Doom Wiki:Central Processing


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

Map screenshots gallery dimensions[edit]

I presume everyone agrees that the default dimensioning of map screenshot galleries is somewhat underwhelming: the thumbnails are post-stamp size, and the borders too large and uneven. Larger thumbnails (with even borders around them) would make them more useful and the page more visually attractive. For my next scripting endeavor I intend to update all existing galleries with new dimensions (and also clean up formatting issues, if any). Empty ones too, to assist future contributors of more screenshots.

How much larger? I sandboxed a few possibilities. I propose to use option 1.3, and set 1.3.1 as default in the skeleton. Any objections or alternative suggestions? --Xymph (talk) 11:46, 30 January 2017 (CST)

Suggestion: using packed galleries; or at the very least noline. See this. Currently we have too much of our real estate pixels (real pixstate?) taken by entirely useless white noise such as borders and trims. By getting rid of these, we can have less poststampy screenshots without increasing the visual size of the page. --Gez (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2017 (CST)
Good idea, both options sandboxed, after which (for me) packed mode can be crossed off again due to the undesirable effect of centering the entire gallery within the page. Nolines mode however looks nice, with the additional benefit that the aspect ratio-dependent height doesn't have to be determined.
Quasar suggested (on IRC) to also try a large gallery, because a larger widths value might balloon it up too much within overall page context. 15 is the largest I could find among vanilla Doom maps (most are 5-10, most galleries elsewhere too). But I find with nolines mode, 160px width still looks fine. So my vote goes to option 2.2 (== 5.2). --Xymph (talk) 08:55, 31 January 2017 (CST)
The alignment can be addressed thusly: <gallery mode=packed style="text-align: left"> or by editing the wiki's CSS. I suppose something similar to {{prettytable}} would end up existing, so we'd just write <gallery {{prettygallery}}> and be done with it. --Gez (talk) 09:38, 31 January 2017 (CST)
For technical reasons I don't understand (but Quasar does), the latter won't work, so we have to keep the gallery params simple. Given that all map screens in a given gallery (should) have the same aspect ratio, I see little difference between nolines and packed modes anyway (apart from centering), so it's easiest to use the former as per my previous proposal. Yes/no/maybe? --Xymph (talk) 11:20, 31 January 2017 (CST)
On Feb 1 in IRC, Quasar expressed his preference for option 2.2/5.2 as well, though an ongoing attack of shyness seems to prevent him from repeating that one-liner that here. %-) So that wraps up this topic, and the bot script is ready to roll. --Xymph (talk) 05:56, 4 February 2017 (CST)
Sorry slipped my mind last night ;) I have been super busy on a contract coding project that's in crunch time, so, minimal wiki editing for right now. --Quasar (talk) 07:16, 4 February 2017 (CST)
Sometimes I'm oblivious to the obvious: after some two dozen updates I realized that in nolines mode too, captions are centered. They used to be left-aligned in traditional mode, but either is a choice we could put to another vote. I'm leaning to the left. :)
If sufficient consensus is left-alignment, this can be handled in Common.css: something like .gallerybox.gallerytext {...} should do it. --Xymph (talk) 13:27, 4 February 2017 (CST)
I was fine with the captions as-is, I thought it was intentional and had already considered when I signaled my prefs. --Quasar (talk) 17:48, 4 February 2017 (CST)

Updating/adding demo links[edit]

For my next bot script, I'm considering the external links to demo sites Compet-N and DSDA. For some PWADs, all map pages in the series contain a link to the PWAD's demos page on either site. In some series, these links are broken, e.g. here and there. In other series, the links seem obsolete (here), or use a HTTP link instead of the appropriate template. For most other PWADs that have a DSDA page, no links are present here yet.

The bot script would add and standardize links on all map series' pages for which a Compet-N and/or DSDA page exists. Is this is a useful project? Are there further aspects to take into account? And is my assumption correct that this site is the obsolete predecessor to DSDA?

Note: updating the tables of actual demo runs in the Speedrunning sections is not within this script's scope. It might be in a future one. --Xymph (talk) 10:45, 16 February 2017 (CST)

Useful: sure. doomworld/sda precursor of dsda: indeed. Appropriate template: don't forget about {{competnmap}} and {{competnftp}}. And do definitely replace all http/https hard links by templates because that's the only way to avoid issues such as the compet-n database jumping around from to and then to -- and completely changing the way individual demos are accessed in the process, heh. --Gez (talk) 11:39, 16 February 2017 (CST)
Thanks for the quick follow-up. competnftp is intended for directly linking demo zips in Speedrunning tables (so falls outside the current scope) but competnmap looks useful indeed, now that I found examples of how it's applied and the resulting output (wasn't clear to me at first from the template's instructions). Originally I had hoped to need only a wad ID in my .ini file per PWAD, but on DSDA some demo collections are distributed across level-specific pages (with a predictable pattern in its map IDs, it looks like), while for Compet-N's level-specific pages the map ID is less predictable unfortunately. So I guess I've got my work cut out for me, once again. ;) --Xymph (talk) 13:14, 16 February 2017 (CST)
No, it's a VERY useful project.  :D   I seem to recall this being the consensus for format at the bottom of a map page (but then we couldn't figure out multi-map runs and the project bogged down).  If it's easier, the bot could start with WAD file names instead of IDs, and parse the source of these lists.  Compet-N's scope is much smaller, never changes, and uses scrambled IDs as you noticed, so I assume it's faster to simply compile those once manually.  For individual file links, it would be progress if the bot could verify they used the correct templates and weren't dead.    Ryan W (usually gone) 21:52, 17 February 2017 (CST)
Thanks. I saw that, and I aim to use that ordering convention on all pages (also on those without Compet-N link but with misc. other links). No that wouldn't be easier, all my scripts start with .ini files to which I simply add a DSDA wad ID field (and a Compet-N one in the 11 pertaining ones, which is already done). The script builds the parameterized template(s) from those ID(s) -- the harder part is putting them into the External links section (which can be missing, empty, contain old-style links to replace, and other links not to be affected).
What "individual file links" are you referring to? If in the Speedrunning section, then see above -- otherwise please elaborate. --Xymph (talk) 14:45, 18 February 2017 (CST)

The new bot script is mostly done and during testing the following questions (and possible topic for debate) came up:

  1. On DSDA, wads with a large number of demo entries get a page per map (e.g. Alien Vendetta (2nd release)), otherwise one overview page for the wad (AV (1st)). The threshold appears to be around 600 demos. The bot script can handle both cases (linking individual map pages to individual DSDA pages), but once it has been run over a wad's map pages and that wad's demo set grows beyond the threshold at some point in the future, it would ideally need to be run again. Does anyone know the exact threshold, and is there a way to find out (except checking manually) when a wad's demos page has been reorganized into subpages?
  2. {{competnmap}} accepts various no...= parameters to disable demo categories. I understand their use in case a category is unavailable (because identical to another category, see section one). But categories shouldn't be disabled just because no demo entries for them have yet been submitted, right? E.g. multiple cats are disabled for E2M8 and MAP30, but is that because they are fundamentally impossible to achieve or "merely" practically very/too hard? For this demos layman it is difficult to determine why a category isn't available for, say, quite a lot of Hell Revealed maps, and to configure / handle that in the script. So I am not going to cover the no...= flags at all, and leave them for manual edits by other enterprising souls, or possibly myself. Is that okay?
  3. I discovered in the HR series that the two demo site links are included not in the External links section but elsewhere: e.g. MAP01 at the end of the Routes and tricks section, and MAP06 directly under the Speedrunning header. This happened right at page creation by Fredrik in 2005. To me the Speedrunning section actually seems quite a logical place, but perhaps there is a later policy to put all such links in the EL section? Does anyone have a strong opinion either way? If we want to change the section for the demos link(s), now would be a good time to decide, then I can still augment the script and apply the new choice in all map series.

--Xymph (talk) 06:10, 22 February 2017 (CST)