Lexicon talk:Main Page

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Books.jpg Things Best Forgotten
This Lexicon talk page has an archive.

Infection

I'd really like us to run another Lexicon. Yes, the first one didn't go like clockwork; people dropped out and rejoined, there are still a couple of pages missing, etc. But no matter how imperfect the game itself was, the output was awesome. We ended up with exactly what a Lexicon ought to be--a coherent story that self-assembled out of 86 more or less related articles by 20 people, the story of the origins of Malton as it is today. It's really an interesting read and we could do it again. Who wants to join? I figure we could call it the Infection Lexicon-- the name of the first one made me think of the names of the .Hack games, that they might work for this. Outbreak, Infection, Mutation, Quarantine.--'STER-Talk-ModP! 02:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

-I'd be up for another run. - Nicks 23:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

It would be nice, but I don't think that people will be able to maintain interest for long enough for it to be worth while. I'm not going to do it again because I found that the main problem with it was that there was no real motivation to get the articles done. - JedazΣT ΞD GIS S! 05:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

For the record, I'd do it again. I think we might want to try it on a smaller scale, though—just a few dedicated individuals. X1M43 04:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I'd said to myself that me and one other person expressing interest weren't enough to make a comannounce. But now it's me and two other people! So!--'STER-Talk-ModP! 20:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is this? I read the main page and it doesn't make sense. --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 20:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Basically, it's people writing an encyclopedia. Except the things they're writing about are made up. And they have to write about things other people wrote, so the whole thing kind of knits itself into a coherent story without the writers making it do so. Check out the first one.--'STER-Talk-ModP! 21:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd be totally up for it -Axe27 22:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Definaly-Vito the Don

Sure - -- TexasFlag.gif BubbaT 01:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

For, and count me in. Reading through it, it makes me mad that I wasn't here to contribute the first time. --Joe O'Wood TALKCONTRIBSUD 02:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I've made a provisional page for the next one. Sign up, but I doubt we should actually start so soon; we should look over the rules from the first iteration, see what worked and what didn't.--'STER-Talk-ModP! 04:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I might have bent the whole "Don't link to your own articles" rule last time...I'll do better this time. - Nicks 06:26, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm interested, but my net access has been severely limited for the last while, and may be again, so I don't know how good of a contributor I'll be. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 01:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll think about it; the first one looked like great fun but it's a commitment... definately think on it, however. --Miss Aska !†!.S-A.dA.UD† 05:06, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

If it works, I'm in. - Terra 12:10, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

It would depend on how many people could get in. With enough people, and enough articles to explore it could be better than the first. Suggest putting somehting bigger up on the main page so that more poeple see it. 40,000 UD'ers and maybe a dozen get involved in the Lexicon. The numbers don;t add up. More advertising for it is needed, IMO. If we could get more people, it would take pressure off the dedicated people as even if somoene only did one article, its still one article others didn;t have to. - JCoops

...what? We probably only want about a dozen people, max. More that that and the whole thing would get unwieldy and confusing. If there were more people, they'd still each be due 1 article per person per round, it wouldn't take pressure off anyone.--'STER-Talk-ModP! 19:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... Fair enough. Didn't think of it that way. I know this is a little idiotic and noobish but are the article titles put up and then you just expand them? Or do you make the whole article up yourself? - JCoops

Not at all idiotic; it's kind of a complicated game, and hard to understand at first. The first round starts with a blank slate; you come up with an article title entirely on your own, and write that article. In every other round, though, there'll be a few--and more and more as the game goes on--article names that have been cited in previous rounds. You have a choice of writing one of those or making something new up, until the round has as many citations in it as there are players; then writing a new one would mean we'd have leftovers. Sorry it took so long for me to answer--I've been without internet the past few days.--'STER-Talk-ModP! 19:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm in. Hardcore. I was pissed I missed the first one. --Pvt. Aaron GoslingFREE01:53, 1 January 2007 (BST)

Right, so just let me get this straight, again. You make up the articles that you are citing. They haven't been made yet? And then someone else expands that article later on in the game. - JCoops

Yep, that's it.--'STER-Talk-ModP! 19:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I am being an idiot again I think. I have put the Lexicon template onto my document but it still isn't appearing on the Lexicon. The page is titled Crowbank Medical Disaster (Lexicon. Can you please just go on it and change the template, or whatever i have done wrong, so that it is added onto the site. Thanks. JCoops

Maybe it is worth just checking the numerous Lexicon submissions to make sure they have all gone in the right place. Or has just not very many people submitted articles?

Survival

I would like to request another Lexicon is started. Yes, the other one died halfway through, but we shall prevail this time! This Lexicon would outline the start of survival; once people had gone past the shock what happened. The Border, for example. Vigilante Groups, people joining the horde. And so forth. Well, wiki, what say you? --RahrahCome join the #party!18:54, 8 October 2009 (BST)

Peorsonally I think its sounds like a good idea. I've read though the other two quickly, and if one was started i wiould be willing to particpate.--Michalesonbadge.pngTCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻20:39, 8 October 2009 (BST)
Likewise. Personally I'd Contact both DSS and Mercy as both groups have some RP and writing experience. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 21:30, 8 October 2009 (BST)


Right. The basic flaw with the lexicon is that its baffling and complex. Here's my idea of simplifying it.

Round 1. All writers write one initial article, entitled Lexicon;Whatever. Round One Ends.

Round 2. Writers read all the pieces. Each writer than takes a word or phrase used in someone else's article and writes an article on that, this is then linked from the first article.

Round 3. All writers write another piece, it must contain reference to at least one other piece that is currently unlinked, and as many others as they see fit.

Continue until interest Dies.

EXAMPLE

Round 1. I write a piece on a retired firefighter, who has decided he's going to try and go over the wall.

Round 2. Rorybob reads my article, and because he wants to writes an article entitled the wall. It is back linked to my article. In the meantime I write an article about rations, having found the phrase in bobs round 1 article.

Round 3 Looking at the first 2 rounds I see no one has linked to bobs round 2 piece about a group trying to set up a revive point. One of the zombie characters look interesting to I write a piece about them, linking back to bobs piece. Because I can I also make reference to the wall

Make almost sense? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 11:39, 9 October 2009 (BST)

I get it! But... nevermind. It makes sense to me. So I can edit Lexicon:Main Page with the new information? Will I have to write up the new rules? --RahrahCome join the #party!10:32, 10 October 2009 (BST)

Yep. Change it to make it make sense. This is your baby Rory. Do it! --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 10:36, 10 October 2009 (BST)

I hope the Lexicon is revived, it's pretty fun to do. Jpanzer 23:20, 10 October 2009 (BST) --Bumpity-bump? Jpanzer 15:42, 16 October 2009 (BST)

The Survival Lexicon is due to start on Monday the 19th. For those that missed out on signing up, you can still sign up for a reserve place. --RahrahCome join the #party!16:44, 16 October 2009 (BST)

Okay thanks, i signed up for a reserve place. =) Jpanzer 21:39, 17 October 2009 (BST)

Thanks panzer, if it goes the same way as the other lexicon, you'll be called up in about a week! --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 21:41, 17 October 2009 (BST)

No problem. I know I sound bad for saying this, but I hope they do. Jpanzer 21:56, 17 October 2009 (BST)

Anyone want to play?

Sounds like a lot of fun, and very ALiM to boot. Who'd be interested in a new round?--Nallan (Talk) 11:44, 7 September 2012 (BST)

+1 --I'm not the Ross UDWiki needs, I'm the Ross it deserves. 11:51, 7 September 2012 (BST)
+2. Can we do religion in malton? ~Vsig.png 14:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Personal tools
advertisements