Talk:Umbrella

There never was a need for this, and there is not a need for this now either.--Thadeous Oakley 13:19, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

This page is protected due to an edit war occurring. Please go to A/PT if you wish to have an edit done. Thanks! Linkthewindow  Talk  14:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Page

I have come to an agreement with Boxy. I will try to expand this page more and more.--Thadeous Oakley 19:24, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

UBCS = Zombie group?

Where you getting that from? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:06, 1 October 2010 (BST)

According to their own page they dropped out of being pro-survivor. Saying they are zombies. It's a bit unclear. I just checked the forum which says pro-survivor. :/ I'll make it pro-survivor again, just to be safe.--Thadeous Oakley 17:08, 1 October 2010 (BST)

Yeah. Thats more sensible. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:10, 1 October 2010 (BST)

That seems to be insinuating Dual nature, if you're reading the same thing as I am.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:38, 1 October 2010 (BST)

When they became The Drifters many months back, they switched to zombie for awhile (I only know this because the SoC had to revoke our ties with them as a result). It's my understanding that they've very recently gone back to pro-survivor...maybe. I'm not sure. —Aichon— 07:28, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Joke Pages

The 2 at the bottom down. In the interest of keep the disambig accurate and serious, I vote for removal. Both "groups" have never existed, and probably never will. Not counting the groupbox, one is a songtext and the other a copied wikipedia entry on actual umbrellas. I know I my sense of humor can be lacking, but now we are tidying up this page I don't see why they need to stay. Kinda for Mis here. --Thadeous Oakley 17:15, 1 October 2010 (BST)

I'm with you there. They should be removed and probably even deleted as crit 2s. They blatantly aren't real groups and were just made to ridicule and escalate an issue which didn't need escalating.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:36, 1 October 2010 (BST)

Oh grow up they're hilarious. 22:11, 1 October 2010 (BST)

They have nothing to do with it and shouldn't be on there.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:12, 1 October 2010 (BST)

They have titles that can be confused with the other listed pages, hence the disambiguation. 22:13, 1 October 2010 (BST)

They are entirely off topic and should be deleted as so. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:26, 1 October 2010 (BST)

Why has everything ever have to be a joke with you? You asked me to keep the inactive pages for archival purpose, yet at the same time you want to seriously keep stuff like that on it? Man, you do could so much better if for once you'd stop fooling around for thrills. :( --Thadeous Oakley 22:30, 1 October 2010 (BST)

Anyhow, I'm going ahead and remove them. Whether or not they should be deleted is something for another time, I'm leaning on getting it out of the mainspace, and if Mis wants to keep it, move it to his userspace. Before I forget, is it possible for there to be copyright issue with the songtext?--Thadeous Oakley 23:06, 1 October 2010 (BST)

Probably less likely than copyrighted images since it's not a medium in its entirety (plus the whole song covers thing). Also I advocate not moving group pages out of the mainspace but whatever suits your one man crusade. 23:29, 1 October 2010 (BST)

your one man crusade I love how you blame me, when there at least two other who think they should be deleted entirely. --Thadeous Oakley 10:50, 2 October 2010 (BST)

You want to bring up copyright issues when your groups are straight out rip offs from the Resident Evil movies? Don't you get how ironic it is, fighting for months (getting on to years), over a name that you all simply copied from elsewhere, because y'all think you can claim to be the "original" Umbrella? -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 03:54 2 October 2010 (BST)

While I do agree, Capcom have officially responded to the Umbrella groups in this game saying they give permission to people to make fan-based roleplaying groups like those in Urban Dead. Or at least I'm sure I read it on one of their image descriptions somewhere. -- LEMON #1 04:03, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Can you (and others) for once, just once, shut up about it. Every time I even do something that relates to a brolly, it starts yet again: Ow Umbrella is ripoff, umbrella sucks, fighting about names blablabla. I already know what your opinion is, you said a thousand times before. How does it even relate to the current topic? I'm just updating a disambiguation page, just making it tidy. I ask if those joke pages have to stay, and yet somehow you manage to it turn into "umbrella suck" competition. And of course, in the end it's all my fault for bringing it up, and I get blamed. --Thadeous Oakley 10:50, 2 October 2010 (BST)

I say let them stay. To be perfectly honest, Umbrella groups in this game amounted to nothing more than petty displays of drama. A shame because it means so much more in the actual RE universe, and should have been better here. --Claire Redfield 13:04, 2 October 2010 (BST)

I say somebody accessing the wiki via a proxy is hardly reliable in this sort of situation.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:04, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Don't we auto-ban proxy IP's? --Thadeous Oakley 14:18, 2 October 2010 (BST)

You know, we just do.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:20, 2 October 2010 (BST)

What is the deal with the bias here. Disambigs should be complete. 14:06, 2 October 2010 (BST)

It isn't bias, Misanthropy. The pages shouldn't be in existence, so they sure as hell shouldn't be on there.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:09, 2 October 2010 (BST)

But they are, so they should. 14:15, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Disambig should be accurate and factual. These "groups" don't exist, and their content has no relevance whatsoever. --Thadeous Oakley 14:18, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Well I'm sure you'll reign in the meatpuppets to try and force through your opinion on this wiki like usual, but until then there's no reason for them to be on here because they have no place on a wiki for an online game about zombies.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:18, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Blah blah blah blah every vote is meat puppeted misanthropy never plays fair blah blah blah (also explain a Halo group in a zombie game then mr dvb) 14:19, 2 October 2010 (BST)

That's a group for the game. Yours is not. And if you honestly expect anybody to believe that a newbie using a proxy IP wandered across this page and registered their opinion (signing correctly) then you're ridiculously foolish. In terms of meatpuppetry, the same 5 or 6 people always bloc voting with you makes sense as random chance, right?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:22, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Of course I'm not a newbie, I know perfectly well how to sign a wiki page. They're all the same. And do you really think I'm not going to use a proxy at work? I'm not Misanthropy, or anyone else for that matter. --Claire Redfield 14:51, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Get your fucking facts straight if you're going to accuse me of sock puppets, that proxy account is nothing to do with me. And if people vote alongside me, perhaps it's because I might sometimes form agreeable positions?--—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Misanthropy (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Why don't we stay on-topic? The joke pages stay off. --Thadeous Oakley 14:26, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Sure, I'll go with that.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:27, 2 October 2010 (BST)

I was actually implying meatpuppetry by it, but whatever floats your boat. The bloc voting by mere chance schtick is ridiculous.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:27, 2 October 2010 (BST)

I don't care beyond myself who sides with who on this, beyond the fact that you're being petty and pretty stupid by making this a non-inclusive disambiguation page and missing the point of the page entirely. As for meatpuppeting everything grow up. 14:32, 2 October 2010 (BST)

This isn't an issue of inclusion, your pages are stupidly off topic and should be deleted.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:33, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Group page, no call for deletion. 14:34, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Spam page, no call for existance.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:36, 2 October 2010 (BST)

You're saying that he should grow up, but when are you getting serious? These pages were never meant to be groups, they are jokes, everyone with half a brain can see that. Disambig should be factual. Fact is your group doesn't exist, and never will. --Thadeous Oakley 14:37, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Just because it has a groupbox doesn't mean it's a group. --Thadeous Oakley 14:38, 2 October 2010 (BST)

It has members, like a group, and a wiki page, which shouldn't be deleted, as it's a page for a group. But hey, whatever, I give up. If you just want to turn this into the most pointless one-sided waste of space page we've got, go ahead, I've lost interest in maintaining it as a sysop should be trusted to, but you're not deleting pages willy-nilly without an actual reason. 14:41, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Getting awefully close to using sysop status as a badge of authority there.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:42, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Far from it, given that I'm not the one trying to bully pages into deletion. 14:44, 2 October 2010 (BST)

It doesn't have members, you created the page simply to stir up an issue. If you deny that, you're basically lying just to win a petty point. --Thadeous Oakley 14:44, 2 October 2010 (BST)

This is nothing about bullying, Mis. Nobody wants the pages on ehre but you. They shouldn't exist, which is only being opposed by you. You've brought up your sysop status in an argument. That is using your authority as a badge.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:46, 2 October 2010 (BST)

I created the group to stir up fun, the wiki page is part of that but it represents an in-game group too. And I brought up your sysop status to because sysops should be impartial on these things. A sysop should be trusted to maintain things down the middle, which you are not doing, as even without the non-RE groups listed, this still leans much more towards Thad's brolly than the others, but no, I used the s word to highlight something you're meant to uphold so that instantly makes me the bad guy pushing a badge in people's noses. How do you follow politics if you can't even follow something point by point? 14:49, 2 October 2010 (BST)

How is he not being impartial, when you at the same time are adding your own group, in which you clearly a vested interest? Sure I do too, but Yonnua? Uh nuh.--Thadeous Oakley 14:53, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Also, Mis' entire argument is stupid because sysops aren't moderators.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:54, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Stop putting words in my mouth and show me where I said we were moderators. 14:55, 2 October 2010 (BST)

You're saying that sysops must be impartial while we have a policy document (one of the wiki's most important) saying exactly the opposite.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:57, 2 October 2010 (BST)

We've a policy stating that we don't police the wiki with authority over other users, but as a figurehead in an accountable position you need to be hitting things straight down the middle more often than not. This is a case where two entirely-made-for-humourous-purposes, but still valid, pages are being shoehorned off what should be a legitimate index page, threatened with undue deletion, and that's not straight shooting. And you're a guy who usually does things by the letter so this surprises me. I've never attempted to call the joke pages serious, but they do exist and if this is meant to be a disambiguation page, they should be listed, even if under a head for 'joke groups' or whatever. This is like DDR's perfect-to-a-tee rendition of the Evil page, which included groups like Evil Avatar, which was long-dead and only half-related. Why? Because it's a legitimate search term connected to it. Obviously it would have been in DDR's interests to list as few pages as possible there, but he didn't because indexing the whole wiki properly was more important. Follow that example. 15:06, 2 October 2010 (BST)

It's completely different because neither are legitimate search terms (both have less than 150 page views) and we've never allowed intentionally humourous pages in the main namespace. The point here is, I am being by the letter. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:19, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Museum

Thoughts? I was thinking of keeping this more group based. Maybe give a link to "Umbrella (in-game item)"?--Thadeous Oakley 14:30, 2 October 2010 (BST)

We might as well include a link to the museums on the disambig.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:31, 2 October 2010 (BST)

But the groups should have a header which says "Umbrella groups" similarly to the museums.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:31, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Dun. --Thadeous Oakley 14:41, 2 October 2010 (BST)

Disambiguation page. Keep it one. 14:32, 2 October 2010 (BST)