Difference between revisions of "Talk:Hell lord"

From DoomWiki.org

(→‎Policy discussion)
(Categorize with tracking template instead of manually. This is the backlog -- trivial vs non-trivial will be assessed later in a separate pass.)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{Vfd-deleted|trivial=0}}
 +
 
* Not about Doom, it's about some fan game. Belongs in an article about the fan game, not as an article itself. '''Delete'''. [[User:Bloodshedder|Bloodshedder]] 00:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 
* Not about Doom, it's about some fan game. Belongs in an article about the fan game, not as an article itself. '''Delete'''. [[User:Bloodshedder|Bloodshedder]] 00:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 
* Our [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Things that may have articles|written policy]] is extremely vague on this point, but I agree that you are describing the existing practice.  '''Delete.'''    [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 01:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 
* Our [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Things that may have articles|written policy]] is extremely vague on this point, but I agree that you are describing the existing practice.  '''Delete.'''    [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 01:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Line 6: Line 8:
  
 
==Policy discussion==
 
==Policy discussion==
−
We would certainly keep an article about a source port if it was in public beta, and we kept [[Sonic Robo Blast 2|this one]] (after some discussion), which is not even at that phase.  So I still agree with [[User:Bloodshedder|Bloodshedder]].  (For a PWAD, maybe not, since the bugs tend to be a lot less subtle.)    [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 16:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
+
''Moved to [[Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing#Big_Important_Policy_Discussion]]''.
−
 
 
−
This brings up another issue: mod and source port specific items, like [[Turbosphere]]. I made a quick edit to the [[Doom Wiki:Policies and guidelines#Things that may have articles|written policy]] about monsters, and I think items like these, much like monsters, should be kept in the main article (in this case [[Skulltag]]) and should be turned into redirects. Discuss? [[User:Bloodshedder|Bloodshedder]] 22:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 
−
 
 
−
: In this specific example (skulltag items), agreed. Regarding a consistent policy: I'm quite happy with the "benevolent dictator" model that we use now (but then I am a benevolent dictator, so I suppose I would be...) -- [[User:Jdowland|Jdowland]] 12:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 
−
 
 
−
:: I've also been happy with it ''hitherto'', but this site might outlive all of the current editors' tenures, so we really ought to write things down just in case.  In fact, I also had thought to expand the policy page, believing that all of our admins agreed on this issue already... don't they?
 
−
 
 
−
:: So far, I would describe our existing practice as follows.  One article per game or source port, '''except''' when:
 
−
 
 
−
::* The game is in the Doom series or is an officially licensed port which differs considerably from the original (e.g. Doom 3, Doom RPG, Doom 64).
 
−
::* The game is based on the Doom engine and id actually helped develop it (e.g. Hexen), rather than just taking a licensing fee.
 
−
::* The available technical information becomes so extensive that a single article would be very unwieldy (e.g. [[ACS]], [[Amulets & Armor Thing Types]]).  Some editors want this to occur for all games eventually, so that we can be a comprehensive technical resource for programmers as well as editors.
 
−
::* The game is a TC which happens to be an IWAD instead of a PWAD, but which works perfectly well with existing ports (e.g. Chex Quest, Freedoom).  These are treated like other TCs.
 
−
 
 
−
:: The obvious objection to this scheme, apparently, is that [[:Category:Strife|Strife only gets one article]].    [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 01:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 

Latest revision as of 21:11, 3 December 2019

Edit-paste.svgThe content associated with this talk page was considered for deletion, and either was deleted, or was kept after a period of discussion. This page has been retained for historical reference regarding the deletion process, or in case of future restoration of any deleted content.
  • Not about Doom, it's about some fan game. Belongs in an article about the fan game, not as an article itself. Delete. Bloodshedder 00:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Our written policy is extremely vague on this point, but I agree that you are describing the existing practice.  Delete.    Ryan W 01:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fraggle 15:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as per above. An additional note: The fangame the monster is from is not finished yet. -- TheDarkArchon 12:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as per Bloodshedder. The article for the game it is from is not particularly developed yet. If it was large and becoming unwieldy, I would reconsider. -- Jdowland 09:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Policy discussion[edit]

Moved to Doom_Wiki:Central_Processing#Big_Important_Policy_Discussion.

Retrieved from "https://doomwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hell_lord&oldid=207896"