Should I write my own DOOM Wiki page?

I’d like a wiki entry for myself of course, but I thinks it a faux pas to write your own. Still, I know my own stuff best, and with the ever-growing backlog of wiki articles that need to be written, it seems like taking action myself will both contribute to the wiki and make me happy. 

It it would be completely unbiased of course, just sticking to the facts, like ‘Emil “NaturalTvventy” Brundage is the greatest DOOM mapper of all time.’

It's not against the rules, only "discouraged" since a lot of people would do it only for the vanity factor. At some point, if nobody else has taken the time to document your work, it's justified though.

More annoying people than you have done that, so the wiki police will not be after you.

if you try to correct stuff people just rewrite/revert and it's a lot of fun

On 12/13/2017 at 3:00 PM, NaturalTvventy said:

I know my own stuff best, and with the ever-growing backlog of wiki articles that need to be written, it seems like taking action myself will both contribute to the wiki and make me happy.

Bumping because of this, and a few others asking the same (here, on-wiki, in IRC).

While it's good that people want to behave themselves, we actually have had few issues with such contributions. Blatant spam or trolling gets removed, but if a person already has several released projects, the article turns out OK no matter who starts it. See here for a competent example. (I say this as someone who has been known to whine about excessive biographical content.)

The most important thing is the backlog (on every subject, not just people) -- we have a lot of topics that only exist in people's heads now. Forums are gone, personal sites are gone, file archives are gone. If you (the general you) don't write about what you know, maybe no one will. And as Vorpal says, others who know your name will probably search for you someday and balance out any possible bias (additional ranty explanations here).

I was joking. The back-and-forth revert article battles when correcting/adding something in wiki culture is the purest agony, I've had sourced and accurate info deleted from doomwiki just because it was anonymous.

6 hours ago, Vorpal said:

I was joking. The back-and-forth revert article battles when correcting/adding something in wiki culture is the purest agony, I've had sourced and accurate info deleted from doomwiki just because it was anonymous.

Sourced? Specific examples will be appreciated.

So I'm rather biased myself, but I'd much rather see people write their own articles than have them not written at all. While it's great that we all hold the Doom Wiki to such a high standard, it's also worth remembering that it's not Wikipedia and in the end we're really just a bunch of video game fans, after all. Besides, even a biased article can be fixed.

18 hours ago, Vorpal said:

I was joking. The back-and-forth revert article battles when correcting/adding something in wiki culture is the purest agony, I've had sourced and accurate info deleted from doomwiki just because it was anonymous.

This shouldn't happen and I'd like to investigate. Please either go into more detail here or if you would prefer PM me. Thanks

I’ve decided that not writing my own is the way to go (unless I’m on my death bed). Otherwise I’d always be left wondering, would it get written if I hadn’t done it...?

I think like 90% of person articles in the last couple of years were made by me (barring historical figures, id staff etc). I generally prioritise people higher up Special:WantedPages because the more red links gone the better, and NEIS sure knocked you pretty far up the list :)

So yes, your page would eventually be written, relatively soon too. I just don't have much time for wiki stuff sadly (and maintenance of these can be a real pain in the arse :P)

I once authored the Wiki entry for The Cyber Shinobi for awhile until it was written over. I prefer my entry over the new one, but I'm admittedly biased. 

I'm going to write the article about myself on Doomwiki, if nobody is going to write it in the next 60 years, just to retrospect what I've done. Honestly, that will be an interesting thing to do for me, looking back to the history of my doom level designing, before I rest in peace. But don't get me wrong. I also like to see the article about myself, written by someone else, as long as it's correct.

On 1/5/2018 at 6:47 PM, Vorpal said:

I was joking. The back-and-forth revert article battles when correcting/adding something in wiki culture is the purest agony, I've had sourced and accurate info deleted from doomwiki just because it was anonymous.

Me too. Once I anonymously re-wrote a section on normal Wikipedia for a game that had just plain incorrect info. I love the game to death and know everything about it, and so I corrected it all. Next day it was all gone. Fucking bullshit. Just because it's anonymous doesn't mean it's wrong. "The encyclopedia that anyone can edit" my ass.

18 hours ago, NaturalTvventy said:

would it get written if I hadn’t done it...?

Nope. If you want something done right, do it yourself.

1 hour ago, Nevander said:

Once I anonymously re-wrote a section on normal Wikipedia

Please don't compare the Doom Wiki with Wikipedia, ever.  It is a slap in the face to those who have spent countless hours trying to make Doom Wiki editing as understandable and collaborative as possible.  As said above, if you think you got fucked over, say what happened specifically, so it can be looked into.  (Even if it was a mod -- believe me, the mods have perpetual differences of opinion on many issues, and another mod will be glad to help you.)

What's the point if nobody takes your contributions seriously?

I don't know much about your experience of Wikipedia, but it's worth bearing in mind that the people editing and maintaining the Doom Wiki are (by and large) the exact same people you'll encounter here on Doomworld. If your edits do for some reason get reverted, it's likely to be me, Xeriphas or some other familiar face who you can talk to, not some rando you've never heard of.

Collaborative projects like wikis are hard to scale up. With a site the size of Wikipedia you never know who the next person to edit the page is going to be. By comparison, the Doom Wiki only gets a handful of edits per day. It's also worth bearing in mind that the rules are a lot more lax - unlike Wikipedia where there's a hard requirement that everything has to be sourced and objective, it's a lot less strict.

So if you've had a bad experience with Wikipedia, bear that in mind and consider that your experience with a much smaller site/community will probably be quite different. Just make sure you use the real Doom Wiki at doomwiki.org and not the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad wikia.com version.

Is it acceptable to edit a wiki entry to add newer projects? For example, my wiki entry only lists my released projects through 2012. I have produced quite a bit of additional stuff since then.

Yes! All of the above applies to any type of contribution, not just creating a new page.

1 hour ago, ReX said:

Is it acceptable to edit a wiki entry to add newer projects? For example, my wiki entry only lists my released projects through 2012. I have produced quite a bit of additional stuff since then.

Please, go ahead. It's not easy to keep up with everything everyone is doing, so in general, if you are a notable mapper who already has a wiki article and there's stuff missing, feel free to update it!

^{Disclaimer: other important subcategories are available!}