RE: Mentioning The other Doom Wiki
Okay, thanks for the message. I'll refrain from promoting/mentioning forks on the Wiki.
- Why can't you do it yourself? Again this wiki is not the place to ask for feedback or opinions on what should be on the next update for Doom. That's not what talk pages are for, instead you could of created a blog, but want me to tell them about the new update you just wrote. Justice ∞ (talk) 05:23, April 11, 2014 (UTC)
- Okay, I will make a blog about Doom iOS update, but if you like it, just tell id software to do the update. I will reply.Pileofdoodoo (talk) 21:24, April 11, 2014 (UTC)
Potential E3 Questions
Hey there Justice Infinity!
My name’s Mike and I’m with Wikia’s gaming ComDev team. Just wanted to say hi and ask you a quick question about E3. As you might know, E3 is one of the biggest game conventions of the year, and it’s right around the corner. We may have the opportunity ahead of the show to interview Bethesda, and we’d love to ask them any questions about Doom 4 you or the other admins might have.
Here’s an example of a community interview we’ve done before: http://xcom.wikia.com/wiki/File:Expert_Showcase_Special_Edition_-_XCOM_Enemy_Within We really like letting Wikia communities ask the questions, because they’re very knowledgeable about their game of choice, and ask extremely in-depth questions that regular news outlets don’t.
If this sounds like something you’d be interested in doing, feel free to submit any questions you have here, or directly to me at email@example.com Hope to hear back from you soon, and thanks again for all your edits & contributions to The Doom Wiki!
So a few years back I wrote two horror novellas based on the first two episodes of Classic Doom, which seemed to be pretty highly praised over at the Doomworld forums, but I don't know if that qualifies them as article-worthy for the wiki. Can you help clear this up for me? I don't mean to toot my own horn or anything, but a lot of community folks said they were better than the official novels, so I wondered if maybe they ought to be listed here. Thanks for your time and patience! --Mikemacdee (talk) 05:19, May 10, 2014 (UTC)
- What are the names of the horror novellas? I'll think about it is those novellas qualify for articles. My apologies for the late reply, I just haven't been that active around here lately. Justice ∞ (talk) 05:00, May 16, 2014 (UTC)
I've decided to rename myself from Jack101 to "Darsycho", what should I do with my article?
- Rename the article to "Darsycho" and be sure to leave a redirect behind. Justice ∞ (talk) 05:00, May 16, 2014 (UTC)
Xcalibur201's "reworking" of the Hexen content
I have been wondering, since Xcalibur201 never finished the "reworking" of the Hexen pages he started three years ago, and since his "reworking" involved deletion of most of the pages' contents, did he ever seriously intend to improve those pages, or was it just an episode of disguised vandalism? (After all, as I pointed out on his talk page, it was not necessary to remove those contents in order to work on them offline; they could have remained in the articles until the time came to replace them.)
Since his "reworking" amounts to a massive vandalism episode (whether intended or not), and he never responded to the legitimate concern I raised on his talk page, and there is no sign that he will ever finish his "reworking" by restoring the "reworked" content, I have blocked him (but not blocked his editing his talk page). If he apologises, and asks for his edit rights back, and promises that he will never pull this kind of stunt again, he can be unblocked; but if not, good riddance (IMO). — RobertATfm (talk) 13:25, June 3, 2014 (UTC)
- There's the possibility that Xcalibur has lost his interest with this wiki, that's why he didn't rework and of the articles that he's promised to do. It's strange that he didn't reply or doesn't care is he's blocked since that goes back to my first sentence of me saying he's lost his interest in the Doom Wiki. Justice ∞ (talk) 03:36, June 6, 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, Xcalibur201 has returned; but instead of asking for his block to be lifted as he should have done (which is why I left editing his own talk page open), he decided to dodge aroung the block with a new account, Bigdan201, which he has used almost solely to remove "his" content (which actually belongs to FANDOM, under the terms he agreed to when signing up) — thereby confirming my original idea, that his most recent edits were thinly-disguised vandalism. Hence I have now blocked his new account (as it violates FANDOM T&Cs), and am giving him one more month to justify himself, before I also remove his privilege of editing his own talk pages. — evilquoll (talk) 03:18, June 17, 2018 (UTC)
Firstly, new user User:Baggins has made a few changes including moving "Doom's protagonist" to "Doom's protagonists" and "Timeline" to "Doom history", the latter in order to create a new "Timeline" article. The former change seems sensible, since the protagonist of the first two games may not be that of the movie and certainly isn't that of Doom 3, but I don't know where he's headed with the Timeline article.
Another thing is that I have found myself in sole command of this wiki a lot recently, which is somewhat uncomfortable especially since I'm currently having technical problems. Time for a third admin? Another new user, User:"Liz" LA-775, appears to me as if she might be a suitable candidate; she is certainly enthusiastic enough. — RobertATfm (talk) 12:18, June 5, 2014 (UTC)
- Personally there was no need to rename the Timeline article to Doom history since it was named that for years, same with Doom protagonist. Yeah Liz seems to be a good choice for a third admin, I'll talk to her and see if she is interested in becoming one. Justice ∞ (talk) 03:36, June 6, 2014 (UTC)
- I've went ahead and renamed the Doom history article back to what it's supposed to be called and deleted Baggin's version of his timeline article since it seems pointless to have a timeline based on the events within the actual Doom games. Justice ∞ (talk) 04:15, June 6, 2014 (UTC)
Hello. The person you just IP blocked was my friend Nambona890 from Neo-HC. The information was real and it was proven he made those two wads because of a message from UltimateAVGN. The message was sent to Stargazer626, one of the members of Neo-HC. So please unblock him. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs) 14:45, July 19, 2014 (UTC+1).
- The reason why I reversed the edit and blocked your friend is because he tried to add the information twice without giving people any kind of proof that Terry made those wads. If what you are saying is true, then how come he hasn't updated his channel description that says so otherwise. If it's not verifiable, then it shouldn't be added to the article and that would be considered false information. Unless I see some proof that he made those wads, there's no reason for me to re-add the information back onto his article. Justice ∞ (talk) 02:42, July 20, 2014 (UTC)
Re: Raw Images of Monster Sprites
Okay. Sorry for uploading photos with transparent backgrounds. Guil Cat Lewis 23:34, September 18, 2014 (UTC)
I'll accept your removal of my edits from the "Knee-Deep in the Dead" page because you're an admin, but can you at least explain to me why you did that? You guys list the Kongregate version of the shareware release of Doom, but I'm fairly certain the Newgrounds version was uploaded to the internet before that. Do you have anything against Newgrounds or something?
184.108.40.206 22:31, February 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Because there's already a link to the newgrounds version in the article. There's no reason to have another link to in the middle of that specific paragraph. I have nothing against the Newgrounds, but what I also did was, remove the redlink to newgrounds since I don't believe the website is qualified for an article. Justice ∞ (talk) 02:34, February 20, 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the explanation. I appreciate it.
- 220.127.116.11 04:30, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
Re: Doom Novellas
Thanks for finally getting back to me (guess we're even since it took forever for ME to reply as well). The novellas are simply named after the original Doom episodes, but can all be read here. I went ahead and added them to the more up-to-date wiki, under The Plutonia Experiment (Series). --Mikemacdee (talk) 11:16, March 12, 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering why there are pages here on game other than DOOM? Shouldn't those pages be confined to there own wikis?
- If you know of any page which is not of any of the Doom games, not one of the games which use any of the Doom engines (Heretic, Hexen and Strife are all based on iD Tech 1, same as Doom, hence belong here; but Hexen II is a Quake-engine game, and Alien Cabal uses an engine which resembles iD Tech 1 but was written from scratch, so neither of these belong), not a page for a thing found in one of the official games (and not even all of those belong; the articles on Thirsty Burst and Robo Cola were deemed not to be notable), and not a mod for any of the official games, by all means let us know of the problem. — RobertATfm (talk) 16:33, March 12, 2015 (UTC)
Doom 4 Weapon Articles
Can I start making pages for the weapons of Doom 4? I mean the gameplay is out and I could take good screenshots from the download trailers?
- Sure go right ahead. Justice ∞ (talk) 06:10, June 21, 2015 (UTC)
Doom 3 Images
With regards to uploading new images, should I just upload a new image in place of the old one (such as the one I did for T. Brooks), or upload a completely new one and delete the old version (if, say, the newer image looked significantly more different than the older version. Sergeant Blige (talk) 12:49, June 22, 2015 (UTC)
Won't let add pages.
For some reason the wiki won't let me make any new pages. It says I need the protected permission. I wanted to make the Railgun page for Doom 2016 but it wouldn't let me. May I make the page?
- I protected the page a few years ago when I was deleting pages for Skulltag weapons which aren't official. I've unprotected the page so you can go ahead and create it. Justice ∞ (talk) 00:30, August 5, 2015 (UTC)
The new game footers are brought to you by Encyclopedia Gamia and our very own Games Hub. The basic goal is simple: draw together Wikia communities in one location that enjoy the same genres and hopefully expose them to some new games and communities they might be interested in. Our secondary goal is to try and connect editors looking for help with members and administrators from other wikias who are interested in helping them out, whether it be with content, technical knowledge, or insight gleaned from running a community.
If you haven't already been approached, feel free to include your site in the submission section below in the genre you feel is most appropriate for the game you cover. Note that, with rare exception, a game should only be placed in one footer.
Here are some other things to consider:
- A member or members of the site should be willing to help those that might ask for assistance in creating their own wikia. Obviously this is at member discretion; members aren't absolutely required to answer every request for help, nor should they if the query is unrealistic and/or no one has the know-how.
- Any site participating in the footer will have a page created on the Games Hub for their franchise for more exposure. Members are encouraged to double-check this entry once it is live and may take ownership of the page.
- Any site participating in the footer will have each individual game in their franchise created on Encyclopedia Gamia for more exposure. Members are encouraged to double-check these entries once they are live and may take ownership of the pages.
- Backgrounds are transparent and links/text are set to match the site's settings.
- The new footers are mobile-friendly.
- Though intended to stretch the entire width of a main page, the footer can also fit into the left rail, if so desired.
In most cases a game can fit into multiple categories, so the best should be chosen when possible that most closely matches the genre. Rogue-like games, for instance, aren't included because many games feature stealth elements. Instead, they can be found within the Action-Adventure footer.
Should the situation arise where another footer is potentially needed, one may be created, but only if 1) the genre can't be included in any other category and 2) there are enough games for the footer.
For footers that were created and maintained by Wikia staff, these will be replaced with the new footers.
Footers created by users will not be touched at this time.
Hi, Justice Infinity!
I was wondering if you had an opinion on this site being included in the new gaming footers? We'd love for the Doom community to be included!
Hey, any way I can PM you on here?
Hey Justice. Thanks for cleaning up the page and removing the doxx. If you have admin, you could delete the original page, since it's still accessible (and a redirect). For example, if you google the doxxed name, it still pops up WITH a redirect that shows a name for the Doom Modder that was banned.
Can i copy and translate all yours wiki to polish wiki?
Hey are you doomguy 2000? You look very different. I have played your Warzone Wads i like them! keep it up. 18.104.22.168 08:52, March 16, 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah it's me. I don't do much on this wiki nowadays and will only show up when it's needed. I look different because of the avatar I use here. Justice ∞ (talk) 21:43, March 17, 2016 (UTC)
Message about Shawn Asking if he can become Admin
- Not going to happen because you haven't done anything yet plus I don't think you would be a good admin. Justice ∞ (talk) 02:11, March 10, 2017 (UTC)
Re: Your Edits
What edits are examples of constructive edits you cannot revert? I thought about putting "E1M2 Nuclear Plant was used for Bill Gates' Windows 95 promo" in the trivia section of that page, since such ordering is better. Why did you revert all my edits for E4M2 Perfect Hatred? I added a new walkthrough for that level, which is a constructive edit, and no one should revert constructive edits.--Superchargecacodemons800 (talk) 20:43, May 27, 2017 (UTC)
- I revert those edit mainly because they are from a POV perspective instead of being in a formal tone. For example, saying something like "I'm really sorry that I cannot be more specific, but unfortunately that's just how the designer of this map designed it to be played, @ a faster pace than normal." is not something that's constructive. You've also redirected Blood (a page that been there for years) to Damaging floor. Again, I still have to go through all of your edits to see how many I may need to revert. Justice ∞ (talk) 00:51, May 28, 2017 (UTC)
- Welp, "E1M2 was used for Bill Gates' Windows 95 promo" is in the gameplay text area, while it is not really relevant to statistics (e.g. Designer, par time, music track, etc.) On doomwiki.org, for E1M2 Nuclear Plant the fact that "Bill Gates was in the level for his Windows 95 promo" was rather put in the trivia section, I like such ordering where non-gameplay facts are rather in the trivia section. I hope you tolerate such edits, because what I requested is wiki-like ordering.--Superchargecacodemons800 (talk) 17:25, May 28, 2017 (UTC)
- I was more concerned about your POV edits when I came to you adding new walkthroughs and other questionable things. Justice ∞ (talk) 19:00, May 29, 2017 (UTC)
- By the way I was using talk pages for commenting, because I'm afraid the Comments feature is disabled. If it was enabled, then I would comment my opinion or my experience about that item. Also on my own wiki - I do not want you to edit my POV articles, because that's my own wiki and I can do whatever I want on it. If you see POV, then please just ignore it and only edit some typos (for example me mostly mistaking powerful as powerfull), or if you are going to create your own walkthrough or a page that is relevant to any part of the Doom universe or my own DOOMWAD! Also why did you revert my edits for key? I did NOT use ANY POV perspectives (e.g. I, me, my)! Also why did you revert my new images for Stimpack, Medikit and Megaarmor? Superchargecacodemons800 (talk) 01:16, May 31, 2017 (UTC)
- It's because this wiki doesn't have a comments section. That's why some of the talk pages you've created have been deleted because none of them had anything to do with the article itself. I was going to say that you can use your own wiki of create your own if you hadn't done that yet. The best solution for me was to just simply roll the edits back to the previous user. I reverted you edits for key because the edits were nonconstructive. I could also say the samething for those three article you've mentioned is because we already have image for those thing and there's no reason to replace those images. I've kept the one for Green Armor because I think that was better then the previous image. Also you should read the Policies and guidelines because I assume you haven't yet. Justice ∞ (talk) 23:27, June 1, 2017 (UTC)
False Doom cheat codes
So, I seen you blocked ChineseMarioMaker for inserting false idkkdowning cheat into Doom cheat codes, where the block was for 6 months. I also please you to revert his edits, because I can no longer revert vandalism? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Superchargecacodemons800 (talk • contribs) 00:01, June 16, 2017 (UTC+1).
- I didn't say anything about not being able to revert vandalism. I blocked ChinesesMarioMaker because of his vandalism. Justice ∞ (talk) 02:18, June 16, 2017 (UTC)
Revert my removing-POV edits
Why did you undo my edit just because I replaced POV perspectives with formal tones (exact article I'm talking about is Making a switch)? If I cannot use POV perspectives, the authors of that page cannot! It's not really fair if someone cannot use POV perspectives but another one can!--Superchargecacodemons800 (talk) 20:32, June 22, 2017 (UTC)
- Because the edit has been fine for a decade and there was nothing wrong with that. Plus the guy who made those edit to that page was an admin. I see you once again had to use a POV on another article when I specifically said I didn't want anymore of those kind of edits where you try to put your opinions into articles. Plus most of the time you get personal with me when I do something you don't like. I've decided to block you for a month because you're still not understanding how to not put your opinion onto articles and your behavior. Why don't you do what your user page says and leave the wiki to move on to your own? Justice ∞ (talk) 01:30, June 23, 2017 (UTC)
Well in MAP30: Icon of Sin an IP anon user said the teleporter wall is scary. I dislike that edit because it's the IP's opinion (POV edit), and you can't put your opinions on encyclopedic pages (I learned that from you). Plus that user did not even register to the wiki! Why did you then have to revert my edit of removing that dumb POV edit? So you're saying that IP can put opinions but I can't!? That's not fair! Plus that IP is unregistered but his opinion was allowed, so why my opinions aren't allowed despite I am a registered user to the wiki!?!?!?!?--Superchargecacodemons800 (talk) 21:11, July 24, 2017 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure you really haven't read the Policies and guidelines, otherwise you would understand editing better. The reason why I reverted your edit because there was nothing wrong with that piece of trivia. I would also appreciate it if you could lay off the personal attacks and complaints that you may have with past edits that aren't a issue. You don't run this wiki and will never be administrator with your attitude and past history of edits. If you don't like it, leave and be gone and actually mean it this time. Justice ∞ (talk) 14:45, July 26, 2017 (UTC)
- Regarding the "that IP is unregistered but his opinion was allowed", bit, the edit in question was made at a time when IP editing was still enabled. This had to change because one IP editor was vandalising several pages at once, and the quickest way to stop this was to disable IP edits. This doesn't mean that edits made by IP editors long ago, and left standing for years, should be removed just because they were by IP editors; although I agree that anything unencyclopaedic (regardless of the registration status of the editor) should probably be removed. — evilquoll (talk) 23:38, July 24, 2017 (UTC)
Turning on Discussions
Hi, Justice Infinity!
With the upcoming Nintendo Switch release, I was wondering if you were interested in turning on the Discussions feature.
In case you are unaware of the feature, Discussions was introduced last year to help communities engage with users and fans. It lives in its own space on the wiki and allows users to interact with other members of the community. It is also mobile friendly, and gives mobile users a chance to contribute and engage with the community, and possibly turn them into wiki editors as well. You can read more about Discussions here.
Let me know what you think, and if you want to proceed I can get the ball rolling. :)
- Just giving this a nudge! Also, we were wondering if you would be open to a main page revamp and new wordmark? Raylan13 (talk) 18:29, October 31, 2017 (UTC)
just let you know that I'm no SJW person, don't worry I'm not angry or anything. have a wonderful day.Stormourner
- Then why did you call Tormentor667 Islamophobic? That comment came off as something a SJW would say. Justice ∞ (talk) 05:27, January 24, 2018 (UTC)
it turns out there was misunderstanding after doing research on the game and I have apologize to Tormentor667 for false accusation, I removed the last words from the suicide bombers on Stronghold article, I don't give commands to the admins but be mindful of any racist nonsense on the Doom wiki.
P.S. I'm sorry about editing your talk page
- At least you took responsibility for your comment, but please don't assume that I allow racism on the wiki aswell. Justice ∞ (talk) 05:31, January 25, 2018 (UTC)
Page protection request.
Hi, I am MTTScientist but you can call me (Spencer). I have been working on a new article related to the series as a whole, I was wondering if you could maybe protect the page. Here's the link ----->Doom (series) .