Doom Wiki:Central Processing

Screenshots category weirdness
Screenshots don't appear in the Screenshots category unless they've been edited, even though they get tagged to that category on upload. Is this supposed to happen? If not, what, if anything, shall be done about it? Draconio 20:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Map layout images
What program was used to make the map layout images that appear with the articles on their respective levels?
 * One by me, in my possession. Fredrik 17:58, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Is the script based on wad2pdf or is it an independant script? Ducon 19:10, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * It's based on Omgifol 0.2, which I still haven't released. Fredrik 19:51, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * When it’ll be released, I’ll send a link for it in linux-gamers.net. Ducon 16:22, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * http://www.doomworld.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31980 - Fredrik 23:35, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. Ducon 04:57, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Zdoom automap map layout images
Related to the above. How do I configure Zdoom so tath the colors of the automap match the pastel colors of the DoomWiki map layouts?

Source Ports section
The Source Ports category is a bit messy in it's current state. The Scripting Languages and ZDoom subcategories both contain some articles that are already in the Source Ports category. But, some of the articles that are in the Source Ports category aren't in the relevent subcategory.

For example, ACS is listed under Source Ports and ZDoom, but not under Scripting Languages. Should it be in all three categories? DooMAD 01:23, 10 Mar 2005 (GMT)


 * ACS should probably be listed under Source Ports, since it is not tied to ZDoom (ACS is from Hexen). Doesnt vavoom have ACS support?
 * It should certainly be listed under Scripting Languages. Fraggle 10:18, 10 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Editing tricks
It might be a good idea to start writing up editing tricks - Doomworld has a section about them here. Perhaps we could see about getting permission to include these here on the Wiki, or at least write up the same tricks included here. Fraggle 07:42, 13 Jan 2005 (PST)

I think it would be a good idea, and I am willing to start off with some things like hills\craters, etc. More    tutorials would be nice for those new. I remember how big a help the zdoom tutorials were. Jehar 5\11\05


 * I found the files with the editing tricks I found by myself time ago (about 6-8 years!). Some of them appear on doomworld, some others don't. Most of them are cool. The problem is, they are written on spanish. I should translate them first.


 * I also found a level I built to show many engine bugs, are you interested on it, too? CarlosHoyos 22:49, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WAD file uploads
JasonR has now enabled support for WAD file uploads (example: [[Media:Test.wad]]). This should be useful for editing tutorials. Just remember that all WADs must be put under the GFDL, so original creations only and no id content included. .lmp files are also allowed now, which means walkthroughs can be uploaded (but again, mind copyright) - Fredrik 13:04, 13 Jan 2005 (PST)


 * But there are LMPs with no bundled documentation at all (like the one under MAP01). Are they therefore copyrighted correctly by default, or should I delete them? Ryan W 20:53, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Writeups on people

 * Moved to Talk:List of Doom community people

#doomroom

 * Moved to Talk:Doomroom (IRC channel)..

Doom Wiki mentioned
Jimmy Wales mentioned us in his lecture at Stanford:


 * WikiCities is a separate for-profit company, that I own, and I don't usually talk about it in my Wikipedia lectures, but basically the idea there is, we've got all these great people in the community that know how to run a community. And there's all kinds of communities that could be formed that don't fit the educational non-profit mission of the Wikimedia Foundation. So, like one of the early active communities we've got is Doom. All about the Doom video game. We've got encyclopedia articles about Doom, yes, but there's tons of things people can collaborate on about Doom that don't really belong in an encyclopedia. And so that's a place for them to do that.

- Fredrik 19:42, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)


 * That is so cool :-) Fraggle 10:18, 10 Mar 2005 (GMT)
 * Heh that really is pretty neat :) --Insertwackynamehere 21:41, 31 Mar 2005 (EST)

Crazy level stats
So, I've gotten a program working to calculate area and volume for a level. Examples of useless trivia that can be computed: Any other good ideas? Updating existing level pages is a lot of work, so I'd rather finish the table layout before starting. - Fredrik 22:11, 25 Feb 2005 (GMT)
 * Average sector volume
 * Amount of volume occupied by monsters
 * Ratio of bounding box volume to used volume
 * Volume used in outdoor areas
 * Inter-WAD rankings

Format of recent changes page
What do all those exclamation points mean next to the article titles? I can't find it anywhere in the wikicities help. Ryan W 20:41, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * It means the edit has not been marked as patrolled. If you click the "diff" link on a change, at the bottom of the Current revision gray box, there's a link to Mark as patrolled. Bloodshedder 13:49, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Aha... thanks. :> Ryan W 02:02, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Any registered user can mark an edit as "patrolled", meaning they have looked at it and seen that it is not spam or vandalism. The idea is that others looking for such stuff can then skip looking at the same article. Further info is at . radius 21:24, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Procedure for clashes between games (doom/heretic etc.)
Some pages are likely to clash. E.g. E1M1 describes doom's first level, not Heretic's. which is E1M1: The Docks. Should we consider using disambiguation pages and namespaces? Note that megawad level-descriptions will clash unless the level's have been explicitly named too.


 * Making disambiguation pages of the ExMx and MAPxx pages seems like a good idea. Fredrik 21:17, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Before somebody starts in on 68 new small articles, does Wikicities have any sort of automated tool available for disambiguation pages? (Maybe they would be too ugly to leave permanently &mdash; things like this are obviously hand-tuned &mdash; but it would solve the problem in the short term.) Ryan W 23:05, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User comments
I think we should allow, and encourage, user comments in articles as well as entirely subjective articles -- this isn't Wikipedia after all. I think there would be no harm if people are allowed to post subjective reviews of WADs and source ports, anecdotes, etc. The NPOV policy from Wikipedia is good, but there's a difference. Wikipedia requires that opinions and facts have been published elsewhere, but original research is not a problem on the Doom Wiki. To keep NPOV, we should just separate comments from facts (e.g. a "Reviews" section is added to a page about a WAD), and signed. Of course, this shouldn't be used for discussion about articles. Thoughts? - Fredrik 18:47, 3 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * Yup, a newstuff 1994 WADs review? ;-) Ducon 20:08, 3 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * I was thinking something along the same lines. I'll keep my eyes open for an opportunity to test this concept -- Jdowland 20:22, 3 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * Beat you to it! - Fredrik 20:53, 3 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree, but I think this should only be for WAD reviews, etc. Factual articles (eg. monsters, weapons) I don't think should have comments like this. Fraggle 08:18, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I can't think of any good use of user comments for that kind of articles. Fredrik 09:10, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC)
 * How about an "add your comments on this wad" template? My only concern is that this may clutter the pages up a bit. Fraggle 23:27, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Adamizer writeup
Is this worth keeping? Fraggle 08:41, 5 Aug 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't think he meets the (admittedly vague) standard for being eligible to have an article. Bloodshedder 13:55, 5 Aug 2005 (UTC)


 * Me (Jon) neither. Suggest we write up some kind of criteria for people articles. Other trivial ones include Areith and Zorcher.

Deletions and moves
I'm getting disheartened at the number of very short, badly written articles that are cropping up. Most of these appear to be vanity articles. As such, I think we could use a procedure for nominating artices for the dust-bin. I'm not comfortable simply deleting the ones I don't think belong here, in case anybody else disagrees. Hence I stuck together Template:Vfd-person. I'd like to put together Template:Vfd too, but perhaps we need to iron out a deletion policy. I am still thinking about the best way to go about this, any opinions? -- Jdowland 13:57, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

We are the featured Wiki
A bit slow off the mark here, but we are the featured wiki on Wikicities for this month. Fraggle 11:11, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Nice! Fredrik 23:26, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * hoorj...who nominated us? Anyone? Bloodshedder 01:08, 10 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * I did. Fraggle 19:51, 10 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Let's just hope it doesn't attract more malicious users. - DooMAD 13:43, 10 Sep 2005 (UTC)
 * Good work everyone! -- Jdowland 17:48, 10 Sep 2005 (UTC)