If you haven't made an edit for that day, make an entry in "Changelog" with the date along with the new version number.
In the index, in the top header, there is the site's version number. This should match the version number in the Changelog.
If the site update is a major one, the first number goes up, and the other two are reset - I.E., 3.0.0
If it is a medium change, the first number stays the same but the middle is changed and the last number is reset - I.E., 3.2.0
If it is a small change, the very last number is changed.
This should most likely link to /id archive. If someone sends a WAD submission, they must have it hosted to a publicly available website.
This does not have to be every literal update. That's what the Changelog is for. But it should display what readers need to know - I.E., "1/1/26: New WAD added."
The top date should be green, and the other two should be blue.
May to-do list:
We stopped doing site versions because eventually it's going to have as many versions as Minecraft.
I'm thinking we'll do at least another major "iteration" before May is over. But damn that's so much to update. It's theraputic in a way to delete everything and start again. I use the word "iteration" a lot. What I mean by that is when the site temporarily goes down and is locked to a single page until a major update happens, and the site comes back with an entirely new look. This has happened two times on dirtpages, and once over here. Really gitdoomer.org hasn't really had one but I combine them all together to sound better.
Dirtpages was shit, but I miss it - specifically the very first version I made in the beginning of April. :-( I didn't think I could miss something so soon! I should've archived a page or something. I keep having this problem with making the sites too "textureless." I try to keep them so clean that they're professional, but eventually start to look soulless.
There is also the matter of the WADs themselves. Of the eight downloadable WADs available, I'm satisfied with maybe... two of those?