Category talk:Historical Events

Obtaining Historical Status

A policy is in place which outlines the method to attain historical status.

Events must have been declared over. The event must have affected either multiple suburbs or how the game was played for a group, such as triggering a change. A nomination should be made on Category_talk:Historical Events. An announcement should be made on Wiki News, and {{HistoricalEventVoting}} should be put on the event's wiki page. Within two weeks of a nomination, the Event must be approved by 2/3 of the voters, with a minimum of 15 voters (or 10 YES votes) for a nomination to pass. The only allowable votes are Yes and No Events that pass will be added to the category as described below. Events must allow a week to pass between nominations.

March of the dead

On 14 June 2009, Giles Sendik voted Yes on this Discussion question. Therefore, I believe that Giles Sendik seeks to propose the March of the dead as a historical event, and therefore, have moved the discussion of March of the dead over to this heading to be voted on.--ShadowScope^{'the true enemy'} 06:27, 14 June 2009 (BST)

There's no arguing this didn't affect most of malton. And the find rate for syringes had to be raised to stop it so it sure changed the way we play the game.
Concerning the March of The Dead, let's give this one another go.

and while I'm here - We decline.-- #99 ^DCC 13:35, 28 September 2008 (BST)

Clarification: the Dead have no desire to ever be a "historical group" however, March of the Dead could be considered.--– Nubis ^NWO 04:17, 11 October 2008 (BST)

Yes

1. Yes - This should be a no-brainer. Crit 1 and 2 are met. --_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 01:32, 14 June 2009 (BST)
2. Yes - If this doesn't count, I don't know what should. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 03:12, 14 June 2009 (BST)
3. Yes - As above.--ShadowScope^{'the true enemy'} 06:27, 14 June 2009 (BST)
4. Yes - Well yeah. --Thadeous Oakley 09:56, 14 June 2009 (BST)
5. Yes - It WAS a large, historical event, so I vote yes.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:35, 14 June 2009 (BST)

No

1. no they don't want it so fuck them. they could give two shits about this game or the wiki. and have stated so on many occasions.----Sexualharrison 08:20, 14 June 2009 (BST)
2. no - it's been declined, so lets not force it upon them. --xoxo 10:02, 14 June 2009 (BST)
3. no - just my opinion.--Bonghit420 10:23, 14 June 2009 (BST)
4. No - but would change to yes in a heartbeat if one of the Dead's member (specifically Nubis or DCC, who turned this down above,) come over and said that they want this. Linkthewindow  Talk  10:35, 14 June 2009 (BST)
5. no As link --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:47, 14 June 2009 (BST)

Archives

• Archive 1:

• Battle of Blackmore
• First Siege of Caiger Mall
• Malton Iditarod
• Second Siege of Caiger Mall
• Third Siege of Caiger Mall
• Battle of the Bear Pit
• The Siege of Giddings Mall
• Yahoomas day
• The Battle of Santlerville
• Valentine's Day Massacre
• Mall Tour '07
• Malton Block Party
• User:RadioSurvivor

• Archive 2

Secondary list of chronological order?

Any votes against the creation of a timeline below the alphabetically ordered list of historical events? I'd list the events along with the dates they ran. I just think it'd provide for a more reasonable reading of this page, and world lore. Jeffool 10:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

On a Category page nothing can go below the alphabetical list, however, if anyone is interested in making something like this it could be useful, although I think one might already exist somewhere. And I found it Timeline--Karek^maps?! 13:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Although it looks like that needs much reworking.--Karek^maps?! 13:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

March of the dead

There's no arguing this didn't affect most of malton. And the find rate for syringes had to be raised to stop it so it sure changed the way we play the game.
Concerning the March of The Dead, let's give this one another go.

and while I'm here - We decline.-- #99 ^DCC 13:35, 28 September 2008 (BST)

Clarification: the Dead have no desire to ever be a "historical group" however, March of the Dead could be considered.--– Nubis ^NWO 04:17, 11 October 2008 (BST)

1. Yes - This should be a no-brainer. Crit 1 and 2 are met. --_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 01:32, 14 June 2009 (BST)
2. Yes - If this doesn't count, I don't know what should. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 03:12, 14 June 2009 (BST)
3. Yes - The criteria seems to be fullfilled. J.I 16:03, 14 June 2009 (BST)