Talk:Entryway

Doom3 here?
Can Doom3 be mentioned here? Ducon 09:38, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * Of course. However, I think this wiki should focus on the classic games. If someone wants to get into detail I won't try to stop them, but the info should be labelled appropriately (for example, the Doom 3 monsters should have separate articles, like Doom 3 imp or Imp (Doom 3)). Fredrik 09:42, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * Does anyone else think that since there are seperate monster articles for Doom 3 (rightfully so, of course), there should be seperate ones for Doom 64? I know there's a Doom 64 Monsters Category... any objections to adding the rest of the D64 monsters to it? (i.e. Imp (Doom 64) ) The Doom 64 versions are different, after all. Kendricken 11:32 30 Jun 2005 (EST)
 * If we have no separate articles for Doom RPG monsters, then we shouldn't have any for Doom 64 monsters.   Ryan W 19:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * But we have sections in demons' main articles dedicated to their appearance in the Doom RPG... we can't also add sections for their forms in D64? Kendricken 18:32 5 July 2006 (EST)
 * By all means. Ryan is answering your question by saying "no, there should not be _separate_ articles". Fraggle 06:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it makes sense, I just thought seperate articles were a possibility seeing as how there are seperate ones for Doom 3. Sections are fine too, though. I look forward to working on those soon. Kendricken 19:48 6 July 2006 (EST)

The above discussion raises an interesting point: Why is Doom 64 linked to in the "Games & history" column, but not the GBA version, the Jaguar version, the SNES version, and so on? AFAICT, Doom 64 was singled out at that time because a TC had recently been released, but that's not getting any younger. (Neither is the Doom movie, though I would have no problem with an "Expanded universe" link in the "Community" column &mdash; which would take care of the comic book complaint as well.)   Ryan W 02:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The main reason why I think Doom 64 deserves to be there is that it has a full set of new levels, just like Final Doom. The new graphics matter too. Unlike all the other console versions, Doom 64 isn't a straight port. Fredrik 09:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, that makes sense. :>     Ryan W 12:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Are automap images copyrighted?

 * I was wondering if it is okay to upload automap images captured in doombuilder of the levels from doom, doom2, etc...
 * Of course, it's okay! Those maps can be seen on a bunch of sites, and the purpose is not to rip anything but to centralize informations. There is no possible spy activity, as far as the maps can be seen freely within an editor. You can make as many screenshots as you want of games and publish them (for free) everywhere, as long as you put also the origin and the copyright of the game (if there is one) if you publish it on another site unrelated to it. So, here is a site about Doom, and you don't have to recall that it's a copyrighted game. The copyright of a screenshot belongs to its creator!! Which means that we can't use a screenshot ripped to another site, because of this copyright. --Jive 03:47, 1 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * Appearing on "other sites" doesnt make it okay here. Everything on the Doom wiki is supposed to be available under th GFDL.  It is probably okay to display map images under fair use, although we should attach a tag informing the reader that it is copyrighted material. Fraggle 06:42, 1 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * If fair use is going to be invoked, doesn't that contradict what it says on the bottom of every edit page? ("DO NOT SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION!") (I understand that this is something people often argue about at Wikipedia, incidentally, so it's not like the occasional contradiction will make us look unusually stupid.) Ryan W 20:42, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Master levels
The master levels were officially released on the 25th of December 1995 as a game to buy on a full box, and was distributed by GT Interactive. You can also find it as one of the 3 CDs in "The Depth of Doom Trilogy". You can also buy it as a downloadable product -- Jive 01:58, 31 Jan 2005 (PST)

Related wikis
It may be useful to add a related Wikicities section on this wiki. See Wikicities:Category:Gaming and Wikicities:Category:Computing for some which may have a similar theme to this one. Also, see Wikicities:Category:English for other English language Wikicities. Angela 23:38, 27 Jan 2005 (PST)

Divers

 * database error when searching --Insertwackynamehere 08:08, 9 Jan 2005 (PST)
 * You can't search for words less that 4 letters long. It should work otherwise. I'll try to get the error replaced with a more useful message. Angela 09:22, 10 Jan 2005 (PST)

Name change
Renamed to Entryway. Since there are many fitting names for the forum, let's wait for input from more users... Fredrik 11:07, 4 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * I like 'Underhalls' for the 'Village Pump'. Ducon 23:50, 4 Feb 2005 (PST)
 * Yeah, I'd prefer 'Underhalls' to 'Central Processing'. Jdowland 19:58, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Did you know template
Added Template:Did you know for easy fact editing --Insertwackynamehere 19:17, 4 Feb 2005 (PST)


 * I suggest this for the next one -> On the original Doom II game, there was a level (MAP28) that could not be played on deathmatch, as there were too few exits for deathmatch. CarlosHoyos 20:40, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * That's not quite true. MAP28 had no DM starts, not exits (DM exits don't exist) --TheDarkArchon 14:21, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

DOOM cheats on Wikipedia
Somebody made a Wikipedia article about cheats from DOOM. It is currently being nominated for deletion. I would like a new Wiki to be made. This Wiki should be called Wikiwalkthrus. We can do a transwiki on that Wikipedia article when Wikiwalkthrus gets formed. --SamuraiClinton 03:08, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * That's great, but what do we have to do with this? We aren't going to be responsible for setting up another Wikicity; why don't you do it? Bloodshedder 04:08, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Level images with Wad2PDF
Should level images be drawn textured as produced by Wad2PDF rather than the current line art images? Pros: looks nicer, has monsters. Cons: may not work well in small sizes.

Maybe both images could be listed?


 * For what it's worth, I prefer the line art images; I believe they are easier to interpret, and certainly easier to annotate clearly (if, for example, you wanted to mark special locations on the map with numbers).-Ashley Pomeroy 19:30, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * The Wad2PDF versions would violate our copyright policy anyway, since they contain raw graphics.   Ryan W 02:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Forget it, we need to get this stuff integrated with Google Earth!!!!

-Advocate (Advocate@firstpersonshooters.org)

Three-monitor support
Ever since playing Doom V1.1 on the college networks, all those years ago, I've been fascinated with the -left, -right and -middle switches. They supposedly allowed you to place three monitors beside each other in order to create a wider field of view, similar to the arcade games Ferrari F355 Challenge or TX-1 and many others.

At the time I never got the switches to work, and didn't know anybody who had. They were taken out in V1.2 due to a change in the network code, and since then they have been completely forgotten, or were just never really understood at the time (like statcopy and control and other oddball switches). Using the "downgrade Doom to V1.1" patch I can't get them to work, but then again I'm not using a TCP/IP network or anything.

Can anybody confirm ever seeing anyone ever using -left and -right? A short article would be nice, and although it would be simple to mock up a trio of screenshots, it would be better to source originals. Did the left and right terminals also show the status bar and automap, or were they bare? Was there an indication that they were not the forward view?

Can anyone get this working with the technology of today? It would be fantastic if ZDoom or whatever allowed for multi-monitor support like this. Doom was years ahead of its time in that respect. -Ashley Pomeroy 19:10, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Tested it in latest dosbox, (dosbox.sourceforge.net). Works but is somewhat buggy and very slow even on seperate fast machines on a gigabit network. -left and -right works on they're own or in 2 'sessions'. Screenshots failed due to dosbox rendering, but I can probably provide photographs upon request. --zokum

Alice in Chains Homage?
The music for Map 23 in Doom II & "Them Bones" by Alice in Chains are very similar. I think we should use this as a "Did you Know?".-User:207.119.148.124 15:29, 31 Jul 2005 (MST)


 * The best approach to this would be to create a page about similarities between music from Doom and heavy metal tracks. Doom music covers might be a good idea? See here. I remember reading something about id employing Bobby Prince and John Romero dumping a bunch of heavy metal cds on his desk for him to cover. Fraggle 21:41, 31 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * Okay, but I stink at making these things. I pretty much supply some info, and hope somebody adds it. Thanks anyway. -207.119.160.238 00:55, 1 Aug 2005 (UTC)


 * My question would be, given that that link points to a Doomworld site (and therefore isn't likely to break for quite some time), what would we add by creating our own article about it? For example, is any one of our editors quite familiar with these albums and possessed of at least a passing acquaintance with music theory (i.e. not me), so that our article could enumerate the similarities in some detail?  Ryan W 20:01, 1 Aug 2005 (UTC)


 * I looked into the sub-adress and found that it was just a page inside one of those places for storing misc files and junk. I guess they linked to it before. -207.119.155.63 23:13, 2 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Doom Doom track 	Cover of E1M1: "At Doom's Gate" 	Metallica - "No Remorse" E1M4: "Kitchen Ace (And Taking Names)" 	Pantera - "Rise" E1M6: "On the Hunt" 	Believer - "Sanity Obscure" E2M1: "I Sawed The Demons" 	AC/DC - "Big Gun" E2M2: "The Demons From Adrian's Pen" 	Metallica - "The Call of Ktulu" E2M3: "Intermission From DOOM" 	Pantera - "Regular People" E3M1: untitled 	Pantera - "Mouth For War" E3M2: "Slough Of Despair" 	Judas Priest - "Leather Rebel" E3M3: "Deep Into The Code" 	Slayer - "Behind the Crooked Cross" E3M8: "Facing The Spider" 	Stormtroopers of Death - "Sargent D and The S.O.D." Doom II: Hell on Earth Doom II track 	Cover of Map01: "Running from Evil" 	Megadeth - "Hangar 18" Map07: "Shawn's Got The Shotgun" 	Slayer - "South of Heaven" Map10: "The Demon's Dead" 	Black Sabbath - "After All (The Dead)" Map18: "Waiting For Romero To Play" 	Pantera - "This Love" Map23: "Bye Bye American Pie" 	Alice in Chains - "Them Bones" Map25: "Adrian's Asleep" 	Alice in Chains - "Angry Chair"

Also download all the Doom mp3s at http://firstpersonshooters.net/

-Advocate (Advocate@firstpersonshooters.org)


 * We already have a page about this: see Music. Fraggle 15:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

How do I download and run Doom?
I can't believe that a whole wiki with over 1000 pages dedicated to the game doesn't tell you how to download and run it!

I'm constantly surprised how the most obvious thing to be on a website is often missing.

210.86.118.251 05:58, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * Downloading it? Unless you mean the shareware version, please don't ask for warez. As for running it? Read the manual. Using source ports like ZDoom is as easy as unzipping them to the Doom directory and double clicking their EXE file. Bloodshedder 06:06, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * Well it would be nice if there was a page that said what freely (legally) available versions there are, what the differences are and how to download and install them. It sounds like you need Rendering Engines and Networking Engines and some kind of DLL file. You seem to be implying you need a Doom directory (an empty directory, or a directory with Doom in it?) When I download the shareware version I can't get the sound to work (I don't know what soundcard I have)... but that's another story. I think people can probably figure it all out with enough time and piecing it together from the various snippets, but it would be nice if it could be a simple article &mdash; all in one place.


 * 210.86.118.251 08:42, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * How to play Doom on Windows XP appears to be what you are looking for. Fraggle 10:02, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * A promising name but no instructions. Just links to "Source Ports". I think I've figured out what you need to get doom running:
 * A "source port"
 * A Doom2.wad (either you buy the original or use something like Freedoom &mdash are there others?)
 * The level wad/s you want to run.
 * Then you unzip them all in the same directory and drag-and-drop the level wads over the .exe file. The Doom2.wad contains the graphics and if you use Freedoom, it's only half complete.
 * 222.154.121.148 05:08, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * A mostly accurate summary. I think you're right, this kind of info could be more easily available on the wiki, I'll think about how to achieve that. Drag&drop works for some source ports, I don't know if it works for them all (afaik, if you D&D a file onto a .exe, the exe sees the filename on it's argument list. Doom by default required a -file flag prior to any extra wads to load). Freedoom is probably more than half complete but it isn't all the way there yet (fancy trying out mapping, making sounds, or graphics? Help us out!). I don't know of another IWAD that you can use bar the official ones or freedoom. -- Jdowland 19:15, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Featured article?
How about adding a "featured article" section, similar to wikipedia? Fraggle 17:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure. What articles are of "feature" quality? Fredrik 19:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * How about something simple like Shotgun or the classic Ouch face :-) Fraggle 20:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * If it's worth anything, I vote E1M1's article


 * I'm no expert on graphic design, but IMHO this is difficult to do without stretching the front page across the linedef of incomprehensibility. Wookieepedia's looks better with it, e.g., and Memory Alpha's would look better without it.


 * I kind of agree with you. One thing that occurs to me is that the "did you know" section is similar to a featured article in some ways: I've always tried to come up with interesting trivia that would link to an interesting article with more information, for example.  We could maybe alternate between "did you know" trivia and featured articles? Fraggle 09:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * If we do have featured articles, I suggest we be careful about nominating level articles; many are still incomplete, formatted differently from WAD to WAD, and/or full of typos. On the other hand, I agree with Fraggle that the weapon/item/powerup articles are in fine shape, as well as certain technical articles (such as Ouch face and Doom rendering engine).    Ryan W 00:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Any idea...
...how to remove Hitler from the front page? Fredrik 00:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * You could erase the text in MediaWiki:Othercontribs, or maybe replace "$1" with a link to the history page, although that seems heavy-handed (and presumably there are good legalistic reasons for the existing content).


 * I notice that User:Adolf Hitler still shows up in the list even though he has already been permanently banned. Is there some kind of "purge" operation that administrators can do, which will remove him even from Special:Listusers?    Ryan W 00:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Uh...what? Where? In what skin? Huh? Bloodshedder 02:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * See the lowest right corner of the page. Janizdreg 02:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I still don't see anything mentioning the Adolf Hitler user or Hitler at all anywhere on the front page. Perhaps a screenshot is in order? Bloodshedder 03:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Here you go. I think the thing is only shown to people browsing the page with Mozilla Firefox. Janizdreg 03:59, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Doesn't appear for me and I'm using Firefox 1.5.0.3. -- TheDarkArchon 11:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * This feature (which is meant to show the names of the users who edited each page) has been turned off for now due to complaints about vandal names appearing there. Angela (talk) 11:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * It still appears on a certain antiquated machine I sometimes use (see screen shot). I hardly expect anyone to investigate that on my account, but I am reporting it anyway in case it is an indirect indication of a more substantial issue.    Ryan W 17:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Possibly a cache issue? I notice the date on your screen cap says 25 November 2006? A tech is looking into it, but it seems only possible to show if $wgMaxCredits is set... --Splarka (talk) 23:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * (Thanks for fixing the formatting.) 25 November 2006 was probably the correct date when I took the picture, but then the to-do list item saying "post this picture to Talk:Entryway" got reshuffled and misplaced as things sometimes do.  It's an intermittent phenomenon anyway &mdash; I'll think about reporting it, and go home to double-check, and find that it's cleared up, and then a month later it comes back.  It wasn't there yesterday, for instance.


 * The cache size is deliberately set to zero on both computers so that I don't confuse myself when double-checking large edits or viewing "non-expensive" special pages, as used to happen every so often. Granted, it's not out of the question that a Microsoft program could be compiling information in a place other than where it says it is, but so far the cache looks blank to me.    Ryan W 18:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

(De-Bump) Very weird. Okay, can you try some stuff for me?
 * Go to this header viewer and copy/paste the 'user agent' string to me.
 * Reload a page until you see the contributors thingy. View the page source and paste it into a http://p.defau.lt/new.html

--Splarka (talk) 00:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Does the order of these two steps matter? (It may not be possible to do the first one and then leave the same browser window open until the second one occurs, since another application would presumably crash the machine after no more than a couple of weeks.)    Ryan W 06:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Erm, are you saying the problem hasn't existed for a few weeks? "It still appears on a certain antiquated machine" seemed to indicate it was an existing problem. Just do step 2 then, for now. --Splarka (talk) 06:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Er, sorry, I made too broad a statement initially. Maybe better like this: "It still appears intermittently every few weeks or so on one of my machines despite officially having been removed at least 6 months ago as stated above ."  (I admit I hadn't considered the possibility that it was being temporarily turned on again for testing, or something... but if that were true, you would know about it, and respond instead by reminding me again to do my homework before posting.  :>    Ryan W 07:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * "but if that were true, you would know about it"... Well, if that were true, there would be no bugs, ever ^_^. If it happens again, let us know, and save the page source to a .txt file so we can examine it. --Splarka (talk) 09:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Chainki + Doom wiki
I'm the webmaster of Chainki and I have a few things: 80.200.134.194 11:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Just to introduce you folks to the Doom pages on Chainki
 * I'd like to request a link to these pages, but I don't know the best place on your wiki for such info
 * Unless you already have a set of organised link which does the same thing as the Chainki pages, why not make that the place for Doom links. I think you will find the editing software easy enough to get the hang of ;-).


 * I don't think there's really a place on the Doom Wiki where it would be appropriate to link to this page. Fraggle 16:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd rather the links were added to this Doom wiki rather than us just linking to a different site. Angela (talk) 22:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with Fraggle. Actually, I would go further and say that our criteria for website articles pretty much rule out any  association with this site: it seems to have no screening procedures to weed out redundant, vestigal, or vanity pages, and (judging by the FAQ) the maintainer in fact hopes to use more and more automation as the site grows.    Ryan W 22:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The Websites article still needs quite a bit of attention. We should probably focus on developing that, as ideal wiki style necessitates an article about each site.  I was hoping that the external link I posted to my own list of links would be temporary and that once the article had sufficient content, it would no longer be needed (because it's a pain in the arse to maintain  :p ).  Sadly, partly due to me being lazy, but mostly due to what is probably best described as a general lack of interest, the article hasn't grown much. - DooMAD 22:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Fuck!!!!!!!!!
I'm going to storm into Raven software right now with a big fucking chainsaw if they don't re-release Heretic. And it better be for $10 AUSTRALIAN.


 * Believe me, I know exactly how you feel, but what does that have to do with this site?   Ryan W 02:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well... Not much.


 * actually, I heard that there was a project to ask them to allow the doom community to build a re-release verion of HeXen... I'm not sure though...  CchristianTehWazzit


 * I'm working to convince them to release the source as GPL, but you'd still need to buy the game for the data. -- Jdowland 09:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

'Sewers' and 'Betray'
... Are the names of two levels created exclusively for the Collecter's Edition of Doom 3. Is there any information on these levels? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.129.0.163 (talk • contribs).
 * ClassicDOOM.com has info on both, including PC-playable versions of the two maps: XBOXSPEC.HTM: PC editions of bonus maps in Xbox Ultimate Doom and Doom II CODOR 23:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey.
Do you think this wad is notable enough for the Doom wiki? It seems pretty solid. 58.178.84.26 22:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * P.S. you can get the wad (ChrisWAD) here. 58.178.84.26 22:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Our current policy is that any released map can have an article.   Ryan W 22:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The fuck what?
What the hell is with the title? oTHErONE (Contribs) 00:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Vandalism. Right. oTHErONE (Contribs) 00:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Nazi Doom
Has anybody heard of this Nazi mod for Doom? Because it's used on a lot of hate websites. oTHErONE (Contribs) 06:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I hadn't. -- Jdowland 12:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, it's just a sprite replacement. It probably shouldn't be created... oTHErONE (Contribs) 21:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's notable enough to warrant an article, but if someone created one, provided it was clearly impartial etc., I wouldn't delete it. -- Jdowland 12:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Accueil/Entryway
When I click on the logo, Mediawiki sends me to the Accueil page. It’s the French word for the Main Page. Ducon 17:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think it should be doing that, but it's likely caused by you having French set in your preferences. I've added "Entryway" to MediaWiki:Mainpage/fr. Does that solve the problem? I can't test it since the logo always links to Entryway for me, even if I try changing my prefs to French. I'm not sure why it would be different for you. Angela talk 17:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, it solves the bug. Thanks. Ducon 18:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey.
Can an admin place semi-protection and page-move protection on Entryway please, this is getting stupid. oTHErONE (Contribs) 01:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
Some bugger replaced the whole of 'Entryway' with 'doom can suck my dick'. anyway i clicked undo, hopefully he doesnt strike again.

can the admin disable editing?


 * Thanks for reverting the page. Protection is only needed for severe cases of vandalism (see Help:Main page) but if the admins find they can't deal with it, it's possible to make the page editable only by registered users. Angela talk 23:29, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The other day I came very close to doing this, because:
 * Almost every edit is spam or vandalism (see thread here).
 * Reasonable people have argued that when the entire main page is replaced with a picture of a penis, the user in question will never be interested in editing constructively.
 * On the other hand...
 * Many IP addresses are dynamic, so a lot of legitimate editors tend to be shut out; while in theory such victims can request admin assistance, in practice it can be very difficult and counterintuitive.
 * Persons disrupting the Doom Wiki in this manner are presumably doing the same to as many other wikis as they can find. IIRC the people at central are working on a more systematized approach to identifying and blocking these users, which would solve 99 percent of our problem &mdash; we would only need to block each one temporarily until the multi-wiki behavior was noticed.
 * On balance, I think the last item trumps. Although I am generally not in favor of offloading work to the people at central, the fact is that they are in a much better position to observe and react to such phenomena.  Since the incidents on this particular site occur at most on a weekly basis, I think we can keep reverting them by hand until the global blocking policy is in place.    Ryan W 10:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

What...
How do you have 1500 articles on one video game series?!?! PatPeter 18:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't see anything that special about it, really. There is a huge amount of topics that can be covered even when dealing with a single game, such as enemies, weapons and items in the game, mods available for it, websites related to it, the game's designers, technical details about the game and its engine, and so on. Even this wiki could be a lot more comprehensive than it currently is. Janizdreg 21:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ya think? ;>     Ryan W 22:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, it's not just Doom that's covered here. 58.178.92.2 09:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The same way the Star Wars people have 50,000+ articles just for the OEM material.   Ryan W 22:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Another answer: because we have a big enough group of obsessive nerds willing to write all this crap! :-) Fraggle 01:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Heh, I'm not all that sure if I want to be called an obsessive nerd, even though I probably am one, more or less :P


 * I guess that to your average games dislikin' Joe this page is indeed a bunch of pointless crap, but I like to think that especially for a Doom fan this is one of the most interesting (Doom) sites available. And yes, I know your post was a joke of sorts, but I just had to reply to your amusing and IMO quite fitting comment. Janizdreg 01:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

FirstPersonShooters.org
I propose some sort of collaboration/merging of this wiki and my site. I run FirstPersonShooters.net as an FPS Encyclopedia, but .org is as of yet unused except by being forwarded. It is meant to be a social site for "rabid fans" of the genre.

-Advocate (Advocate@firstpersonshooters.org)


 * Oh, and it's all completely free, non-commercial, etc. I will eventually have ads up but they will be a) relevant b) non-intrusive c) any money made will be put back into the site 100%


 * If you have some useful information to add to the wiki that isn't already here, by all means feel free to do so. Looking at your site though, your pages about Doom seem fairly basic and it doesn't look like there is much information there that would be of use to the Doom wiki.
 * Also, bear in mind that this is supposed to be an encyclopedia of information related to Doom. If you have information or material on your site that you feel is relevant to link to, then please do so, but please do not abuse the Doom wiki to advertise your website (you should bear in mind that all external links on wikia have rel=nofollow set on them, so adding links here will have no effect on your Google ranking. Fraggle 15:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

As every fan of Doom is also the fan of some other FPS, I'd say they'd like to know about it. The Doom page(s) are rather basic, most of them are, but that's only because it's a one-man show. I'll be adding more 'til the end of time. But, it's an encyclopedia as well, so eventually it'll have everything that's here, and the equivalent for every other title as well.

Anyway, spam is mis-used to apply to another free, fan-based site.

-Advocate (Advocate@firstpersonshooters.org)

New Main Page design
I created a new design for the main page: Entryway/New. Does anyone object replacing the current one with it? You can edit it and improve it, of course. Ausir 03:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I like it - it's certainly more professional looking than the current one. -- Janizdreg 16:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I could go either way... there really aren't any obvious deficiencies in the current version, but on the other hand I can see why a lot of people would prefer a more "professional looking" page. Two minor adjustments I might make, to address things that have turned out badly in the past: do not say "edit this page to your heart's content", and definitely do not encourage first-time contributors to create new articles.  (Maybe put a search box there instead?)


 * Also, Ausir, while I appreciate how much work it must have taken to put this together, our wiki is far too small and too infrequently edited to make such a major decision in 14 hours. Give it two weeks, at least.    Ryan W 18:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd say shift the navagation to the left. I think it makes more sense that way. - InsanityBringer


 * Well, it's a wiki, so I just went ahead and changed it, although I understand why you reverted it. If you want to change anything, go ahead and edit Entryway/New. Ausir 00:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks pretty good to me, but I'd make a few changes. To begin with, there really is no need to show the logo twice on the main page. It's "The Doom Wiki", not "Doom Wiki", and I don't like small caps. There are also perhaps too many thick borders in those boxes. Fredrik 04:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think we should cut the whole top off the page. I don't like the text at the top - "We are creating the gamers' guide to the Doom games, and you can help!" sounds a bit too manic to me, and we already have a welcome message anyway.  Having the Doom wiki logo at the top is redundant, because it's already shown at the top-right of every page anyway.
 * I agree that the "create article" box probably isn't a good idea and that a search box might be better. Fraggle 23:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I edited the page somewhat. How do you like it now? -- Janizdreg 14:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd still say move the navagation to the left -- InsanityBringer/Rmalec


 * I disagree. IMO the welcome text should be the first thing that a new reader sees, so it makes sense that it's in the top left of the page. The navigation is the second most important thing, and it should be on the top part of the page, right after the welcome text, where it is now. So all in all I'd say the new main page is now ready to be put to use. -- Janizdreg 18:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * * shrug*  No objections.  If I'm in a really bad mood one day I might add some links at the bottom for games that existed before the PS2.   :>    Ryan W 04:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I edited the links to mostly point to wikis that feature other video games released in the 90's. Though we should probably vote for what games wikis we link to, I think. -- Janizdreg 22:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * That remark was meant only semi-seriously. Certainly the most active wikis, and therefore the ones most prepared for new participants, will usually be about recent games.    Ryan W 00:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Even though you were kidding, you had a relevant point - 90's games tend to have a lot more in common with Doom than those being released today, which is why I think we should mostly link to wikis about these "old" games. Of course there are exceptions to this "rule", and links to wikis about games such as Serious Sam and Painkiller could very well be featured here, if such wikis existed on Wikia. -- Janizdreg 00:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Did you know template
Now that the new Entryway design is in place, a question has popped up in my mind; should we delete the Did You Know template or modify it to fit the new design? -- Janizdreg 13:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I just modified the template and the old Entryway design so that the template is usable in both the new and old design. -- Janizdreg 13:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I sure can't tell the difference, which means &mdash; good programming job!  :>    Ryan W 20:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
You're all invited to participate in the FPS WIki (http://firstpersonshooters.org/wiki/) It will eventually incorporate everything found on Wikipedia, The Doom Wiki, The Halo Wiki, and any others I can find.

I hope you exercise as much concern and care there as here. My sites are Both for the good of the community above all. I offer them and my thousands of hours spent working on them to you all gratis. Help & Enjoy.

Advocate@firstpersonshooters.org

Files list
Ha, what about creating a page listing all files (sounds, graphics and etc) with a description of them, like what we see in the Status Bar page?


 * US$0.02: Those are resources, not files.  Each corresponding lump probably already has an article (if not, that should be fixed first!).  Given this, a brief glossary with links to the detailed lists (like the status bar list) might well be useful for cross reference.    Ryan W 20:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

New color scheme
The new style seems like it might be consistent with the way a professional looking page should look, but I feel the headeres and stuff are a little too strong in contrast with the white background. Actually I liked the old style; it was warm in a subtle way. Opinions? Zack 03:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I reverted the JoePlay's edits and put the old colors back for now, since these type of changes should be discussed before put into use.


 * I think JoePlay's color scheme makes Entryway have too much contrast (as Zack mentioned), plus it obviously looks very, very bland. Instead of altering the Entryway color scheme, I'd suggest that we disable the Gaming skin, which makes Entryway almost unreadable (this in turn was the reason for JoePlay's edits in the first place). -- Janizdreg 05:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, if you want to keep the main page the way it was, I would agree that disabling the Gaming skin is the way to go, because the text is virtually invisible (except for links). Of course, you'd be forcing anyone who is used to the dark look of the Gaming skin to adjust to the brightness of the other skins (not to mention not being able to read the main page), but it's your call and I respect that. Personally I don't see any problem with having transparent backgrounds for the main page's content blocks, since the text would still be easily readable with the lighter skins, yes? I do agree that the darker color that I tried out for the headers may be too much contrast when using the lighter skins. My apologies for that. JoePlay (talk) 21:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)