UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/New Suburb Tag (edit, new vote)

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to 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.
This policy was abolished by a later policy and is no longer in effect.

Deserted: New Suburb Tag for Suburb Page Usage

It is noted by most of the editors that regularily change the reports on the suburb page that there is currently an issue with the old "tags" for suburbs. Specifically because of the new ransack changes, it is quite possible for a suburb to be very dangerous for a single survivor to attempt to sleep in without there being many zombies about that would destroy a larger and more organized group.

Therefore I submit that there should be a new tag that is basicly between "Safe" and "Very Dangerous"; this tag should be "Ghost"; (background: #EEE; border:solid 2px #CCC;), it leaning neither towards the color of Green or Red, the latter being VD and the former Safe.

The "rules" of this new tag should be something of such: At least 2/3rds of the suburb's buildings either Empty of Survivors or Ransacked AND Having no zombie mobs of over 10 and no total zombies over 60

This allows for there to be a period in which "No One Lives Here" but can still be a "Great Place To Live". I believe that this tag should be named Deserted. It should be noted that this may still allows there to be a safe house or group of safehouses in the suburb but if the suburb is not secured and barricaded by survivors it cannot be called Safe no matter how few zombies there are.

Ghost Town


  1. Author Vote --Karlsbad 20:01, 7 September 2006 (BST)
  2. Woooooo! go stuff! Jp7777777 20:20, 19 September 2006 (BST) apologies if dats not how u signature, im Jp7777777
  3. Now it looks good. Unless it doesn't... whatever. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRCT+1 20:14, 7 September 2006 (BST)
  4. Better --overlord hagnat mod 21:08, 7 September 2006 (BST)
  5. Sensible and useful. -- Catriona McM 21:39, 7 September 2006 (BST)
  6. sounds good...as long as its still urbandead...i dont care what happens to it. -- Amanofpower 16:54, 7 September 2006 (EST)
  7. I like it however areas tagged deserted, will probably not be for very long. --Poodge 03:41, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  8. The more info the merrier! --Axe Hack 04:20, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  9. --Gage 04:24, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  10. Though I have my doubts about it, I do believe that it's a good fix for a large problem. Hopefully, it can help reports be a bit more... accurate, instead of having wars over a suburb being red or green. --Nomader TRCDC 04:44, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  11. --Thari TжFedCom is BFI! 07:49, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  12. I don't see any reason not to. - Jedaz 10:01, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  13. Awesome. We need more of the same. Ron Burgundy 17:14, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  14. I like it. --SirensT RR 23:39, 8 September 2006 (BST)
  15. Sounds like it would work pretty well, giving a better idea of what's going on especially if you're running around by yourself. --Zotikos 8 September
  16. Looks good, though it will probably not see too much use. --Terminator 02:40, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  17. More information is good, and the suburb page is the first place I check on the wiki. --OmegaPaladin 04:19, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  18. Xoid STFU! 04:41, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  19. I think we should have used my color scheme. But the tribe has spoken or some such nonsense. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 05:45, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  20. Yes. Its much better than having to avoid all the red suburbs when in reality they are just devoid of human and zed (un)life--.--Mercsenary TRCDC 05:57, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  21. Sounds good to me. Serpardum 09:56, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  22. Clarity is good --Preasure 19:35, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  23. I like it, we need more stricter lines between the current ones though--Jattern3434 02:54, 10 September 2006 (BST) EDIT: sorry forgot to sign it
    Struck for being an unsigned vote --Karlsbad 21:41, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  24. No reason not to. --Gold Blade 02:55, 10 September 2006 (BST)
  25. Sure.--Grigori 03:28, 10 September 2006 (BST)
  26. I approve. Anything to make the suburb danger reports more accurate. -- Alan Watson Talk · MalTel 10:47, 10 September 2006 (BST)
  27. Nubis 13:27, 10 September 2006 (BST)
  28. The suburb page is broken. This will make it look cool. Ron Burgundy 20:23, 10 September 2006 (BST)
  29. I don't know if this is perfect. It could provide an interesting set of information if used correctly. --Max Grivas JG,T,Max4Mod,F! 22:38, 10 September 2006 (BST)
  30. YES Asheets 04:31, 11 September 2006 (BST)
  31. Good idea, useful tag - Attentater 12:32, 11 September 2006 (BST)
  32. I like it. The Badman 17:25, 11 September 2006 (BST)
  33. Yummy --CaptainM 05:08, 12 September 2006 (BST)
  34. --EzriSun 17:02, 12 September 2006 (BST)
  35. Took a long time to get to voting! About time. Pillsy F! 16:01, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  36. This will be useful for planning and reporting on reconstruction efforts. -- Iluliaq 16:25 13 September 2006 (BST)
    I think this would help alot of noobs so i am for it. 6:11 14 September 2006
    Struck unsigned vote. Restore when corrected. --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 02:50, 15 September 2006 (BST)
  37. Useful. Bubba 11:35, 16 September 2006 (BST)
  38. Neurotrashed 12:25, 16 September 2006 (BST)
  39. Sounds good to me. --SirBlastalot 15:58, 17 September 2006 (BST) September 17
  40. This would be a great help to newer players, and any groups looking to set up. MrConspiracy 07:44, 19 September 2006 (BST)
  41. I like it, I'll vote yes, I only wish this idea was availble when I had first started to search for a new home for my group oh so many weeks ago --BigJD 19 September 2006
  42. Like it. That way, we can tell the difference between a truly safe town, or one that's just deserted. --Bluemofia 21:46, 20 September 2006 (BST)
  43. I like the Idea.. So Yea. Thats a Yes from ME.
  44. Yup, makes perfect sense.--Mr yawn 06:22, 21 September 2006 (BST)


  1. Not a thrilling idea, all told...honestly, ghost-towns are as safe as can be to live in. Speaking as someone who's used one (prior to the evolution of Ransack, but that doesn't matter; no zeds, no ransack anyway). --Ivan Romanov 10:52, 8 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re: not necessarily. If the place is mostly devoid of survivors and 'cades, the moment even a small horde waltzes in you're dead meat. –Xoid STFU! 11:23, 8 September 2006 (BST)
      • or the moment a horde of survivors waltzes in, it's pretty much secure. Basically, you're saying "IF there were zombies there it would be dangerous". There aren't zombies there, though. --Kiki Lottaboobs 17:45, 10 September 2006 (BST)
        • It is also saying that IF there were survivors there, it would be safe. The two do not preclude one another. --Karlsbad 02:19, 11 September 2006 (BST)
          • The absence of zombies is pretty darn safe. I mean, if you are the only player in an entire suburb, what have you got to be worried about? Zombies are the primary cause of death in Malton - if they aren't present it stands to reason that the area is safer. --Kiki Lottaboobs 04:30, 16 September 2006 (BST)
  2. Sorry, but it's just more work to add to the suburb page. And I think the game should be played - not just read up on using the wiki. - David Malfisto 16:45, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  3. TheDictator 1042, 9 September 2006 (MST)
  4. Still not a good idea to add this. Anyone who ever posts this has got to be able to back up his claim with recon data on 2/3rds of the suburb. It's much easier and informative to just look at the number of zombies. --Kiki Lottaboobs 17:45, 10 September 2006 (BST)
    • I'm sorry that this idea doesn't fit to your standards of "easy", Ms. Lottaboobs.  ;^) --Karlsbad 02:19, 11 September 2006 (BST)
  5. Ditto Kiki's recon data claimage. (I'm not certain why the author is attempting to rebutt all no votes in the vote list instead of on the discussion page.) --Cartoonlad 06:27, 11 September 2006 (BST)