Category talk:Malton Confederacy

Please note: All correspondence to the confederacy should be directed through their website at [1]. Requests for assistance should be placed in the same manner. This talk page is for discussion of development of the Malton Confederacy category and it's sub pages only.

Complaints regarding Article/Sub-category status aka "Edit war"

The debate concerning this subject is occurring here: Moderation/Deletions under the subheading "Category:Malton Confederacy". This matter is currently open and there is still plenty of time to vote on the issue, and get your opinion heard.

• Please discuss possible solutions to the problem here, instead of the deletion requests page. Also, do not make any major edits in the pages related to this if it goes against the general consensus or if such consensus hasn't been reached. This edit war is being way too immature. --Daranz | Talk | 19:00, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)

• Maybe like with Suggestions: someone wants the Category links to stay (sounds reasonable), let them speak their piece; someone repeatedly insists that those links be deleted (Is my bias showing?), let them say why ... or stop. Rohstun 20:40, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Once again, I'd like to present my possible solution to the problem: The content of the MC page can be moved to a separate, non category page, and the MC category can remain just a listing of the pages within it. First of all, that ensures that there will be less issues with the wiki (as redirects to categories tend to work incorrectly), and in addition, MC won't have to be a subcategory of the Human Groups category if the Category:Malton Confederacy page doesn't have to be categorized (which annoys *cough* some people immensly). Thoughts? --Daranz | Talk | 21:10, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Personally, I'm of the opinion the page works as a subcategory. If it were a main category, I could see reason for complaint. But as it is, the page does not really interrupt the natural flow of the section it is in and it fits the general style of the group. If anything, I would say that groups in the organizations section should have a choice about whether or not they are subcategories or just main pages to reflect their individual styles. LilithTaveril 16:00, 5 Dec 2005

User Alexei saves the day!

I have un-catagorized both the confederacy, and The Imperium. I then placed
 both of their original article pages, which now redirect to the categories,
 into the categories they were formerly part of. Thus neither one appears at
 the top of the pages but down among the rank and file where they belong.

 Having solved the issue completely, I formally withdraw the request that
 they be deleted. Alexei Yaruk 22:23, 3 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Which part of "Redirects to categories do not work" are you unable to comprehend. When I said you don't know what you are doing, that was your cue to go and read a few helpfiles... not to make another crap edit.

If you read the discussion in the archive, which you were part of, or check the history, you will see that before I even entered the debate, I tried fixing it as you have, but I found it didn't work, and reverted it. Lacking a good solution, I posted on the subject, but no one was interested.

However, as you can't be arsed to read help files, let me explain... if you redirect to a category, you will see the category, but it will contain no links. This is a bug, and will be fixed, hopefully, in the next release of Mediawiki.

In the meantime, I have proposed a solution below, and challenge you to produce a better solution. If you do so, I'll sing your praises, but in the meantime, I'm feeling somewhat grumpy. --Timothy Askins 02:52, 6 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I thought I had found a variation on your method that worked slightly differently, next time I will double check not go from memory. I would like to sate that it seemed to work at first. But when I checked later it did not work the same way as before. I do not pretend to understand that one. Alexei Yaruk 09:15, 6 Dec 2005 (GMT)

PS. I would like to apologize for being a jerk about this. When I feel strongly about something I get very mulish and try to take IMMEDIATE action.

A possible solution

1. ) Change all category group tags to one of three or four templates. The templates should bear the names of the basic group types - eg. {{Template:Survivorgroup}}
2. ) Remove all groups from the groups category.
3. ) Remove all groups from their subcategory (eg. Survivor Groups).
4. ) Create {{Category:AllGroups}}
5. ) Add {{Category:AllGroups}}, and {{Category:(group type)Groups}} eg. {{Category:ZombieGroups}} to each of the group-type templates.

Right, here's how it works: A group adds, for instance, the SurvivorGroup template to their group. That's all they need to add. It's easy, and they need not worry about typing category code on their page. Once the groups have added the appropriate template, you merely need to add the category tag to that template to move all groups with that template to the category inserted.

In other words - there's a huge amount of group pages, and editing their category location by hand will take a long time... so let's only do it once, and make any future changes the work of half-a-second, eh? It also looks a lot neater, and is easier with regard to page editing.

This should result in the groups category containing no groups, and all groups featuring in two (or more) subcategories, thus no group/organisation/etc. will have subcategory or article links on the main groups page, and we shall all be able to relax with a nice cup of cocoa.

I also propose ditching the organisation category, as Mods and others have suggested. This is because there can never be an adequate definition for an organisation, nor a fair way to judge such, and this category can be joined easily by any group who can be bothered to make the effort.

Yes, I'm aware that the category names in my examples above are incorrect, but it's not worth checking unless it's going to be implemented.

So, what do you think of that idea? Awful? Badly communicated?

Thanks, --Timothy Askins 02:52, 6 Dec 2005 (GMT)

One problem I see with that solution is that it will make it impossible to add sort keys. I'm not quite sure why exactly we'd be doing this... to move groups between categories more eaisly? Do we need to move them anyway? As to subcategories, as I said above, main articles shouldn't really be placed in category: pages anyway, and category pages should merely list the articles within the category, with a separate page being the main article. --Daranz | Talk | 03:15, 6 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Caiger Mall: Request for assistance

Caiger Mall Survivors could use your help. 100+ humans have been fending off 300+ zombies for days now. They just do not understand this mall is ours. <<Flaunted 19:14, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Salutations Flaunted, we are currently dealing with an incursion in the Marven Mall vicinity, however I'm sure we'll be able to mobilise a decent team of zed hunters to head out and give you a hand. Join deadscape.com and post as much info in relation to the incursion in the new forums so the rest of the brethren are made aware. BrianSutherland 19:20, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)

My character ran upto Caiger two days ago, and counted over 800 zombies outside, including the corpses. --Timothy Askins 20:55, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Thank you MC!! we're truly sorry that some of our members have been asses to you, but don't take the few stupid oens in our group to represent the rest of us, we're sorry that you've been mistreated and hopefully these bad apples won't spoil thepie for everyone. I just wanted to say thank you and good work! --- Rowan Issac 3:30 GMT nov 27th, '05

Indeed. we have a designated revive point set up at St. Isadores, which is for ANY human willing to fight these zombie scum. Many thanks for your assistance. --Flaunted 17:16, 28 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Deo Vindice.

Interesting. I had planned on forming an organization very similar to this one. I was gonna ask any interested human groups to send delegates to our first congress as soon as the battle for Caiger Mall ended. http://www.urbandead.proboards52.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=thestreets&thread=1126999984&page= This is where I first suggested that the people of Malton consider to possibility of political independence http://zombies.desensitised.net/board/index.php?topic=78.0 This is where I issued a Declaration on the Causes and Intentions of the Malton Provisional Confederation. I'm glad to see that I'm not alone in my secessionist sentiment.

So, how might the good citizens of Darvall Heights join this here Confederacy? Nathan Bedford Forrest 08:44, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Throw the {{TMC}} boilerplate on your groups user info page, join the forums, get active and reap the benefits of working together. Fantastic username by the way, almost asphyxiated on my coffee when I read it. :P BrianSutherland 09:42, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)

• [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Category_talk:Malton_Confederacy&oldid=42719

Archive

Archive 1 - 02:58, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT)]

Alliance Requests

The Union would be very interested in forming an alliance with the Malton Confederacy (despite the fact that our groups names are foils of each other). We operate in the same area, in fact, right next to each other. NOFX985 6:45 11 Feb 2006 (EST)

A Message from CMS

Great warriors, soldiers, medics, and scientist alike; allies who were, are and will bravely defend the mall, listen to me. The mall has been under siege now for more then a month and the defenders have done well. The zombies have noticed this as well, and have lost a great deal of hope, trying to reach an unreachable goal. They are tired, and want to leave, but do cannot make up their mind. It is up to us, fellow defenders of all sorts and ages, to help them decide, to help give them a good hard push, send them home, to where they belong. Fellow members of CMS have come up with an effective plan, and would like to call out to all the allies of the mall to aid them in, for this is as a mall for us as it is for you. If you would like to get involved in the plan, please email me (redbeak@gmail.com) your Username and your profile link, and I would then send you a password to an account for a forum, on which the plans and discussions are being held. All this is a precaution, in order to prevent complications of zombie spies. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask, I would most definitely answer it.

Hope to see you all in the birth of this great plan, MLSGuy (Steven Yu, member of CMS)

Certificate of Death

Well, maybe I'm not qualified to give this. And probably nobody reads this. But for the two or three people that might wander through here, be aware: The Malton Confederacy is, for the most part, in the last throes of a painfully slow death. The MC's been on the decline for a couple months now, and by this time most of the core members have moved on. So, if you're coming here to stir up shit or anything like that, be advised that there's really no point. --Dinferno 01:17, 18 April 2006 (BST)

I've gone ahead and removed Malton Confederacy category references from each of its former protectorate suburbs. --Natalya Zveda 17:43, 20 April 2006 (BST)