Talk:Deathmatch Revival: 35 Cross Compatible Maps By The Doom Community

Nomination For Deletion
I did a quick google search and what I mostly saw was forums threads about this, most of which, don't have many replies except for the thread on Doomworld. There were search results for another website that talks about it, but has an untrusted connection, and also an page on Moddb. This wad was recently released on the idgames archives with just six votes and no Cacoward nominations. Plus this page including the uploaded video and pictures was created by one of the authors as self promotion for something he contributed. Delete. Justice ∞ (talk) 00:46, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

I just wanted to add one more thing that this article is poorly written because I see sections telling you where to download it, and parts of the wad text file are also added to create unnecessary fluff trying to make the article more interesting. The person who created it probably didn't read the Wiki's policies and guidelines. Justice ∞ (talk) 00:56, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Hi Justice Infinity, since you are a moderator I respect your request for a deletion of my article. First and foremost, I am new to the Doom Wiki and I did read the rules/guidelines to posting articles on this site. This deathmatch megawad has been released about a week ago and yes it does have 6 ratings (currently holding a 4.5 star rating) along with 1 written review on /idgames. There are quite a few thread of the megawad with over 10,000 + views on forums such as Doomworld, Zandronum, Odamex, and ZDaemon. Although it has not yet become a household name, there are a good amount of people from the Doom Community who have at least heard of the name "Deathmatch Revival" and have played it online via ZDaemon, Odamex, and Zandronum. Based on the "Deletion" section from the rules and guidelines. I don't see how I am violating anything.

1) Nothing is stolen from copyright protected material.

2) Images are original shots from the megawad (nothing is from the Doom 2 IWAD).

3) The article is relevant to Doom Wiki because it is a custom Doom PWAD made by members of the Doom Community.

4) The article is written in third person.

However, now that you mentioned the part that it was "poorly written," I do have to agree that it is somewhat sloppy. Though, sections can be edited, especially regarding the copy/pasted notes from the test file. The download link can be removed, but I would like people to know where it is available for download. The maplist is legitimate and I don't want that to be removed. Everything I wrote that was copied and pasted from the text file can be removed (such as the DMR copyrights and permissions).

If there is anything else that I may have failed to mention in my defense to this deletion request, please let me know. Again, I am new to this site and my intensions were not to spam or troll. I would like to gain a better understanding of what articles are acceptable/unacceptable. Thank you. DG93 (talk) 20:33, April 10, 2014 (UTC)DG93


 * Figures you didn't read the guidelines first when you should of of had. Part of the front page even said "New contributors should read our policies and guidelines and Wikia's tutorial first." The wad as you stated was released a week ago. The amount of views that the threads got as already talked about in my first message is not enough. Same thing with the fact that you claim "a good amount of people from the community know about this wad and has yet to be a household name." It hasn't been released long enough for it to even be deserving of an article. Now let's go over your point on why I should keen this article.

1. Still is not a good reason for me to keep the article.

2. Again same reason I nominated the images for deletion because they have something to with an non notable wad.

3. There are even community projects in the past that are not notable for articles. Deathmatch Revival is another example an community project that is undeserving of one.

4. You still wrote yourself since you are one of the authors of this project. That video of yours that you uploaded, but never used for this article is an prime example of your self promotion and that kind behavior is generally frowned upon. It's different if you were notable, but that is not the case here.

Well that's it for my counter arguments against your points. I suggest you read the Doom Wiki Policies and guidelines if you haven't, specifically where it talks about things that may have articles. If it isn't notable, it probably shouldn't have an article. Justice ∞ (talk) 05:18, April 11, 2014 (UTC)

You're right since it isn't that well known. Please delete the article along with the photo/video uploads. Again, my apologies for the inconvenience and time I may have taken away from you. I won't upload anything on this site again. DG93 (talk) 17:13, April 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * I've already done a bit of needed copy-editing to the article, correcting spelling (implimented->implemented) and converting the date in American format (most of the world, including parts of Canada, uses European, but that's just as ambiguous hence is not suitable either) to International. — RobertATfm (talk) 21:34, April 10, 2014 (UTC)