Category talk:Historical Groups

Obtaining Historical Status

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

Groups must no longer actively contribute to the game. 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. Groups that pass will be added to the category as described below. 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)

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.

New Nominations

PTT

It's been ages since I've seen any of the members active, and it's also been ages since I've seen them on the stats page. The group was made up of a bunch of members on a Taiwanese bulletin board system under the same name of the group. They came into existence in late 2006, and held strong until early 2007 (from what I know, at least). Their base of operations was situated around Shearbank. They've reached over 200 in weeks, took a small part in Battle of Blackmore, and were a major force in defending Shearbank from Shacknews after Shacknews came in and ravaged Blackmore. If anything, they were probably the largest group whose players originated from Taiwan. And believe me, their presence gave Malton a good feel of having a mixed-culture population, especially since the majority of the players in Urban Dead speaks English.

Yes

1. Yes - Those were good old days, all right, and these guys were a big help in many major sieges back then. If you ask me, Shearbank should have been renamed to China Town due to the large Chinese speaking population stationed there. ;) --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:28, 3 September 2010 (BST)
2. Yes - The name rang a bell, but the wiki page brought it all back. Certainly deserve it.-- Adward  17:02, 3 September 2010 (BST)

   Heh. Remember when the SysOps of old thought the first few users trying to create the group page were adbots? xD --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:06, 3 September 2010 (BST)

   My lurker memories of old remember that :3 -- Adward  18:57, 3 September 2010 (BST)

3. Yes --User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 17:29, 3 September 2010 (BST)
4. Yes - Their page is even in the top 10 most visited on the wiki, and for good reason. —Aichon— 18:52, 3 September 2010 (BST)
5. Yep --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:54, 3 September 2010 (BST)
6. Yes - A great group. Redoubt 19:40, 3 September 2010 (BST)

No

1. No - I always assumed they got their page views via bots, I never thought they were actually a group. --VVV ^RPGMBCWS 23:27, 3 September 2010 (BST)
2. No - Too much zerging and not enough actually doing stuff for my taste. --Papa Moloch 00:22, 4 September 2010 (BST)

Recent Nominations

• The Crimson Clan - Failed

Previous Discussions

There are 3 archives for this page.

General Discussion

	Things Best Forgotten
	This Category talk page has an archive.

Voting Succeeded

	Things Best Forgotten
	This Category talk page has an archive.

Voting Failed

	Things Best Forgotten
	This Category talk page has an archive.