Talk:Whispers of Satan

Deletion
This is an unreleased project. It evidently has no publicly available demos. Therefore, it does not meet our WAD notability criteria.


 * Delete.   Ryan W 17:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, it might not be a bad idea to allow articles for projects from known authors that have screen shots or other signs of progress. Don't the IMDb and the Wikipedia often include entries on notable entertainment that hasn't been released yet? Who is like God? 21:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand the principle behind that idea, but I think in practice it would attract far more bad edits than good ones. An unreleased project of such significance will already have a thread at the Doomworld projects forum.  If it has an official site and posts an update with screen shots, we can put a link on the news board; that's why it's there.  To go beyond that and create our own article would just be rewording other people's statements, without being able to add anything ourselves because we can't see the maps.  It would also be in perpetual danger of misinterpretation as "The Doom Wiki is a community portal with free hosting and promotional space."  (Which, to judge by the content of Special:Newpages, is a very common perception already.)


 * My limited understanding of IMDb is that its notability criteria, and questions about whether a project meets them, are not open to the editorship at large but are discussed among a small committee whose decisions are final. I imagine that that greatly streamlines questions like "Who is considered a known author?" and "How many months of inactivity is acceptable before an article is deleted?", which would take us years to decide.  The wikipedia policy, WP:CRYSTAL, may or may not have broad approval there &mdash; it's hard to tell nowadays because the "BLP fundamentalists" tend to remove anything that looks like speculation about a living person, even when it has citations, so the prediction has to be impeccably sourced to survive the carpet-bombing.    Ryan W 19:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't worry so much. I'm sure us editors can judge notability well enough, and promotional activity (which isn't exactly a sin) would be limited by this and by any NPOV-oriented editing on the contributions. If the Wikipedia has Doom 4 and Solomon Kane articles, it can't hurt us to have one for the megawad-in-progress by the two main authors of 2002: A Doom Odyssey. We could add a category for it, in fact (the Wikipedia has various "upcoming" categories). We can of course discuss notability in this respect a bit further, so we can make sure there are few, if any, misunderstandings in regard to more doubtful WADs-in-progress, although I brought this up in relation to this WAD because I felt it is clearly notable.


 * In accordance to what I've said, I think we should keep this article. I think it should go through some editing, ideally; its contents should match external sources, and any statements about specifics should be contextualized (links to where stuff is said should be provided, that is, as inline citations if necessary). I know it may add work to editors, and not all entries might end up being perfect, but hacking out potentially reasonable articles out of fear that they may "go out of hand" doesn't seem sensible to me. Who is like God? 22:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)