Category talk:Historical Groups: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 6: Line 6:
#Groups must no longer actively contribute to the game.
#Groups must no longer actively contribute to the game.
#A nomination should be made on [[Category talk:Historical Groups]].
#A nomination should be made on [[Category talk:Historical Groups]].
#Within two weeks of a nomination, the group must be approved by 2/3 of the voters, with a minimum of 15 voters for a nomination to pass. The only allowable votes are '''Yea''' and '''Nay'''.
#Voting will last for exactly two weeks following nomination. To be successful, a group must be 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'''.
#Groups that pass will be added to the category as described below.
#Groups that pass will be added to the category as described below.
#Groups must allow a week to pass between nominations.
#Groups must allow a week to pass between nominations.
#Groups must allow 4 months in between when the group disbands and when they can be nominated for Historical Status. (Note: Only for [[Malton]]-based groups)
|}
|}
<br clear=both />
<br clear=both />


=Nominations for Historical Status=
=Nominations for Historical Status=
When nominating a group, please add a note to [[Template:Wiki News]] and add {{CodeInline|<nowiki>{{HistoricalGroupVoting}}</nowiki>}} to the top of the group's page.  
When nominating a group, please add a note to [[Template:Wiki News]] and add {{CodeInline|<nowiki>{{HistoricalGroupVoting}}</nowiki>}} to the top of the group's page. Also, please add {{CodeInline|<nowiki>{{HistoricalVotingRules}}</nowiki>}} under the group's application for historical status.


==New Nominations==
=New Nominations=




===[[Escape]]===
 
==Recent Nominations==
 
==[[East Becktown Defenders]]==
{{HistoricalVotingRules}}
{{HistoricalVotingRules}}
I was told I had to do this through here, but I'll keep it short. [[Escape]] is over - it was always designed to end on June 1, something that was heavily advertised throughout the duration of the movement. If you could pass me on this so I can go ahead and start writing my memoirs, I'd be most appreciative. -[[User:CaptainVideo|Captain Video]] 05:56, 3 June 2010 (BST)
The East Becktown Defenders officially disbanded on [[EBD/Epitaph|May 1st, 2020]], which makes them eligible for Historical Group status.
The EBD had been active since 2016, and included dozens of members, including both veterans and entire newbies. They maintained good relationships with survivor groups (including, but not limited to the DHPD, SoC, Knights Templar and the DEM) and zombie groups (specifically the Daubeney Resident Zombies next door, and of course our favourite frenemies in the RRF).
Aside from regular survivor-style operations, they also brought a fun, no-pressure approach to the game, along with [[East_Becktown_Defenders/Tools|wiki-tools]] (like the automatic SitRep on their group page) and weird events (like the [[EBD_Stat_Party_2016|EBD StatParty]]).
The group decided not to fade away like many others, but officially disbanded after exactly 4 years of activity.
 
=== Yes ===


====Yes (Escape)====
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Peralta/Signature}} 13:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' - Definitely one of the most interesting and highly publicised events in a looooooooong time. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 06:10, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Clayton Carmine|Clayton Carmine]] ([[User talk:Clayton Carmine|talk]]) 13:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Hell yes''' - Absolutely. --{{User:Hashk/sig}} 06:22, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:MicoolTNT|MicoolTNT]] 13:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Oh, hell yes''' - Lots of publicity, huge turnout, unfortunate results. --[[User:TheBardofAwesome|TheBardofAwesome]] 06:41, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Stelar/sig}} 14:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' - Same reasons as DDR. {{User:UnholyReign/Sig}} 06:52, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Roddy Winters|Roddy Winters]] ([[User talk:Roddy Winters|talk]]) 17:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#:{{s|'''Yes''' - It was interesting and even though I did not participate, the numbers were large enough that it deserves a mention. --[[User:Travis Wells|Travis Wells]]}} <smalL> not signed properly --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 08:42, 3 June 2010 (BST)</small>
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Matt Langley|Matt Langley]] ([[User talk:Matt Langley|talk]]) 18:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' - Most certainly. --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 08:31, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Tarkenton|Tarkenton]] ([[User talk:Tarkenton|talk]]) 20:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes, yes and thrice yes''' - twas verily bloody good fun, m'lud. <span style="font-family: Segoe Script, Comic Sans MS, sans-serif;text-shadow:grey 0.4em 0.4em 0.4em">[[User:Chief Seagull|<span style="color: green;">Chief&nbsp;Seagull</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Chief Seagull|<small>squawk</small>]]</span> 09:04, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 23:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' Events do not need to be successful to be historical and anything that gathers that many brains into one big buffet most certainly counts as significant! --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 10:09, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Simcoe|Simcoe]] 07:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
#:<s>'''Incredibly Weak Yes''' - I'd prefer it to be a historical event, in all honesty, but I don't see why it can't be both (assuming someone makes a page for the event).--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 10:51, 3 June 2010 (BST)</s> Changin' mah vote.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 11:27, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Yo Ris|Yo Ris]] ([[User talk:Yo Ris|talk]]) 07:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' - Largest group on the stats page by far in a good while, lots of publicity, and clearly significant by the numbers that turned up on both sides --[[User:ORakoon|ORakoon]] 11:49, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:RaiNo|RaiNo]] 10:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' - Utter failure but a good try--{{User:Imthatguy/sig}} 12:44, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Frank Burn|Frank Burn]] ([[User talk:Frank Burn|talk]]) 13:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Weak Yes''' - Has been definitively the most significant event this year so far. (Of course, the opposition consists of the umpteenth Battle of Krinks and St. Aiden's zerg army trying to reclaim Ridleybank, so this isn't really a badge to be proud of.) --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 12:54, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' -  [[User:DoXBr|DoXBr]] ([[User talk:DoXBr|talk]]) 14:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' - A historic fail, but historic none-the-less.  [[User:Asheets|Asheets]] 13:13, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Richardskull16|Richardskull16]] ([[User talk:Richardskull16|talk]]) 09:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' - There's a blurred line between an event and a group that sets itself a time-limited objective/reason to exist/whatever, but this doesn't count against it as a historical group IMO. Escape had good flavour (lol), a new idea, a large following and a large zombie response. Historical. Yes. [[User:Garum|Garum]] 13:17, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - The Malton Globetrotters turbodunk the ayes! --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 00:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Without a bloody doubt, Yes''' - The sheer momentum it picked up in such a short space of time, and given that it came from absolutely nothing in the first place, people are gonna remember this. Anyone who was there saw the numbers present, both inside and out after the zeds came. PK'ers came, BH'ers came... it was ''the'' place to be. And for a while, there was an atmosphere of excited hope buzzing around the place, something the game had been lacking for too long. F'kin yes man. GG Escape, GG. [[Image:Clap.gif]] {{User:Kempy/sig}} 14:30, 3 June 2010 (BST)
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Benigno/sig}} 16:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
#'''Yes''' As Kempy. [[User:Oidar|Oidar]] 15:09, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''Yes''' I don't see why not. As a group, the largest I have ever seen, by the way, it was one of the more bizarre moments of Urban Dead. It certainly deserves to be remembered, though perhaps under events as opposed to groups? --[[User:The Prophet of Life|The Prophet of Life]] 19:01, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''Yes''' - It deserves it. [[User:Mesousa|Mesousa]] 19:39, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''Yes''' - Obviously. --[[User:Armpit Odor|<span style="color:red"><sup>A</sup><span style="color:green"><sub>O</sub><span style="color:red"><sup>R</sup><span style="color:green"><sub>D</sub><span style="color:red"><sup>M</sup><span style="color:green"><sub>O</sub><span style="color:red"><sup>P</sup><span style="color:green"><sub>R</sub><span style="color:red"><sup>I</sup><span style="color:green"><sub> ! </sub><span style="color:red"><sup>T</sup></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span>]] 21:02, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''Yes''' - Hell, I knew, without a doubt, that this would end in nothing but a complete and total zombie massacre, and yet there were enough people involved and enough interest raised that I lemminged right along. [[User:InvincibleZombie|InvincibleZombie]] 21:32, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''Yes''' - Fo shizzle homey.  --{{User:Quentin Julius/Sig2}} 23:12, 3 June 2010 (BST)


====No (Escape)====
=== No ===
#'''Why?''' - I'm leaning towards a yes for the reasons DDR mentioned, but aside from being highly publicised I'm not really seeing any effects from the event. You know, aside from a whole lot of zombies in one place, which was funny as hell. --{{User:Maverick Farrant/sig}} 06:39, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#I was going to go with “Who?” but [[Talk:East_Becktown_Defenders#Your_page|apparently we’ve spoken]]. As they did not fix their page in the entire 4 years they spent as a group, I cannot in good conscience vote for this group to be historical. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} {{Goonsig|Revenant}} 16:13, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
#:I understand your point, but events this big are few and far between nowadays. In fact, that's an understatement, since as far as I know, this is the largest gathering of people I've heard of in two years, since [[March of The Dead]] and the apparent [[Battle of Barhapolis]]. In a game where numbers are declining and group actions en masse aren't as spectacular (particular in roleplaying value), I found this thrilling and exciting. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 07:30, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#From what I see is a run-of-the-mill survivor group engaged in standard survivor play of maintaining a particular area. It was not innovative (like MCM or 404 were), it didn't have a distinctive style (like for example B.A.R. or ULC would have), nor was it involved in significant events (like Escape or c4NT were). --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 20:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
#::Your word: event. This ''group'' was less than impressive and failed to change anything about the way the game was played. The ''event'' they were at was much bigger than just their group, which is what makes the event historical, even though the group is not. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 11:33, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#As Spiderzed. Groups that had some members, did some things, and had a central pitch of being "well liked" didn't classify as historical when Urban Dead was bigger. I don't believe that should change for groups that existed during UD's [[Survivor-Zombie_Imbalance#7|long tail]]. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 05:55, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
#:::Personally I think the exact opposite. As an event it was shit, I just sat there and listened to spam and then got PK'd and died. The group is what was original. Now we are just butting heads about opinions though so let's agree to disagree since we've both made points for and against yeah? --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 11:36, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#As Spiderzed. --[[User:Papa John Schnatter|Papa John Schnatter]] ([[User talk:Papa John Schnatter|talk]]) 17:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
#::::I can agree to that. I think I viewed the event differently since I was on the outside looking in, rather than the inside looking out, as you were. For us zombies, this was the best eating we've had in awhile, and the most fun too, since almost all of the big groups showed up in force. Lots of joint strike operations and the like make for lots of fun. :) {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 11:41, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''No/Abstain''' - It's absolutely a historical group/event, but I'd like to see something on the page which details what happened.  Now that the 1st and 2nd have come and gone, perhaps some of the people who participated can write up a little "post-event analysis". Then I'll happily vote yes.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 09:03, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''No''' - I feel that the ''event'' was HUGELY significant and should definitely be considered historical (see [[:Category_talk:Historical_Events|here]]), but the group itself failed to change the game at all and didn't do anything of significance aside from get together in one place and get themselves (along with everyone and everything else in a 10 block radius) killed by hungry zombies. Had they actually succeeded at their objectives, possibly even their secondary one of committing mass suicide by jumping, I might change my mind, but they didn't. Also, with 414 members still active in the group, that makes it far and away the largest in the game right now, so I think it's still too early to consider the group beyond the point of actively contributing (as the rules at the top of this page require). I know that's a bit of a technicality, but it's just one reason for my vote amongst several. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 11:25, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#:Typically groups made for a one-time purpose go into historical groups not events. Eg. [[Category_talk:Historical_Groups/SucceededArchive#Blackmore_Bastard_Brigade|BBB]], and more likening to Escape itself, [[Category_talk:Historical_Groups/SucceededArchive#Pre_voting_Historical_Groups|On strike]]. Just like Big Bash (which didn't really "change the game" besides be a horde but is still with my former examples in Historical Groups category), it's just the thing we do, I guess. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 11:32, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#::But if it's an event, then we avoid No Escape requesting the same thing. They'd both be pinned down under the same name.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 11:33, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#:::On Strike actually succeeded though, and as I said, had Escape succeeded, I may have changed my vote (likely would have). As for likening it to other events, why not the famous sieges and the like that are mentioned over [[:Category_talk:Historical_Events|here]]? This was essentially the biggest and shortest siege in recent history, after all. Yonnua also makes a good point about it covering all of the groups if it's an event. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 11:36, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''No''' - Like my vote up there in the yes column says, it was very weak, and Aichon's changed my mind. As Aichon, and as I said before, but with much more frowny-face. >:( --{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 11:28, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''No''' - This seems more like an event to me, and didn't actually change anything within the game. I supported the effort, but I don't think it deserves enshrinement like this given its eventual lack of any impact. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 15:24, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''Hahahahahahahaha! Oh, wait. You're serious? Let me laugh harder. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!''' - They didn't do shit other than get trolled to death. And they certainly didn't accomplish anything. And like Aichon said, the event might be historical, but the group isn't. The group is just a footnote on the event's historical page in my opinion. - {{User:Goribus/Sig}} 21:23, 3 June 2010 (BST)
#'''No''' - Event, yes. Group, no. --[[User:The Hierophant|Papa Moloch]] 00:28, 4 June 2010 (BST)


==Recent Nominations==
With voting well and truly finished, the East Becktown Defenders have become a '''historical group'''. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 07:53, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
*[[Category_talk:Historical_Groups/FailedArchive#Guardians of the YRC|Guardians of the YRC]] - '''Failed'''
*[[Category_talk:Historical_Groups/FailedArchive#Assylum|Assylum]] - '''Ineligible''' and therefore '''Failed'''
*[[Category_talk:Historical_Groups/FailedArchive#The Church Of The Beyonder|The Church Of The Beyonder]] - '''Failed'''


=Previous Discussions=
=Previous Discussions=
Line 74: Line 64:
==Voting Failed==
==Voting Failed==
{{ArchiveNoticeSmall|ArchiveName=FailedArchive}}
{{ArchiveNoticeSmall|ArchiveName=FailedArchive}}
=Historical Groups Use Discussion=

Latest revision as of 00:12, 8 September 2022

Obtaining Historical Status

A policy is in place which outlines the method to attain historical 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 be 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.
  6. Groups must allow 4 months in between when the group disbands and when they can be nominated for Historical Status. (Note: Only for Malton-based groups)


Nominations for Historical Status

When nominating a group, please add a note to Template:Wiki News and add {{HistoricalGroupVoting}} to the top of the group's page. Also, please add {{HistoricalVotingRules}} under the group's application for historical status.

New Nominations

Recent Nominations

East Becktown Defenders

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 Yes and No. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

The East Becktown Defenders officially disbanded on May 1st, 2020, which makes them eligible for Historical Group status. The EBD had been active since 2016, and included dozens of members, including both veterans and entire newbies. They maintained good relationships with survivor groups (including, but not limited to the DHPD, SoC, Knights Templar and the DEM) and zombie groups (specifically the Daubeney Resident Zombies next door, and of course our favourite frenemies in the RRF). Aside from regular survivor-style operations, they also brought a fun, no-pressure approach to the game, along with wiki-tools (like the automatic SitRep on their group page) and weird events (like the EBD StatParty). The group decided not to fade away like many others, but officially disbanded after exactly 4 years of activity.

Yes

  1. Yes - PB&J 13:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  2. Yes - Clayton Carmine (talk) 13:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  3. Yes - MicoolTNT 13:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  4. Yes - stelar Talk|MCM|EBD|Scourge 14:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  5. Yes - Roddy Winters (talk) 17:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  6. Yes - Matt Langley (talk) 18:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  7. Yes - Tarkenton (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  8. Yes - Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 23:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
  9. Yes - Simcoe 07:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
  10. Yes - Yo Ris (talk) 07:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
  11. Yes - RaiNo 10:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
  12. Yes - Frank Burn (talk) 13:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
  13. Yes - DoXBr (talk) 14:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
  14. Yes - Richardskull16 (talk) 09:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
  15. Yes - The Malton Globetrotters turbodunk the ayes! --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ We're going to destroy everything, and you can't stop us ☉ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 00:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
  16. Yes - Benigno SSZ RCC 16:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

No

  1. I was going to go with “Who?” but apparently we’ve spoken. As they did not fix their page in the entire 4 years they spent as a group, I cannot in good conscience vote for this group to be historical. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 16:13, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
  2. From what I see is a run-of-the-mill survivor group engaged in standard survivor play of maintaining a particular area. It was not innovative (like MCM or 404 were), it didn't have a distinctive style (like for example B.A.R. or ULC would have), nor was it involved in significant events (like Escape or c4NT were). -- Spiderzed▋ 20:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
  3. As Spiderzed. Groups that had some members, did some things, and had a central pitch of being "well liked" didn't classify as historical when Urban Dead was bigger. I don't believe that should change for groups that existed during UD's long tail. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 05:55, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
  4. As Spiderzed. --Papa John Schnatter (talk) 17:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

With voting well and truly finished, the East Becktown Defenders have become a historical group. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 07:53, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Previous Discussions

There are 3 archives for this page.

General Discussion

Books.jpg Things Best Forgotten
This Category talk page has an archive.

Voting Succeeded

Books.jpg Things Best Forgotten
This Category talk page has an archive.

Voting Failed

Books.jpg Things Best Forgotten
This Category talk page has an archive.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Category_talk:Historical_Groups&oldid=2420457"