This is an archive of my user talk page from 2014-2015.
- 1 Reasons to nominate an image for deletion
- 2 P.S.
- 3 Naming conventions
- 4 Message
- 5 Doom WAD Reviews
- 6 my emails
- 7 Hexen beta
- 8 common.css dead weight?
- 9 Sandboxes
- 10 License templates -- apology
- 11 Memento Mori 1 Map 13 Pending changes
- 12 Memento Mori 2 1 Map 29 Pending changes
- 13 GBA e1m1
- 14 Pending Changes and Change Summary
- 15 Notable Terrywads
- 16 Greetings
- 17 Hey, how can I get a hold of you?
- 18 Hello Quasar
- 19 How do I contact you?
- 20 Cite tag
- 21 In regards to the Doom 4 leaks
- 22 Movement of Template:Stub in Edidoom
- 23 This is a reply to your message
Reasons to nominate an image for deletion
Hi Quasar. Wow, did I hit my head on something and start to disagree with everything that everyone posts? :P Regarding this:
- the amount of benefit to the server from deleting files is minimal — Um, no one ever thinks about server load unless you or Manc mentions it. :> I think the power users trust you to flag problems, and have other things on their minds anyway.
- Deleting things just for the sake of deleting them has very little benefit. — What? It discourages people from using us as free hosting, and reduces clutter for the next person doing maintenance (who we want to be nice to, because they don't grow on trees). Orphaned non-free media absolutely needs to be deleted; I suppose I've made rare exceptions where the intended use is incredibly obvious. The MediaWiki developers have talked about "purging" deleted files on Wikipedia to improve performance, although they've never done so (except by accident during hardware upgrades), and indeed people have argued that deletions over a certain age be auto-purged so that even admins don't have perpetual access to the copyrighted content.
- the wikia version of this image currently has very high SEO — Newbie question perhaps: doesn't this contradict what we've done elsewhere, e.g. reorganizing Entryway, to improve our rankings by *differing* from Wikia?
Ryan W 16:26, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
- I probably gave the impression that I necessarily assume you're thinking the things I said, but I just wanted to explain some reasons that deletion isn't necessarily as large a benefit as it might seem while discussing that particular resource which, while certainly not vital, could be satisfactorily repurposed. As far as the "free hosting" point I have to agree, we don't want a sea of irrelevant things sticking around that have no use. Let's just make sure there's not a good use before we get rid of them. :) If server disk space were a concern (currently is not AFAIK) or we had a serious copyright issue, I'd consider purging deleted material in those cases. Right now we really don't have cause to think about it. For the wikia image, my reasoning there is that wikia's copy is showing up and ours currently is not. If we can bump theirs down and possibly even replace it, then that's good for us. I dunno if it will work or not. ;) --Quasar 18:03, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
- Um... no, I didn't get that impression. You have a right to your opinion (as would anyone else joining the deletion thread) that those points apply to that image. I disagree, but I also didn't want to sidetrack the thread with what I said above, which is really not about that image but about how we tend to assess our whole stock of uploads to date. If this post makes no sense then please ignore it; we've probably no chance of convincing each other anyways. :> Ryan W 15:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yup. Just an initiative put forward to me by fraggle (I dunno if he intends to participate himself or not) that we should start rewriting articles with the highest hit counts so that they differ substantially enough from those at our previous host to not be penalized for identical content. Never hurts to give them a good once over anyway and if it has an SEO benefit as well, then that's icing on the cake. --Quasar 17:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yep, I agree with this too. At last check I still had 1,045 items on my to-do list for the Doom/Doom II weapon and monster articles, plus 79 items for each notable map predating the source release, so hopefully I'll assist with some of that rewriting eventually... Ryan W 18:45, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I have seen you have created a redirect from Punch Dagger to Punch dagger. I would have moved Punch Dagger to Punch dagger instead, following the widespread naming conventions of this wiki. Sorry for nitpicking. What do you think? --Kyano 12:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- Probably so. If we do that, then Punch dagger should become a redirect. I just went for the quick fix because I found a broken link. Correct thing to do is delete the redirect I created, then move Punch Dagger to Punch dagger and the move should leave a redirect automatically. --Quasar 15:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Please take a look at your Doomworld PMs. :) --Gez 15:19, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Doom WAD Reviews
Just wanted to let you know that I now have Doom Wiki links to every PWAD article that I've reviewed via a cool graphic button courtesy of Esselfortium. I think. I'll try to keep it updated as stuff appears. Thanks for all your hard work. --KMX E XII (talk) 22:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Quasar, did you read my latest emails about bugs and suggestions for Eternity? I'm just curious about the current status of the source port and I haven't received a reply since some time. 22.214.171.124 21:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC) -FistMarine
- Your last message disregarded several of my previously expressed sentiments so I did not feel a need to respond. --Quasar (talk) 22:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Ok thanks for letting me know but I deleted my old emails, so I don't remember all I said. P.S: I am using neighbour's internet as mine is down, lol. -FistMarine
If you want, I can send you the store (early) beta of Hexen to compare to the PSX/Saturn ports as proof. I have the beta, and have played it, as well as all of the ports. There are currently no videos of it available, but that's because the beta is pretty obscure. The PSX and Saturn versions are also not well-covered with full-gameplay videos. But rest assured that the they are based (perhaps almost) entirely on the beta version. I wish I could record videos on my PC and from my game systems to provide the evidence, but lack the resources for that. But I am willing to let you see for yourself.
EDIT: Actually, look here as well: http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?p=543310#p543310. That post is consistent what this information.
- I have access to the betas, it's the PSX and Saturn versions to which I have no access. I am highly skeptical that either of the console ports are based on the betas; code-wise, I am certain that they are based on the final PC game. They may indeed use some abandoned resources from earlier versions, however, for some reason or another, and that would be easy to accept with the slightest amount of proof. As you note, though, I can't find any shots or videos of the Yorick's Skull or its statue for either game. Unfortunately this is an encyclopedia first and when we make bold claims as such, we want citations or visual evidence for them. Downloading the wad from that forum post only gives me a couple of sound effects. --Quasar (talk) 23:50, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
common.css dead weight?
Hi Quasar. On IRC you said:
- do you have a way to audit templates and articles for use of CSS classes? :P . . . things I don't THINK are used: "Help headers" styles, "Babel", "Forum formatting", "Standard Navigationsleisten", "For experimental Adoption 2.0 template", "More hubs styling", "remove talk link from forum namespace", and "TabView extension"
I believe that none of those items are invoked within those namespaces. Of course, some might not take that seriously, coming from me. My research suggested this method:
- when #blahblah is defined in common.css, search for "blahblah in dump
- when .blahblah is defined in common.css, search for blahblah" in dump
License templates -- apology
Hi Quasar. Sorry I kept posting about this crap when I knew I'd only be at the computer for 10 minutes and couldn't follow up to help you. That should be settled now, and I'm thinking up a proposal re this. I like the "physical objects" version you created — a sorely ill-documented part of Doom's history, it should definitely be covered in detail here. Ryan W (talk) 17:46, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Memento Mori 1 Map 13 Pending changes
Could you check the edits i made on MAP13: The Inmost Dens II (Memento Mori)? Since i made it two weeks ago, i guess you might have forgotten to do so.
- I took care of that one, didn't see any issues with it; I think it just slipped past. EDIT: Sorry I am a complete goofus. None of the other edits I had a problem with were by you, I'm seriously confused :V --Quasar (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
2 1 Map 29 Pending changes
Bumping again: I edited MAP29: Island of Death (Memento Mori) almost three weeks ago, but nobody checked it so far.
Thanks for clarifying it was from the Jaguar version. I added it by verifying it on GBA doom which I've acquired, but I had no way of checking the Jaguar version. RE having the list of changes in the article; I'd like the list of changes somewhere in the wiki, but the article could get unwieldy if the list grew too long, so they might need to be moved elsewhere. Perhaps in per-map articles (section 'different versions' or something) -- Jdowland (talk) 02:02, 22 June 2015 (CDT)
- I have a system envisioned where each of the normal Doom (and Ultimate/Doom II in the case of PSX) level articles will use a template that says something to the effect of This level has a console version' with it being wiki linked with some magic word/template/subpage magic being used to make the special cases iron out. So, for each map with a "Jag" (console really) version, there'll be a secondary article which displays the modified/simplified map, sums up the major changes (and minor ones too if it doesn't run on beyond reason), and shows both map pictures to enable visual comparison.
- I want to do something similar for the alpha/beta maps at some point as well, to detail their historical evolution during development.
- This is a huge undertaking though, obviously, and I have had it in the planning since late December.
- There are, actually, as far as I know, no differences in the maps between Jaguar, 32X, 3DO, and GBA, other than which maps are included. PSX makes some changes to many of them though. --Quasar (talk) 02:08, 22 June 2015 (CDT)
Pending Changes and Change Summary
Another one slipped past: MAP29: Kings of Metal (Memento Mori II). I always keep my edits in a text file until checked, then re-reading to correct if needed and then deleting from textfile when checked. (If it stays unchecked i wait at least for a week until i notice you.) Re-reading my edit of MAP07: Sickbay (Icarus: Alien Vanguard) i noticed that the change summary is:
Secrets: Coop with active player #3 (+#4), secret #2: thin crate stack is in the room's (south)east/Things: Replaced table
while it should be:
Secrets: Coop with active player #3 (+#4), secret #2: thin crate stack is not in the room's (south)east/Things: Replaced table
Sometimes i am a goofus too, creating typos and/or weird stuff. This time, i am sure, it must have been the heat. Could you manually fix it or should i simply make a minor edit to correct this summary?
- Nothing wrong with doing a minor edit; it'll get you to autopromotion faster and then you won't need to worry about me reviewing all your edits :V So far your stuff has been universally high quality so you deserve it anyways. I'm not sure how far off you are from it but it can't be too much at this point. We of course can promote people manually as well, it just takes special effort to discuss :) --Quasar (talk) 12:21, 5 July 2015 (CDT)
How may I get a hold of you? Need insight on a page edit. I'm trying to make it look closer to how it is on doom.wikia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Monkeyofeons (talk • contribs) 18:28 29 September 2015 (UTC).
Hey, how can I get a hold of you?
Is there any way of removing the name that was Doxxed from either Wikis? One of my friends told me to google my name. I had initially made the mod out of anger because my favorite mod (at the time) was in Doom World's infamous list (Matt Dixon's Gothic 99 which was VERY detailed/pretty/gothic), which I admit was childish of me at the time, but could you please remove my name from DoomWiki? I'll message Justice as well. I could have jumped in an played victim (especially in today's climate), because someone tried defending me (for the wrong reasons) on Doomworld's actual page, but I'd just like to stay out of all of this. I hope I'm not bugging you. -Dark Exodus.
And oh, if you need confirmation that I'm real, I can gladly provide proof or have one of my fans/friends (I SOMEHOW have a very small cult following on Youtube) attest that I'm real. And I can also provide other proofs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DarkExodus (talk • contribs) 18:41 29 September 2015 (UTC).
How do I contact you?
I just read the discussion thread on Spider Master Mind. I'm not trolling. I'm just...cautious and worried because I do suffer from depression and I don't want to be bothered by internet drama. I made a dumb choice when I was 14, but that was out of anger due to percieved bullying. And being bullied in real life, I felt that I could at least stand up to people who were being mean in a gaming community. I was wrong. So is there some way I can email you to have the information removed? Out of good faith? I DID read a message you sent Justice in 2013 where you mentioned that if information on here is hurtful, you would remove it. So please do so, Quasar. Please don't let this add on to my anxiety... If you need me to go on Skype and show you my legal ID I will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 07:19 30 September 2015 (UTC)
- Since there is a question about the information, I'll talk to the other admins and see if they agree removing it is for the best. If so, the article will be renamed appropriately and I'll take whatever other steps are necessary. Please be sure your future edits, if you plan to make any, are done in good faith and accordance with all of our Policies and guidelines --Quasar (talk) 09:21, 30 September 2015 (CDT)
- Thanks; it's part of our battle against the link rot (more details preserved about a source, the better, usually) and of course, an effort to be more encyclopedic. --Quasar (talk) 12:44, 26 October 2015 (CDT)
In regards to the Doom 4 leaks
They're mainly from the portfolios of Mark Bristol and Thao Le. If you don't like the idea of having an article focusing on the leaks, I can remove it.
- The article doesn't concern me as much as the files do. It's legal to write about things that happened but not necessarily to distribute leaked media. It's a fine line. Obviously I'd prefer to have the stuff myself, I just know that Bethesda/ZeniMax have been very unreasonable about it so far. Also, when this moves out of your userspace eventually it'll need to be named something other than Doom 4, as that's reserved as a redirect to Doom (2016) and we don't have plans to change that currently due to association of the term with the upcoming game by the public at large (something like "Doom 4 (abandoned concept)" would work however). Give us more time to debate the issue of the leaked media before doing anything drastic. I may have to review some legal stuff to see if fair use is safely possible in these circumstances. --Quasar (talk) 12:11, 23 November 2015 (CST)
Movement of Template:Stub in Edidoom
Moving of the stub after the infobox causes the infobox to be placed above the stub, which then causes all content to be placed under stub. The stub before the infobox causes the infobox and article content to be flush with each other under the stub banner. Thus what is currently there has much whitespace at the start of the article. Is this your intention? I currently use the MonoBook theme. GhostlyDeath 14:00, 30 November 2015 (CST)
This is a reply to your message
I understand that rapid edits aren't as good as larger, good quality edits. My edit for Doom's protagonist may have been a bit destructive however I have changed them again. the meaning for my edit is that there is a repeat of information within the first sentence. thanks for informing me of my rapid edits.