UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Historical Groups

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Green check.png Guidelines — Policy Document
This page is a statement of official UDWiki Policies and Rules. See Policy Discussion for policy additions and changes.
Padlock.png Administration Services — Protection.
This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Deletion of Old Group Pages

Groups are commonly created and abandoned shortly thereafter. The resulting pages clutter up the wiki and are worthless. A new criterion will be added to M/SD.

12. Defunct group page: Non-historical group pages over two months old that have not had an update in a month and are not on the stats page.

Historical Groups

Groups are considered historical if they are part of Category:Historical Groups. Groups are added to historical groups if they have made an impact on the way the game is played or otherwise contributed to the history of Malton. All groups currently within the category will remain as long as they have a historical significance section added within a month of the passing of this policy.

Adding to Category

To attain historical group status:


  1. Groups must no longer actively contribute to the game.
  2. A nomination should be made on Category_talk:Historical_Groups.
  3. Voting will last for exactly two weeks following nomination. To be successful, a group must by approved by 2/3 of eligible voters to pass. A minimum of 15 votes must be cast for the vote to be valid. The only allowable votes are Yes and No.
  4. Groups that pass will be added to the category as described below.
  5. Groups must allow a week to pass between nominations.

Maintenance

After having attained historical group status:


  1. The {{HistoricalGroup}} template shall be placed at the top of the group page.
  2. A similar template (that doesn't add the category) shall be placed at the top of the group's talk page
  3. A section detailing the historical significance of the group shall be placed at the top of the group page


--Darth Sensitive Talk W! 04:17, 7 August 2006 (BST)


Voting Section

Voting Rules
Votes must be numbered, signed, and timestamped. They can take one of two forms:
  • # comments ~~~~
    or
  • # ~~~~

Votes that do not conform to the above will be struck by a moderator.

The only valid voting sections are For and Against. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

For

  1. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 05:07, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  2. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS 05:44, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  3. Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 05:49, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  4. Max Grivas JG,T,P! 05:58, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  5. Niilomaan GRR! 08:46, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  6. Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 08:59, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  7. Xoid 12:13, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  8. Vikermac 17:36, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  9. EMAG TRESNI 22:03, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  10. --The Godfather of Resensitized, Anime Sucks 23:09, 7 August 2006 (BST)
  11. TheDictator 23:40, 7 August 2006 (MCT)
  12. --DJSMITH CDF 14:44, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  13. --ERNesbitt 14:59, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  14. Thari T/C/TJ! 15:27, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  15. V2Blast TP! 17:46, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  16. Gage 01:02, 9 August 2006 (BST)
  17. Canuhearmenow 01:03, 9 August 2006 (BST)
  18. ALACE 03:07, 9 August 2006 (BST)
  19. Abi79 AB 10:21, 10 August 2006 (BST)
  20. As I mention in the talk page, I vote for it with one reservation. --Luigi Galleani 18:04, 11 August 2006 (BST)
  21. Technerd CFT 03:40, 15 August 2006 (BST)
  22. (It's kinda something for a group to work for, y'know?) SirensT RR 04:03, 16 August 2006 (BST)
  23. Stickman 19:26, 16 August 2006 (BST)
  24. Conndrakamod T CFT 08:56, 18 August 2006 (BST)
  25. I did have one reservation about it but after mulling it over it seems fine. Pillsy 11:59, 18 August 2006 (BST)
  26. Axe Hack 9:57, 18 August 2006 (EST) I say go for it.......not many people joined the temporary group of MLD.........yet other groups accomplished what it planed..........

Against

  1. For the same reason I was against the 'Creating a Group Page' suggestion. A heading for important Historical groups is fine, but for the rest of them 1 month is too short a time not to edit. What about when people have exams or work deadlines or go on holiday? Making sure someone is updating the Urban Dead group page is not always a priority! 3 or 6 months might be alright, if it is so enormously necessary to delete lots of group pages. Is it necessary? GrownUpSurvivor 08:36, 8 August 2006 (BST)
    Discussion moved to talk page.
  2. Colonel Hannibal Smith 14:16, 8 Ausgust 2006 (EST)
  3. To note, I agree with everything proposed; I just feel that 1 month is not a long enough period. - Bango Skank 20:36, 8 August 2006 (BST)
  4. Amazing Hector 06:39, 9 August 2006 (BST)
  5. Make it a minimum of 10 yes votes to pass and I'm happy. A minimum of 15 votes means that a few no votes can make it pass, a bit silly don't you reckon? - Jedaz 14:15, 9 August 2006 (BST)
  6. Just beacuse a group doesn't check into the wiki all the time, doesn't mean we should destroy there info! Satandisc 05:22, 11 August 2006 (BST)
  7. One month is not long enough. Bubbadick 19:25, 11 August 2006 (BST)
  8. Nuke Texas 23:43, 13 August 2006 (BST)
  9. Looks to be just yet another veiled attempt to delete as many group pages that don't update as possible. There are much better things to do then waste time trying to delete every group that you assume is inactive. --Rogue 19:43, 15 August 2006 (BST)
    Deletions with full vote, yes. Speedy deletions left up to a Moderator who is online at the moment, no. -- (The Lord God) Pray 01:24, 18 August 2006 (BST)
    Vote by banned vandal struck as per moderation decision here. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 10:40, 22 August 2006 (BST)
  10. Dog Deever TNec 02:01, 18 August 2006 (BST)
  11. More time should be given ~ Francis Farmer 17:32, 19 August 2006 (GMT +10)
  12. Don't feel that a month is enough time, even though I'm sure The Faggots would be considered a historical group.Jjames 00:20, 20 August 2006 (BST)
  13. Does Category_talk:Historical_Groups even get 15 hits every two weeks? If a group is historical, it should be fairly obvious and we shouldn't need strict rules about how to categorize them. As far as I can tell, this is only a tool to delete old pages and I can't see what's wrong with the system in place now. By the way, is the wiki really that stressed for space? --Ron Burgundy 02:24, 21 August 2006 (BST)
Personal tools
advertisements