Talk:Doom novels

Cover pictures
If I were to take a photograph of the books, would it be acceptable to upload it to the wiki? After all, the photo is mine and the books are merely the subject. I think it would be more acceptable than a scan, anyway... - Jdowland 15:40, 10 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Of course. You took the photograph, not the authors of the books. Bloodshedder 15:51, 10 Apr 2005 (EDT)

I think either is acceptable. On Wikipedia, album covers are considered "fair use", so the same likely applies to book covers. Fraggle 19:15, 10 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Ack well, my camera is busted this week :( I'll sort it out though. - 82.39.116.133 13:38, 12 Apr 2005 (EDT)

todo here

 * The Doom novels have been heavily criticised by some members of the Doom community. Much of the criticism comes from the ways the story differs from the game. - actually, the main source of criticism is that they're awful :)
 * add spoiler template
 * move the in-depth book descriptions either into their own articles or down beyond some kind of executive summary
 * add those darn cover pics
 * seems a bit off having a "differences" section seeing as the stories have almost nothing in common - a "similarities" section would be briefer ;)

-- Jdowland 16:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Might I also suggest:


 * transfer the "Doom novels" monster descriptions from the Doom/Doom II monster articles to here, because the monster articles are about Doom, not the expanded universe or Doom 3 or anything else


 * Ryan W 16:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

The books aren't awful. They expanded on a game which had minimal story backup at best. Nevermind that Final Doom had the aliens returning in a... space ship? How can they get from Hell to Earth in a space ship?


 * The problem is that they miss out one of the biggest aspects of Doom: HELL. As for the space ship in Evilution, I'll quote the manual "It was a bio-mechano-magical construct from the depths of Hell and It had come through space for its vengeance." -- TheDarkArchon 20:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)