Perhaps I have not given our hypothetical newbie enough credit for left-brain thinking. I felt that my method accomplished this with a minimum of clutter, but you're right - it does make a straightforward tabulation more difficult. For instance, the secret near the secret exit can be obtained without getting the rocket box, but grab that too, because it comes in handy! But the information should be included somewhere, because it would remove the ambiguity for those readers who really wanted to know, such as (more guesswork) new players who have extensive experience editing/cheating in other games and just haven't played Doom yet. We don't actually say that, because it would make that section needlessly turgid, and more importantly we assume that the swag is at least as important to the reader as the secret tally is. For example, in this map, when you go from the computer room to the supercharge, the secret is the little ledge that lowers, but when you go to the rocket launcher, the secret is the hallway beyond. What's a new player supposed to do the the sector numbers of the secrets? radius 00:39, 25 February 2006 (UTC) Maybe the same thing they're supposed to do with the total number of vertexes and sidedefs, or the volume of each level? :> When we list the secrets (both before and after my large revision), the text itself doesn't give their exact locations. As I said, great job in general, but I have one more quibble. But my feeling was that a little bit of that was OK to keep the 100% secrets list intact. So I know what you mean about awkward and repetitive. In fact, I remember thinking at one time (incorrectly of course) that I needed to look through that cool window to get 100% secrets, so I was surprised to see it on the secrets list! I did go through these first walkthrough articles some time ago to make the secrets lists accurate. I often played to get 100% secrets, and I think a list of what's needed for that is good for new players. But I was thinking back to when I was a new player. I think you are doing a great job in general. Maybe someone has a little sister they can guinea pig with? Sarge Baldy 03:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC) I totally agree that spiffing up these walkthrough articles is a good idea and that new players are the target audience.

Perhaps there is a way to do it without making the categorization seem arbitrary (again, to the intended audience, not to editors of this site), but I couldn't think of one. I did try to revise that section in the manner you describe, as you can see from the history page, but I thought it read awkwardly, and stated the same information twice for no good reason. I believe that our walkthroughs should contain all the information implied by the first two definitions, but give priority to definition 1 because it is closer to the dictionary definition of 'secret', and therefore more likely to make sense to a first-time player (in addition to the reasons I stated when I revised E1M1). Definition 3 is irrelevant because we're showing them the entire map at the outset. In this case, our own Secrets article defines 'secret' in three different ways. In walkthroughs, we should ask ourselves, 'How can we express information clearly?', rather than, 'How can we once again show off our ability to make lists?'. That's fine for technical articles and editing articles, but IMHO not walkthroughs. me, you, and Fraggle), at the expense of comprehensibility to inexperienced Doomers. Articles in this wiki are routinely written to please chipheads (e.g. Since they're not doing that, however, we have to guess. radius 14:49, 18 February 2006 (UTC)Д«lanket disclaimer: Until neophyte players start leaving us feedback, we can never be sure that anything in these walkthroughs is sensible.

That was the case with this article at one time.

I kind of like to see the 'secrets' section of each level article enumerate the actual secret sectors needed for 100% secrets (nothing more or less).

Doom toxin refinery secrets