Difference between revisions of "Talk:MAP27: Mount Pain (TNT: Evilution)"

From DoomWiki.org

m (Sorry!)
(archive old Compet-n)
 
Line 20: Line 20:
 
::Hopefully, that's good enough. [[User:TheGreenHerring|The Green Herring]] 23:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 
::Hopefully, that's good enough. [[User:TheGreenHerring|The Green Herring]] 23:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  
:::I'm not sure June 21 is the right date, as a couple of the published entries are stamped later (e.g. [http://www.doom2.net/~compet-n/database/cn.cgi?map:tnt:07+2005:12 ev07-658] and [http://www.doom2.net/~compet-n/database/cn.cgi?map:plut:09+2005:12 pp09-134]).  Maybe also change "officially published" to "officially peer-reviewed"?  The Doomworld speedrun forums are sometimes filled with sprightly unofficial reviewing.   :>     [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 02:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
+
:::I'm not sure June 21 is the right date, as a couple of the published entries are stamped later (e.g. [https://web.archive.org/web/20100921175150/http://www.doom2.net/~compet-n/database/cn.cgi?map:tnt:07+2005:12 ev07-658] and [https://web.archive.org/web/20100921175153/http://www.doom2.net/~compet-n/database/cn.cgi?map:plut:09+2005:12 pp09-134]).  Maybe also change "officially published" to "officially peer-reviewed"?  The Doomworld speedrun forums are sometimes filled with sprightly unofficial reviewing.   :>     [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 02:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 
::::I chose June 21 because that's what the date for the site's last update reads.  Perhaps it could just say "since 2005"?  In any case, I changed the wording to what you suggested. [[User:TheGreenHerring|The Green Herring]] 02:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 
::::I chose June 21 because that's what the date for the site's last update reads.  Perhaps it could just say "since 2005"?  In any case, I changed the wording to what you suggested. [[User:TheGreenHerring|The Green Herring]] 02:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:26, 8 September 2022

I think we had had some discussion about what to do in regard to demos that are in incoming. I think we should keep the "official record" and add the one in incoming as a note to it. Who is like God? 16:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Quite possibly.    Ryan W 19:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)oh, hah, you've obviously already seen that.  Your idea would work well IMHO.    Ryan W 23:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Like this?

Unpublished records[edit]

Some of the above records have been broken, or empty tables filled, by newer demos, but those demos have not been officially peer-reviewed due to the Compet-n's lack of updates since June 21, 2005. Nevertheless, the newer demos may be downloaded below.

Run Time Player Date File Notes
UV speed 01:59 Tamas Flamich 2008-07-02 ev27-159.zip
NM speed 04:00 Tatsurd-cacocaco 2008-09-22 tn27-400.zip
NM100S 04:00 Tatsurd-cacocaco 2008-09-22 tn27-400.zip
UV -respawn 08:56 Serge Marudov (Never Again) 2008-02-10 ER27-856.zip
UV pacifist 02:06 Tatsurd-cacocaco 2008-09-26 ep27-206.zip
Hopefully, that's good enough. The Green Herring 23:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure June 21 is the right date, as a couple of the published entries are stamped later (e.g. ev07-658 and pp09-134).  Maybe also change "officially published" to "officially peer-reviewed"?  The Doomworld speedrun forums are sometimes filled with sprightly unofficial reviewing.   :>     Ryan W 02:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I chose June 21 because that's what the date for the site's last update reads. Perhaps it could just say "since 2005"? In any case, I changed the wording to what you suggested. The Green Herring 02:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)