User talk:Gez

From ZDoom Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Please don't erase the flag values from pages like this. Many still use them. From a neutral standpoint, it's best to give people options rather than entice authors of mods through force by exercising such actions. Some will use flag values, some will use the flag names. Forcing someone to use one or the other when the engine supports both as of now is unprofessional and selfish. -- Xenaero 22:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not selfish when it's to prevent other people from making mistakes. There was a problem recently in a A_WeaponBob thread in editing where someone who didn't use the flag names suffered from that, as the values had changed. But mostly, it gives a clearer and more readable code and is simply a better practice. --Gez 23:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to stress this point again. The flag values may change, but you will be insulated from any changes if you strictly use the mnemonics. If somebody insists on using numbers instead of names, they can still look them up for themselves in zdoom.pk3, but I don't think the wiki should implicitly condone this practice by listing them directly in the article. --Randy Heit 01:35, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Demon Eclipse link

If you unzip the as reachable from idgames, as well as the from Megaupload, you will notice that the supplied .WAD files have the same date. Hence the replacement by the idgames link. Specifically, they are both dated January-2008! (So it seems the idgames file was updated. And I know the idgames database _is not_.) —jengelh 12:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I can confirm that the downloaded from megaupload and the downloaded from idgames are currently identical. It's a shame the database at Doomworld doesn't update when the files on the archive are updated. -- Randy Heit 15:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Alright, no problem. --Gez 15:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you help me?

Hi, I'm fairly new to wiki's, but not new to the Doom engine, or even ACS scripting. I have a few useful things to contribute, and wondered... how do you start a new page??? Like from scratch? Thank you in advance. PeskySaurus 21:05, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Creating new pages isn't hard. A simple method is this: edit a page, any page, and add a wiki link to the page you want to create, for example A_PodPain. Now, do NOT click on "Save page"! It would make me grumpy. Instead, click on "Show preview". The link appeared in the preview, so follow it instead of saving the page. You are now able to edit the new page. If you need help with wiki syntax and such, remember that this wiki uses the MediaWiki software (the same that powers Wikipedia) so you can usually find what you want simply with a Google search for "mediawiki" "help" plus whatever term you're looking for, e.g. if you wonder how templates work you can search for "mediawiki template help". Finally, don't forget we have a FAQ and editing guidelines that you would do well to read. --Gez 21:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Page and images removal

Hey Gez, can you delete pages? I've been meaning to get rid of the article on The Hell Worm and the related pics for it. I'm still working on it but the page is outdated and I don't care enough to update it, so it may as well not waste the space. --Ceeb 17:51, 24 October 2010 (CDT)

Yes, I can delete pages. But if your concern is space, then you should know they're not really deleted; they're just hidden and it's possible to later restore them. Which means that, by the way, if you want to update them, just drop a word and I'll restore them. --Gez 01:10, 25 October 2010 (CDT)
Ah, truth is I've been favoring other projects a lot, and since it's not moving forward and I have no plans to finish it any time soon, I'd just as soon erase all references to it for the time being. --Ceeb 17:32, 25 October 2010 (CDT)


It's not that I don't think they should be fixed, but that I don't think they will be fixed. I agree my report is not concise: I don't know the exact conditions under which the bug(s) occur. I don't understand the inner workings of the thing, so I post it where people will see it. Koverhbarc 20:00, 4 December 2010 (CST)

If you think there's a bug, please report it as such. Then let the developers decide what to do about it instead of second guessing them. Adding tl;dr texts to the documentation is not going to help anyone. -- Graf Zahl 9:13, 5 December 2010 (CET)
The conclusion to all this is on the forums. --Gez 07:39, 6 December 2010 (CST)
What did the forum just do to me? It allowed my first post to go through apparently without moderation under the made up name 'Betsy Senningtock'. Then, it said my second post would have to go through moderation, which the help message says only applies to the first post! Koverhbarc 08:15, 6 December 2010 (CST)
That was not your second post, that was your first registered post. Your very first post was anonymous, and the forum software gives random names to anonymous posters. A good example would be this thread, which had plenty of anonymous activity. --Gez 08:28, 6 December 2010 (CST)

My crazy templates

Do you want me to undo the const template to be more... subtle? And aside from using templates that already exist, what should I focus on updating or improving? The strife and raven classes and codepointers are a given, of course. More documentation on until loops may be nice, I didn't know they existed until under a week ago. I'm standardizing things that take arguments in an editor, as the previous method was a little clumsy, and implied they had fields, like angle rather than simply being a byte[5] array. I'll stop creating really excessive templates without checking them here, if you prefer. --Deded007 (talk) 11:03, 12 February 2013‎ (CST)

I like templates and made a bunch of them myself, but I don't get the purpose of the Lookup template since all it makes is change how links look. Templates like Classes:, Flags, Properties, CVAR, CCMD, Param, etc. make it simpler to create links. LE (which I took from the UESP) and a few others make it simpler to create repetitive markup. C allows to avoid using HTML tags directly in the page. And so on. So I have no problem with those templates of yours that follow the same kind of philosophy; but I don't see how {{lookup|blah}} is better than [[blah]]. --Gez (talk) 12:53, 12 February 2013 (CST)
For the 'lookup' one, if you hover your mouse pointer over it, it'll display the syntax of the function/pointer (at least that was I saw). Blue Shadow (talk) 13:40, 12 February 2013 (CST)
Indeed. A_LookEx allows you to see the parameters without clicking the page, and can be easily extended to any function, it was mainly intended for large examples or complicated scripts or functions like A_SpawnItemEx, which has a parameter list that barely fits on my page in slade3 when it pops up. My intention was so it saved a bit of time, especially when all you need is the parameters, not the usage, you could mouseover to get them, just like T_BARON. --DemolisherOfSouls (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2013 (CST)
Doesn't work for me, the link's title (or lack thereof) is overriding the span's title for a mouseover, so it'd only work on pages where it isn't a link... --Gez (talk) 07:23, 13 February 2013 (CST)
Odd. What browser are you using? I may have to do some testing. Span overrides the link mouseover in firefox. --DemolisherOfSouls (talk) 09:25, 13 February 2013 (CST)
Firefox too, but with this, which might be responsible for the change in behavior I guess. --Gez (talk) 12:28, 13 February 2013 (CST)
It works with Google Chrome, too. Randy Heit (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2013 (CST)
The alt tag should not be read as the tooltip, the title should, as per the html spec, mouseover works in IE as well though. --DemolisherOfSouls (talk) 00:32, 14 February 2013 (CST)

Captcha Problem

I can't create new pages for mods, it comes up with captcha to click on the cats, and after clicking on them all it does not accept it. So it reverts me back to the editing page when I click save. The only way to avoid this is by posting pages without any url's or images. Meaning I can't create a mod page with the necessary format. Theunbeholden (talk) 04:44, 12 September 2013 (CDT)

I can't help you with that. Just make sure that JavaScript and cookie are allowed for the captcha site. If it's already the case, I do not know what causes your issue. You can still use the wad template however, even if you do not include links. --Gez (talk) 10:36, 12 September 2013 (CDT)


This function shares the same name as the built in function, which vastly outperforms it. Just leave it be? Nobody can use this code, unless they rename the function, and they would only be adding a large array to bloat their project. [[Getactorclass]] vs. GetActorClass

Oh, if that's the reason, then deleting the page altogether is the proper action. --Gez (talk) 08:28, 20 September 2013 (CDT)

Red alarm spam alert

I see those guys have come over here since we got rid of them at the Doom Wiki. We should see about migrating the Titleblacklist and AbuseFilter tweaks over here if at all possible. --Quasar (talk) 00:10, 16 February 2016 (CST)

I see you're on a complete lockdown right now. What problem are you seeing with the Title Blacklist? --Quasar (talk) 09:41, 16 February 2016 (CST)

Things that should have been blocked haven't been blocked. --Gez (talk) 10:39, 16 February 2016 (CST)
Please re-enable the rules and test them one by one while logged out. All of the PCRE regexps pass syntax tests, and this page is clearly working or the .* block you added would not be having an effect. The rule you are concerned about (User:...............) only blocks user names of EXACTLY 15 characters. I do not know if this was intended. 14 is not blocked, and 16 is not blocked. If you want to block 15 or more, you must use User:.{15}.* --Quasar (talk) 10:19, 17 February 2016 (CST)
PS Also none of the users you blocked even match any of the regexps that were for User: pages. I am testing them with a PCRE tester and they all fly through the checks because the checks are very specific and none of them match these names. --Quasar (talk) 11:44, 17 February 2016 (CST)

Optional Keywords

I take issue with the use of [] brackets on the wiki to denote optional keywords when used INSIDE code blocks. This makes it confusing for more casual users (and even intermediate users who spend hours on the wiki) to get started by using code examples. When used in documentation that CANNOT be directly used, [] brackets are perfectly fine, but non-valid code inside a code block is just confusing. All code blocks that live in any kind of coding or scripting documentation should be valid. See Skyboxes, but there are other examples. Just a suggestion. Let me know what you think. --Katori (talk) 08:25, 4 April 2017 (CDT)

Those aren't real code blocks, just formatted syntax guides. There are similar things in the dynamic light definitions above, where you will find both angled brackets denoting that a value should be used instead of the name, and square brackets denoting optionality. E.g. [offset <X> <Y> <Z>]; or the brightmap definition which also uses pipes within angle brackets to show a list of choices (brightmap <flat|sprite|texture> <IMAGE>). I understand that beginners can be confused, but the real issue here is that there aren't actual examples of code outside of the dynamic lights section. --Gez (talk) 08:35, 4 April 2017 (CDT)

Some editing suggestions

Hey, I've been helping out the wiki recently and I have some suggestions since I can't edit those select pages. I've already privately contacted Rachael about it.

 |width="33%" align="center"|Current release version of GZDoom: 4.10.0


 |width="33%" align="center"|Current release version of GZDoom: 2.4.0 (View source of this section to see what I mean)
  • Macintosh logo on this page is practically invisible for me on my end. A thicker/darker outline of the logo could help me see it more.

If you need any help around here, feel free to contact me (on the forums it's unRyker) because I'm willing to help out!

--Undeadryker (talk) 15:45, 9 April 2017 (CDT)

No. ZDoom is no longer in development. A template to keep track of its latest version is not needed. Latest was shifted over to GZDoom development, which is the new main thing. QZDoom is an experimental fork for tinkering with code before merging back into GZDoom. --Gez (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2017 (CDT)
Ah, I see. I'm reverting the affected pages now. Sorry for the inconvenience. --Undeadryker (talk) 18:04, 9 April 2017 (CDT)