Talk:ZDoom

Several months ago, I downloaded & played both ZDoom and JDoom.

For internet play, I have now converted to ZDaemon, which lacks the graphical sophistication, but works well over the internet. I see here ZDaemon grew out of ZDoom, but I had somewhere read (either a FAQ file, Websites, or Readme.txt's) that earlier on, ZDoom and JDoom were collaborative.

Can anyone ellaborate on Zdoom and JDoom's connected history?

They are not related. ZDoom is based on Linux Doom and has been in development since 1998. JDoom is based on the Hexen source code (it was actually predated by JHexen), and has been in development since 2002. There has never been any collaborative development as far as I know, and the special features of the two are for the most part incompatible. Fredrik | talk 00:05, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Banner Update?

Would anybody mind if I updated the ZDoom Banner image? It was created(and last updated) in mid-2003, and since then it seems to have been changed to the one with the red, big capital letters that can currently be seen on ZDoom.org, be it the main page or the forums. DomRem 03:41, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

sigh

Somebody's doing vandalism to this webpage. V_V - Bouncy

Can't someone just ban Timthedim? He's vandilised the page several time over the past 5 minutes alone. -- TheDarkArchon 16:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

wish somebody would. - Bouncy

Not notable is a joke

ZDoom, along with ZDaemon, Skulltag, PrBoom, Chocolate Doom, and the Eternity Engine, is one of the foremost DOOM source ports. It inarguably has the largest feature list and the widest user base of any of them, as can be ascertained from wad reviews, polls, and posting at the Doomworld Forums at doomworld.com and from heavy use of both its own site at zdoom.org and its project wiki.

The Skulltag article was wrongfully deleted by a user with a known external vendetta using this same justification. If this is not stopped, all DOOM port articles will be deleted from Wikipedia for no good reason. Simply because people are too lazy to do the research to find out how much these ports are used in the highly active DOOM community doesn't make them "not notable."--QuasarTE 02:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree, and have removed the notice. (Although actually Doom Legacy and JDoom are much more popular than you give them credit.) This was added because it is not considered notable by the standards of an unofficial policy suggestion, which at this point looks like a mess that would not achieve consensus and would if effective result in the deletion of articles for most open source projects. Owen 03:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I third that motion. I have noticed a user named bjWeeks or something actively deleting content. You might want to see what he edits and keep an eye on him. I am very happy to see other Doom enthusiasts protecting the hard work of contributors. Keep up the good work guys. Something is very wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.70.153 (talk • contribs) 21:49, November 28, 2006

I have been cleaning up the ZDaemon article and when the previous editor removed the prod template he simultaneously reverted content that another editor removed. So when I saw his edit to this article I thought the same has taken place and I did not look into it far enough as I was in a hurry. I apologize and no harm was meant to this article. BJ^Talk 04:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You still need to somehow prove notability, while they are guidelines such as WP:SOFTWARE that is all we have and they will always be guidelines. Please show in the article on how it is notable. --Simonkoldyk 08:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

A simple google search of the term Zdoom should be sufficient for relevancy. WP:SOFTWARE conditions have been met for this article. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.70.153 (talk • contribs)

How has WP:SOFTWARE been met? You need to show specific mention from a notable source a newspaper, magazine, article about it.--Simonkoldyk 18:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Since this (IMO ridiculous) notability criterion for software-related article has gotten totally out of control and now threatens to delete every single Doom source port article, we are taking steps to create a new article about source ports in general, which will then in turn cover ones which are known to be notable within the community of people who play them in more detail while simply listing the rest as it currently does. Currently I'm the only one actively working on it, though I have the support of users Bloodshedder and DomRem for sure, and possibly others. Once we're done, the notability nazis can delete to their hearts' content. Until that point I would respectfully ask that the article be left as-is.--QuasarTE 21:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)