Category talk:Historical Groups: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(443 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
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, and have a minimum of 15 voters for a nomination to pass. The only allowable votes are '''Yes''' and '''No'''.
#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.
Line 16: Line 16:
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.
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=
===[[Columbine Kids]]===
{{HistoricalVotingRules}}
10 months have passed since [[Category_talk:Historical_Groups/FailedArchive#Columbine_Kids|the last nomination]], which furthermore failed by just one vote. I see it thus as justified to re-approach them and see how well their reputation has kept up.


It has now been much more than a year that any Columbine Kids have been active, let alone orchestrated anything together.


From their very founding day on, they have polarized the UD metagame, going even as far as getting the group [[UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive/Aug_2007#Columbine_Kids|put up for deletion vote]] due to bad taste, or because no one thinks of the children, or whatever the reasoning was for those who voted for deletion. And it wasn't just at the beginning that they shocked and polarized the UD crowd, [[Talk:Columbine_Kids#I.27m_Disgusted|it even continued throughout their career]].


They have not just made impact by their concept, though. They were also effective PKers, racking up [http://rg.urbandead.net/profiles/view/754030 massive bounties], performing [http://iamscott.net/1271806991373.html highly coordinated timed strikes] and getting involved in events like the [[2008 Wedding Crash]] or [[Samhain Slaughter|Samhain Slaughter 1]] [[Samhain Slaughter 2|to]] [[Samhain Slaughter 3|3]]. You also mustn't forget their various school shooting tours they have organized and pulled off on their own.
==Recent Nominations==


They were recognized in the [[Malton_Murder_Awards_MMX#Player-Killer_Awards|Malton Murder Awards 2010]] as nominee for Best PKer Group.
==[[East Becktown Defenders]]==
{{HistoricalVotingRules}}
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.


Seriously, if you are involved in the PKer metagame at all, you have heard of them and their exploits. --'''<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>''' 15:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
=== Yes ===


====Yes====
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Peralta/Signature}} 13:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#See above. --'''<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>''' 15:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Clayton Carmine|Clayton Carmine]] ([[User talk:Clayton Carmine|talk]]) 13:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
# --{{User:Lady Clitoria/Sig}} 15:59, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:MicoolTNT|MicoolTNT]] 13:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#--{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 16:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Stelar/sig}} 14:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#They was robbed last time. You all is just e-cock blockin'. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>19:57, 4 February 2012 (UTC)</sub>
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Roddy Winters|Roddy Winters]] ([[User talk:Roddy Winters|talk]]) 17:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>20:27, 4 February 2012 (bst)</small>
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Matt Langley|Matt Langley]] ([[User talk:Matt Langley|talk]]) 18:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
#They're well known, have maintained mindshare over the last year, participated in a number of major events, and were effective in doing what they set out to do. They may not have pioneered new tactics or methods for PKing, but they did make a name for themselves, and it wasn't all just bluster. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Tarkenton|Tarkenton]] ([[User talk:Tarkenton|talk]]) 20:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 23:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Simcoe|Simcoe]] 07:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Yo Ris|Yo Ris]] ([[User talk:Yo Ris|talk]]) 07:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:RaiNo|RaiNo]] 10:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Frank Burn|Frank Burn]] ([[User talk:Frank Burn|talk]]) 13:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' -  [[User:DoXBr|DoXBr]] ([[User talk:DoXBr|talk]]) 14:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - [[User:Richardskull16|Richardskull16]] ([[User talk:Richardskull16|talk]]) 09:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - The Malton Globetrotters turbodunk the ayes! --{{User:Dragonshardz/dragonshardz}} {{Goonsig|Dragonshardz}} 00:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
# '''Yes''' - {{User:Benigno/sig}} 16:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)


====No====
=== No ===
#As the previous bid's against votes. Too much of their value has been put into their apparent offensiveness, and otherwise they seem only successful, and neither of these points are enough to be entitled historical, or what should be called historical. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 17:39, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
#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)
# No, Same as last time wiki drama does not make you Historical. They were just your average PKers who only PKed nothing more. This does not make you Historical.--[[User:Josh Clark|Josh Clark]] 18:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
#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)
# They did nothing of note besides "participated" and "had a cool name." They just floated around like typical flotsam. Hardly standout. Frankly, these guys have done zilch to be considered anywhere near the same notability as groups like Channel Four or the old FOD.--[[User:RadicalWhig|RadicalWhig]] 01:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
#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)
# No, as Josh Clark. (There, I agreed with Josh for once!) They weren't historical last time this came up, and they've not become any more historical in the meantime.--{{User:Mallrat/sig}} 02:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
#As Spiderzed. --[[User:Papa John Schnatter|Papa John Schnatter]] ([[User talk:Papa John Schnatter|talk]]) 17:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
#No, while CK was a skilled collection of PKers and good fun to boot, I have to agree with AHLG.  Skilled? Yes. Historical?  Me thinks not. --[[User:Ciscokitty|Ciscokitty]] 03:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


==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/SucceededArchive#Channel_4_News_Team|Channel 4 News Team]] - '''Successful'''


=Previous Discussions=
=Previous Discussions=
Line 57: Line 64:
==Voting Failed==
==Voting Failed==
{{ArchiveNoticeSmall|ArchiveName=FailedArchive}}
{{ArchiveNoticeSmall|ArchiveName=FailedArchive}}
=Historical Groups Use Discussion=
just a question why and how did the roftwood assault force become historical?--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>04:16, 23 June 2011 (bst)</small>
:[[Category_talk:Historical_Groups/SucceededArchive#Roftwood_Assault_Force|here's the vote]]. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 05:45, 23 June 2011 (BST)
::man did it squeak by. must have been when i was inactive for a few months.--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>06:06, 23 June 2011 (bst)</small>

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"