Talk:Platforms Doom has been ported to



The list of platforms, in itself, is redundant with Games.  An extremely short overview of each, as is done here, could easily be added to Games without bloating it (precedent for formatting: Monsters, Weapons, Skulltag).  Ledmeister has demonstrated, of course, that much longer descriptions of similarities and differences are possible, but to go into that amount of detail we could always give each port one article, which I believe was the original intent of all the red links in Games (the author of this article has been turning those into redirects, misleadingly IMHO).

  • Merge.    Ryan W 22:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge. Bloodshedder 23:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge. -- Janizdreg 03:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge. Nuxius 07:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Well since this has been up for almost a year, and no one has objected, I am going to go ahead and merge some of this into games. Mostly taking info out this article and sticking it into pages that don't exist yet. I'll keep this one here, so if someone does have a problem, we can always revert. Nuxius 07:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright, almost everything is done, with the exception of:

NEXTSTEP -- One sentence does not a article make, me thinks. ;)

DOS -- Information is already in other places; redundant.

Doom 95 -- ditto

X-Box 360 - ditto

Playstation/Saturn -- Has some useful info, however a article already exists (for PSX), so they'll have to be merged. I'm working on it. Also, I'll split the Saturn info and put it into it's own article.

X-Box. For some reason, on the Games page, there are 2 entries for the 2 versions on X-Box. Well, both the GBA and PSX had 2 versions, and they are on the same page. I think for uniformity sake, the 2 X-Box versions should be one article as well. Does anyone have a problem with this? Nuxius 08:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Nuxius, the changes look great so far. I'd like to see the article deleted eventually (as opposed to leaving it here like you suggest) since it will probably be a completely redundant article. Also I'm a grammar Nazi and "Platforms Doom has been ported to" makes my eye twitch. ;) AFAIK deletions can be reverted as well. Zack 22:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Once the article splitting is completed, this article should be deleted. It makes no sense to have duplicated content. Fraggle 10:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
US$0.02:  Deletions can indeed be reverted, but I don't think that makes a deletion just another normal editing action.  When all the content in this article becomes either redundant or irrelevant, then by all means nominate it, but until then, each contributor should be able to evaluate the situation for themselves (especially important on this site, with the amount of almost-drive-by editing we attract).
AFAIAA the two Xbox releases are even more similar than the two GBA releases, so if the latter share an article, the former should also share an article.  The Playstation case is complicated by the fact that Williams swapped a couple of levels around between games (see here for some previous discussion).  DOS could redirect to Vanilla Doom.  I've read that the NeXTSTEP version was used during development, so even if the public release has no gameplay differences from the Linux version, we could still write about its history, similar to the Alpha articles — assuming of course that somebody outside id has ever seen it!    Ryan W 13:04, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify some stuff, I do agree that is page should be deleted; what I meant was that I'm not going to be the one to delete it. Anyway, I'll do like Ryan was saying and nominate it for deletion when I'm through getting the info I need out of it.

Also, I agree that NEXTSTEP deserves an article, I just think the lone sentence here shouldn't be that article. And since I know next to nothing about the NEXTSTEP port, I'm definitely not the person to write it. :p Nuxius 08:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Nuxius, how is this coming along? Have you gotten all the information you needed so that the page can be deleted? Zack 00:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I already have all of the info I need from this article. I was just waiting until I got all of the pages up elsewhere in the wiki before saying anything. Anyway, now that I am back from my vacation, I'm back to finishing this up (only have the X-Box article to finish up). So you can delete the article/nominate it for deletion/whatever. Nuxius 03:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and took the last article, the Xbox one, and made a quick stub out of it so we can finally get rid of this page. This way we won't have any more users making duplicate edits to both this page and the actual port articles themselves.

My suggestion would be to turn this into a redirect to Commercial_games.Nuxius 08:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that why you started this whole project, because we'd already gotten consensus for that at the top of this page?  :>   (Our own special form of consensus, which I keep meaning to write about on the policy page because it differs from Wikipedia's.)  If you think the new articles are ready, feel free to create the redirect.    Ryan W 16:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Renaming console version articles[edit]

One thing; the articles are all being called after the system name, when they aren't in general about the system, but about ports/adaptations of the games to those systems. I'm moving them to "(Console) version" titles, except in the case of Doom 64, where I've simply added a redirect from Nintendo 64 version for consistency and completeness. Naturally, all the original titles redirect to the new ones, so anyone typing the console names should get to the articles. I've also edited the Commercial games to go along with this. -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Who is like God? (talkcontribs) .

Well isn't that kind of obvious? This is a Doom wiki, after all. There aren't any basic system articles, and probably never will be (see Talk:Computer). I personally see this as entirely redundant. If a person isn't smart enough to realize that a article titled Sony PlayStation in a Doom wiki is about that particular Doom version, then I don't think adding version after it is going to make it any clearer for them. Heck, if you want to make it clearer and completely fool proof, you might as well go 'all the way' with it and title the articles Doom (Console Version), like Doom (PlayStation Version), for example. I personally think that makes for a far better article name, and is also completely fool proof. I don't think even the biggest idiot could confuse what that article is about. :p Nuxius 01:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Also, I went ahead and moved them back until we get a broader consensus over what the new article titles should be; if we do decide to change them. I'm O.K. with renaming them Doom (Console Version), if that's what everyone else agrees to, but I still think it's redundant in a Doom wiki.
On another note, I do agree that the Super NES article needs a rename one way or the other; it would probably be better off being named Super Nintendo or Doom (Super Nintendo version), to try to avoid the abbreviation. We didn't use them in any of the other articles. Nuxius 02:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
It may be obvious to us in general for the most part, especially as we're constantly reading the articles and editing them, but all sorts of readers should be able to access the site and do the least possible side-research when reading the articles. It also makes stuff messier and thus more likely to discourage people from reading in the first place. Additionally, the more little inaccuracies that add up, the harder it is to revert them (I had to edit quite a few things to make the changes). I agree the Doom (console version) format would be better/best. Talking about sloppy... I didn't sign last time?!
Anyway, pardon me if I seemed obtrusive or complicating with my edits, I was just trying to help. Who is like God? 02:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
No apologies needed. After all, I myself did something similar when I started moving everything out of this article into their own articles (see my talk page). I just like to get a general consensus before doing anything like this, and if most do agree that we should rename the articles to whatever, it would be easier for me/someone else to move them from their old location rather than the one you moved them to, to prevent redirects of redirects (which can get nasty).
Reading your first part, I see your point, and am inclined to agree with you now.
Thinking about that, what are your thoughts on Template:Console_Doom? We (Ryan W and I) recently moved the XBox levels into there. However, the top two levels (under Console Doom) are not in the XBox version (although they are in the PlayStation/Saturn versions). The thought had crossed my mind of someone getting confused and thinking the Console Doom levels were in the XBox version, however, I just assumed they would read the article and see that's not the case.
Thinking about what you just said though, maybe that's not such a good idea? I wonder what we should do with them then? I can't think of anything else to name the Console Doom levels, as they appeared in every console version of Doom with the exception of the SNES and XBox versions. On the other hand, I don't think that the 2 lone XBox levels constitute their own template, either. I'm open to suggestions. Nuxius 03:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
How about something like this?

Console Doom maps

Version key (click for full map lists)

GGame Boy Advance
SSega Saturn

(VERY sloppy draft; please fix cross-references if it is used.)    Ryan W 23:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks great to me, thanks Ryan. :) I'll try to tidy it up a bit with the necessary information and get it implemented tonight. Nuxius 01:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I just implemented a slightly altered version of this idea. Hopefully it's both a bit clearer and a bit more concise. :)Nuxius 08:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)