST)
 
: Some thoughts, I might have more later:
 
:* Regarding point #2, I've seen a few NoMo demos but none from the other categories (at least based on the few WADs I've gone through), so I'd support the suggestion to make NoMo a main category (I imagine with a link to [[no monsters mode]]) and leave the others in miscellaneous.
 
:* Regarding point #8, demos can have notes attached to them (see MAP21 from {{dsda2|wad=1klinecp|title=1klinecp|linkonly=1}} as an example) but I don't know how those are added in. Also, this particular demo is in the Other category.
 
:* As an aside, I never include records that have been flagged as dubious. If they are to be added, I feel they should be noted as such in the Notes column. [[User:Gauss|Gauss]] ([[User talk:Gauss|talk]]) 16:45, 23 November 2021 (CST)
 
  
:: The NoMo link is already in, see the 1klinecp map01 example link above. There are notes on non-Other demos too {{dsda2|wad=doom|map=E1M1|title=sometimes|linkonly=1}}, but we'd have to find one that is the record to see if it gets returned in the API result before I will be able to include the correct field in the table. And the API returns "the" record for a category so I'd expect dubious ones to be skipped.
+
* Release Dates for games (Dec 10. for [[Doom|Doom 1]]), mods (Jun. 2nd for [[Knee-Deep in ZDoom]]), and tools (Jun. 19th for [[DeHackEd]])
:: Re. #2, I'm leaning towards including everything in the main table, the 4 new categories only if they exist. On DSDA they are all together in the categories list, no distinguishing in two groups, so why should we? And on the wiki, the Misc. demos section can then be used for highlighting manually selected demos that are not a record, like with E1M1. So by default the section would not be present, which reduces stubbiness in map articles. And it solves the scripting trickiness of updating or preserving the Misc section. The datestamp then goes below the main table in "Current records", like for Compet-n. Actually, I can also update those tables to [http://www.doom.com.hr/index.php?page=compet-n_database&cndb=&wad_id=&category_id=9&map_id=&player_id=&sort=&order= include NoMo] if it exists. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:39, 24 November 2021 (CST)
+
* Noteworthy community events (Apr. 30th for the DWIronman League's "you humor me greatly" incident)
 +
* Important social media posts (Apr. 21st for the [[2015 Doom source data release]])
 +
* Development/business incidents (Jul. 7th for [[Tom Hall]]'s resignation from id)
 +
* Births (Oct. 28th John Romero) and deaths (Jul. 31st for [[Ty Halderman]])
  
:: Some exploring shows that not only the IWADs but also several PWADs like [[Icarus: Alien Vanguard]], [[Plutonia 2]] and [[Hell Revealed II]] have maps with Misc.demos sections that were manually compiled (e.g. [[TAS]] entries). So the approach outlined above is necessary to permit scripted updates that leave those sections alone, and I'm moving forward on that premise.
+
I feel it would help create repeat visitors (everyone loves fun facts, especially tight-knit communities centered around 30-year-old games).[[User:MargaretThatcher|MargaretThatcher]] ([[User talk:MargaretThatcher|talk]]) 17:05, 24 November 2023 (CST)
:: Meanwhile the script can do a few more useful things, as illustrated by the latest [[Special:Diff/279181/280095|test]] [[Special:Diff/280097|updates]].
+
: Wikipedia can get away with having such a feature because it has a virtually endless supply of information it can display in that sense. For what it's worth, on the DoomWiki, I'd say this largely goes against the current procedures for (not all but most) featured articles, since these often get picked in lieu of anniversaries. As a result I don't think we need such an addition. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 10:54, 25 November 2023 (CST)
::* Records can be returned by the API because {{dwforumsp|2418404|they are cross-listed}} from another category even if they are not visible in DSDA's default view. The script detects this and adds a note, so now there is a use for that column as yet. The row could be italicized like on DSDA, but that seems excessive here.
 
::* Players without a wiki page are linked to their DSDA demos list.
 
::* NoMo, NoMo 100S, Stroller and Collector categories are listed only if there's a record, and the first (or only) occurrence of NoMo is wikilinked.
 
::* If the main table remains empty, 'data' in "The data was last verified..." refers to nothing, which is a bit odd. In that case, the string becomes "The (absence of) data was last verified..."
 
::* The "Miscellaneous demos" section is removed if it contains only empty row(s). If it contains a row now moved into the main table, it will have to be deleted manually. If preserved with other manual data, "Demos" in the header is lowercased if necessary, and direct links to the old DSDA site are replaced with {{tl|dsdaftp}} (which itself should eventually point to archive.org, I guess).
 
:: I'll probably make further tweaks as I encounter new situations not yet taken into account. Any feedback so far? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 10:33, 26 November 2021 (CST)
 
  
::: I've looked at the linked test updates and I like what I see! I don't really have anything to add to the approach already outlined (which I agree entirely with), just a minor suggestion: list [[NM100S]] on the table as NM 100S, to better match the style for the other non-[[No monsters mode|NoMo]] categories ([[skill level]] and name of the category separated by a space).
+
== WAD criteria versus helpful walkthroughs? ==
::: To clarify one doubt that has been raised, I believe dubious/cheated records are not returned by the API, as evidenced by the difference between the [https://dsdarchive.com/wads/italo?level=Map+14 default view] and the [https://dsdarchive.com/wads/italo/leaderboard?category=UV+Max&level=Map+14 leaderboard view], for example. --[[User:Andromeda|Andromeda]] ([[User talk:Andromeda|talk]]) 07:42, 27 November 2021 (CST)
 
  
:::: Space added (in the script). It was a Compet-n convention, but I found it a tiny bit jarring in DSDA context too.<br>Yes, the [https://dsdarchive.com/api/demos/records?wad=italo&level=Map+14&category=UV+Max API call] returns the Nevanos entry. Thanks. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 07:55, 27 November 2021 (CST)
+
Hi, before I forget, this is the first time I've done anything more than a minor edit to the Doom wiki so I apologize if I mess anything up. I'm a frequent user of the Wiki, primarily for WAD lists and notes on secrets or tips for particularly confusing maps. (Thanks to whomever wrote the 10 sectors MAP24 entry, for example, that's why I was here.) I saw the discussion about self-promotion and how it relates to the wiki's desired notability for WAD entries, but it got me thinking. For me, and a lot of other people who I talk about Doom with, the Doom wiki is valuable for having those walkthroughs/secret lists for as many WADs as possible, since the other options are seeing if anyone has a recording on YouTube and scrubbing through that manually, or popping open an editor and looking at the secrets that way (which I don't even know how to do.) In other words, when I recommend Doom to new players, the Wiki is the first place I recommend they check if they're stuck.
  
::::: Home stretch: Heretic and Hexen support were added, as well as skipping NM 100S if there are no secrets, and everything except UV speed/pacifist if there are no monsters either. For maps with secret exits the second occurrence of the relevant categories (UV speed, NM speed, Pacifist, NoMo, Stroller, and the Heretic/Hexen skills) is not wikilinked  -- also added to the Compet-n script.<br>For the WADs added today, the demo tables have already been generated along with Heretic's [[City of the Damned|first episode]], and everything looks ready to (rock 'n) roll. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 15:32, 28 November 2021 (CST)
+
This seems to suggest a problem to me - the use of the Wiki as a repository for playthrough information about as many WADs as possible is resisted by the idea that WADs with entries here need to be notable. The notability criteria makes sense from the perspective of an encyclopedia/research resource of course, but I can't think of anywhere else on the internet that's as well suited to help people out with tips for actually playing Doom. I've made some small (anonymous) edits in the past to help make pages clearer (for example, I added the information that MAP24 in 180 Minutes Pour Vivre had a Porcupine Tree MIDI as its soundtrack), and I've always thought that if I ended up playing a WAD that wasn't covered here that would be a good excuse to learn the tools used here for making WAD/map pages and try and get it covered. But if notability is a concern, I frankly don't have any idea how to tell if a WAD I'm playing is notable, it's just something I was playing and I would figure other people might appreciate help for secrets/the maps in general.
  
:::::: A feature I'd like to see in the future would be tables for movie runs, like on the [[Hell Revealed#Current Compet-n records|Hell Revealed]] page. Nonetheless it's nice to see this being rolled out for the level pages at long last, thanks for the effort in automating this! --[[User:Andromeda|Andromeda]] ([[User talk:Andromeda|talk]]) 09:31, 19 December 2021 (CST)
+
So I guess my question is, has the idea of using Doom Wiki as a repository of walkthroughs/tips for Doom maps in general been considered? Or is the intent to keep it as a focused critical source with attention paid to notability for WADs first and foremost?
  
← ← ←<br>
+
(And just to avoid any questions, I'm not "EPICALL" and I don't even really know who that is or what Overload is like as a WAD. I just saw the conversation in the recent changes panel and clicked to read it. I signed up because asking a question on here felt like it should be done with an account, not anonymously like my minor edits before.)
The initial pass to update map pages is complete (I think), apart from the 11 WADs that already have Compet-n record tables. Here a second, DSDA section can be added as was already done manually long ago for [[MAP30: Fire and Ice (Scythe)#Speedrunning|one map]]. From the perspective of sections within the page, it would then make sense to rename "Current records" to "Current Compet-n records". However, that requires also updating the anchors in the map links on [[Aleksey Kamenev (4shockblast)#Current Compet-n records|mapper pages]]. While all this can be mostly done script-wise, it's still quite a lot of work for [[:Category:Compet-n players|118 compet-n players]]. So, any agreement/disagreement about this approach?
 
  
After that, adding episode/DxAll runs to WAD pages is also on my to-do list, but it may take a (long) while before I'll get around to it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:24, 22 February 2022 (CST)
+
Uh, thanks!
 +
-- [[User:Arivia|Arivia]] ([[User talk:Arivia|talk]]) 01:33, 28 November 2023 (CST)
 +
: Hello and welcome! I came here at the beginning of the year for a similar reason: I wanted to know what music tracks were used in some of the Winter's Fury levels. I didn't find this information here, so I got it myself. And then I thought, why not add this information to DoomWiki? So, I signed up, started editing, and here I am, with over 4,000 edits and almost 100 articles under my belt. So what you wrote about is a very good reason. But! There simply can't be a Wiki page for every level of every PWAD ever released. Given the number of active editors, this is simply not possible. This is where notability comes in – it helps us choose what exactly is worth writing about here. And it usually works: if you play something interesting, popular or unique, there's a very good chance it has a page here on DoomWiki. And if not, you can always create one yourself, given that it is notable, meaning that someone other than you will need this information. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 11:33, 28 November 2023 (CST)
  
: DSDA records were added yesterday to all map pages for the 11 Compet-n WADs, and the Compet-n headers/anchors updated. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 02:57, 25 February 2022 (CST)
+
: Yes, Doom Wiki is an encyclopedia first and foremost, and a walkthrough site as a side effect. And until 2016, it covered mere dozens of PWADs (along with the IWADs) because it requires a ''lot'' of human effort already just to create series of map pages completely and consistently, let alone write up gameplay info. Since 2016 the wiki has [https://doomwiki.xymph.nl/ grown a lot], covering [[User:XymphBot#Statistics|hundreds of PWADs]] due to extensive scripting via [[User:XymphBot|my bot account]]. But it still takes me time (for complex projects up to several hours) to prepare, configure, and run the scripts and generate the map views -- often in tandem with Dynamo to crop the maps and create custom things tables. There are only so many hours in the day and we have lives and off-wiki projects, so unlimited PWADs coverage remains impossible. That too is a major reason to stick to the notability angle. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:07, 29 November 2023 (CST)
  
← ← ←<br>
+
== Alias omission ==
Daily wiki activity finally slowed down enough again to resume and finish development of the movie run records script, and all WAD articles for which they exist have now been updated with the table. Please let me know if you find any errors. This applies in particular for non-standard Doom II episodes. Normally, episodes 1/2/3 contains MAPs 01-10/11-20/21-30 but sometimes a WAD defines its own (smaller) episodes, and then the DSDA episode records cover those smaller map ranges. So far I've found this to be true for [[The Alfonzone]], [[Judgment]], [[Scythe X]], and [[Valiant]]. If I missed any, please let me know as well so the script can be improved.
 
  
One more note about map records: some maps have one secret that is "impossible to miss" (e.g. the [[MAP01: The Combine (Master Levels)#Secrets|first]] or [[MAP10: Chambers of War (Hell Revealed)#Secrets|last]] sector the player has to move through). This implies categories NM 100S and NoMo 100S are identical to NM speed and NoMo, respectively. But I don't know if DSDA considers the categories equivalent in such cases, and drops one (presumable the latter). So this is not handled automatically in the dsdaMapBot script, like it drops NM 100S if there are no secrets. This may change upon feedback. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:46, 29 July 2022 (CDT)
+
Why are certain person aliases omitted on page names? Here's a few examples I've spotted so far.
  
== Essentials of a map page? ==
+
[[Tom Mustaine]] > ''[[Tom Mustaine (ParadoX)]]'' <br>
 +
[[L.A. Sieben]] > ''[[Leo Sieben (Anavrin)]] <br>
 +
[[Jonathan El-Bizri]] > ''[[Jonathan El-Bizri (Biz)]]''<br>
 +
[[Patrick Pineda]] > ''[[Patrick Pineda (Metacorp)]]'' <br>
 +
[[Jon Dowland]] > ''[[Jon Dowland (Teppic)]]'' <br>
  
I was wondering if there are any special requirements needed to be able to ''fill'' a page on a map and have it removed from the map stubs category. One of my long term goals is to populate/expand the pages of my favorite maps (especially 1994 WADs) and I was wondering what is considered necessary for a page to not be a stub. When I write for a map stub, I tend to focus on: 1. walkthroughs 2. gallery and 3. descriptions. Thanks to the monumental efforts of Getsu Fune, a good number of maps already have their secrets completed; adding the secrets plus the points I mentioned is what I, personally, would consider as a well filled page. - [[User:Endless01|Endless01]] ([[User talk:Endless01|talk]]) 03:50, 7 February 2022 (CST)
+
--[[User:Horizon|Horizon]] ([[User talk:Horizon|talk]]) 22:31, 21 December 2023 (CST)
:I also consider the walkthrough to be vital for "de-stubbing", not least because it puts the other parts of the article (points of interest, secrets, screenshots) in context. [[User:Gauss|Gauss]] ([[User talk:Gauss|talk]]) 04:59, 7 February 2022 (CST)
+
: No particular reason, I guess. Some articles exist since the wiki's earliest days, when conventions were not firmly established yet, others are recent. In some cases like Sieben, the person didn't use their alias much themselves and in commercial releases (Mustaine's too) it is customary to use only formal names, no aliases. I've made various adjustments. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:20, 22 December 2023 (CST)
:I'm using the rules enforced by the [[User:XymphBot#destubMaps.php|destubMaps]] and restubMaps bot scripts, which I run occasionally (as they take a long time). So you don't need to actively worry about forgetting to destub sometimes. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 05:54, 7 February 2022 (CST)
 
  
== Mapping themes ==
+
:: There also might be very slight confusion between [[BiZ]] and [[Jonathan El-Bizri (Biz)]] with the auto-caps thing. - turn ''[[Biz]]'' into a disambig page and move '''BiZ''' to ''<nowiki>[[BiZ (mapper)]]</nowiki>'' to maintain consistent formatting like this? --[[User:Horizon|Horizon]] ([[User talk:Horizon|talk]]) 16:00, 22 December 2023 (CST)
 +
::: [[BiZ]] is widely linked already, so that can remain the canonical link for that person. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 17:21, 22 December 2023 (CST)
  
I was thinking about some ideas for future articles around Mapping themes. Now that we have a few, it's a great start that and, I think, helps readers tremendously, especially when the maps are categorized correctly with their specific theme. It's often a bit difficult to find ''specific'' maps, so this is a great way to organize maps.
+
Quite a few more are missing: (these are from skimming over random people pages) <br>
 +
[[Ola Björling]] > [[Ola Björling (ukiro)]] (this appears to be a redirect for some reason) <br>
 +
[[Malcolm Sailor]] > [[Malcolm Sailor (Hayduke)]] <br>
 +
[[Justin Fisher]] > [[Justin Fisher (Harlequin)]] <br>
 +
[[Charles Jacobi]] > [[Charles Jacobi (Chukker)]] <br>
 +
[[Jekyll Grim Payne]] > <nowiki>[[Jekyll Grim Payne (Agent_Ash)]]</nowiki> <br>
 +
[[Jim Lowell]] > [[Jim Lowell (Symbol)]] <br>
 +
[[Kim André Malde]] > [[Kim André Malde (Mutator)]] <br>
 +
[[Kyle McAwesome]] > <nowiki>[[Kyle McAwesome (kmc)]]</nowiki>
  
I was thinking in the future, we could create articles for the following topics:
+
--[[User:Horizon|Horizon]] ([[User talk:Horizon|talk]]) 04:47, 27 December 2023 (CST)
 +
: Some pages renamed, for others who rarely/never used the alias themselves I added redirects. Pretty sure Jekyll Grim Payne is an alias, so it cannot use the "full name (alias)" format. Possibly McAwesome is an alias too, so I didn't rename that yet until some confirmation either way surfaces. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 07:04, 27 December 2023 (CST)
  
* Outdoors/Nature/Landscape map (I'm not sure which term is more suitable, so I put those three for the moment).
+
Sorry if it gets boring doing this, just trying to keep things somewhat consistent. ---[[User:Horizon|Horizon]] ([[User talk:Horizon|talk]]) 03:04, 28 December 2023 (CST) <br>
* Horror map
+
[[Dan Townsend (sgt dopey)]] > [[Dan Townsend (Yukarin)]] - page was not moved with name update. <br>
* Winter/Snow map
+
[[Jaakko Keränen]] > [[Jaakko Keränen (skyjake)]] <br>
* Desert map
+
[[Elias Papavassilopoulos]] > [[Elias Papavassilopoulos (CaveMan)]] <br>
* Cyberpunk map
+
[[David Asaad]] > [[David Asaad (A1s)]]
* Space map
 
* Castle/Fortress map
 
* Industrial map
 
* Heaven map
 
* Surreal map
 
* Plutonia-esque/Plutonia styled map
 
  
Of course, some of these could be considered subtropes. For example snowy and desert can be part of outdoors/nature/landscape, and this can also have more subtropes, like the [[Egyptian map]] being a subtrope of the Desert map, etc.
+
A few more... <br>
 +
[[Will Hackney (Archvile46)]] > [[Will Hackney (Kid Airbag)]] - page was not moved with name update. <br>
 +
[[Piotr Kapiszewski]] > <nowiki>[[Piotr Kapiszewski (Kapi)]]</nowiki> - would this even count as an alias? <br>
 +
[[Jan Van der Veken]] > [[Jan Van der Veken (BhadTrip)]] <br>
 +
[[Thomas van der Velden]] > [[Thomas van der Velden (Rabotik)]] <br>
  
This, of course, would be a long term goal with contributions from anyone here.
+
--[[User:Horizon|Horizon]] ([[User talk:Horizon|talk]]) 02:04, 5 January 2024 (CST)
  
Oh, and I was also planning to create a main article for Mapping themes, and put some concepts about it, design tips and the list of themes. That way users can search for the main article in the searchbar, and fall into the rabbit hole of mapping themes ;)
+
Well, since there's a list, there's also:
  
What do you think? What other themes could be added? - [[User:Endless01|Endless01]] ([[User talk:Endless01|talk]]) 01:07, 23 March 2022 (CDT)
+
[[Roland van der Velden]] > [[Roland van der Velden (space is green)]] <br>
:The themes I was thinking of doing to round things up are:
+
[[Malcolm Sailor]] > [[Malcolm Sailor (Hayduke)]] <br>
*E3 style (just because there are E1, E2, and E4 styles)
+
[[Jonathan Rimmer]] > [[Jonathan Rimmer (JonR)]] <br>
*Gothic map (think Gothic DM, Crucified Dreams, and perhaps also stuff like Crusades and maybe also some of Hexen)
+
[[Kerkko Välilä]] > [[Kerkko Välilä (Robocat)]] <br>
*Medieval map (think Heretic E1 towns and anything else that seeks to depict a medieval Europeanish aesthetic -- by opposition to Egyptian/Mesoamerica themes or the modern look of City maps)
+
[[Nicklas Linnes]] > [[Nicklas Linnes (nathas)]] <br>
*Space map (Vrack & co, anything set up on a spaceship or space station)
+
[[Tom Mustaine]] > [[Tom Mustaine (ParadoX)]] <br>
Other themes that may work are:
+
[[L.A. Sieben]] > [[Leo Sieben (Anavrin)]] <br>
*Asian (or East-Asian) map. For stuff with a Chinese/Japanese/Korean aesthetic, like Japanese Valentines for example.
+
[[T. Elliot Cannon (Myscha the Sled Dog)]] > [[Thomas Elliot Cannon (Myscha the Sled Dog)]] <br>
*Cyberspace map. Stuff that emulates visiting a cybernetic environment, like some of the Hacx maps but also {{ml|VR: The Internet Machine (Reelism)}} or {{ml|MAP31: Cyberwar 7734 (Valiant)}}.
+
[[Jeremy Wagner]] > [[Jeremy Wagner (Iron Lich)]]
*Flesh map/Meat map (think Cyb's Freaky Colonoscopy, or {{ml|MAP20: The Mouth of Madness (Going Down)}} and its followups)
 
*Scaled map/shrunken player map: maps that depict gigantic versions of normally smaller objects. Like rat solitaire or some of the maps from [[Mandrill Ass Project]].
 
*Plutonia style (to go along with the episode styles, and it's a popular one -- more than TNT style)
 
--[[User:Gez|Gez]] ([[User talk:Gez|talk]]) 09:55, 23 March 2022 (CDT)
 
  
== Doom 3 screenshots ==
+
--[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 05:21, 5 January 2024 (CST)
  
Some screenshots from Doom 3 are of a low quality and resolution. Two questions:
+
EDIT: I see that some of these have been brought up already, but for the sake of consistency I think it'd be better to rename them (L.A. Sieben seems particularly unfitting for the wiki standards as the first name tends to be used) rather than just having redirects - but that is, of course, only if the amount of work required to do that is reasonable. --[[User:Dynamo128|Dynamo128]] ([[User talk:Dynamo128|talk]]) 05:23, 5 January 2024 (CST)
  
* Is this a copyright issue or something similar, or can those screenshots be replaced with better ones?
+
One more: <br>
* Is it okay to use BFG Edition screenshots when the difference is minimal? (For example, in weapon pages.)  
+
[[Paul Corfiatis]] > [[Paul Corfiatis (pcorf)]] (redirects for some reason) <br>
 +
Going from similar treatment just now to JonR.
 +
--[[User:Horizon|Horizon]] ([[User talk:Horizon|talk]]) 08:42, 5 January 2024 (CST)
 +
: As mentioned in my first reply, almost all Sieben's credits are by initials, so that seems the canonical styling for this person's name. That's why I kept it that way. Same for "T. Elliot", which is just a style convention to emphasize one's calling name as Elliot. Just like my middle initial P. isn't used much (or is public, even). I also commented on Mustaine already. As before, I don't feel it necessary to updating all uses of names with(out) aliases throughout the wiki into their new canonical paths. Redirects are not that harmful. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 09:42, 5 January 2024 (CST)
  
--[[User:Kyano|Kyano]] ([[User talk:Kyano|talk]]) 17:10, 10 April 2022 (CDT)
+
== Hub categorization? ==
: Which ones, for example? Define 'low' and 'better'?
 
: There are [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Images|some guidelines]] re. image quality, but I see plenty 640x480 Doom 3 screens in our archive, and that is not too low, if that's what you mean. Their purpose is to illustrate encyclopedic information about games, not to show off stuff in glorious 2560x1440 or what have you. Such screens merely take up more disk space than necessary (and we're starting to run low). I'd limit replacements to something like 800x600 - 1440x900.
 
: But yes, a screenshot can be replaced by a similar scene under the same {{tl|Doom 3 screenshot}} license. A different scene is probably better added as a new screenshot. As for the BFG Edition, I don't know. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:26, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
 
::For example [[:File:Chainsaw_d3.jpg]] is of a very low resolution and has dark lighting, making the details of the weapon very hard to see. I have seen several images that are similar in quality. Also, I disagree that low resolution screenshots are good enough for Doom 3; because of the dark setting of the game, many things are hard to make out at low resolutions. Doom screenshots on the other hand usually have high contrast and weapons, monsters, etc are much easier to see. I am not saying that we should be uploading 4K png files for the reasons that you have mentioned, but 1080p screenshots should be acceptable.
 
::I asked about BFG Edition because it works better on modern machines and it would make it easier for me and others to take screenshots. --[[User:Kyano|Kyano]] ([[User talk:Kyano|talk]]) 05:40, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
 
::: Yeah, that one and similar tiny shots can be replaced. I suppose there is precedent for 1920x1080 too, as long as reasonably sized (but smaller) shots aren't replaced just for the sake of that resolution (which take up 800-1500 KB each). Lack of disk space ''will'' become a real problem eventually, given the {{dwforumsp|2222381|absence of response}} to calls for a Linux admin to help Quasar with server maintenance and (eventually) migration.
 
::: If BFG/original edition differences are minimal, I guess such shots are acceptable, but I'd really punt this topic to someone more knowledgeable about it. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:46, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
 
  
== Question about protocol for editing a page that's about me ==
+
Last night Nockson and I briefly [[Doomwiki (IRC channel)|chatted]] about hub WADs w.r.t. the {{tl|wad}} template, which reminded me of an entry on [[User:Ryan_W/TODO/Subcategorization#Mass_edits|Ryan W's todo list]]. Currently single-hub WADs with a handful of maps are categorized as {{cat|Multilevel WADs}}. Such mods exist [[Shadows of Chronos|not]] [[Hexen: Scourge of Viscerus|only]] [[Curse of the Lost Gods|for]] Hexen but [[Gomorrah|also]] [[Death's Dichotomy|for]] Doom (II). Would it make sense to create a separate "Hub WADs" category for these? If Hexen's hubs are moved into a "Hexen hubs" category like Ryan proposed, the PWADs could go into that new category, both under the main {{cat|Hubs}} one. Template type 'h' could auto-add the category. But is it meaningful to distinguish them from other multilevel WADs that way? And what to do about megawad hub-based mods, like [[Cabro's Legacy]] and the RAMP series? Should "Hub WADs" come in addition to the usual multilevel/episode/megawad types? Let's hear (uhm, read) your thoughts. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:49, 31 January 2024 (CST)
 +
: Well, if the major sorting factor now is the amount of levels then there's no need to add hubs into the template. Though I also think that the hub category is useful, it could be added manually. This hub question also touches the other thing that we discussed yesterday: partial and total conversions. After my 7 edits today, there are no pages on the DoomWiki that use the "t" or "p" parameter in the wad template, the categories for TCs or PCs in all of them were added manually. So the parameters for TCs and PCs are useless. So here are my proposals to change the wad template: either add an additional type2 field that can have parameters for hubs, TCs and PCs (dunno what to do with T/P conversions with hubs in them), or remove "t" and "p" parameters entirely from the template. --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 12:03, 31 January 2024 (CST)
  
Hi!  I used to go by a different handle and noticed that there is a page about me that uses my old handle and I would like to update it. The problem is, someone else has also used this handle and a couple maps are included on the page that were by that other person. The page in question is https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Nomad
+
:: Removing the t & p parameters seems reasonable if they are no longer useful, although this request would perhaps be better put in the [[Template_talk:Wad]] page.<br> With regards to the "Hub WADs" cat, I would honestly favor a "Hub maps" category that can be added to the hub level articles themselves rather than associating this with the main page. After all, these are the actual hubs, not the PWAD overall. "Hub WADs" to me implies that the WAD is entirely (or mostly) made up of hubs, which isn't the case most of time - maybe a Hub WADs cat would make sense for these type of WADs specifically (if they exist). But the question is whether a WAD needs to be filed under a Hub cat just because it contains one or two hub maps. Sort of like creating an "Icon of Sin WADs" category, rather than just adding an "Icon of Sin maps" category to the maps that actually have one (that could be another worthwhile category to add btw :)). --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 15:32, 2 February 2024 (CST)
 +
::: That's a good proposal, it really will be nice and convenient to have "Hub levels" or "Hub maps" category instead of WADs. I support this! --[[User:Nockson|Nockson]] ([[User talk:Nockson|talk]]) 01:50, 4 February 2024 (CST)
  
I contributed to all of the projects mentioned except the two maps in A.L.T., and was not the Nomad involved in "Clan [B0S]." but otherwise the information is accurate. As I noted, I'd like to update this with my new information (as well as potentially some new map contributions) but I don't want to just erase the other Nomad's information. What should I do in this situation? [[User:Annunakitty|Annunakitty]] ([[User talk:Annunakitty|talk]]) 16:51, 18 May 2022 (CDT)
+
:::: Alright, category created, [https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=Search&search=%22hub+map%22&ns10=1&profile=advanced this search] helps to find a bunch (but not all) of them. Also created the Hexen subcat per Ryan's todo.<br>Functionality in the Wad template should not be removed as it may be useful yet. After all, it is entirely feasible (albeit uncommon) to have TCs/PCs without levels, and we are already covering [[Looney Tunes Doom|two]] [[Ultimate Simpsons Doom|such]] PCs.<br>What would be the use case for the "Icon of Sin maps" category? --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 04:52, 7 February 2024 (CST)
: The correct and simple solution is a new [[Annunakitty|mapper article]] with your works. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 11:27, 19 May 2022 (CDT)
+
::::: Well, one would first have to define the [[Final boss|Icon of Sin]] as the combination of [[Romero's head]], [[monster spawner]](s), and a boss texture plus some form of distorted voice sample being played at wakeup, so as to exclude such maps from the category that only feature one or two of these components, such as utilizing monster spawners or using Romero's head on its own. So [[MAP30: Hell Revealed (Hell Revealed)|HR MAP30]] would fall under such a "IoS maps" category but [[MAP32: Mostly Harmful (Hell Revealed)|HR MAP32]] (uses monster spawners as a central threat) and [[MAP23: Ascending to the Stars (Hell Revealed)|HR MAP23]] (uses Romero's head to simulate a reactor blowing up at the end) would not. I think it would be neat and useful for documenting purposes to have a comprehensive list of Icon of Sin maps, new and old, listed on one page.<p></p> Another thing to consider would be an even larger "Boss fight maps" or "Boss levels" category that the IoS maps category would be a subcat of. A boss level category would only cover maps that have some boss entity to fight or kill in it, so maps that use large encounters as a substitute for a boss, whether they occupy the final map slot or not, would not qualify in my opinion. Therefore, [[MAP24: Tough Skin River (BTSX-E1)]] or [[MAP30: Haunting Dreams (Scythe 2)]] do not count as a boss level while [[MAP30: Eternity (Eviternity)]] and [[MAP07: The Beating Heart (Heartland)]] very much do. But I'm sure there would be some fringe cases to discuss for either category. --[[User:Gregor|Gregor]] ([[User talk:Gregor|talk]]) 11:29, 7 February 2024 (CST)
:: Yo! Thanks so muchI see you added my ASS maps too, thanks again :) [[User:Annunakitty|Annunakitty]] ([[User talk:Annunakitty|talk]]) 12:36, 19 May 2022 (CDT)
 
  
== What about gkrellflynn? ==
+
== Soundtracks ==
  
It’s a [https://github.com/cmj/gkrellflynn/ krell] for gkrellm (a graphical side monitor) that show Flynn’s head. The more the processors work, the more Flynn’s head is injured.
+
I've noticed a few weird things about the pages listed in the "Soundtracks" table seen here: {{tl|Music}}
Where should be categorized an article about it? [[User:Ducon|Ducon]] ([[User talk:Ducon|talk]]) 13:26, 26 July 2022 (CDT)
 
  
== Playtester category ==
+
They are as follows:
 +
* [[Doom music]] is missing [[E1M10: Sewers (Xbox Doom)|E1M10: Sewers]] from the [[Xbox]] port.
 +
* [[Doom II music]] is missing [[MAP33: Betray (Xbox Doom II)|MAP33: Betray]] and all of the maps featured in [[No Rest for the Living]].
 +
* [[Final Doom TNT music|TNT: Evilution]] is listed under Bobby Prince, incorrectly implying he was the main composer (or deliberately contributed to the soundtrack at all). In reality, TNT's music was a collaboration between [[Jonathan El-Bizri]], [[Josh Martel]], [[L.A. Sieben]], and [[Tom Mustaine]], with some of Bobby's Doom II work re-used.
 +
* The listing of soundtracks based on what composer was featured the most. While this works for games with single composers (i.e. Bobby Prince), this doesn't work for games with multiple composers like TNT: Evilution (see above) and Doom PSX (for which Club Doom was composed by [[Danny Lewis (Technoman)|Danny Lewis]].
  
Some playtesters in the Doom community do a lot of work to ensure maps are decently balanced and playable.  While their portfolio of work may not be to the same degree as mappers, modders or source port authors, I feel that there should be a place where prominent playtesters could be added, in recognition of their contributions.
+
Another related complaint I have is that some games/campaigns do not have music pages of their own when I feel they should. These are
: You may want to sign yourself, Gibbon ;) But ill just repeat what i said on Discord. I agree, some playtesters do a lot of good and useful work in the community. But if this is your only credit, it is a little bit thin, in my opinion. --[[User:Redneckerz|Redneckerz]] ([[User talk:Redneckerz|talk]]) 17:15, 12 August 2022 (CDT)
+
* ''[[Hacx]]''
: I think the main distinction is that mappers, artists, coders ''create'' something, while play/code-testers "merely" help them to improve/debug those creations. Their contributions are of value to projects, sure, but I feel that there is little value to the wiki in listing these contributions here too. The projects' documentation should do that, and wiki cannot and should not need to completely cover every little detail too. Notability, however hard to define, remains an important factor for the wiki.
+
* ''[[Hell to Pay]]'' and ''[[Perdition's Gate]]''
: Also, given the wide variety of completeness and formatting in said documentation, and in the release process of many projects, it is already challenging enough to track mapping/artist/etc work on the wiki. So whatever the outcome of this discussion, personally I won't be investing any effort into tracking testing work too. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 06:43, 19 August 2022 (CDT)
+
* ''The Ancient Gods, Parts [[The Ancient Gods, Part One|one]] and [[The Ancient Gods, Part Two|two]]''
 +
[[User:MargaretThatcher|MargaretThatcher]] ([[User talk:MargaretThatcher|talk]]) 16:40, 5 February 2024 (CST)
  
== Thing data tables ==
+
: Reference that template, don't transclude it, so this page doesn't get added to category Music.
 +
:* Xbox maps added.
 +
:* TNT Evilution split off and NRftL added (shouldn't be in the D2 table because assignments vary between releases).
 +
:* Soundtrack articles for Hacx, HtP and PG are meaningful only if there is sufficient reliable information about them, like track names, composer(s), lengths, etc.
 +
:* [[Doom Eternal soundtrack]] already mentions the DLCs should get dedicated soundtrack articles, with the same requirements.
 +
: --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 16:42, 7 February 2024 (CST)
  
This is a follow-up to the [[Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2016#Thing data tables|original topic in 2016]]. The welcome slow pace w.r.t. new PWADs in recent weeks finally allowed me to resume development of my [[Frans P. de Vries (Xymph)#Utilities|INFO.c tools]]. The planned implementation of generating the information in wiki-ready tables (using the same templating approach as in [[DMMPST]]) now works for DMINFO, and various samples are [[User:Xymph/Thing data|collected here]]. In comparison with the existing tables you'll notice some fields don't have a value, that is because some cannot be determined from the INFO.c and related data (alone), but the tool takes creating the tables for monsters, weapons, and items as far as it'll go automatically. The remainder will have to be added manually, as usual, and thus no additions/updates will happen via a XymphBot script.
+
:: Would need to e-mail Jim Lynch about titles and better clarity/corrections on this, but for Hacx:
 +
:: MAP01: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
 +
:: MAP02: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP03: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP04: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP05: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP06: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP07: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP08: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP09: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP10: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
 +
:: MAP11: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP12: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall + Mark Van Natta
 +
:: MAP13: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
 +
:: MAP14/Text screen: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
 +
:: MAP15: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP16: Ellsworth Hall
 +
:: MAP17: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
 +
:: MAP18: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
 +
:: MAP19/MAP21: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP20: Jim Lynch
 +
:: MAP31: Jim Lynch
 +
:: Intermission: not sure
 +
:: Title: not sure
 +
:: --[[User:Blursphere|Blursphere]] ([[User talk:Blursphere|talk]]) 17:48, 7 February 2024 (CST)
  
The same is planned for the Heretic one (HTINFO), and then for Hexen and Strife where no thing data tables exist yet at all. I'll certainly encounter some unexpected situations there (because of the variety in weapon and monster behavior/data) but bridges can be crossed one at a time.
+
== Coordination ==
  
Changes versus the existing tables:
+
Hello, I was wondering if the wiki has any kind of central coordination base, like a Discord server or the like. I couldn't find anything on the sidebar links but wanted to confirm since it's a pretty common arrangement these days. Thanks. {{unsigned|Kisequé}}
# The layout of the three monster tables/columns is now done with standard col templates instead of the custom table that made the whole thing more complex to edit manually.
+
: You just found it, right here. And for a quick chat, there is also [[Doomwiki (IRC channel)]], a few editors hang out there from time to time. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 03:02, 28 March 2024 (CDT)
# The thing type, mobj/enum, appears-in fields are now consistently present in that order, usually first in the table. Only for weapons they are, as before, preceded by the weapon-specific data. Should the three rows go first there too?
+
:: I see. Very old-school, charming! I'm not terribly familiar with discussing over talk pages so I apologize as I get used to the conventions. <br> On the IRC chat, I did see that but was unable to connect. Are there any common errors in getting set up there? I've never used the technology before. [[User:Kisequé|Kisequé]] ([[User talk:Kisequé|talk]]) 13:46, 28 March 2024 (CDT)
# In 2016 we discussed showing the flags field in hex and/or decimal, and it (finally) occurred to me that the simple solution is to list both on separate lines in that cell (not [[Special:PermanentLink/117478#Data|comma-separated in one line]]).
+
::: For talk pages, you can learn from examples all around the wiki, but your first reply is fine. :) For IRC, one client used by several editors that is pretty easy to set up and use, is HexChat. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 14:30, 28 March 2024 (CDT)
# I've merged the flags list table for monsters into the main table as I didn't see a real need to keep it a separate table, and the layout is cleaner this way. [[User:Xymph/INFO.C|Description lengths]] vary, but it shouldn't be problem to have in them the right column of the main table.
 
# The flags field/list are now included in the weapon/item tables too. Is that okay?
 
# The weapon Sound row moved below the Sprite row, that seems a more logical order.
 
Please share your answers/feedback on the above. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:38, 11 September 2022 (CDT)
 

Latest revision as of 14:31, 28 March 2024

This is the central discussion forum for wiki editing and administration activity on the Doom Wiki. Feel free to ask any questions or pose any concerns you have here, and you should receive a response shortly. Check the archived discussions for older threads. For extended discussion on long-range "to do" issues and project planning, please also visit our Request For Comment hub.

Archived discussions


Contents

Broken links to doomedsda.us[edit]

We don't know the exact volume (Wayback Machine scrapes files occasionally) but anecdotal evidence is discouraging.  Here, for example, 8 of 8 links have expired.

AIUI a complete solution requires further web development, but here are some band-aid ideas.  I will be glad to implement them if people agree, excepting #4 which might be too large:

  1. Temporarily invoke Template:Frozenlink within Template:Dsdaftp, with hover text directing readers to the generic DSDA item in "External links"
  2. When Template:Dsdauser and Template:Dsda2user are used together, and the first represents 100% redundant content, remove it (example)
  3. Hope that archive.org re-enables deeplinking when their bandwidth issues subside, and retarget certain links there (example).  While not my primary goal, that feature WAS WORKING the day I tested it
  4. Peripheral mass edits to reduce 404s:
    (a) Replace bare links to zip files with Template:Dsdaftp, so any remediation propagates automatically
    (b) Update links of the form [http://doomedsda.us Doomed Speed Demos Archive] above map record tables
    (c) Remove the dummy string {{competnftp|**|**}}.  Now that pwad records have rolled out, such links are vanishingly unlikely to be used
    (d) List invalid Wayback Machine links generated by Template:Dsda, Template:Dsdauser, and Template:Dsdauserp (example)
    (e) List usages of Template:Archived link containing bare links to doomedsda.us

P.S.  None of this was caused by the automated tasks in the above section, which look great in my limited review so far.  :>  Any feedback or additional proposals appreciated!  Thanks, Ryan W (living fossil) 16:14, 3 January 2021 (CST)

Didn't reply sooner but have been working on this in tandem with the map/WAD records since last year, and I think everything is sufficiently cleaned up.
  1. Templates Dsdauser and Dsdauserp have archive links and are only left on user articles when the user has a reasonable number of demos on the old site (typically only FDA entries) that aren't on the new site, and a user profile (which the new site doesn't support). This covers item 2 above.
  2. Dsdaftp (with archive link) is only still in use for the Plutonia 2 FDA demos. This negates the need for item 1.
  3. All direct file links to old/new sites have been templated (item 4a). This also includes the old ftp://.zip stub and competn.doom2.net links. And also almost all Compet-n links, btw.
  4. Item 4b was covered by the scripted updates, no more external links.
  5. 4c ditto, though there is no working query to confirm that because of the asterisks.
In my experience with archive.org links, there is no need for further effort on items 3, 4d, and 4e. Please let me know of any stragglers. --Xymph (talk) 11:08, 29 July 2022 (CDT)

UAC Handbook[edit]

Hi there. I own a copy of the UAC Handbook second-hand. Not sure where it originates from, but I'm assuming a promo pack for DOOM (2016). As it is a rarity, and as it doesn't appear to be transcribed elsewhere, would it be allowed to be transcribed on this wiki (copyright infringement barring)?

If so, I'd be more than happy to help contribute to a page if one were to be created and initially set up (I'm not entirely sure about the creation and formatting procedures). Also, whilst I don't have the means to scan the booklet, I can take reasonable-quality images if required.\

P.S.: just found this article which may be a good reference to link to in a potential page created on this wiki.

--Rezalon (talk) 03:05, 25 May 2021 (CDT)

That's very interesting and I wasn't even aware it existed prior to this. However as you deduced we can't transcribe the entire booklet due to copyright. We can however describe it thoroughly in text and provide front/back pictures. A full description would be something like Doom instruction manual, or something less in-detail is also of course acceptable. --Quasar (talk) 07:26, 25 May 2021 (CDT)
Done the basics here. Someone else should be able to provide categories and other stuff I'm not fully aware how of adding. --Rezalon (talk) 22:41, 25 May 2021 (CDT)

Should we replace the old Cacoward image with the one seen on Cacoward 2018?[edit]

While browsing Cacoward 2020 looking for "mini mod safari" to search some cool stuff from ZDoom forum, I noticed something different, it seems they replace (or remake) the gold Caco image. So, I go to the previous Cacoward and notice the new Caco was first use in 2018. So should we replace the old Caco with the new one? Because Doom Wiki still use the old one —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lokbustam257 (talkcontribs) .

With links, this is easier to follow: our award image, used in the {{wad}} template, originated here; the new image is here. I'd say that yes, we can update to the current version. Or even, get fancy in the template and use it only from 2018 onwards. --Xymph (talk) 03:08, 8 June 2021 (CDT)
With no further discussion or objection, this is done. --Xymph (talk) 10:03, 23 November 2021 (CST)

How to get article name changed?[edit]

I'm assuming only admins can do this at the moment. If so please hmu on my talk page pls but i'll probs contact an admin Kuresed (talk) 02:41, 30 October 2021 (CDT)

If Relic can send me a private message on Doomworld to confirm this is not someone pulling a prank, I can take care of it. --Xymph (talk) 04:12, 30 October 2021 (CDT)
Reverted, for no response in two weeks. Either this was a prank by an unknown nickname, or it is entirely unimportant to the real Relic, and the rename wasn't necessary after all. --Xymph (talk) 04:50, 13 November 2021 (CST)

DSDA records tables[edit]

Previous discussions here, here, here and here; starting a new topic in case the 2019/2020 topics ever get archived.

After covering Compet-n last year, I (finally) have time/energy/inspiration to turn some long-desired attention to DSDA -- partly prompted by Gauss' recent heroic efforts to manually update/verify map records. The initial version of dsdaMapBot.php is working, but I figured I'd bring up a few choices and caveats before plowing ahead full steam.

  1. In the table header category column, Compet-n tables use "Run", while the skeleton (as generated by DMMPST) used "Style". I will be using "Run" from now on.
  2. Based on Eris Falling's sandbox I'll include NoMo as a main category. Further DSDA categories NoMo 100S, Stroller and Collector go into the Miscellaneous demos section/table if present, otherwise that entire section is omitted. We could also make a different choice, e.g.: include all 12 categories in the main table. Or include the original 8 categories, and the newer 4 only if present. What do you think?
  3. Category 'Other' is ignored, it's just not practical to do anything scripted with that. I am using the only available API endpoint to fetch the record in each category which returns one entry for Other anyway. Further API development is not expected anytime soon.
  4. This also means any manually constructed tables like for Doom E1M1 cannot easily be preserved (unless all categories go into the main table and the Misc section can be left alone). Those are very rare so it's not going to be a problem anyway, as all bot-edits are viewed and manually approved anyway. And see the next point too.
  5. For the 11 WADs covered by Compet-n, it might make sense to also include DSDA tables, but then we need to decide how to structure the (sub)sections for script-wise edits to remain practical, and the 'verified' datestamp unambiguous. So for now I won't be touching these.
  6. The bot updates will also address some of the broken link issues listed above, like the DSDA title, old DSDA templates/bare links, and dummy competnftp templates.
  7. The current script already omits NM100S if the map article's Secrets section has no #-bullet entries, but auto-omitting rows in other situations -- like proposed by Eris Falling -- is going to be difficult. can be accomplished with per-map configuration flags in the .ini files, a variant on the one already in place for maps with secret exits.
  8. The API call does not return any notes, so we could chose to discard the Notes column. Not sure how much existing info we'd lose that way; Gauss recently made a point of noting v1.2 usage for KDiZD demos, but since that is the latest version I'd say this can safely be dropped. There may be more, and useful, examples, but I'll only encounter them once I start crunching WADs.

Any input/votes/opinions? --Xymph (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2021 (CST)

Some thoughts, I might have more later:
  • Regarding point #2, I've seen a few NoMo demos but none from the other categories (at least based on the few WADs I've gone through), so I'd support the suggestion to make NoMo a main category (I imagine with a link to no monsters mode) and leave the others in miscellaneous.
  • Regarding point #8, demos can have notes attached to them (see MAP21 from 1klinecp as an example) but I don't know how those are added in. Also, this particular demo is in the Other category.
  • As an aside, I never include records that have been flagged as dubious. If they are to be added, I feel they should be noted as such in the Notes column. Gauss (talk) 16:45, 23 November 2021 (CST)
The NoMo link is already in, see the 1klinecp map01 example link above. There are notes on non-Other demos too sometimes, but we'd have to find one that is the record to see if it gets returned in the API result before I will be able to include the correct field in the table. And the API returns "the" record for a category so I'd expect dubious ones to be skipped.
Re. #2, I'm leaning towards including everything in the main table, the 4 new categories only if they exist. On DSDA they are all together in the categories list, no distinguishing in two groups, so why should we? And on the wiki, the Misc. demos section can then be used for highlighting manually selected demos that are not a record, like with E1M1. So by default the section would not be present, which reduces stubbiness in map articles. And it solves the scripting trickiness of updating or preserving the Misc section. The datestamp then goes below the main table in "Current records", like for Compet-n. Actually, I can also update those tables to include NoMo if it exists. --Xymph (talk) 04:39, 24 November 2021 (CST)
Some exploring shows that not only the IWADs but also several PWADs like Icarus: Alien Vanguard, Plutonia 2 and Hell Revealed II have maps with Misc.demos sections that were manually compiled (e.g. TAS entries). So the approach outlined above is necessary to permit scripted updates that leave those sections alone, and I'm moving forward on that premise.
Meanwhile the script can do a few more useful things, as illustrated by the latest test updates.
  • Records can be returned by the API because they are cross-listed from another category even if they are not visible in DSDA's default view. The script detects this and adds a note, so now there is a use for that column as yet. The row could be italicized like on DSDA, but that seems excessive here.
  • Players without a wiki page are linked to their DSDA demos list.
  • NoMo, NoMo 100S, Stroller and Collector categories are listed only if there's a record, and the first (or only) occurrence of NoMo is wikilinked.
  • If the main table remains empty, 'data' in "The data was last verified..." refers to nothing, which is a bit odd. In that case, the string becomes "The (absence of) data was last verified..."
  • The "Miscellaneous demos" section is removed if it contains only empty row(s). If it contains a row now moved into the main table, it will have to be deleted manually. If preserved with other manual data, "Demos" in the header is lowercased if necessary, and direct links to the old DSDA site are replaced with {{dsdaftp}} (which itself should eventually point to archive.org, I guess).
I'll probably make further tweaks as I encounter new situations not yet taken into account. Any feedback so far? --Xymph (talk) 10:33, 26 November 2021 (CST)
I've looked at the linked test updates and I like what I see! I don't really have anything to add to the approach already outlined (which I agree entirely with), just a minor suggestion: list NM100S on the table as NM 100S, to better match the style for the other non-NoMo categories (skill level and name of the category separated by a space).
To clarify one doubt that has been raised, I believe dubious/cheated records are not returned by the API, as evidenced by the difference between the default view and the leaderboard view, for example. --Andromeda (talk) 07:42, 27 November 2021 (CST)
Space added (in the script). It was a Compet-n convention, but I found it a tiny bit jarring in DSDA context too.
Yes, the API call returns the Nevanos entry. Thanks. --Xymph (talk) 07:55, 27 November 2021 (CST)
Home stretch: Heretic and Hexen support were added, as well as skipping NM 100S if there are no secrets, and everything except UV speed/pacifist if there are no monsters either. For maps with secret exits the second occurrence of the relevant categories (UV speed, NM speed, Pacifist, NoMo, Stroller, and the Heretic/Hexen skills) is not wikilinked -- also added to the Compet-n script.
For the WADs added today, the demo tables have already been generated along with Heretic's first episode, and everything looks ready to (rock 'n) roll. --Xymph (talk) 15:32, 28 November 2021 (CST)
A feature I'd like to see in the future would be tables for movie runs, like on the Hell Revealed page. Nonetheless it's nice to see this being rolled out for the level pages at long last, thanks for the effort in automating this! --Andromeda (talk) 09:31, 19 December 2021 (CST)

← ← ←
The initial pass to update map pages is complete (I think), apart from the 11 WADs that already have Compet-n record tables. Here a second, DSDA section can be added as was already done manually long ago for one map. From the perspective of sections within the page, it would then make sense to rename "Current records" to "Current Compet-n records". However, that requires also updating the anchors in the map links on mapper pages. While all this can be mostly done script-wise, it's still quite a lot of work for 118 compet-n players. So, any agreement/disagreement about this approach?

After that, adding episode/DxAll runs to WAD pages is also on my to-do list, but it may take a (long) while before I'll get around to it. --Xymph (talk) 05:24, 22 February 2022 (CST)

DSDA records were added yesterday to all map pages for the 11 Compet-n WADs, and the Compet-n headers/anchors updated. --Xymph (talk) 02:57, 25 February 2022 (CST)

← ← ←
Daily wiki activity finally slowed down enough again to resume and finish development of the movie run records script, and all WAD articles for which they exist have now been updated with the table. Please let me know if you find any errors. This applies in particular for non-standard Doom II episodes. Normally, episodes 1/2/3 contains MAPs 01-10/11-20/21-30 but sometimes a WAD defines its own (smaller) episodes, and then the DSDA episode records cover those smaller map ranges. So far I've found this to be true for The Alfonzone, Judgment, Scythe X, and Valiant. If I missed any, please let me know as well so the script can be improved.

One more note about map records: some maps have one secret that is "impossible to miss" (e.g. the first or last sector the player has to move through). This implies categories NM 100S and NoMo 100S are identical to NM speed and NoMo, respectively. But I don't know if DSDA considers the categories equivalent in such cases, and drops one (presumable the latter). So this is not handled automatically in the dsdaMapBot script, like it drops NM 100S if there are no secrets. This may change upon feedback. --Xymph (talk) 05:46, 29 July 2022 (CDT)

Essentials of a map page?[edit]

I was wondering if there are any special requirements needed to be able to fill a page on a map and have it removed from the map stubs category. One of my long term goals is to populate/expand the pages of my favorite maps (especially 1994 WADs) and I was wondering what is considered necessary for a page to not be a stub. When I write for a map stub, I tend to focus on: 1. walkthroughs 2. gallery and 3. descriptions. Thanks to the monumental efforts of Getsu Fune, a good number of maps already have their secrets completed; adding the secrets plus the points I mentioned is what I, personally, would consider as a well filled page. - Endless01 (talk) 03:50, 7 February 2022 (CST)

I also consider the walkthrough to be vital for "de-stubbing", not least because it puts the other parts of the article (points of interest, secrets, screenshots) in context. Gauss (talk) 04:59, 7 February 2022 (CST)
I'm using the rules enforced by the destubMaps and restubMaps bot scripts, which I run occasionally (as they take a long time). So you don't need to actively worry about forgetting to destub sometimes. --Xymph (talk) 05:54, 7 February 2022 (CST)

Mapping themes[edit]

I was thinking about some ideas for future articles around Mapping themes. Now that we have a few, it's a great start that and, I think, helps readers tremendously, especially when the maps are categorized correctly with their specific theme. It's often a bit difficult to find specific maps, so this is a great way to organize maps.

I was thinking in the future, we could create articles for the following topics:

  • Outdoors/Nature/Landscape map (I'm not sure which term is more suitable, so I put those three for the moment).
  • Horror map
  • Winter/Snow map
  • Desert map
  • Cyberpunk map
  • Space map
  • Castle/Fortress map
  • Industrial map
  • Heaven map
  • Surreal map
  • Plutonia-esque/Plutonia styled map

Of course, some of these could be considered subtropes. For example snowy and desert can be part of outdoors/nature/landscape, and this can also have more subtropes, like the Egyptian map being a subtrope of the Desert map, etc.

This, of course, would be a long term goal with contributions from anyone here.

Oh, and I was also planning to create a main article for Mapping themes, and put some concepts about it, design tips and the list of themes. That way users can search for the main article in the searchbar, and fall into the rabbit hole of mapping themes ;)

What do you think? What other themes could be added? - Endless01 (talk) 01:07, 23 March 2022 (CDT)

The themes I was thinking of doing to round things up are:
  • E3 style (just because there are E1, E2, and E4 styles)
  • Gothic map (think Gothic DM, Crucified Dreams, and perhaps also stuff like Crusades and maybe also some of Hexen)
  • Medieval map (think Heretic E1 towns and anything else that seeks to depict a medieval Europeanish aesthetic -- by opposition to Egyptian/Mesoamerica themes or the modern look of City maps)
  • Space map (Vrack & co, anything set up on a spaceship or space station)

Other themes that may work are:

  • Asian (or East-Asian) map. For stuff with a Chinese/Japanese/Korean aesthetic, like Japanese Valentines for example.
  • Cyberspace map. Stuff that emulates visiting a cybernetic environment, like some of the Hacx maps but also VR: The Internet Machine or MAP31: Cyberwar 7734.
  • Flesh map/Meat map (think Cyb's Freaky Colonoscopy, or MAP20: The Mouth of Madness and its followups)
  • Scaled map/shrunken player map: maps that depict gigantic versions of normally smaller objects. Like rat solitaire or some of the maps from Mandrill Ass Project.
  • Plutonia style (to go along with the episode styles, and it's a popular one -- more than TNT style)

--Gez (talk) 09:55, 23 March 2022 (CDT)

Doom 3 screenshots[edit]

Some screenshots from Doom 3 are of a low quality and resolution. Two questions:

  • Is this a copyright issue or something similar, or can those screenshots be replaced with better ones?
  • Is it okay to use BFG Edition screenshots when the difference is minimal? (For example, in weapon pages.)

--Kyano (talk) 17:10, 10 April 2022 (CDT)

Which ones, for example? Define 'low' and 'better'?
There are some guidelines re. image quality, but I see plenty 640x480 Doom 3 screens in our archive, and that is not too low, if that's what you mean. Their purpose is to illustrate encyclopedic information about games, not to show off stuff in glorious 2560x1440 or what have you. Such screens merely take up more disk space than necessary (and we're starting to run low). I'd limit replacements to something like 800x600 - 1440x900.
But yes, a screenshot can be replaced by a similar scene under the same {{Doom 3 screenshot}} license. A different scene is probably better added as a new screenshot. As for the BFG Edition, I don't know. --Xymph (talk) 03:26, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
For example File:Chainsaw_d3.jpg is of a very low resolution and has dark lighting, making the details of the weapon very hard to see. I have seen several images that are similar in quality. Also, I disagree that low resolution screenshots are good enough for Doom 3; because of the dark setting of the game, many things are hard to make out at low resolutions. Doom screenshots on the other hand usually have high contrast and weapons, monsters, etc are much easier to see. I am not saying that we should be uploading 4K png files for the reasons that you have mentioned, but 1080p screenshots should be acceptable.
I asked about BFG Edition because it works better on modern machines and it would make it easier for me and others to take screenshots. --Kyano (talk) 05:40, 12 April 2022 (CDT)
Yeah, that one and similar tiny shots can be replaced. I suppose there is precedent for 1920x1080 too, as long as reasonably sized (but smaller) shots aren't replaced just for the sake of that resolution (which take up 800-1500 KB each). Lack of disk space will become a real problem eventually, given the absence of response to calls for a Linux admin to help Quasar with server maintenance and (eventually) migration.
If BFG/original edition differences are minimal, I guess such shots are acceptable, but I'd really punt this topic to someone more knowledgeable about it. --Xymph (talk) 06:46, 12 April 2022 (CDT)

Question about protocol for editing a page that's about me[edit]

Hi! I used to go by a different handle and noticed that there is a page about me that uses my old handle and I would like to update it. The problem is, someone else has also used this handle and a couple maps are included on the page that were by that other person. The page in question is https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Nomad

I contributed to all of the projects mentioned except the two maps in A.L.T., and was not the Nomad involved in "Clan [B0S]." but otherwise the information is accurate. As I noted, I'd like to update this with my new information (as well as potentially some new map contributions) but I don't want to just erase the other Nomad's information. What should I do in this situation? Annunakitty (talk) 16:51, 18 May 2022 (CDT)

The correct and simple solution is a new mapper article with your works. --Xymph (talk) 11:27, 19 May 2022 (CDT)
Yo! Thanks so much! I see you added my ASS maps too, thanks again :) Annunakitty (talk) 12:36, 19 May 2022 (CDT)

What about gkrellflynn?[edit]

It’s a krell for gkrellm (a graphical side monitor) that show Flynn’s head. The more the processors work, the more Flynn’s head is injured. Where should be categorized an article about it? Ducon (talk) 13:26, 26 July 2022 (CDT)

Playtester category[edit]

Some playtesters in the Doom community do a lot of work to ensure maps are decently balanced and playable. While their portfolio of work may not be to the same degree as mappers, modders or source port authors, I feel that there should be a place where prominent playtesters could be added, in recognition of their contributions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FUNKYGIBBON (talkcontribs) .

You may want to sign yourself, Gibbon ;) But ill just repeat what i said on Discord. I agree, some playtesters do a lot of good and useful work in the community. But if this is your only credit, it is a little bit thin, in my opinion. --Redneckerz (talk) 17:15, 12 August 2022 (CDT)
I think the main distinction is that mappers, artists, coders create something, while play/code-testers "merely" help them to improve/debug those creations. Their contributions are of value to projects, sure, but I feel that there is little value to the wiki in listing these contributions here too. The projects' documentation should do that, and wiki cannot and should not need to completely cover every little detail too. Notability, however hard to define, remains an important factor for the wiki.
Also, given the wide variety of completeness and formatting in said documentation, and in the release process of many projects, it is already challenging enough to track mapping/artist/etc work on the wiki. So whatever the outcome of this discussion, personally I won't be investing any effort into tracking testing work too. --Xymph (talk) 06:43, 19 August 2022 (CDT)

Thing data tables[edit]

This is a follow-up to the original topic in 2016. The welcome slow pace w.r.t. new PWADs in recent weeks finally allowed me to resume development of my INFO.c tools. The planned implementation of generating the information in wiki-ready tables (using the same templating approach as in DMMPST) now works for DMINFO, and various samples are collected here. In comparison with the existing tables you'll notice some fields don't have a value, that is because some cannot be determined from the INFO.c and related data (alone), but the tool takes creating the tables for monsters, weapons, and items as far as it'll go automatically. The remainder will have to be added manually, as usual, and thus no additions/updates will happen via a XymphBot script.

The same is planned for the Heretic one (HTINFO), and then for Hexen and Strife where plenty thing data tables don't exist yet. I'll certainly encounter some unexpected situations there (because of the variety in weapon and monster behavior/data) but bridges can be crossed one at a time.

Changes versus the existing tables:

  1. The layout of the three monster tables/columns is now done with standard col templates instead of the custom table that made the whole thing more complex to edit manually.
  2. The thing type, mobj/enum, appears-in fields are now consistently present in that order, usually first in the table. Only for weapons they are, as before, preceded by the weapon-specific data. Should the three rows go first there too?
  3. In 2016 we discussed showing the flags field in hex and/or decimal, and it (finally) occurred to me that the simple solution is to list both on separate lines in that cell (not comma-separated in one line).
  4. I've merged the flags list table for monsters into the main table as I didn't see a real need to keep it a separate table, and the layout is cleaner this way. Description lengths vary, but it shouldn't be problem to have in them the right column of the main table.
  5. The flags field/list are now included in the weapon/item tables too. Is that okay?
  6. The weapon Sound row moved below the Sprite row, that seems a more logical order.

Please share your answers/feedback on the above. --Xymph (talk) 12:38, 11 September 2022 (CDT)

The silence is deafening. Anyone? Anyone? Gez? ;-)

All four tools are now ready to emit templated tables; samples of various thing types are here. Data may be incomplete (or even incorrect) because not everything can be determined from static data tables alone. More complex monster/boss/weapon behavior will always need manual work to describe completely.

I am still undecided on how detailed the Appears-in field should become. Since Hexen's DDC expansion is a separate IWAD (as are both parts of Final Doom), the current approach is to treat the extra maps/episodes not in the original registered/commercial release for the other series as separate expansions too. This was done by saving Ultimate E4, SSR E4-5, the D64 LL and VetEd maps into separate 'IWAD' files. The result is in the appearances table, and in the INFO tools this was easy to code.

For Doom in particular that means a lot of lines. So the second row there is a manual summary in fewer lines. The series sections below that table list single-player occurrences of all things in those (I)WADs, but in many cases a thing that occurs in the original release also occurs in the corresponding expansion. However, it would be the exceptions that make coding correct summaries more complex. E.g. Doom's lite goggles are not in Plutonia, so the "Doom II/Final Doom" should become "Doom II/TNT". For other game series more exceptions exist.

So what do you think, is it meaningful to detail occurrences in expansions separate from the original release like currently done? Or is it worth additional effort to condense the entries from the perspective of better presentation of information?

Also, any feedback on the included fields, their ordering, and formatting? One little change since my initial post above is the use of the {{c}} template around the Flags hex/dec values. It seems excessive to do that with, for example, all sprite/sound lump names or Enum strings though.

This is a kind of "speak now or hold your peace forever" week, for once I start updating tables I would hate to retread and change something as yet. After the summer of 2016 this will be second time to make pass over all thing data tables, and I do intend it to be my last one. --Xymph (talk) 12:44, 19 September 2022 (CDT)

Well, I don't have much to say.
  1. fine. It's not like I could think of reasons not to use the standard col templates.
  2. Yeah, it might be more consistent? Of course there are special cases such as weapons that don't have a thing type (e.g. fists), weapons that have three thing types (Hexen ultimates), weapons that share a thing type (Heretic normal/powered up, or Strife crossbow/grenade launcher/mauler) and the Sigil is a mess. Might make sense, then, to have weapon data in a separate table, just lik monsters have a separate table for their ranged attack.
  3. Is the decimal value useful for DEHACKED? I suppose it is, otherwise I don't see the point of having it at all, but I suppose it doesn't hurt.
  4. That makes sense.
  5. That is okay but see #2.
  6. That's fine.
Finally, looking at the appearance table for Heretic, it seems the only difference between the episode 2-3 column and the episode 4-5 column is D'Sparil and his teleport spots, which by the way is my prog rock band name so maybe making this distinction is not very useful. But again, I guess it doesn't hurt and Doom gets to have a whopping eight columns so Heretic would look sad if it was reduced to two columns. --Gez (talk) 16:39, 20 September 2022 (CDT)
Re. split weapon table, that thought crossed my mind some time ago, but then I forgot to explore it. Makes a lot sense now that I updated the samples. For non-projectile attacks, the right table will be shorter, but it is still worthwhile. I even added the flags for spawned Mobjs, but that may be overkill. What do you think? For more complex weapons, multiple tables in the right column will be needed; bridges to cross...
Re. decimal flags, yes, see the original 2016 discussion, where Quasar wrote: "The original logic behind decimal flags values is because of how DeHackEd displayed them, yes. I would rather have the value in both bases".
Earlier I made a subtle change to the frames with square brackets around the animation letters, to stand apart from the parenthesized state string. Hmm, regrouping these two rows into a separate table would probably be clearer. Will explore that.
In the weapon data, the changed order of shots/min, velocity, damage follows a more logical action/effect flow.
Re. appearances, for Hexen too everything except Korax, Reiver and a few keys occurs in the expansion too. So I feel it is better to summarize the rows for Doom and both H's. Only Strife has more significant diffs between VetEd and original game, so there the distinction still makes sense.
Any further questions/remarks/suggestions? --Xymph (talk) 14:09, 21 September 2022 (CDT)
Previously the weapon tables mixed weapon attributes into the ranged attack table. That has now been remedied, and the state/sprite/frame data is presented much clearer in its own table. Quite happy with how this turned out.
So again, any (final) questions/remarks/suggestions? --Xymph (talk) 11:06, 22 September 2022 (CDT)
The other day I chatted on #doomwiki with Quasar, who is also okay with the updates to the data tables. So, off I go... --Xymph (talk) 07:13, 26 September 2022 (CDT)
And two months later, I think I got everything for the four main games (phew). There are a few loose ends, such as the player speed that is elaborately defined for Doom, and which for the other three games I'll happily leave to a specialist. I'm also unsure how the maulotaur charge damage is calculated, so left the existing values. Otherwise, hope I didn't make any mistakes, but they can be addressed the normal wiki way when they are discovered. I'm still planning a brief afterburner for the unique Doom 64 things using relevant parts of the the DOOM64-RE codebase. (Shouldn't that get its own wiki article, Redneckerz?). But apart from that, it's a wrap. :-) --Xymph (talk) 05:49, 28 November 2022 (CST)

What does the type= parameter do?[edit]

Hi there. I wanted to create a new article but i don't know enough about the syntax used for editing. Specifically, what does the type= parameter do? I couldn't find any documentation about that on the Mediawiki page. I've seen type=e, type=m & type=l all used in the source code for most articles on wads in the section relating to the titlepic at the very beginning, but they seem to have no effect on the displayed page itself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gregor (talkcontribs) .

Selects the primary categorization. For example "e" equals Episode WADs, "m" equals Megawads. I do not know the full list of values myself as I did not design the template. --Quasar (talk) 22:00, 12 October 2022 (CDT)
Looking deeper, the full list of values is on the page - {{Wad}}, listed under "type: General type. The template will attempt to auto-categorize based on this; the default is a general PWAD without maps." --Quasar (talk) 22:02, 12 October 2022 (CDT)
To clarify the distinction, type= therefore is not basic MediaWiki syntax, but part of a template. Templates are extensively used here to ensure consistency, avoid repetition of basic wiki code, and make our lives easier. Most templates come with explanations/instructions. In the edit window, the list of templates used in the page/section is shown below the Preview/Save buttons. When previewing an edit, any categories (explicit ones or generated by templates) are at the bottom of the page. --Xymph (talk) 02:06, 13 October 2022 (CDT)
Thanks for the clarification! Gregor (talk)

Gamepedia links[edit]

Since the Hell-site bought out Gamepedia we have a ton of lingering links to formerly decent sites that still haven't been addressed. I think we should try searching/finding all these and re-evaluate which are really needed and what can be purged or replaced. While we're at it we could do the same for any remaining w:c: interwikis, which I'm starting to sour on the idea of having any of those left either (a few exceptions were made, especially for Chex Quest, previously during the migration cleanup). --Quasar (talk) 19:09, 19 October 2022 (CDT)

I'm in, this list (two entries already fixed) helps a little. Scripted searches, including direct database queries (like here), can do a lot more. I'd need to know which patterns to search for besides 'w:c:'. An initial script for the latter is done and produces 50 hits in all namespaces. --Xymph (talk) 04:48, 20 October 2022 (CDT)
I haven't seen any Gamepedia entry in the Interwiki list. So any gamepedia link we have is not an interwiki link but a hard link. --Gez (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2022 (CDT)
A couple of them became redirected domain names; this was the case for the Zelda Wiki - when they moved to Gamepedia, they sold their domain name to Gamepedia. Bad move since it now belongs to the Hell-site! They're using a new one now, which is the one to which I changed it over. Not sure how to find these other than going down the list and manually looking for them. grimaces --Quasar (talk) 14:26, 21 October 2022 (CDT)

New affiliate[edit]

I was contacted by the folks at the new Independent Fallout Wiki which is currently in register-only "early access" and will be going full public soon and they want to do the full affiliate thing like we have w/NIWA and Quake Wiki. They've already got things setup on their end to my satisfaction (Wiki Node style affiliates page with our logo and link, and footer links on community pages). I'll be adding them to our Node, main page footer (may require some retooling yet again), and setting up an interwiki. We definitely have some places that Fallout links are appropriate, with the Easter eggs in Doom '16 and the extensive Doom references in FSO (which they're also sending me some resources regarding so I can possibly add more info about that). --Quasar (talk) 20:52, 29 October 2022 (CDT)

I happened to be around in #doomwiki two days ago when one of their (presumably) admins came looking for contact info. We had a pleasant chat and I was able to point them in your general direction. Good that they liberated themselves. --Xymph (talk) 02:50, 30 October 2022 (CDT)
There's also a couple of "Creation Club" content for FO4 mentioned in Doom references in other games that it would be nice to turn into links if they have dedicated articles. Just out of laziness, I'd rather have the template named {{fowiki}} or {{fallout}} instead of {{falloutwiki}}, though. :p --Gez (talk) 18:26, 30 October 2022 (CDT)
I changed that, good time for it since it's not used quite yet. --Quasar (talk) 14:22, 31 October 2022 (CDT)

New funding method[edit]

Adding to excitement Manc dropped a new Patreon as he wants to get the finances fully in order before we move forward with server migrations/upgrades. The left-hand column has thus grown a bit with a new option. --Quasar (talk) 14:20, 31 October 2022 (CDT)

Info on monsters' states[edit]

Recently wiki pages on monsters and adjacent expanded to cover things like animation frames. However one of the most important data pieces, duration is missing. Things like how long does it take for monster to fire aren't covered at all, and neither is info on how long does every step take (Although at least that one specifies speed in units per second). Should this perhaps be specified? --ViolentBeetle (talk) 14:49, 17 November 2022 (CST)

See Thing_data_tables, "speak now or hold your peace forever" week happened in September. --Xymph (talk) 15:07, 17 November 2022 (CST)
I wouldn't object forever to addition of more information but it would have to be universally applied consistently and proven correct beforehand. For various reasons I don't feel like attack state durations would fit here very well though because they can rely on things like action functions calling P_Random etc. If someone wanted I'd be more ready to support them creating a separate table with that kind of information. --Quasar (talk) 10:07, 18 November 2022 (CST)
When I wrote that I was a little miffed at process changes being proposed while 90% of the process was already done. But I also wrote it somewhat provocatively, knowing full well it isn't the "wiki way" to stifle discussion. So I'm not surprised someone kicked in on that aspect. ;-) But I was primarily referring to my last paragraph of September 19, in that I really don't want to go over several hundred pages (or dozens if just the monsters) for a third time. Also, to me the original post was too vague about exactly what info to add where in which layout. But if that would be hashed out in further discussion, I certainly wouldn't be stifling it - just perhaps staying away from it. --Xymph (talk) 12:39, 18 November 2022 (CST)
Def understandable :) --Quasar (talk) 12:42, 18 November 2022 (CST)

Map links don't autogenerate map stubs[edit]

I was just wondering why the map links in the Knee-Deep in Knee-Deep in ZDoom article as of yet haven't auto-generated the usual map stubs? The article is out for a while and the wad contains quite a lot changes to the layout of the original KDiZD plus different secret locations, so separate map articles are very much justified. I'm just curious if there's a problem with data extracting process. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gregor (talkcontribs) .

It's not a fully automated process as far as I'm aware. I'm sure it's on somebody's radar. --Quasar (talk) 22:03, 21 November 2022 (CST)
There's nothing autonomous about XymphBot, not sure why people keep thinking that. It is a bot account so its many edits do not clutter Recent Changes (unless you choose to Show them), but especially map articles creation takes a lot of human preparation/time on the .ini file, map views, and the actual script runs. I backburned KDiKDiZD because:
  1. with four builds (oh, a fifth one came out since the article was created) it is evidently in a state of flux. Projects shouldn't be added to the wiki until they are released. Originally that meant an idgames archive release, but with so many forum-only releases picking up Cacowards in the past decade, that was loosened to include release candidates (RC) and other releases that have at least been stable for months. Creating map articles and then having to regenerate thing tables and map views upon further betas/builds/fixes/re-releases, is a pain I have had to go through way too many times already.
  2. Projects with custom things should have a mapping table before things tables can be generated. Yes, stable projects can get map articles without things tables, but that just means I'll have to revisit them later (more double work). There are nearly 200 examples. Dynamo did fantastic work on a metric ton of TSVs this year, but is currently unavailable.
So there. What you or Sena could do, is to fix the map paths on all the co-author pages, like Gez did in the main article. --Xymph (talk) 02:09, 22 November 2022 (CST)
I guess it's a roundabout compliment that you've made this place so efficient at covering new mods that people think it happens magically now ;) --Quasar (talk) 08:38, 24 November 2022 (CST)

From this conversation I get the impression that if I want to make WAD article, I would just need to make a page for wad and eventually you will fire up a bot to auto-generate pages. Is there a specific template I should follow if I get around making one, or just copy the layout over? --ViolentBeetle (talk) 16:00, 29 November 2022 (CST)

There is no template for WAD overview pages, but of course hundreds of examples exist, so pick a similar one. As noted above however, it needs to have a stable release before I'd start working on it, and, for projects with more than a few custom things, a TSV list. Also, speedmapping projects will not get individual map articles for several reasons. And while the wiki could cover any released WAD, just because it was released doesn't mean it has to get coverage. Some measure of notability would be helpful, although that is notoriously hard to define. See here for some past discussions. --Xymph (talk) 04:44, 30 November 2022 (CST)

Fraction?[edit]

How do i type fractions? The normal way, "1{{frac|1|2}}", doesn't seem to be supported by Doomwiki, nor does 1{{frac|1|1|2}} or 1{{1/2}}. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gregor (talkcontribs) .

I presume you're looking for output similar to 1½ ? I'll try looking up what those template(s) do elsewhere. --Quasar (talk) 23:35, 28 November 2022 (CST)
I've added {{fraction}} which works the same as it does on wikipedia. There's no frac shorthand redirect though because I don't see the point of adding that here as it's older/deprecated on wp. --Quasar (talk) 00:20, 29 November 2022 (CST)
Yes, that was just what i was looking for. Thank you very much! --Gregor (talk) 00:45, 29 November 2022 (CST)

When to use "MIDI rendition of" in soundtrack info[edit]

I just wanna check before i go any further with this. I've seen a lot of articles that clarify a midi as a "MIDI rendition of " only if the original is a proper recording. If it is from a video game soundtrack, especially from the 90s or 16-bit, then the name is just listed as is, somewhat suggesting that the game actually used midi compositions or that the WAD included mp3 or vorbis ogg recordings of these tracks in their original form. Of course, that is almost never the case, and also would be highly illegal in many cases. So is it ok to just let this bit of ambiguity stand? Or should a "MIDI rendition of" be used as a default whenever the track listed is in fact originally not a midi?

As an example: in the Sunlust article, a track from Streets of Rage 2 was listed as a "MIDI rendition of..." but a track from Secret of Evermore was listed without that info. Both are tracks from 16-bit consoles that don't use MIDI. I added "MIDI rendition of" for all tracks in question for that article just for consistency but i'm not sure whether it would not be better to rather just remove that info for all tracks instead of cluttering the text with repetition of the same phrase over and over, even though it would technically be correct to do so.

The Pleiades article also highlighted a case where it is useful to clarify a MIDI rendition for pieces which are in the public domain and so could be included as proper recordings (depending on the recording in question of course).

So what's the stance on that? --Gregor (talk) 09:22, 7 December 2022 (CST)

I guess I opened a can of worms. :) I know little about old discussion/choices made in this area, but just noticed something that seemed inconsistent. Please also keep in mind that WAD soundtrack lists are not as tightly defined as map lists or many other parts of the wiki, not in the least because they are often not tightly defined (if at all) in the source documentation, i.e. the WAD's .txt/credits file(s).
That said, it seems to me that previously released rock/pop/film/etc. music are always MIDI renditions, unless indeed stored in MP3/Ogg formats. But for music from other, especially older, games that can vary, and I don't know how to treat those. Personally I only verify soundtrack lists to the point of having valid links and reasonable formatting, and otherwise pay little attention to them. And the Pleiades mess immediately cured me from one attempt trying anything more. ;-)
Given limited time/energy I would shy away from prefixing MIDI tracks with the 'rendition' phrase on loads of existing WAD/map pages. There are plenty areas in the wiki that should have higher priority. But I can't really address your policy/stance questions. --Xymph (talk) 11:06, 7 December 2022 (CST)
AS far as I'm concerned, MIDI rendition / MIDI sequence / whatever you wanna call it ought to be specified every time a music track like that is utilized, because then you can have cases like DUMP 2 where they're using .spc files and such instead of .midi files - they are simply different compositions you can think as covers. But obviously, midi sequence is not necessary to specify if the tracks in question were originally midis to begin with. The reason there's so much inconsistency simply comes down to different authors being involved for different pages - the way of the wiki, as it goes. --Dynamo128 (talk) 15:10, 7 December 2022 (CST)
I don't think that the "MIDI rendition of" phrase needs be used as the default way for non-MIDI soundtrack sources. As long as the usage is consistent within the article it's ok. It does make sense to include it where it helps to avoid ambiguity. In the Pleiades article the listed classical pieces could have been included as proper recordings (since they are all in the public domain), especially given that it is a mod for ZDoom, though i don't know if even ZDoom supported none-MIDI formats as early as 2000. In this case, the added "rendition" phrase helps to clarify what kind of version of the pieces you actually gonna find inside the wad.
What i do consider problematic is if an article is inconsistent in its usage, like the DBP37: AUGER;ZENITH article, where it lists some songs with the MIDI rendition prefix and others without, even though all except two tracks have none-MIDI sources and so would qualify for the prefix. Either use it for all or don't use for any of them. That's my stance on this. So that's the one case where i think it should be "corrected". --Gregor (talk) 13:17, 19 April 2023 (CDT)
Just to add to the above. Like I posted on the Talk:Sunlust page, I think it makes more sense to assume MIDI as the default format for most Doom soundtracks and point out exceptions where the included track is not in MIDI format rather than the other way around, so as to avoid cluttering the soundtrack list with "MIDI rendition of" before every entry. There are exceptions of course where non-MIDI formats are the default instead but these are most likely GZDoom-exclusive mods and even then it's the exception rather than the norm to have the majority of the soundtrack not in the MIDI format.
As a compromise, one could clarify the file format by prefacing the soundtrack list with a line like "All music tracks inside the WAD/PK3 are in MIDI format (except where noted otherwise)". That way information about the file format for each track is included while avoiding any visual clutter. --Gregor (talk) 13:23, 6 August 2023 (CDT)

Linking ZDoom forum[edit]

Is there a template for the ZDoom wiki like there is for wikipedia? --Gregor (talk) 22:51, 15 December 2022 (CST)

We have a large Templates arsenal, including lots of External link templates with several ZDoom-related ones. --Xymph (talk) 01:57, 16 December 2022 (CST)

Possible For MoonMan mod to be here[edit]

well ThL2 (talk)

We're not interested in that kind of content, no. --Quasar (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2023 (CST)

If Hdoom can be allowed so can MooN Mod too? How about the Kek Doom mod —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ThL2 (talkcontribs) .

The year of release for projects that have a year in the name[edit]

Hello everyone! I am now in the process of cleaning Doomworld Mega Project articles and one big thing that I see is that most of these articles have wrong year of release listed. Example: DMP2013 is listed as 2013 WAD, but its first version was actually released in early 2014. When I asked Xymph about it, he mentioned the exception implemented by Eris Falling. I want to discuss this topic. I'm okay with exceptions like this, but I think that they should be part of wiki rules or listed somewhere publicly available, not on the certain user's personal talk page. So, two questions are: should we keep this exception for year-numbered projects, and if so, how can we make this exception publicly available? --Nockson (talk) 01:52, 19 March 2023 (CDT)

I didn't reply so far because I don't really have an opinion either way. I was kind of hoping Eris Falling would chime in with more discussion how this came about, but it looks like Eris isn't regularly active, at least not here in Central Processing. --Xymph (talk) 13:23, 15 April 2023 (CDT)

Gaming Wiki Network[edit]

I just found out about the Gaming Wiki Network and I figure it might be of interest here. A couple of our affiliates and network links are also affiliates or members over there (IFW, SEIWA). --Gez (talk) 07:01, 19 March 2023 (CDT)

Looks to be a worthwhile initiative. Perhaps Doom Wiki should sign up there? --Xymph (talk) 13:23, 15 April 2023 (CDT)

Extquote template issues[edit]

When i use the extquote template {{Extquote|quote|attribution|source}} for sources outside the wiki it doesn't seem to work correctly. I insert the source as a url behind the attribution and have the ref section at the bottom of the page. But it doesn't display the source over the attribution as i understand it should do; instead it just ignores the source and renders it like no source was given. How do i use it correctly? The wiki page doesn't go into a lot of detail in what exact format the source should be given.

Also, is there a way i can keep the "Articles with unsourced quotes" category from being automatically added to an article that uses either the quote or extquote without filling the source field? I understand that this kinda defeats the point of having such a category, but it makes it look like the quote is lacking essential information, even though it is intentionally left unsourced (since the source is already provided through the author field for instance or by a separate citation). --Gregor (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2023 (CDT)

Alright, i figured out the problem. For the source field in the template:extquote, you have to use the {{cite web text|...}} template rather than {{cite web|...}} for it to function correctly, otherwise it will produce a citation within the citation, resulting in an empty ref entry. I don't know why the template behaves this way, maybe its a custom change to this wiki? But whatever. At least this way it works as intended. --Gregor (talk) 11:44, 24 May 2023 (CDT)
To answer my second question, with the quote template one can use the nosource=true command in place of the source field text to prevent the article from being listed under the "Articles with unsourced quotes" category. As a result, the {{cite web}} template can be used in the attribution field (following the author/source) to achieve the same effect as if placing it in the source field using the {{cite web text}}, so long as the nosource=true command is provided in the source field. However, the extquote template will ignore this command, so a source has to be provided to prevent the article from being categorized as an "Articles with unsourced quotes".
I think it would be helpful for future reference if this information about the nosource=true command and the idiosyncrasies in the usage of the {{cite web}} template would be included in the articles for the quote and extquote template. --Gregor (talk) 13:45, 24 May 2023 (CDT)

Problems with all-caps filter[edit]

I had to junk the soundtrack section in a WAD article that I recently created, as some of the song titles were in all caps, as were a couple of lump names from songs found in other WADs who's names I could not immediately source. The abuse filter prevented me from creating the page. I know I could always create an account, but I perfer to work semi-anonymously on this wiki for various reasons. I get why the filter exists, but in this case it seemed to be a bit overzealous. 23.251.65.173 01:54, 23 May 2023 (CDT)

Not sure why soundtracks would cause a problem unless they contain specific profanities. There is no generic restriction on all-caps words, there are plenty places with those around the wiki. Just lowercase/capitalize them and try again. --Xymph (talk) 13:18, 23 May 2023 (CDT)

Guideline regarding capitalization of map names[edit]

Throughout this wiki title case is enforced for map names. So first and last word are always capitalized, as well as verbs, adverbs, adjectives, pronouns and long prepositions (five or more letters), etc; while articles and short prepositions, and coordinating conjunctions (but, and, or) are always lowercase. The exact definitions are actually pretty numerous. However, the use of title case is not mentioned anywhere in the Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines section as far as i can see. I think that should be added. --Gregor (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2023 (CDT)

Just saw the same topic was already opened on the Doom Wiki talk:Policies and guidelines page earlier this day. It's more appropriate to discuss this there. --Gregor (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2023 (CDT)

Limit removing[edit]

I recently noticed that the article for limit removing WADs does not have a hyphen in its title, as is the case for Category:Limit removing source ports, whereas there is a hyphen in the category Category:Limit-removing WADs. Would it be a good idea to move the first two pages so they are hyphenated, or should I wait for discussion/consensus first? Sena (talk) 18:13, 8 June 2023 (CDT)

Better wait. Moving a category leaves a redirect that remains in use on all pages in the category, and is rendered in italics. That is rather undesirable. As for the dash/no-dash inconsistency, I don't know how what came about and just got used to it. --Xymph (talk) 02:07, 9 June 2023 (CDT)

Heretic/Hexen capitalization issues[edit]

I've noticed that most of the Heretic/Hexen pages don't follow the DoomWiki's capitalization rules. So here's a table with my renaming suggestions. I also showed how, IMO, these names should be used in the text of the articles.

Heretic/Hexen renaming suggestions
Current name New name Use in text
Dragon Claw Dragon claw dragon claw
Elven Wand Elven wand Elven wand
Ethereal Crossbow Ethereal crossbow ethereal crossbow
Phoenix Rod Phoenix rod phoenix rod
Quartz Flask Quartz flask quartz flask
Mystic Urn Mystic urn mystic urn
Silver Shield Silver shield silver shield
Enchanted Shield Enchanted shield enchanted shield
Chaos Device Chaos device chaos device
Frost Shards Frost shards frost shards
Sapphire Wand Sapphire wand sapphire wand
Serpent Staff Serpent staff serpent staff
Banishment Device Banishment device banishment device
Dark Servant Dark servant dark servant
Dragonskin Bracers Dragonskin bracers dragonskin bracers
Falcon Shield Falcon shield falcon shield
Mesh Armor Mesh armor mesh armor
Mystic Ambit Incant Mystic ambit incant mystic ambit incant
Platinum Helm Platinum helm platinum helm
Claw Orb Claw orb claw orb
Crystal Geode Crystal geode crystal geode
Energy Orb Energy orb energy orb
Ethereal Arrows Ethereal arrows ethereal arrows
Flame Orb Flame orb flame orb
Greater Runes Greater runes greater runes
Inferno Orb Inferno orb Inferno orb
Lesser Runes Lesser runes lesser runes
Mace Spheres Mace spheres mace spheres
Pile of Mace Spheres Pile of mace spheres pile of mace spheres
Quiver of Ethereal Arrows Quiver of ethereal arrows quiver of ethereal arrows
Wand Crystal Wand crystal wand crystal

I haven't included artifacts such as the Tome of Power or the Mace of Contrition because there are two options: all caps (like the One Ring) or no caps at all (like the philosopher's stone). Let's discuss! --Nockson (talk) 11:13, 12 June 2023 (CDT)

Decided to open a can of worms, did you? :) And the above table doesn't even include Heretic ammo, Hexen keys, etc. When starting at the wiki in 2016, I wondered a bit about the different convention but figured there would be good(?) historical reasons for it. Perhaps old-timers like Ryan W, Fraggle or Quasar can fill us in. From a convention viewpoint I could understand changing to the new names, but from a practical viewpoint I'd be very reluctant of the humongous amount of work (even with the assistance of pregreplGen.php and DMMPST, which is not a given). So this discussion should not be rushed into a conclusion. But if the conclusion is to rename, then the current articles should be moved (not new redirects created to the existing articles) in order to preserve their edit histories at the (new) canonical paths. --Xymph (talk) 03:36, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
Well, I can't stop my perfectionism, it's taking over. :( I've added Heretic ammo to the table (I worked on it prior to your message). I see some strange inconsistency in names, examples: Crystal vial, Map scroll and Hexen ammo. And sorry for all the redlinks. --Nockson (talk) 03:48, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
There's another variant - presume current state as a rule and fix only the exceptions. --Nockson (talk) 04:07, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
Timon's Axe should remain capitalized. The name implies a specific, legendary axe; so it's used as a proper noun. It does not mean "the axe of this dude called Timon that we found in his shed, he wasn't there so we nicked it." We are talking about the kind of axe here where thunder roars and lightning strikes when you lift it above your head.
I think the same could be argued for the Mystic Ambit Incant. That's not a generic item name like "flame orb" or "silver shield." Sounds like the name of an ancient magical scroll, full of arcane writings. The fact that it appears multiple time in the game could be chalked up to video game logic. Not sure about the Ethereal Crossbow and Phoenix Rod. Again, if we're talking about specific, legendary weapons, so not a generic name for a class of crossbows that the elves from Heretic liked to use, but rather a unique, magical crossbow given to the Chosen one in the temple of yada, yada, yada. Same could be argued for the Serpent Staff and Sapphire Wand, though i'd say the names imply a somewhat more generic nature of these items. Kind of a grey area there. But Timon's Axe is a pretty solid case in favor of capitalization. --Gregor (talk) 21:13, 13 June 2023 (CDT)
Agreed on Timon's Axe. I've removed it from table. About Incant - yes, it sounds like a special thing, but I'm not sure. About crossbow, I see an analogy here: plasma rifle is a futuristic rifle that shoots plasma, ethereal crossbow is a fantasy crossbow that shoots ethereal arrows. --Nockson (talk) 11:15, 20 June 2023 (CDT)
Ok, i checked the manuals for both Heretic and Hexen to get to the bottom of this, since according to the guidelines the author's intent when it comes to naming things should be respected wherever possible. The names of all the weapons and most items in Hexen are used as proper nouns including Serpent Staff, Sapphire Wand, Frost Shards, Mesh Armor, Platinum Helm, Dark Servant, Quartz Flask, Mystic Urn, Flechette, Chaos Device, Banishment Device, Dragonskin Bracers and Falcon Shield. "Torch", "Crystal vial" and "Mystic Ambit Incant" are the only ones that are left unclear. I'd argue that a torch is a torch is a torch..., but who knows.
For Heretic, Dragon Claw, Phoenix Rod and Enchanted Shield are all clearly capitalized. Curiously, the manual calls it "Elvenwand" rather than written as two separate words. The manual also lists both the Ethereal Crossbow and the Gauntlets of the Necromancer as simply "crossbow" and "gauntlets," but it is clear that the gauntlets' full name as it appears in-game is a proper noun, so again, it doesn't make sense that Ethereal Crossbow would be the one weapon with a fancy name that isn't meant to be a proper noun. The "Staff" could be the only real exception here, since it isn't capitalized in the manual and also is only weapon without a epithet like "ethereal" or "elven." It seems to be nothing more than a simple staff. Couldn't find any official documentation for Mystic Ambit Incant, Greater Runes and Lesser Runes, but i think, given the evidence, there is a clear desire from the developers of both games to have these weapons and items be seen as legendary stuff with unique names from the days of yore. So I'd say these should also be capitalized for the same reasons.
Finally, the ammo for the Heretic weapons is still a bit of a grey area since the second word at least, like in Claw Orb, could be seen as nothing more than a common descriptor, so it could be rendered as Claw orb instead. But if that's all it comes down to, i think we can simply leave as it is. The only things that may be worth changing would be the capitalization for "Staff" and "Torch" and changing "Elven Wand" to "Elvenwand" instead. --Gregor (talk) 20:20, 20 June 2023 (CDT)
Well, if you check HERE the manual for the Ultimate Doom (starting at page 11), you can see that everything is also capitalized (Plasma Rifle, Ammo Box, Radiation Suit, Health Potion, Former Human Sergeant etc). Another thing is this: in Heretic if you pick up any item the message is shown in the upper part of the screen and it's written in all lowercase no matter what item you take. --Nockson (talk) 02:33, 21 June 2023 (CDT)

Commercial Games Generally Like To Gratuitously Capitalize Everything, so we haven't always gone with author's intent for those. Otherwise we'd never write "Doom", but only "DOOM" in all-caps and it'd get old fast. Also yes, the in-game styling is affected by game fonts not having proper caps support; Doom's is all in upper-case while Heretic's and Hexen's is all in lowercase. So the way things appear in-game is not a valid indication of intent, and so the text strings from the code aren't either. That said, the Gratuitous Caps in Heretic and Hexen do kinda fit with the general Ye Olde Medieval Fantasy aesthetics, though. --Gez (talk) 08:25, 21 June 2023 (CDT)

I personally think it would be good to standardize the capitalization in these to be more in line with Doom stuff, but that's just me. --Dynamo128 (talk) 08:32, 21 June 2023 (CDT)

Well, we had a discussion connected to this topic over here on the guideline's talk page a couple of weeks ago regarding map titles, where i argued for a more uniform approach across the wiki with using title case for all map names, independent from their styling in the documentation, apart from special exceptions where deemed appropriate. Quasar summed up his stance on the matter like this:

"So the only rule I'm going to support is that the capitalization used is the one used by the author of the mod in its official announcements or documentation."

Even though it is not the exact same topic, i do think it has relevance for this discussion as well. Because if that's the rule/guideline (from now on?), then i think the fact that the manual capitalizes these items does matter. The way Doom monster and weapon names are handled should perhaps be considered the exception to the rule rather than the rule for everything else to follow; an example of "accepted usage." --Gregor (talk) 09:45, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
Here's Heretic's level designer Michael Raymond-Judy's opinion about the manual: "...some [ideas for the world, creatures and background story], sadly, was made up by the people who later wrote the manual/hint book. I say sadly because they pretty much made things up as they wanted without asking anyone here, and a lot of what they made up just didn't fit with the "reality" we had created behind the game. Like the second Highlander movie, I just try to pretend it never happened..." (LINK) It looks like the manual was made by some outside people not connected to developers. Manual itself states in credits: "Package/manual design: The Richards Group/R&D". --Nockson (talk) 10:05, 21 June 2023 (CDT)
Just to weigh in on this from an old-timer perspective many of the Heretic and Hexen items were considered legendary or mystical in nature given the fantasy bent of the series so we never made a call on which should be capped or not and just kept them all that way. Reminder that the current lowercase consensus for Doom evolved over time and that early on there was pure chaos with no consistent styling. I'd suspect at one point caps for Doom items were more common than lowercase but I never ran statistics on that. I have no real issue with this changing now so long as the items that are clearly legendary items remain capped, as that is in fact a style rule in English writing in general and not specific to this wiki. --Quasar (talk) 23:00, 24 September 2023 (CDT)

Restart[edit]

I've thought a lot and want to restart this thread. I've gained some information from last time, and am also better prepared in terms of the rationale behind the renamings.

Heretic weapons and ammo:

I think that all articles about weapons and ammo from Heretic should be renamed and written in lowercase letters, i.e. dragon claw, ethereal crossbow, firemace, phoenix rod, staff, wand crystal, crystal geode, ethereal arrows, quiver of ethereal arrows, claw orb, energy orb, lesser runes, greater runes, flame orb, mace spheres, pile of mace spheres. My rationale: none of these weapons are considered special, they can be found everywhere. Phoenix rod is simply shaped like a phoenix, and the same goes for dragon claw. Ethereal arrows are just a kind of fantasy ammo, similar to Doom's sci-fi plasma cells. None of these weapons can be considered unique, with the exception of the firemace (because it is rare), but it has a very generic and uninteresting name.

I see four possible exceptions:

  • Hellstaff - must be capitalized because it contains the word "Hell";
  • Inferno orb - same goes here, "Inferno" should be written with a capital letter (but "orb" should not);
  • Elven wand - "Elven" should be capitalized because it is a race (but "wand" should not);
  • Gauntlets of the Necromancer - sounds like something special (typical fantasy X of the Y thing), although they can be found at almost any level. I'm not sure about this one, but inclined to not capitalize.

Heretic items:

These can be divided into ordinary items and artifacts. The former ones should all be renamed, and the latter ones should continue to be capitalized. My rationale is the following: by "artifact" I mean everything that was written with a special "addition" in the manual, apparently indicating the person who created/used them (for example Darchala's Chaos Device). These additions make items special (but, as I wrote in the previous discussion, some of the information in the manual was made up by its authors, who did not consult with folks at Raven).

Hexen weapons:

This is a special case because many of Hexen's weapons can be considered special. List:

Hexen items:

Please share your thoughts! --Nockson (talk) 12:46, 5 December 2023 (CST)

Just caught up with this, all seems fine and in good order to me, but perhaps some people who are more directly involved with Heretic/Hexen work on the wiki (if any) can weigh in? From me though, the only words are, "yes please". --Dynamo128 (talk) 10:03, 16 December 2023 (CST)
I also meant to follow up on this when it was quiet enough. While I kinda like Ye Olde Medieval Fantasy aesthetics for names, as a wikipedian I understand the desire for consistent styling. And from that angle, I think this new scheme and rationale are more solid than the first proposal. So while I'm not strongly in favor (because of the amount of work in updating everything), I'm not against it on principle either. The only change I'd make is to lowercase "inferno orb": as the large ammo type its connection to the meaning of "large uncontrolled fire" is much stronger than to a Hell-ish location. --Xymph (talk) 10:36, 16 December 2023 (CST)
I largely agree with Nockson's list above, but also share Xymph's view that "inferno orb" should be lowercase. That item is not unique. Gauss (talk) 07:09, 17 December 2023 (CST)
I think these are mostly fine too, but I do disagree about the styling of Bag of Holding and the items "Boots of Speed", "Disc of Repulsion", and "Krater of Might". In my opinion these all imply unique and special items that are correctly capitalized. It would be something different entirely if they were called "speed boots", "repulsion disc", and "mighty krater". That would describe generic items. But written in the form "X of Y" emphasizes their unique nature. It's not just any krater we're talking about. It's the "Krater of Might". Same with the "Boots of Speed". One can imagine another, similar item being called "Boots of Power" (thunderclap!). But whether the attribute is speed, might, or power shouldn't matter. What matters is the implied legendary nature of the items.
And under the same rationale, the "Bag of Holding" should also remain capitalized. Yes, in the end it's just a medieval-sounding name for backpack, but the styling does imply unique, legendary status. So the same rule should apply, just like for Timebomb of the Ancients, Ring of Invincibility, Tome of Power, Krater of Might, Disc of Repulsion, and Boots of Speed. Talk about consistency. --Gregor (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2023 (CST)
I have to disagree about the discs. Sometimes you can find several disks placed in a row at the same time, which hardly makes them unique. Krater and Boots seem pretty rare, so I OK with keeping them, but bag IMO should not be capitalized. It's just a bag with supplies, nothing special here, simply a backpack reskin. --Nockson (talk) 03:38, 17 December 2023 (CST)
I don't think its useful to argue about whether or not an item is special or generic based on how frequently it can be found in the game, since all items can be found more than once. This is about consistency first and foremost. In my opinion, basically all items and weapons that use the "X of Y" form should remain capitalized, excluding any generic descriptor like "quiver of ethereal arrows" and "pile of mace spheres". But I don't see why the name Bag of Holding or Amulet of Warding implies less uniqueness than a Krater of Might or a Tome of Power. These are all deliberately formal stylings of the names for these items, and I think that's what matters, not the specific function of the item they describe.

Sure, the Bag of Holding is just a fancy name for a backpack, and they could have just named it "supply bag", in which case no-one would argue about it being written in lowercase. But it was written in this overly formal style, obviously a bit tongue-in-cheek, and part of the joke is that it now implies this legendary item, even though it's just a bag with some supplies. And the fact that the Disc of Repulsion can be found all over the place, can simply be put down to video game logic, where good game mechanics and balancing is far more important than logically consistent world building and storylines. Again, IMO it's more about the form the name is written in and the nature of the item thus implied than the function or the availability of the item itself. --Gregor (talk) 04:34, 17 December 2023 (CST)
The legendary angle appeals to me too. (And Nockson hinted at it for Gauntlets of the Necromancer above as well.) It seems to me we're in consensus about ammo/armor/health objects going all lowercase, and only are debating whether some special items get changed. Perhaps it helps to see all of them together in the new style, so I updated the DMMPST tables. I like this (intermediate?) result for the most part, just am not sure about lowercasing dark servant and dragonskin bracers, as those seem just as legendary in nature as the "X of Y" objects. --Xymph (talk) 13:41, 18 December 2023 (CST)
Looking good! Though I must admit consistency is definitely a problem. Now I agree with Gregor. Looks like we should capitalize anything that has X of the Y or X of Y construction. And I'm still not sure about the Arc of death spell. I want it to remain lowercase but consistency... --Nockson (talk) 04:30, 19 December 2023 (CST)
I agree with all these except for bag of holding, I don't think holding counts as anything legendary, it's just another way of writing holding bag, I think. It is a minor thing either way. --Dynamo128 (talk) 05:07, 19 December 2023 (CST)
I still don't quite see why "Bag of Holding" cannot be considered a legendary item. Again, it's the naming formula more than the pure function that implies its legendary status. Yes, it's another way of writing holding bag, but the two terms are not identical in meaning, because they imply a difference in nature of the item; and the developer deliberately chose to go with "Bag of Holding" because it gives the item a more legendary feel. If we are in agreement that the legendary nature of an item determines whether or not it should be capitalized, and that the "X of Y" form does imply such a nature, then "Bag of Holding" as well as "Amulet of Warding" should both be capitalized. --Gregor (talk) 07:26, 19 December 2023 (CST)
Lowercasing bag of holding just like all other ammo items is fine with me, keeping it capitalized as a legendary item too. But can legendary status be inferred without the "X of Y" construct too? Dragonskin Bracers could be viewed as Bracers of Dragonskin, not just any average material but Dragonskin(!), and unlike the other Hexen armor items it isn't used immediately but carried in the inventory. Dark Servant is so special it summons one of the tallest, heaviest monsters in the game. If Bag of Holding and Amulet of Warding are legendary because of naming convention, then I'd say the other two are too due to the special power they grant the player. In other words, most items in class 5 then remain capitalized, except map scroll, quartz flask, and mystic urn. And if the inventory aspect is taken into account, at least the latter could remain capitalized too as it is fairly rare and...<drum roll> Mystic(!). Okay, I guess this isn't making things much easier... should we take a vote on the items of contention? --Xymph (talk) 15:16, 19 December 2023 (CST)
I would prefer we figured this out logically instead of just basing it on whatever gets more votes from among the four or five of us. --Gregor (talk) 15:26, 19 December 2023 (CST)
I am of the opinion, as I stated above, that the form of the name is the decisive mark, not the function of the item. Not because I think that names are more important than the function, but because it seems to me that that is what the developers wanted to imply by making use of the pseudo epic-sounding "X of Y" form for certain items. So it's not that a Bag of Holding is more special or powerful, but that the name, rather than being a plain descriptor of its nature, has this epic, if somewhat tongue-in-cheek, tone to it that IMO warrants capitalization. Having said that, a Dark Servant being capitalized makes sense too, if this term is seen as a proper noun rather than a generic one. Dragonskin bracers on the other hand seem generic to me. They could have been styled as "Bracers of the Skin of the Dragon", but they weren't. Just like a holding bag would have essential meant the same thing as "Bag of Holding", but it would have lacked the implied high-fantasy epic tone of a "Bag of Holding" ("I bestow upon thee this Bag of Holding! May it lighten your burden, brave youth, as thou ventureth forth into darkness on your path of valor, etc."). --Gregor (talk) 16:06, 19 December 2023 (CST)
Alright. That leaves Arc of death vs Arc of Death - the former is how it's styled in the article. But in use it's a spell and the arc is just the effect, not a physical object like the Mace/Hammer. So it could just as well be fully lowercased, like frost shards and firestorm. And regarding weapons, I think hellstaff can also be lowercased. The word Hell is not a separate, proper noun here and in the article it is already written lowercase in quite a few places. --Xymph (talk) 02:48, 20 December 2023 (CST)
I agree on both. --Nockson (talk) 03:43, 20 December 2023 (CST)
I agree on hellstaff. With "Arc of Death" vs "Arc of death" I would have to argue that for the sake of consistency it should also be styled like the other "X of Y" terms (apart from the generic descriptors like "pile of maze spheres"). It doesn't really make much sense to capitalize "Boots of Speed" but not "Arc of Death". Besides, the name doesn't imply a short circuit, not just a deadly arc, but the "Arc of Death". --Gregor (talk) 08:45, 20 December 2023 (CST)
Fair point on the boots comparison. Okay, if that was the last item under discussion (I don't recall any others), then the renaming can be put into effect. I've updated DMMPST and will re-do Thing tables all over. Perhaps Nockson would like the honor of moving/updating the pertaining articles, since it was your project to begin with? --Xymph (talk) 09:39, 20 December 2023 (CST)
Hell yeah! Gonna do it soon! --Nockson (talk) 10:11, 20 December 2023 (CST)
I'm done with renaming! I hope I haven't forgotten anything. Gonna fix the pages today and tomorrow. --Nockson (talk) 10:50, 20 December 2023 (CST)
You forgot to change "Arc of Death". --Gregor (talk) 10:53, 20 December 2023 (CST)
My mistake. All good. --Gregor (talk) 10:55, 20 December 2023 (CST)

Wrap-up[edit]

To recap, we agreed on the following changes (partly reusing & expanding Nockson' original table):

Heretic/Hexen renaming consensus
Current name New name Use in text
Heretic weapons
Staff Staff staff
Elven Wand Elven wand Elven wand
Ethereal Crossbow Ethereal crossbow ethereal crossbow
Dragon Claw Dragon claw dragon claw
Hellstaff Hellstaff hellstaff
Phoenix Rod Phoenix rod phoenix rod
Firemace Firemace firemace
Heretic ammo
Wand Crystal Wand crystal wand crystal
Crystal Geode Crystal geode crystal geode
Ethereal Arrows Ethereal arrows ethereal arrows
Quiver of Ethereal Arrows Quiver of ethereal arrows quiver of ethereal arrows
Claw Orb Claw orb claw orb
Energy Orb Energy orb energy orb
Lesser Runes Lesser runes lesser runes
Greater Runes Greater runes greater runes
Flame Orb Flame orb flame orb
Inferno Orb Inferno orb inferno orb
Mace Spheres Mace spheres mace spheres
Pile of Mace Spheres Pile of mace spheres pile of mace spheres
Heretic/Hexen items
Crystal Vial Crystal vial crystal vial
Enchanted Shield Enchanted shield enchanted shield
Silver Shield Silver shield silver shield
Map Scroll Map scroll map scroll
Mystic Urn Mystic urn mystic urn
Quartz Flask Quartz flask quartz flask
Shadowsphere Shadowsphere shadowsphere
Torch Torch torch
Hexen weapons
Spiked Gauntlets Spiked gauntlets spiked gauntlets
Sapphire Wand Sapphire wand sapphire wand
Serpent Staff Serpent staff serpent staff
Firestorm Firestorm firestorm
Frost Shards Frost shards frost shards
Arc of death Arc of Death Arc of Death
Hexen items
Falcon Shield Falcon shield falcon shield
Mesh Armor Mesh armor mesh armor
Platinum Helm Platinum helm platinum helm
Dragonskin Bracers Dragonskin bracers dragonskin bracers
Clock Gear Clock gear clock gear
Emerald Planet Emerald planet emerald planet
Ruby Planet Ruby planet ruby planet
Sapphire Planet Sapphire planet sapphire planet

Hope I didn't miss any, feel free to augment. --Xymph (talk) 10:57, 20 December 2023 (CST)

Gauss was right, added two more. --Xymph (talk) 16:23, 20 December 2023 (CST)

← ← ←
I think we need to take a few final steps in this discussion: 1) names of parts of ultimate (4th) weapons in Hexen shouldn't be capitalized (for example: Quietus (Hilt) -> Quietus (hilt)); 2) all of the Hexen keys should be written lowercase in text (for example: Emerald Key -> emerald key); 3) caps in Hexen puzzle items - planets and gears all lowercase inside text (for example: Clock Gear (Steel in Bronze) -> clock gear (steel in bronze)), some IMO must be changed (Flame Mask -> flame mask, Yorick's Skull -> Yorick's skull, Glaive Seal -> glaive seal, Holy Relic -> holy relic), all others should be kept as they are; 4) for the sake of consistency I think that spike's subtypes should be written in lowercase in the things tables (i.e. Spike Down/Up -> Spike down/up). --Nockson (talk) 15:14, 28 December 2023 (CST)

I was already wondering when you'd bring these up. ;-)
  1. Agreed.
  2. Agreed. And while we're here, so should the Strife keys.
  3. All puzzle items are unique, occurring once in the game. So all could be considered proper nouns. But indeed not the multiple gears and planets. So lowercase those but I'd prefer to keep all others unchanged, as they are the Codex, the Relic, the Seal, etc.
  4. Sure.
Updated DMMPST thing tables per current proposal. --Xymph (talk) 07:24, 29 December 2023 (CST)
Thanks! I agree with your point on #3. Also, is there a possibility that the results of this discussion could become part of the Wiki's guidelines? So that new editors know how to write correctly. --Nockson (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2023 (CST)
Done. --Xymph (talk) 08:38, 1 January 2024 (CST)

← ← ←
It's a shame, but I missed one more thing that we need to discuss - Hexen classes - I assumed (by looking through existing pages) that they should be capitalized in text (example: "...for the Fighter it is...") and I've already fixed half of Hexen level pages this way before thinking that I need to ask this here. Should we keep it that way? My personal opinion is that classes should not be capitalized. I don't see anything special in these names. --Nockson (talk) 14:05, 12 January 2024 (CST)

It makes sense to capitalize the classes since they are part of a name - Baratus the Fighter. When you're using the classes by itself, you are still implying that name, just in a shortened form, instead of a generic class of "fighter". So in my opinion it therefore needs to be capitalized as well. --Gregor (talk) 16:35, 12 January 2024 (CST)
Works for me. --Xymph (talk) 03:19, 13 January 2024 (CST)
Forgot to answer here. I'm 100% agree and will continue with my caps fixing then. --Nockson (talk) 11:47, 17 January 2024 (CST)

Capitalization of custom names for weapons and monsters[edit]

Ok, since we've been having fun recently around here opening up a bunch of metaphorical cans, I'd like to take the opportunity to open up a particularly large one myself that has been on my mind for a while now and I need some clarification going forward.

A good example to illustrate my point is from the PS1 game Soul Reaver. I don't know if anyone remembers this one—Nosgoth, vampires, Kain, Raziel, The Elder God, etc. It's not really important. It's about the name Soul Reaver and what it is used for. You might refer to the title of the game itself or by extension the series—in this case it is obviously capitalized. But you could also refer to the protagonist Raziel, who The Elder God turned into a literal reaver of souls, his soul reaver, which then of course must be written in lowercase. However, there is also Raziel's spectral sword that is central to the plot, which is called Soul Reaver as well, but here is must be capitalized because it is the name of this specific sword. While the name also describes the function of the blade, it is first and foremost the name of that specific weapon and therefore a proper noun.

Returning to the Doom universe, for a weapon like the Wraithverge from Hexen, we are not describing its class or type, it's a proper name as well, just like the Soul Reaver. Think of Anduril or Narsil from the Lord of the Rings, or the Peacemaker from Jak II. These are all weapons that have a proper name. Unlike the rocket launcher or plasma gun, where the name is simply a descriptor of their generic nature and function, just as with 'soul reaver' when used to describe Raziel as a literal reaver of souls. Same for the super shotgun since it is just an alternate way of saying "very powerful shotgun". But a Waithverge is not a verge of wraith, it's not a class of weapons, it's the specific weapon the player finds that has been given this name, a sort of demonic BFG. So it's the name for this specific demonic BFG, the Wraithverge.

Now, for monster names the situation is more complicated. Again, a monster like the devil, or super imp, from Valiant is not an actual devil. It's an imp variant with a fancy name. So you could argue that the name is used as a proper noun here as well. The name of the diabolist from Ante Mortem is not meant to imply that he's a literal devil-worshipper (he's a demon after all, so it's a bit of a given). What he is is a type of arch-vile. The name "diabolist" doesn't describe its nature or function. Same with monsters like the "death incarnate". They are not literally death incarnate, it's just a descriptive name chosen by the creator of the monster. They are called Death Incarnate. Could have just as well been named Hellraiser or Doominator. You get the idea.

Of course you could also argue that the rule doesn't apply here because there is more than one death incarnate, diabolist or devil. So it's the name of a species of demons rather than a specific demon given a name. So then it's not a proper noun anymore and case closed. BUT. It is nonetheless confusing as hell to the reader to refer to something as death incarnate when you're not actually wanting to imply death incarnate. I want to refer to a custom monster named death incarnate not literal death incarnate. But how can i distinguish the two terms visually on the page if i can't capitalize the name of the monster? Can we put quotes around it, "death incarnate", or quotes plus caps as in "Death Incarnate?"

But to summarize: for custom weapons with fancy names it seems pretty clear that they should be capitalized since they are used as names for a specific, unique weapon, not a generic descriptor of a weapon type like a rocket launcher, pistol, or chaingun. The same i think holds true for boss enemies. It's the Icon of Sin, so it's also the Behemoth when we're talking about one specific monster given this title (see the Archangelus of Eviternity). For species of demons it's more of a grey area. I personally would prefer to capitalized them as well unless the name serves as a literal descriptor of their nature or body. It's a fact that most mod authors capitalize the names of their custom monsters in their official documentation, so there is a clear desire from the author's side to have these names visually emphasized and distinguished from the literal nouns that are used. But it obviously clashes with the guidelines of this wiki and would open up a HUGE can of worms in regards to the vanilla bestiary. So, yeah.

Anyways, that's all I had to say. Is my assessment correct, right on the money, way off, utter nonsense, kinda right but not quite? Let me know. --Gregor (talk) 20:39, 13 June 2023 (CDT)

I don't see what the actual issue here is? Names of specific individuals are proper nouns and proper nouns are capitalized in English always, period. There is sometimes debate at most over whether a phrase constitutes a proper noun or not. "Spider mastermind" is the best example of this to come out of classic Doom because while it seems to have been thought of as such at first, there are later many "spider masterminds" so it loses its uniqueness quickly. That being said however it is again treated as a proper noun for the singular Spider Mastermind of Doom (2016) and Eternal's continuity. So now it's not even consistent across the series which is lovely. At any rate your decision on the matter should be based on the rules of the English language and whatever context is available to indicate if something is or is not a proper noun. The generic names of species are not proper nouns, which is why a word like "imp" is NOT capitalized. A diabolist may just be a type of demon, or it could be a specific group of demons calling themselves "the Diabolists", see the difference? --Quasar (talk) 23:08, 24 September 2023 (CDT)

Where to request page?[edit]

Hi, I wanted to know where page requests were handled. I've wanted a page on "Mars 3D/Mars: The Ultimate Warrior", a low-budget Taiwanese FPS released in 1997 that uses several graphics from Doom, Heretic and Hexen, along with a modified version of the .WAD format known as .MAD. Where do I request this? MargaretThatcher (talk) 13:53, 21 June 2023 (CDT)

There's no place to request a page directly (at least not to my knowledge), but rather, Special:WantedPages lists the 'most wanted', based on the pages that have the highest number of redlinks. But the best guaranteed method of getting an article made is to just make it yourself. Sena (talk) 20:04, 21 June 2023 (CDT)

Citing wikia pages[edit]

So Nockson removed a citation to the metroid.fandom wiki i posted from the Attack on IO article. I understand that linking to pages of the doom wikia is a no-go for obvious reasons. But there are plenty of wikis on that site, some of which are the go-to places for their respective communities with a wealth of info regarding those titles. Are we not allowed to use that info in citations just because it's posted on the "wrong" wiki? Sounds like politics to me. I think the fact that the info is accurate should be the decisive point, no? Or are we just gonna categorically dismiss all of the info over there as worthless or untrustworthy just because fans of those games posted it on a site that the Doom wiki has had a past with? The guidelines say you're not allowed to link to sites whose primary purpose is advertisement, but i don't think you can categorize the metroid wiki as being primarily ads. Fact is, the page I linked to on the metroid wiki contains no visible ads at all. So in this case, I'd say the link and the info is valid and should be reinstated. Opinions? --Gregor (talk) 13:34, 29 June 2023 (CDT)

There's actually a free Metroid wiki. Unfortunately it isn't as thorough as that other one. The ads on fandom sites are pretty aggressive, pop up windows, auto play videos and stuff. That's why I only enter these sites with AdBlock on. And yeah, I saw some useful info about Heretic and Hexen there recently, but I won't link that and will try to find another source. P.S. What's the point of providing sources for the music? It's the first time I saw that here. --Nockson (talk) 13:51, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
Ok, I have to admit I forgot that I have adblock on at all times, so I have no popups as a result. The situation is different with it turned off... Still, the info is valid. And it's not an External link for further reading, but only for people that want to confirm the source of the info, and for those cases I think it's still fine. You're not catching a virus off that site or anything if you visit.
With regards to the use of citations for the composers: the soundtrack for both Super Metroid and Castlevania is credited to two composers in most sources but the individual pieces weren't written as collaborations (like Lennon/McCartney were always credited together even though most Beatles songs were written by either one of them alone), the publisher/developer simply didn't care to give specific credit to who wrote what, so those information for each track are often difficult to find credible sources for on the net (and for Castlevania III such info simply isn't available at all). But i want to list the composer for each track whenever possible, so in order to justify the fact that I left out the second composer of the OST that is normally listed alongside the actual composer of the piece in question, I wanted to provide a source that identifies them as the composer of that specific track. And yeah, i looked at the other metroid wiki as well, but like you saw for yourself, that wiki is unfortunately not nearly as comprehensive when it comes to info on things like soundtrack. So I chose the more in-depth source. --Gregor (talk) 14:47, 29 June 2023 (CDT)

I can replace the link in the Attack on IO article with another source I found, it's about the official soundtrack album that the wikia article is using as a source because that one has the individual song credits in it. But more generally, are the guidelines excluding any fandom.com wiki from being linked to in any shape or form on this wiki? Or is it more of a case-by-case situation with some leeway? That's really the core question here for me. --Gregor (talk) 15:13, 29 June 2023 (CDT)

Apparently using AdBlock has been against their ToS for a long time, but nevermind that. ;) I can't find where he said it but ISTR that Quasar is against adding new fandom links and in favor of using alternate sources whenever possible. There are no fandom links left, and almost all wikia links are in old discussions, not main space. I suppose Quasar's opinion does not equate formal wiki policy, but one specific reason for that is to not help improve their SEO, as they don't deserve that. --Xymph (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2023 (CDT)
Ok, I didn't have the full picture, thanks for providing a bit more context. So fandom/wikia sites are just generally off limits. Gotcha. --Gregor (talk) 17:15, 29 June 2023 (CDT)

I remembered I had already done some scripted work to find all such links, and this actually stemmed from a #doomwiki discussion, hence I couldn't find a link for Quasar's comments. Also, LinkSearch uses http: as default protocol if unspecified, so the above two paths are not the complete story for existing links: a small dozen fandom ones do exist too (and conversely, no https: entries for wikia). Additionally, a variety of interwiki paths are used as well. So these entries, at least the main space ones, are to be replaced by equivalent free wiki sources, if possible. --Xymph (talk) 09:11, 3 July 2023 (CDT)

Doom Wiki feature for Indie Wiki Buddy[edit]

Hey all. I'm the creator of Indie Wiki Buddy, a browser extension that helps redirect people from Fandom and Fextralife wikis to their independent counterparts (including, of course, Doom Wiki). I'd like to start featuring some wikis on the homepage, promotional banners, etc. (example image here). I'd love to include Doom Wiki, as a shining example of a long-lived independent wiki. Let me know if that'd be all right. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:56, 26 July 2023 (CDT)

Should be fine. We're extremely pro-working-together when it comes to the wiki scene. I spearheaded efforts in the past that resulted in our affiliates section existing on the homepage for example. If you need to make use of any logos etc. they are all licensed under dual CC-BY-SA 2.0 and GFDL. Our preferred way to be mentioned is as "The Doom Wiki at DoomWiki.org" --Quasar (talk) 23:00, 26 July 2023 (CDT)
Excellent, thanks. Speaking of working together, I also happen to be NIWA's current Coordinator - so if you ever need to chat about anything related to NIWA or its members, feel free to reach out to me. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:05, 26 July 2023 (CDT)

Map with 27 co-authors[edit]

Today, Tribute Quilt was uploaded to idgames, and I'd like to put credits on whoever's pages, but considering the map is made by 28 different people, it seems a bit impractical to post the list on every page --ViolentBeetle (talk) 02:40, 9 August 2023 (CDT)

A one-liner "title (ig template)" suffices, no co-authors. Like for all these {{patchwork maps}}. --Xymph (talk) 02:55, 9 August 2023 (CDT)

Page for "Can It Run Doom?"?[edit]

The question/phenomena of "Can it run Doom?" is certainly a Doom related topic, but there doesn't appear to be a page for it here. Can someone make a page for it, covering its history and notable things that have run (or displayed) Doom? --Nanashi (talk) 13:17, 20 August 2023 (CDT)

Buildup of pending changes[edit]

I've recently made some changes that I understand as placing more burden on the approver than when I add a bug to some pwad map article. Given that my first of these odd pending changes, an edit to change the target source port for Sacrament, is steadily racking up weeks of age, I'm wondering what the process is, and why I haven't been hollered at to discuss any of it. The changes aren't that important, but I'm getting to be disappointed with the radio silence while my minor contributions get handled within a few hours. Did I miss anything in the FAQ? Are you hoping someone else deals with it? Is there a secret panel of experts being consulted? Is it a passive-aggressive way of telling me to keep working on a bad change until it no longer sucks? I'm just left wondering to myself with nothing to go on. In any case, thanks for taking the extra time with inexperienced wiki users like myself when we're being a piece of work. Inuk (talk) 13:35, 3 September 2023 (CDT)

I personally did not see them, in August I was really busy doing a large batch of edits myself, and even when I visited the Sacrament page a few days ago I failed to spot there were pending changes - they display automatically for registered users so I already saw it was Boom-compatible without realizing it was an unapproved edit. I'll go through them now and check. None of it was meant to be passive-aggressive, please understand that the wiki's pace can at times be glacial, as it is ultimately a hobby, and a few people who also approve content were I'm guessing on vacation for August and July. --Dynamo128 (talk) 03:02, 4 September 2023 (CDT)
Alright, the last thing to cross my mind was that nobody saw what was only coincidentally icky changes. I always imagined that there's a backlog page for approvers, but if the recent changes page is the tool they have then it makes good sense. Inuk (talk) 04:34, 4 September 2023 (CDT)
Process is a big word for a small ragtag group of editors looking (ir)regularly at pending changes. Each has topic areas they are familiar with, and others they are uncomfortable with. I check almost every edit in recent changes, but feel unqualified to approve some, and when nobody else touches them either, then the pending changes list slowly builds up. The current backlog isn't even so bad, there were times it had dozens of entries pending for many weeks or even months. Eventually it's Quasar who clears the backlog a few times per year, but he hasn't be active much in the past 1-2 months. And besides that list, there are also the new (or sometimes ancient) but unreviewed pages where progress can be even more glacial. Such is wiki life. --Xymph (talk) 05:15, 4 September 2023 (CDT)

Featured screenshot for levels[edit]

When I've played through a WAD, I like to go back to its Doomwiki entry some time later and go through the levels on there. Just for fun and to remind myself of the great time I had playing it :) Now, I don't usually remember map names and sometimes it's a bit difficult for me to bring to mind a level from its wiki entry, especially if there is no screenshot. I would like to see a screenshot of the level featured more prominently on a level's page. Maybe at the same place as the title screen image on a WAD's wiki entry (e.g. Speed of Doom). Perhaps a good image could be the starting point of the map, or the most notible section of a map. I think it should gives a level's wiki level a bit more soul instead of "just another level". Maybe this is just me though! :) --Ecotip (talk) 10:04, 22 September 2023 (CDT)

I'm sorry, but can you be a bit more specific? You want more level pages to have screenshots? Plenty of editors have added some, but understandably due to the nature of the work involved, quite a few wads don't have them yet. --Dynamo128 (talk) 11:30, 22 September 2023 (CDT)
I'm suggesting a more prominent presentation of a screenshot of a level, presented in the right sidepane of the level's page. Not sure if I have permission to do so, but I could try it for a page and see if people like it. --Ecotip (talk) 11:50, 10 October 2023 (CDT)
Single-level PWADs already have the {{wad}} template with that easy screenshot option, but a title screen takes precedence if present. Map pages that are part of a multi-level PWAD however need the navbox in the top-right corner and the map view image at the start of the Walkthrough section. There is little or no vertical space between those on the right side (remember the navbox can vary hugely in height), hence screenshots are best placed in the Screenshots gallery. The actual page width (depending on browser window or device screen width) also affects vertical placement of elements on the same side. What could look good for you doesn't always look good for a lot of other visitors, so it's better not to overload the right side. But perhaps you have another idea than I'm thinking, so yeah you can experiment - it can always be reverted. --Xymph (talk) 12:30, 10 October 2023 (CDT)

Correct license for gameplay mod logos[edit]

I wanted to add the mod logo to the Æons of Death article but I realized that I don't know under which license. For a gameplay mod it seems I can't just choose the "Other PWAD" option under Screenshot that I would use for a WAD's TITLEPIC lump. Although technically speaking a titlepic is not a screenshot either but in most cases either original artwork or a modification of someone else's original artwork or a photo of some kind combined with either original or modified artwork. As far as I can see, uploaded logos to wiki use either the "Other Fair Use" options, one of the other more specific copyright options—like I did for the Voxel Doom logo where it was clearly id Software's copyrighted Doom logo with some simple text overlayed—a GPL license (why would you release artwork under a software license??), Creative Commons, etc. How do I know which one to use? Do I need to contact the creator of the image or is there a fallback solution? --Gregor (talk) 12:02, 24 September 2023 (CDT)

Almost all mods are going to be fair use. If there's no license published with the mod, then it's fair use only as everything is, by default, copyrighted. --Quasar (talk) 22:51, 24 September 2023 (CDT)

wiki dumps[edit]

I've completed my annual dump of the wiki for archive.org: https://archive.org/details/wiki-doomwiki.org-20231010 The number of images on the wiki is now so large it's proving interesting :-) For practical reasons I zip them up for archive.org and only upload one file (images.zip): for the 2023 dump, this is now 6.1GiB. -- Jdowland (talk) 07:51, 11 October 2023 (CDT)

Creating category page[edit]

I recently added a category for platforming, but it didn't function correctly at first after I created it. Is there something to observe other than just create the page? It also took quite a bit of time before a lot of the linked articles I added were listed in there afterwards. Do these type of pages just need longer to update or is there another reason for this behavior? Also, what are the rules for what categories have to be added to them? I just went with PWADs because it is listed in most category pages (at least the ones I checked). But it was really just a stab in the dark... --Gregor (talk) 17:10, 16 October 2023 (CDT)

Category updates (and various other background jobs) happen every 15 minutes via runJobs.php from cron.
Categories should be added to at least one parent category that makes sense, but normally not to a subcat that is under the same cat to which you already added the new one. See also the guidelines and Special:CategoryTree. --Xymph (talk) 02:17, 17 October 2023 (CDT)

Titlepic license and public domain images[edit]

Not to open a can of worms, but why exactly is it standard to pick the {{Screenshot-pwad}} license for titlepics? These images are almost never actual in-game screenshots and often don't even include any id Software owned artwork - most of them are either original artwork or modified artwork of some sort, or a combinations of the two. So what's the reason for this modus operandi?

Also what do I do when the reproduced image is in the public domain, like with the titlepic for Four Perfectly Fine Lemons, which uses a rendition of Several Circles by Kandinsky? None of the available option for public domain images seem to work for this case since I'm not the creator of this painting (so I'm not releasing it into the pd), neither is the mod author nor did Kandinsky release the image into the public domain himself. It naturally entered the public domain because of the time that elapsed since the creator's death. Maybe an option for such a scenario could be added? Something simple like "This image is in the public domain." --Gregor (talk) 11:54, 18 October 2023 (CDT)

This is just my opinion, but when you're uploading an image and you have to choose what type of file you're uploading, the drop-down menu doesn't have an option for titlepics. The closest I saw was "Screenshot", which will pick {{screenshot-doom}} or a similar template. Plus it's not always easy to verify if a titlepic is copyrighted or public domain, so I think you have to err on the side of caution in those cases.
As to your second question, would {{PD-Art-100}} be of any help here? I know it's not exactly what you're looking for. Gauss (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2023 (CDT)
I'm just saying that it is an odd choice to license title screen images as screenshots, when they are very much not, instead of as fair use images. I just want to understand the rationale behind it, since a lot of the time the titlepics reproduce copyrighted artwork from another party entirely unconnected to id Software, like the titlepic for Altars of Madness, which reproduces part of the album cover art from the album of the same name by Morbid Angel.

The public domain template you posted could actually work for the Kandinsky image, since the painting by Kandinsky hasn't really been altered in any significant way apart from what is necessary due to the limitations of the Doom picture format, specifically change of aspect ratio, lower resolution and reduced color depth; but for a public domain image that shouldn't really matter since there is no copyright holder anyways. I would prefer that the license included these kind of modifications as well though. Otherwise it sounds like it needs to be an actual photograph (which wouldn't work in most source ports) to qualify for that license. But it's curious that this template (along with several other I didn't know were available) isn't accessible from the dropdown menu but can only be found through the Copyright and image templates category page. That's good to know.

But in general, is there a reason other than accepted practice to upload title screen images under the {{Screenshot-pwad}} license instead of deciding on a case by case basis what is the most appropriate license for each image? And also, isn't there a potential legal risk in falsely applying the screenshot license indiscriminately to all these titlepics? --Gregor (talk) 21:25, 18 October 2023 (CDT)

Self-promotion[edit]

Recent attempts at self-promotion by various Doom people have led me to the following thoughts:

  • The practice of not-yet-notable mappers listing their work on their user pages should be prohibited in rules. The user page is for Wiki activity only. If a person doesn't meet the notability criteria (which are currently very loose), they should not have a Wiki page, regardless of whether it is located in the main or user space.
  • Attempts at self-promotion while simultaneously failing to meet the notability criteria should be a valid reason for speedy deletion. I propose to create a special criterion for this case or add a special quick voting mechanism so that the votes of at least 3 active editors are sufficient for deletion.

What do you think? --Nockson (talk) 15:38, 22 October 2023 (CDT)

I don't see anything wrong with people talking about what they've done on their user page. A user page (i.e., User:WikiUserName) is not an article page. And notability is always a thorny issue. You'd get a situation where some people are allowed to talk about their works and others aren't, based entirely on whether a jury deems them notable? Nah, that doesn't sound good. I agree that self-promotion can be annoying, but one person's own user page is specifically where it's harmless. --Gez (talk) 03:00, 23 October 2023 (CDT)
I agree with Gez concerning your first proposal - I feel like a user's Talk page is pretty much their turf and they can post whatever they want (apart from grossly offensive or discriminatory content, etc).

But I do agree with the second proposal - self-promotion isn't nearly as much of a grey area as notability. If a mapper is creating an article about their own work that isn't especially well-known/received, then they are self-promoting. If this was allowed in the past, that doesn't mean we have to continue to allow it going forward. If we don't want self-promotion on the wiki, then we should think about adopting a (near) zero-tolerance policy toward it - map makers should simply not create their own articles, neither about themselves nor about their work—unless their work is already clearly notable (a mention somewhere in the Cacowards is always a good marker everybody can agree on).

Now, with regards to notability, we do have the definition of notability in the FAQ that lists three criteria for it: popularity, acclaim, and historical value. And I think these are good, valid points to use as a baseline in any decision making about determining notability. I would personally like to add a fourth criterion here that a WAD can also qualify as notable for by being significant within the context of a specific genre or category of Doom gameplay or modding. For example, I recently created a Platforming WADs category and added articles for some WADs that are specifically notable from within the context of platforming in Doom, though not necessarily notable outside of it. But of course, notability can't be defined exactly (let alone numerically) and there will (and should) always be a healthy margin for interpretation when it comes to something so subjective. However, that does not mean that no guidelines for notability should be applied at all and the only criterion for inclusion we are left with is whether or not a WAD has a stable release. I don't know how far things listed in the FAQ are counted as official guidelines (I was under the assumption that they do count), but given that there is a desire from the editors' side to have some form of notability standard be applied for the creation of wiki articles and the fact that notability is already rather neatly defined in the FAQ, I don't see why these points can't be officially adopted and, as a result, enforced. They are also not in disagreement with the existing rule under guidelines that states: "If a game, WAD, editor, or utility exists only in source/demo/beta form, but is available to the general public and meets all the criteria below, then it can be included." The emphasis here is on can, not must or should. So if a work does not meet any notability threshold, it can be excluded based on these guidelines. And finally, in the case where a WAD very clearly does not meet any notability threshold AND also constitutes a very obvious case of self-promotion, I think the situation is rather straightforward and a speedy deletion vote as proposed by Nockson is called for. --Gregor (talk) 06:25, 23 October 2023 (CDT)
Okay, I've looked through the guidelines again. The only line (that I was able to find) related to contents of a user page is this: "Your User: page can say anything you wish, subject to server performance and applicable law." I think this should be corrected ASAP. You see, most people who have never edited any wiki will not see the difference between pages in main and user space. I've seen some people linking from the main space to their user page or adding categories such as "Mappers" there. I believe that self-promotion must be fought wherever it occurs. These people don't care about the Wiki. They're here because they think having a DoomWiki page will make them notable, when in reality it's the other way around.
Getting back to the point - we can use Wikipedia's guidelines on user pages: "User pages are pages for organizing the work users do on Wikipedia, as well as speaking to other users. ... Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal website. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project." Imagine if someone used their user page as a pseudo-article about their first map? Something clearly needs to be done about this. --Nockson (talk) 12:46, 23 October 2023 (CDT)
The current guidelines do have a thing against linking to user page from the main namespace. Any such inappropriate link can therefore be removed. --Gez (talk) 13:35, 23 October 2023 (CDT)

← ← ←
(Gregor wrote: "...a user's Talk page..." Small correction: this is not about talk pages (used to communicate) but the main User page.)

In a few recent instances where a new contributor created their own person page in main space with few or mostly unnotable works, this was promptly moved or copied to their User page. The body-of-work type list was preserved, not as explicit approval of this kind of usage for their user page but so as not to be completely unwelcoming to such newcomers. But any links from main to user space and people categories on the user page were immediately removed per the guidelines. In fact on October 11, I did a clean-up pass on old redirects from user pages to main space, which are also against the rules (simple wikilinks are okay). And that was also why I needed to fix {{Competnuser}} the other day, as I belatedly noticed my speedrunners page showed up in Compet-n players.

We are not responsible for other people not seeing the difference between person pages in main vs. user space, or outside links to them. Within the wiki everything meets the current guidelines or can be quickly resolved under them. Nockson does have a fair point that wiki's are not general websites and that a few users may believe that having a wiki page makes them notable. The Doom Wiki is however a core part of the wider Doom community, so the question is whether a user page can cover a person's community activities or should be restricted to wiki activities like on Wikipedia. In many areas Wikipedia is understandably more strict than the Doom Wiki, but like others above I'm relucant to apply similar limitations here -- as judged by which jury?

Currently half a dozen pages with a body-of-work list exist, where the first three (Mrchris, Matador, Kaapeli47) also have a very similar main space article. So this is really about the three person pages created this month (quickly moved to user space) and which did indeed have a whiff of self-promotion, especially in connection with the WAD articles two of them created (The I.M.P. Act, OVERLOAD).

In short, I don't see body-of-work lists on user pages as harmful to the wiki, and if (per Nockson's example) a user page is written up into a map article, then this can be addressed via {{SpeedyDelete}} reason 8 "Inappropriate use of user pages" or the page can be moved to a sandbox path below the user page.

For mods I second Gregor's reasoning and am okay with adding the fourth, context criterion. Got a proposal how to word it?

The guidelines against self-promotion should however be easier to find. It had been so long since I read the FAQ that I had forgotten it already had relevant entries on this. Linking the FAQ from the people and WAD criteria is a suitable way to improve visibility without duplicating rules. So that's what I did just now, hope this is okay with (uber-)admins.

To deal with clear violations of either guideline, I agree on adding a speedy delete option. How about "17 = Clear self-promotion of person or their mod."? --Xymph (talk) 10:44, 25 October 2023 (CDT)

"...this was promptly moved or copied to their User page." - Sorry, but I think it was a mistake. The correct solution, IMO, would be to move this content to the user's sandbox and place a link to it on their page. This will make the user's page more difficult to confuse with the real article. It would also be a good idea to import this template from Wikipedia and place it on similar user pages.
"...as judged by which jury?" - According to the rules that need to be updated. I'll come up with some ideas in a few days and post them here.
"...this can be addressed via SpeedyDelete..." - I don't understand what the difference is between turning a user's page into a map page or an article about a person? Why are you ready to tolerate the latter and at the same time propose to speedy delete the former? Currently, the rules allow the user to do almost anything with their page. This is why I suggest using Wikipedia's rules about user pages.
I also fully agree with the new speedy deletion criteria. --Nockson (talk) 14:01, 25 October 2023 (CDT)

←←←
(Xymph wrote: "For mods I second Gregor's reasoning and am okay with adding the fourth, context criterion. Got a proposal how to word it?")
In keeping with the wording of the other three criteria, how about something like "contextually significant (Jumpmaze X, Doomer Boards Projects)"? Besides that, I also agree with the new speedy deletion criterion. Seems useful and reasonable. I don't know how quickly something like this can be implemented. If it can be done relatively quickly I would hold off on opening a deletion vote for OVERLORD as it would very clearly qualify for the new criterion. --Gregor (talk) 14:40, 25 October 2023 (CDT)

Speaking about the notability criteria, the first one should also perhaps be revised not to be quite so demanding in its definition of popularity. "Incredibly popular" is a bit much to expect, I think. That would really only allow for seminal works like Valiant, Brutal Doom, Eviternity, and MyHouse to have their own articles. I understand that these criteria were formulated in the early days of the wiki when the landscape still looked different in terms of the sheer number of significant wads being created every year. So one could get away with being a bit more picky about what qualified as popular. Nowadays though, a "hugely popular" or even a simple "very popular" probably better describes the practical threshold for inclusion based on this criterion. --Gregor (talk) 15:06, 25 October 2023 (CDT)

The volume of text makes it impractical for me to answer to everything but I would like to add a few thoughts:

  • While I agree that self promotion is not desirable and should be discouraged, at the same time I think we shouldn't conflate the desire to self-promote with the somewhat naive enthusiasm that a few newcomers to the community have, where I think they legitimately thought they were helping.
  • In terms of self-promotion, the worst example on the wiki is likely Mike MacDee (Impie)'s works: not only are some of them excessively detailed (such as Project Einherjar having multiple pages for its episodes in a way that literally no other mod does), but the notability threshold was barely ever met for some of them as they are mostly of dubious quality and significance. The author even went out of his way to promote his own fanfic on the wiki for some reason. If there ever was a target in need of cleanup for notability, I would say the extra episodes for Project Einherjar would definitely qualify. It's maybe too late now to remove some of the less notable works which have pages and everything, but I am bringing this up because Impie is ranked second in terms of mapping output on this wiki for no reason other than self-promotion, when other very prolific mappers have comparatively very few pages on their works for the simple reason that they didn't self-promote and making so many pages was felt to be excessive. And I think that's just unfair.
  • I would like to place a strong emphasis on historical significance, particularly when it comes to WADs from the 90s and early 2000s. A WAD that would be good to fantastic in 1994 would not make much of a splash today, which is why its release date should count towards the notability. But I think everyone already agrees on this part.
  • I feel much less strongly about self-promotions on user pages. For one thing, they are not parsed by the regular search function, making their usefulness as self-promotion a lot more dubious (even though I suppose they would show up on google). I am of the opinion that anyone can do whatever they want on their user page, and I have a neutral stance on whether that information should go to the sandbox section instead.
  • Regarding the proposed fourth addition to notability, how about expanding it to being notable also to a particular sub-community? A lot of Skulltag or ZDaemon mods for example would fall into such a category. Odamex CTF by itself is not a particularly notable WAD in Doom modding in general or even compared to some other CTF WADs, but it is an extremely notable WAD within the context of Odamex and thus worth covering for that reason alone. Willem Sitters's maps (even though articles don't exist yet, but will soon) are not that well known in the broader Doom community but are extremely important for the Risen3D scene. And so on and so forth.
  • Also, another thing that is maybe obvious but bears specifying: I indeed oppose the idea of modders creating pages for themselves or their own work, but I am not opposed to the idea of them expanding said articles with more detail, because after all, in a niche community such as Doom, who would know these works better than the creators themselves? So I think we should treat these two aspects very differently and encourage the latter.
  • I fully agree with the new speedy delete proposal, perhaps an admin i.e. Gez would like to weigh in on this?
  • Regarding Wikipedia, that website needs to use different and more stringent rules owing to its much greater and general scope, I don't think it should serve as an example to follow in every situation, we can afford to be slightly more loose and lenient if we so choose. I say this as someone who is also an extremely active Wikipedia editor, with over 1,000 edits there, so I would say I'm familiar enough with the place to be able to comment on this aspect.

I'll add more thoughts if they come to mind but hopefully this is helpful to iron out a few of the details being discussed here. --Dynamo128 (talk) 04:19, 26 October 2023 (CDT)

With regards to the point Dynamo raised concerning the scope of a potential fourth criterion, I just want to point out that I think the wording I proposed—"contextually significant"—already allows for sub-communities to be covered by it. Something that's important within the Skulltag community for instance would qualify as contextually significant. However, I would add one condition to it, that the genre or sub-community for which the mod in question is significant should itself qualify as notable first. If a mod X is to be considered notable for being part of Y, then Y itself must also be notable to allow for that rationale to make sense. In particular, Y should meet one of the other three criteria for notability (popularity, acclaim, historical value) to qualify as notable. I think this way it works quite well as a criterion—not too lenient but also flexible enough to be useful.

The other point I wanted to bring up is in relation to mod authors creating their own articles versus contributing to existing ones. I think that notability is again the key factor here. Because otherwise a mod author could just create an article under a different account name, or have a friend create the article for them and then expand it. That would circumvent the self-promotion restriction but still be self-promotion, just in a less obvious way. If on the other hand, all articles that are created must meet at least one of the notability criteria, while that doesn't solve all potential problems connected with self-promotion, as an author might still contribute to an existing article with the express intent to self-promote, at least the existence of the article itself isn't in question at this point and makes sense from the perspective of the wiki. It becomes a problem about the quality and intent of the content—not whether the article should exist at all. Long-winded way of saying, I agree that authors can contribute to existing articles that cover their work as long as their work meets at least one notability threshold—otherwise the article in question shouldn't exist in the first place. --Gregor (talk) 10:58, 27 October 2023 (CDT)
I agree with all of Dynamo's comments. The "contextually significant" entry to notability in the FAQ is fine, but I don't feel like that needs to be fenced off very strictly. Every sub-genre or -culture is part of a bigger one, and recursively requiring a context to be notable itself can make things more complicated than necessary. Every article can still be debated for its own merits. The entry has been added.
Re. Impie, the fact that his covered mods have map pages is not only due to him starting to cover some maps, but also due to me completing all such series via normal XymphBot processes, for consistency's sake if nothing else. This is probably a factor not mentioned so far: guidelines for covering mods according to notability were adhered to more strongly a decade or so ago, simply because of the excessive human effort required to cover map series if the bar were lowered too much. With the automation progress made there after 2016, the wiki can cover a wider array of mods influenced also by practical aspects (server resources, my time/energy) and not just strict principles. I don't think pragmatism is a wrong direction as such (and I have already drawn some practical lines myself) and this comprehensive mod coverage also distinguishes us from the 'other' wiki (which doesn't even have real Cacowards coverage after 2014 or so) as the community wiki par excellence. But I'm no fan of removing long-established articles with good information like English Wikipedia is doing, so pruning the episode articles for Project Einherjar and Strange Aeons would be a bridge crossed too long ago IMO.
Btw, early this month I opened a discussion/deletion vote on one such article that is waiting for participants. --Xymph (talk) 09:06, 30 October 2023 (CDT)

← ← ←
So I've been asked to chime in again. On the issue of people creating pages for their own works -- while I agree it can go too far (fanfiction isn't really in this wiki's focus AFAIK), I'm reticent to ban it outright. Thing is, a wiki only contains what its contributors put in, and sometimes nobody gets around to fill in notable works. If it's the author who ends up doing it, is it bad just because it's the author? For the new speedy delete category, I'm not against it in principle, but hope it'll be used responsibly, only for truly egregious cases. --Gez (talk) 15:16, 29 October 2023 (CDT)

Just to chime in myself, I am not in favor of any additional restrictions on user page content. Listing things you've done there whether or not the wiki considers them notable has always been fine and I don't see any possible issues. A User page cannot be cited, it cannot be linked from mainspace except in the most rare situations, and it is absolutely not suitable for use as evidence of notability because anyone can make them and they are not held to the accuracy standards of mainspace. I don't see any need for more strict policy in mainspace either. What we've had for years is working fine. Self-creation of pages is heavily discouraged but it is not disallowed for reasons already mentioned here, such as consistent overlooking of works otherwise considered notable in the community. --Quasar (talk) 22:12, 29 October 2023 (CDT)

Okay, the template has been expanded but should primarily be used for the obvious cases of mod self-promotion, not for the notable mods that would be covered anyway and that its author just happened to beat another editor to. Most participants above are against restricting or labeling user page content. Self-promotional person pages in main space could be speedy-deleted or moved to the pertaining User area (depending on the circumstances) so as not to stifle their "somewhat naive enthusiasm", as Dynamo put it and as I did a few times this month. I hope this correctly summarizes the gist of the above discussion. (Note that the speedy-delete process allows anyone to raise a discussion and call for a normal vote as yet.) --Xymph (talk) 09:06, 30 October 2023 (CDT)
I did not agree that this is a suitable reason for speedy deletion either. That's a complete circumvention of the usual process of determining consensus about what is or is not notable. By having this as a speedy deletion reason you are saying there is no need to ever debate any notability dispute, in effect. That's what we want?? This is completely unprecedented in the history of the wiki's administration and sounds like the kind of thing that was used to scaremonger about us moving off of Wikia back in 2011 by comparison to previous policy. I can see if it's going to be restricted to the utmost painfully obvious and egregious examples of bad content, but the first time I see this applied to something worthy at all of debate I'm going to feel vindicated in asserting that it's a slippery slope to admin overreach. --Quasar (talk) 10:53, 2 November 2023 (CDT)
Not to belabor the point, but the added reason for speedy deletion is self-promotion, not lack of notability. So a lack of notability alone only allows for the normal deletion vote. And a speedy deletion call can always be downgraded to a normal deletion vote if there's disagreement. In fact, the way Xymph phrased it above, only the combination of blatant self-promotion AND a clear lack of notability will qualify for the new criterion. Also, the added context threshold for notability makes it easier to argue for the notability of an article. So I don't think this will lead to notable work being deleted without discussion. What it does, is allow for those truly egregious cases to be removed more quickly and with less hassle. --Gregor (talk) 16:09, 2 November 2023 (CDT)
Given that until now speedy deletion was only for the utmost trivial of issues where discussion is pointless entirely because they are effectively routine maintenance tasks, this is a dramatic expansion of the power of the utility. It runs counter to the terms under which speedy deletion as a policy was accepted in the first place, if you care to go back and read the discussions on that at the time. It was only adopted under an agreement that it would not, in fact, be expanded to cover any type of content where discussion, even if minimal, might be warranted. To me this seems to be based not only on a false assertion - that we are apparently overrun with such content to the point that it's an administrative issue - but is reaching toward giving power users more influence by-proxy, so that they can tag certain things they happen to not personally like as speedy delete and then get an admin to do it for them without any thought given. I don't see that as appropriate, it's not how things have been done here in general ever before. Speedy delete is precisely dangerous because it doesn't provide for a necessary chance for there to be any disagreement. Speedy delete means that, if I as a singular admin look at the page and, even if I know nothing personally about the situation, decide I also don't care for it, then it's gone, period. If nobody got to weigh in yet well, too bad. I need to see all these supposed cases where the normal deletion process did not already work for such articles before I'm going to agree that speedy delete is even valid for this purpose. --Quasar (talk) 21:53, 2 November 2023 (CDT)
Some very good points here. After reading up on it, I understand Quasar's reluctance to agree to the new speedy deletion criterion. The bottom line for me is that articles of non-notable work (→not meeting any notability threshold + subjective margin) that constitute a clear case of blatant self-promotion should be deleted. Whether this happens through a normal deletion vote or speedy deletion is secondary to me. The normal deletion vote however can sometimes drag on for a long time and end without sufficient people voting on it, creating a deadlock in certain cases. I think the idea was to add the criterion to avoid exactly those types of situations where the case is clear but not enough people vote on it. Maybe the alternative proposal by Nockson to an additional speedy deletion criterion in the OP is a better solution. "I propose to create a special criterion for this case or add a special quick voting mechanism so that the votes of at least 3 active editors are sufficient for deletion." --Gregor (talk) 14:37, 3 November 2023 (CDT)
In Quasar's Oct 29 response, he did not comment on the speedy delete topic, which I took as a "no objection", and went ahead as five other editors agreed (with the stated reservations about its use). So I was a little surprised by his Nov 2 (10:53) follow-up in the opposite direction. The 21:53 response helped me understand that stance better, as did reading up on the policy talk page. The thing is, in practice "speedy delete" meant to me not that the actual delete happened any faster than after a normal deletion vote, but only simpler, without being blocked by a lack of discussion and votes. In recent years I had grown accustomed to few (or sometimes no) admins looking after pending (speedy-)delete nominations regularly or timely. That is why I would prune speedy-deleted pages/files (via XymphBot) after at least three (often more) months of "no discussion/objection" (see the Delete log). This way most nominations didn't drag on for many months or several years (a few did as I don't review the queue that frequently either), while still offering ample time for occasional passers-by to raise questions or change the speedy delete template into a regular one. The fact that an admin can swing by and delete such a page within days of its nomination simply hadn't occurred to me (until Quasar pruned the image with that absurd filename on Nov 2).
For examples where the normal delete process drags on a year, see the two templates and this image. I understand and agree with Quasar's point that the speedy-delete process should be used only for trivial maintenance tasks, and that the wiki should operate by consensus as much as possible, also noted in the policy and its discussion. The question then comes back to whether user and mod pages created by the pertaining user themselves are to be viewed as (blatant? subtle? how can you tell?) self-promotion and whether dealing with that is trivial maintenance, or should still always be debated. I can see Quasar's slippery slope too, but if there is a regular discussion and vote, what turnout is required at minimum? 3 editors? 5 regular users? Something in between, or more? Conversely, Quasar, the mod that prompted this topic is OVERLOAD (along with person page moved to user space User:EPICALLL) - how do you feel about this being nominated for speedy delete under that new criterion?
And all you other active editors, please review the delete nominations and chime in. --Xymph (talk) 07:59, 9 November 2023 (CST)
As an admin if I find that a speedy-delete nomination fits the suggested category, I can delete things instantly. That's how it essentially works. There's no mandated delay or need for discussion. The fact it usually happens slower than that, particularly where I'm involved, is that I'm an anti-deletionist in general. I tend to think things might have a use and want to determine that isn't the case first. My opinion is still that speedy delete is not justified in the case you point out. A regular deletion template has been used for cases of non-notable works, and it didn't matter who created it. I don't understand the sudden concern with who is creating an article. "Don't self promote" is a rule of thumb not a rule of law here, according to the policies and guidelines. I didn't see that those were being amended. I didn't comment on it before because I missed it and didn't realize it was a suggestion. I only just have limited time for this lately. Super-long conversations are going to fly by me. --Quasar (talk) 16:29, 12 November 2023 (CST)
Alright, the template text "If you disagree with the speedy deletion nomination..." suggests there should be a window of opportunity to raise concerns, but I suppose with the trivial maintenance type of deletes that wasn't an important factor. The sudden concern arose from three user and two mod articles being created by those pertaining users in October, but indeed this was quite rare in preceding months/years. So I think wrapping up this extended discussion is best accomplished by revoking the new speedy delete criterion and starting a normal delete process on that one mod. It may take a long time but I also don't feel like this wiki needs a new, third delete-voting process. If the other editors participating in the above discussion can live with this outcome, then I will soon revert the SD template and initiate the normal delete. --Xymph (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2023 (CST)
As I stated above, it doesn't matter much to me whether the SD or normal deletion process is used as long it leads to a decision, not a stalemate. Having said that, I still think Nockson had a valid point for initiating this discussion in order to push for an update on the deletion voting process. I think it would be useful to have some clarification on that matter before wrapping up this discussion. That's also something I was wondering about myself. What's the minimum number of votes that are necessary to complete a discussion on a deletion? What constitutes consensus? And shouldn't there be a timeframe established for it? Any other form of voting in society is bound to a specific time period after which the vote is closed, whether you voted on it or not. Xymph mentioned to me that he normally waits three months before deleting SD requests. I think that's a pretty healthy timeframe for active editors to read up on the topic and make up their mind on whether they want to chime in or not. No vote to me means no objections, and the deletion can then go ahead after a set amount of time has passed. I don't see much benefit in a deletion vote that can take years to "complete". Especially, if at the end, we're still left with the issue of admin overreach if it's just down to an admin to decide when a discussion is closed.

With regards to OVERLOAD, I just like to point out that we already had the discussion about it on EPICFALLL's talk page and the consensus was that the mod does not meet any notability threshold and constitutes a very clear case of self-promotion. I don't think there's any disagreement on this. I don't see any reason therefore for another discussion that "may take a long time" as Xymph suggested. I'd say anybody with an opinion on it already voiced it, so there's no reason to wait much longer in this specific case. --Gregor (talk) 23:21, 13 November 2023 (CST)
On #doomwiki Quasar provided a quick answer about the voting turnout, majority, timeframe: "there's never been a firm definition of those things, as there isn't on the wikipedia model that it adapts; a "reasonable" number, amount, etc". So there. --Xymph (talk) 15:06, 20 November 2023 (CST)

Levels by editor[edit]

I came up with a "new" way to categorize levels/WADs - by the editor used. Does anyone else think this is a good idea and actually useful? If yes, what is the correct name for it: "Levels by editor" or "Levels by editing utility"? --Nockson (talk) 14:05, 30 October 2023 (CDT)

Don't find that particularly useful or interesting: the result and how it's used (e.g. which port) matters, not how a mapper arrived there. Also, while for single-author projects the editor may often be documented, in CPs lots of mappers may use a variety of tools but this is usually not documented per map. And even then, would wiki visitors select levels/WADs because they were built in one editor and ignore those built in others? Seems unlikely to me. --Xymph (talk) 18:26, 30 October 2023 (CDT)

Page Suggestion: Elemental Damage[edit]

This page would cover the following elements.

Heretic/Hexen:

Strife:

Would be a convenient crossroads page. MargaretThatcher (talk) 22:52, 14 November 2023 (CST)

I don't think the page is needed considering said information already works well in the articles related to such topics. --Dynamo128 (talk) 04:08, 15 November 2023 (CST)

Hotlinks to files hosted on Discord's CDN will eventually become ephemeral and rot[edit]

As far as I am aware, many people within the community use Discord and its CDN to host archives, WAD files, screenshots, and so on, whilst hotlinking them elsewhere.

Unfortunately, this practice is on borrowed time, thanks to the gradual implementation and enforcement of three new parameters (they have already existed since September or so) in the URLs.

https://i.imgur.com/mY9VYnZ.png https://i.imgur.com/zNbhyTN.png https://i.imgur.com/fzqyUit.png

Fortunately, there exists only one affected page on the wiki.

https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?target=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.discordapp.com&namespace=&title=Special%3ALinkSearch

--Pringao friki chalado (talk) 09:27, 22 November 2023 (CST)

Thanks for the heads-up, we should then be disallowing such temporary links in the future. As for the one patch link copied from the release post, that can be removed from the wiki, or replaced if someone comes up with a new location. (Hint: download while you can and upload to another service?) --Xymph (talk) 10:52, 22 November 2023 (CST)
Done. I didn't even know a single Discord link existed on the wiki until now, so I am at least not surprised to see it was just one. I've always seen Discord as disposable hosting for quickly sending files and nothing more than that. --Dynamo128 (talk) 11:00, 22 November 2023 (CST)

Suggestion: "On this day" section on the front page[edit]

Was looking at Wikipedia and realized how much I enjoy reading the "On this day" section (where it tells you some historical events that happened today). I propose we do something similar. I have a few suggestions:

  • Release Dates for games (Dec 10. for Doom 1), mods (Jun. 2nd for Knee-Deep in ZDoom), and tools (Jun. 19th for DeHackEd)
  • Noteworthy community events (Apr. 30th for the DWIronman League's "you humor me greatly" incident)
  • Important social media posts (Apr. 21st for the 2015 Doom source data release)
  • Development/business incidents (Jul. 7th for Tom Hall's resignation from id)
  • Births (Oct. 28th John Romero) and deaths (Jul. 31st for Ty Halderman)

I feel it would help create repeat visitors (everyone loves fun facts, especially tight-knit communities centered around 30-year-old games).MargaretThatcher (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2023 (CST)

Wikipedia can get away with having such a feature because it has a virtually endless supply of information it can display in that sense. For what it's worth, on the DoomWiki, I'd say this largely goes against the current procedures for (not all but most) featured articles, since these often get picked in lieu of anniversaries. As a result I don't think we need such an addition. --Dynamo128 (talk) 10:54, 25 November 2023 (CST)

WAD criteria versus helpful walkthroughs?[edit]

Hi, before I forget, this is the first time I've done anything more than a minor edit to the Doom wiki so I apologize if I mess anything up. I'm a frequent user of the Wiki, primarily for WAD lists and notes on secrets or tips for particularly confusing maps. (Thanks to whomever wrote the 10 sectors MAP24 entry, for example, that's why I was here.) I saw the discussion about self-promotion and how it relates to the wiki's desired notability for WAD entries, but it got me thinking. For me, and a lot of other people who I talk about Doom with, the Doom wiki is valuable for having those walkthroughs/secret lists for as many WADs as possible, since the other options are seeing if anyone has a recording on YouTube and scrubbing through that manually, or popping open an editor and looking at the secrets that way (which I don't even know how to do.) In other words, when I recommend Doom to new players, the Wiki is the first place I recommend they check if they're stuck.

This seems to suggest a problem to me - the use of the Wiki as a repository for playthrough information about as many WADs as possible is resisted by the idea that WADs with entries here need to be notable. The notability criteria makes sense from the perspective of an encyclopedia/research resource of course, but I can't think of anywhere else on the internet that's as well suited to help people out with tips for actually playing Doom. I've made some small (anonymous) edits in the past to help make pages clearer (for example, I added the information that MAP24 in 180 Minutes Pour Vivre had a Porcupine Tree MIDI as its soundtrack), and I've always thought that if I ended up playing a WAD that wasn't covered here that would be a good excuse to learn the tools used here for making WAD/map pages and try and get it covered. But if notability is a concern, I frankly don't have any idea how to tell if a WAD I'm playing is notable, it's just something I was playing and I would figure other people might appreciate help for secrets/the maps in general.

So I guess my question is, has the idea of using Doom Wiki as a repository of walkthroughs/tips for Doom maps in general been considered? Or is the intent to keep it as a focused critical source with attention paid to notability for WADs first and foremost?

(And just to avoid any questions, I'm not "EPICALL" and I don't even really know who that is or what Overload is like as a WAD. I just saw the conversation in the recent changes panel and clicked to read it. I signed up because asking a question on here felt like it should be done with an account, not anonymously like my minor edits before.)

Uh, thanks! -- Arivia (talk) 01:33, 28 November 2023 (CST)

Hello and welcome! I came here at the beginning of the year for a similar reason: I wanted to know what music tracks were used in some of the Winter's Fury levels. I didn't find this information here, so I got it myself. And then I thought, why not add this information to DoomWiki? So, I signed up, started editing, and here I am, with over 4,000 edits and almost 100 articles under my belt. So what you wrote about is a very good reason. But! There simply can't be a Wiki page for every level of every PWAD ever released. Given the number of active editors, this is simply not possible. This is where notability comes in – it helps us choose what exactly is worth writing about here. And it usually works: if you play something interesting, popular or unique, there's a very good chance it has a page here on DoomWiki. And if not, you can always create one yourself, given that it is notable, meaning that someone other than you will need this information. --Nockson (talk) 11:33, 28 November 2023 (CST)
Yes, Doom Wiki is an encyclopedia first and foremost, and a walkthrough site as a side effect. And until 2016, it covered mere dozens of PWADs (along with the IWADs) because it requires a lot of human effort already just to create series of map pages completely and consistently, let alone write up gameplay info. Since 2016 the wiki has grown a lot, covering hundreds of PWADs due to extensive scripting via my bot account. But it still takes me time (for complex projects up to several hours) to prepare, configure, and run the scripts and generate the map views -- often in tandem with Dynamo to crop the maps and create custom things tables. There are only so many hours in the day and we have lives and off-wiki projects, so unlimited PWADs coverage remains impossible. That too is a major reason to stick to the notability angle. --Xymph (talk) 04:07, 29 November 2023 (CST)

Alias omission[edit]

Why are certain person aliases omitted on page names? Here's a few examples I've spotted so far.

Tom Mustaine > Tom Mustaine (ParadoX)
L.A. Sieben > Leo Sieben (Anavrin)
Jonathan El-Bizri > Jonathan El-Bizri (Biz)
Patrick Pineda > Patrick Pineda (Metacorp)
Jon Dowland > Jon Dowland (Teppic)

--Horizon (talk) 22:31, 21 December 2023 (CST)

No particular reason, I guess. Some articles exist since the wiki's earliest days, when conventions were not firmly established yet, others are recent. In some cases like Sieben, the person didn't use their alias much themselves and in commercial releases (Mustaine's too) it is customary to use only formal names, no aliases. I've made various adjustments. --Xymph (talk) 04:20, 22 December 2023 (CST)
There also might be very slight confusion between BiZ and Jonathan El-Bizri (Biz) with the auto-caps thing. - turn Biz into a disambig page and move BiZ to [[BiZ (mapper)]] to maintain consistent formatting like this? --Horizon (talk) 16:00, 22 December 2023 (CST)
BiZ is widely linked already, so that can remain the canonical link for that person. --Xymph (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2023 (CST)

Quite a few more are missing: (these are from skimming over random people pages)
Ola Björling > Ola Björling (ukiro) (this appears to be a redirect for some reason)
Malcolm Sailor > Malcolm Sailor (Hayduke)
Justin Fisher > Justin Fisher (Harlequin)
Charles Jacobi > Charles Jacobi (Chukker)
Jekyll Grim Payne > [[Jekyll Grim Payne (Agent_Ash)]]
Jim Lowell > Jim Lowell (Symbol)
Kim André Malde > Kim André Malde (Mutator)
Kyle McAwesome > [[Kyle McAwesome (kmc)]]

--Horizon (talk) 04:47, 27 December 2023 (CST)

Some pages renamed, for others who rarely/never used the alias themselves I added redirects. Pretty sure Jekyll Grim Payne is an alias, so it cannot use the "full name (alias)" format. Possibly McAwesome is an alias too, so I didn't rename that yet until some confirmation either way surfaces. --Xymph (talk) 07:04, 27 December 2023 (CST)

Sorry if it gets boring doing this, just trying to keep things somewhat consistent. ---Horizon (talk) 03:04, 28 December 2023 (CST)
Dan Townsend (sgt dopey) > Dan Townsend (Yukarin) - page was not moved with name update.
Jaakko Keränen > Jaakko Keränen (skyjake)
Elias Papavassilopoulos > Elias Papavassilopoulos (CaveMan)
David Asaad > David Asaad (A1s)

A few more...
Will Hackney (Archvile46) > Will Hackney (Kid Airbag) - page was not moved with name update.
Piotr Kapiszewski > [[Piotr Kapiszewski (Kapi)]] - would this even count as an alias?
Jan Van der Veken > Jan Van der Veken (BhadTrip)
Thomas van der Velden > Thomas van der Velden (Rabotik)

--Horizon (talk) 02:04, 5 January 2024 (CST)

Well, since there's a list, there's also:

Roland van der Velden > Roland van der Velden (space is green)
Malcolm Sailor > Malcolm Sailor (Hayduke)
Jonathan Rimmer > Jonathan Rimmer (JonR)
Kerkko Välilä > Kerkko Välilä (Robocat)
Nicklas Linnes > Nicklas Linnes (nathas)
Tom Mustaine > Tom Mustaine (ParadoX)
L.A. Sieben > Leo Sieben (Anavrin)
T. Elliot Cannon (Myscha the Sled Dog) > Thomas Elliot Cannon (Myscha the Sled Dog)
Jeremy Wagner > Jeremy Wagner (Iron Lich)

--Dynamo128 (talk) 05:21, 5 January 2024 (CST)

EDIT: I see that some of these have been brought up already, but for the sake of consistency I think it'd be better to rename them (L.A. Sieben seems particularly unfitting for the wiki standards as the first name tends to be used) rather than just having redirects - but that is, of course, only if the amount of work required to do that is reasonable. --Dynamo128 (talk) 05:23, 5 January 2024 (CST)

One more:
Paul Corfiatis > Paul Corfiatis (pcorf) (redirects for some reason)
Going from similar treatment just now to JonR. --Horizon (talk) 08:42, 5 January 2024 (CST)

As mentioned in my first reply, almost all Sieben's credits are by initials, so that seems the canonical styling for this person's name. That's why I kept it that way. Same for "T. Elliot", which is just a style convention to emphasize one's calling name as Elliot. Just like my middle initial P. isn't used much (or is public, even). I also commented on Mustaine already. As before, I don't feel it necessary to updating all uses of names with(out) aliases throughout the wiki into their new canonical paths. Redirects are not that harmful. --Xymph (talk) 09:42, 5 January 2024 (CST)

Hub categorization?[edit]

Last night Nockson and I briefly chatted about hub WADs w.r.t. the {{wad}} template, which reminded me of an entry on Ryan W's todo list. Currently single-hub WADs with a handful of maps are categorized as Multilevel WADs. Such mods exist not only for Hexen but also for Doom (II). Would it make sense to create a separate "Hub WADs" category for these? If Hexen's hubs are moved into a "Hexen hubs" category like Ryan proposed, the PWADs could go into that new category, both under the main Hubs one. Template type 'h' could auto-add the category. But is it meaningful to distinguish them from other multilevel WADs that way? And what to do about megawad hub-based mods, like Cabro's Legacy and the RAMP series? Should "Hub WADs" come in addition to the usual multilevel/episode/megawad types? Let's hear (uhm, read) your thoughts. --Xymph (talk) 06:49, 31 January 2024 (CST)

Well, if the major sorting factor now is the amount of levels then there's no need to add hubs into the template. Though I also think that the hub category is useful, it could be added manually. This hub question also touches the other thing that we discussed yesterday: partial and total conversions. After my 7 edits today, there are no pages on the DoomWiki that use the "t" or "p" parameter in the wad template, the categories for TCs or PCs in all of them were added manually. So the parameters for TCs and PCs are useless. So here are my proposals to change the wad template: either add an additional type2 field that can have parameters for hubs, TCs and PCs (dunno what to do with T/P conversions with hubs in them), or remove "t" and "p" parameters entirely from the template. --Nockson (talk) 12:03, 31 January 2024 (CST)
Removing the t & p parameters seems reasonable if they are no longer useful, although this request would perhaps be better put in the Template_talk:Wad page.
With regards to the "Hub WADs" cat, I would honestly favor a "Hub maps" category that can be added to the hub level articles themselves rather than associating this with the main page. After all, these are the actual hubs, not the PWAD overall. "Hub WADs" to me implies that the WAD is entirely (or mostly) made up of hubs, which isn't the case most of time - maybe a Hub WADs cat would make sense for these type of WADs specifically (if they exist). But the question is whether a WAD needs to be filed under a Hub cat just because it contains one or two hub maps. Sort of like creating an "Icon of Sin WADs" category, rather than just adding an "Icon of Sin maps" category to the maps that actually have one (that could be another worthwhile category to add btw :)). --Gregor (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2024 (CST)
That's a good proposal, it really will be nice and convenient to have "Hub levels" or "Hub maps" category instead of WADs. I support this! --Nockson (talk) 01:50, 4 February 2024 (CST)
Alright, category created, this search helps to find a bunch (but not all) of them. Also created the Hexen subcat per Ryan's todo.
Functionality in the Wad template should not be removed as it may be useful yet. After all, it is entirely feasible (albeit uncommon) to have TCs/PCs without levels, and we are already covering two such PCs.
What would be the use case for the "Icon of Sin maps" category? --Xymph (talk) 04:52, 7 February 2024 (CST)
Well, one would first have to define the Icon of Sin as the combination of Romero's head, monster spawner(s), and a boss texture plus some form of distorted voice sample being played at wakeup, so as to exclude such maps from the category that only feature one or two of these components, such as utilizing monster spawners or using Romero's head on its own. So HR MAP30 would fall under such a "IoS maps" category but HR MAP32 (uses monster spawners as a central threat) and HR MAP23 (uses Romero's head to simulate a reactor blowing up at the end) would not. I think it would be neat and useful for documenting purposes to have a comprehensive list of Icon of Sin maps, new and old, listed on one page.

Another thing to consider would be an even larger "Boss fight maps" or "Boss levels" category that the IoS maps category would be a subcat of. A boss level category would only cover maps that have some boss entity to fight or kill in it, so maps that use large encounters as a substitute for a boss, whether they occupy the final map slot or not, would not qualify in my opinion. Therefore, MAP24: Tough Skin River (BTSX-E1) or MAP30: Haunting Dreams (Scythe 2) do not count as a boss level while MAP30: Eternity (Eviternity) and MAP07: The Beating Heart (Heartland) very much do. But I'm sure there would be some fringe cases to discuss for either category. --Gregor (talk) 11:29, 7 February 2024 (CST)

Soundtracks[edit]

I've noticed a few weird things about the pages listed in the "Soundtracks" table seen here: {{Music}}

They are as follows:

Another related complaint I have is that some games/campaigns do not have music pages of their own when I feel they should. These are

MargaretThatcher (talk) 16:40, 5 February 2024 (CST)

Reference that template, don't transclude it, so this page doesn't get added to category Music.
  • Xbox maps added.
  • TNT Evilution split off and NRftL added (shouldn't be in the D2 table because assignments vary between releases).
  • Soundtrack articles for Hacx, HtP and PG are meaningful only if there is sufficient reliable information about them, like track names, composer(s), lengths, etc.
  • Doom Eternal soundtrack already mentions the DLCs should get dedicated soundtrack articles, with the same requirements.
--Xymph (talk) 16:42, 7 February 2024 (CST)
Would need to e-mail Jim Lynch about titles and better clarity/corrections on this, but for Hacx:
MAP01: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
MAP02: Jim Lynch
MAP03: Jim Lynch
MAP04: Jim Lynch
MAP05: Jim Lynch
MAP06: Jim Lynch
MAP07: Jim Lynch
MAP08: Jim Lynch
MAP09: Jim Lynch
MAP10: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
MAP11: Jim Lynch
MAP12: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall + Mark Van Natta
MAP13: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
MAP14/Text screen: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
MAP15: Jim Lynch
MAP16: Ellsworth Hall
MAP17: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
MAP18: Jim Lynch + Ellsworth Hall
MAP19/MAP21: Jim Lynch
MAP20: Jim Lynch
MAP31: Jim Lynch
Intermission: not sure
Title: not sure
--Blursphere (talk) 17:48, 7 February 2024 (CST)

Coordination[edit]

Hello, I was wondering if the wiki has any kind of central coordination base, like a Discord server or the like. I couldn't find anything on the sidebar links but wanted to confirm since it's a pretty common arrangement these days. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kisequé (talkcontribs) .

You just found it, right here. And for a quick chat, there is also Doomwiki (IRC channel), a few editors hang out there from time to time. --Xymph (talk) 03:02, 28 March 2024 (CDT)
I see. Very old-school, charming! I'm not terribly familiar with discussing over talk pages so I apologize as I get used to the conventions.
On the IRC chat, I did see that but was unable to connect. Are there any common errors in getting set up there? I've never used the technology before. Kisequé (talk) 13:46, 28 March 2024 (CDT)
For talk pages, you can learn from examples all around the wiki, but your first reply is fine. :) For IRC, one client used by several editors that is pretty easy to set up and use, is HexChat. --Xymph (talk) 14:30, 28 March 2024 (CDT)