Talk:ZPack - Random Maps for ZDoom


Revision as of 18:55, 18 July 2008 by (talk)


With due respect to the designers, all of whom probably work harder on each map than I ever have on the wiki... does anyone else find it strange that we don't have separate episode articles for The Lost Episodes, a commercial release, but we do have them for this WAD, which is just another ZDoom entry in /idgames?    Ryan W 18:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, now that I think of it, I find this odd, myself. In fact, now that I have the Requiem pages done, I thought about making pages for the Lost Episodes. I don't have the book, so I can't provide any story-related content from it, but I can certainly provide the usual gameplay information (or at least the secrets. ;) Failing that, I also considered doing pages for either Community Chest 3 (oh, the hubris!) or Mars War, but I digress. Either way, though, the contrast is certainly quite strange. The Green Herring 00:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Just my explanation of my thinking when I wrote the first draft of the articles. I was going off of this statement regarding WADs in the policies and guidelines on notability: "One article per map, plus one summary page for each multi-level file (as with the episodes of the classic series)." To me, this statement is ambiguous. It says multi-level file as if referring to separate wads but then episodes of the classic series which are absolutely not individual files. So, I made a guess, assuming that at the worst if other wiki editors did not like it they would merge things together. So that all is up to the regular editors of the wiki to decide.
As far as my personal opinion goes, I don't see a real problem with letting wads which have arguably separate episodes (like ZPack, with 3 sets of 10 maps, definitely has unique episodes) have separate episode articles. Maybe some certain criteria, like how I put (ZPack) in the article titles for all the episodes, needs to be met, but that's about it. 22:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I think you're right about that statement being ambiguous.  It was probably written before we had good examples of "summary" pages for third-party releases (they either had a list of levels and little else, or huge sections about plot and authors with no links to maps).
Rereading my comment above, I made it sound like I wanted to merge the ZPack episode articles into the main article, but that's not the case — I can see merit in both approaches.  For example, IMHO, Knee-Deep in the Dead has evolved into a fairly solid and self-consistent summary of things pertaining to that episode and only to that episode.  On the other hand, 99 percent of PWAD articles are so short (because they don't really have storylines and their development wasn't discussed with the general public) that three episodes could easily be merged without creating an unwieldy article.  In that case I would suggest an exception for commercial releases, splitting the actual lists of levels into a subsidiary article, because the introductory discussion and context is so long (similar to what Wikipedia does, or did do before the subsidiary article was deleted for non-notability).
At this point, the whole issue may be a minor one, because few high-profile WADs actually use the Doom 1 episode structure.  However, if we are really going to give every PWAD an article, then we should also ask how such a guideline would apply to WADs whose episodes are defined by scripted events, or even by text screens alone.    Ryan W 22:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, what to do going forward basically goes beyond me as I'm not, nor do I plan to be, a long term contributor. I just wanted to get what I knew about ZPack down since I was having a really slow night (with just an oh so tiny hint of insomnia). Guidelines and standards are good and all that, so go right on ahead and figure that out whenever.
I guess I might do some articles on the ZPack levels too, if I had that tool that makes the PNGs of the map layout. 23:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)