From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Deletions Archive
2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4
2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2014 Jan-Jun Jul-Dec
Years 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

This is an archive page for Moderation/Deletions. This page represents all Deletions archived in March 2006.

Image:PKer Kalief.jpg

Reason Unused image. --Nov W!, Talk 03:59, 19 March 2006 (GMT)

  • Keep It's only a day old, not much time for it to get itself used. Besides we already have the policy of deleting unused images after 30 days. --RedKnight 04:24, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
Delete Ok, now that it's been almost a week without getting linked to I think it's safe to delete. And Grim, I completly agree with you that the wiki shouldn't be a hosting service. Perhaps it is time to revisit the unused image policy. --RedKnight 07:01, 24 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete- The wiki is NOT an image hosting service. --Grim s 12:23, 22 March 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: Deleted eventhough it's not yet 2 weeks. People should not abuse the wiki as an image hosting service --Nov W!, Talk 04:48, 27 March 2006 (BST)

The Union

Reason This group was disbanded a short while ago. See in it's history where it's content was deleted by the author (then brought back up). There used to also be another Union page somewhere, but I can't find it (I guess it's been turned into a redirect) (and don't ask me why this one is a category). A link to a forum post of the group leader claiming he is deleting the group can be obtained if asked for. --McArrowni 05:25, 7 March 2006 (GMT) --McArrowni 05:42, 7 March 2006 (GMT) Had problems linking to it... dunno if I can link directly to a category. Anyways, seems I found the old page. --McArrowni 05:42, 7 March 2006 (GMT)

  • Delete: And now commentary: Use a : at the front of the link to link to a category. So [[:Category:The Union]]. I'm the one who brought it back up, and I'll admit to missing the note the second time he started blanking the various Union pages that stated the group was disbanded (since I found them through fixing double redirects). — g026r 16:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep I have no idea what the wiki policy is for disbanded groups, but I'd rather keep the page with a disclaimer on the top stating that the group is disbanded instead of deleting the page. That way, a record of the group is kept as part of the "history" of Malton. --Nov W!, Talk 06:51, 8 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete I'm inclined to say that pages that were blanked by their author probably can be deleted. --RedKnight 07:11, 8 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep Just move the page to a new catagory 'Disbanded Groups'. That way we preserve the history of Malton. --

Technerd 17:29, 8 March 2006 (GMT)

  • Keep Move it to the History group category. That way we can still get info from it if we need to. Saromu 21:39, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: Kept - there are many disbanded groups around the wiki. Someone can go around tidying them up at some point, but there's no point deleting all these group pages that go belly up.--Nov W!, Talk 04:48, 27 March 2006 (BST)

urbandead.co.uk chat

Reason This page only contains a link to a website that seems to be dead. --Tethran 15:06, 11 March 2006 (GMT)

  • Delete - Seems pretty useless. Well, actually completely useless. --Brizth W! 15:25, 11 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - If there will be content in future, it can always be added into the IRC channels page. --Nov W!, Talk 05:08, 12 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - The link doesn't work, so there's no sense in keeping it. --Kleptonis 17:46, 26 March 2006 (BST)

Moderator - Dead link, deleted. --Nov W!, Talk 04:39, 27 March 2006 (BST)


Reason As it stands, all it appears to be a page dedicated to flaming Katthew. As far as I can tell the creator is annoyed that he was banned from the Desensitised forum. - CthulhuFhtagn 02:57, 1 March 2006 (GMT)

  • Keep- This is in no way a flaming response. This was written after 2 years of intense study of Malton and its associated "guilds" or "clans". This clan has been particulary intersting in its "coup de ta" type take over. We at Ithaca College hope to track more powerplays and political developments like this in the near future. It is EXTREMLEY intersting how even real life emoitions and motives can transerse the plane of reality into the plane of siuperficial and even "un-real" environments.--FiringSquad- 03:30, 5 March 2012 (GMT)
Sign your vote for it to be valid Mr. Nobody. As for the post, no vitriol here. No sir, just cold reliable fact...
"I didnt think someone could actually sink so low"
"elite Neo-Nazi like .... Katthew lovers"
"If there are ANY redeeming factors in Katthew it is the HONEST OPINION that they died with her heart and about 60% of her brain sooo long ago."
Oh yea, thats unbiased journalism at its best. Want my advice? Ignore her. From what I've seen she's a prima donna who derives great joy from watching people like you shake their e-fists impotently. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:30, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds like an upstanding person's honest opinion. After all, if an atrocity like the Iron Cross Brothers's page can be kept online, surely you moderators won't frown upon keeping a page like this one up? After all, we're protected by freedom of speech. -Erados 03:12, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - The ICB justifies its existance with relevant content that is useful to anybody. This does not. It can't even exist independant of POV, and obviously exists to push it. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:15, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete Not useful, in any way. --RedKnight 03:26, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete No real purpose, except maybe flaming/trolling/whatever. --Brizth W! 03:29, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep I don't know about you fellas, but I kinda like it. --Katthew 07:14, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep This will permanently remove her from our plane of existance, correct? We are going to use a banishment spell from Unearthed Arcana, right? Petrosjko 07:45, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - The Iron Cross Brothers page is relevant to the game and is NPOV. This is not. --Sindai 14:06, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Speedy Delete - Criterion Nine, page about a user without the User: prefix. It would just be a delete vote if the page were named something different, since as much as I dislike Katthew I don't think we need an entire page talking about how much she sucks.--'STER-Talk-Mod 19:00, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
SHE. SHE. There are females on Internet and I am one of them, okay? (If it was a typo that's okay I guess.) --Katthew 18:32, 2 March 2006 (GMT)
My mistake. It's not like naming yourself "matthew" with one letter changed might be misleading or anything.--'STER-Talk-Mod 20:55, 2 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - This is not the only page that is mainly for comedy. If it is meant to be serious it is only funnier. I say we can't dump it because then someone can say that everything thats just satire is off the wiki. Like the WCDZ, and imprison slavik pages. If the ice queen from whence there is no return is ok with it, I see no reason to slay this page. -Banana Bear4 21:09, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - Everyone knows that Katthew is beloved, and the page as well as this discussion just prove how much folks secretly care about her and want her to have their babies. --SLA (aka Roxie) 21:33, 1 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - I agree with Banana Bear4, if this page is deleted it'd be the thin edge of the wedge for all comical pages within the wiki. Kripcat 09:35, 2 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - Not accurate enough, there are a number of glaring omissions. Where is the mention of Katthew's predilection for molesting pigeons? --Way 12:50, 2 March 2006 (GMT)
What. --Katthew 18:32, 2 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Speedy Delete - Criterion Nine. Besides, whatever needs to be said about here can be said on her discussion page or on the author's user page. Why does she get a User page AND a separate page on the wiki devoted to her? This isn't a Katthew adoration hate/fan-club wiki, it's a wiki about the game Urban Dead. --Nov 10:32, 3 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - I agree with Crtiterion Nine.

-Sign your vote for it to be valid Mr. Nobody. As for the post, no vitriol here. No sir, just cold reliable fact... "Quoted from the mod startin with the "z"... too lazy to scroll.........--FiringSquad- 03:30, 5 March 2012 (GMT)

  • Keep Its pretty damn funny, since when does relevance have to do with anything, and if the moderators are as big of fans of free speech as they appear to be from their comments elsewhere on the page, hiding behind Criterion Nine seems inappropriate, to say the least. --Shantzman 22:05, 4 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - Katthew is much like an urban legend in UD. Who knows, someone might be thinking, "Hey, who's this crazy Katthew I always hear about?" Well, now they only need to check the wiki. Considering her User page is... well, let's just say it's interesting, and another view of her in this page could be nice to have. Plus it is quite funny, and besides, Katthew loves the attention. Mrdbeau 23:04, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

THINK ABOUT IT - If this page goes down... why not take down the User: Katthew page as well?? its pretty one sided, has about as much relevance as mine does as is... as you page bashers say "as one sided" as mine is. I merely want to put up an opposing side. This reminds me of Katthew really..... If theres any opposition or diviation from the "one path" then it gets the Smack-Down from the man (raises fist hangs head slightly).--FiringSquad- 03:30, 5 March 2012 (GMT)

  • Suppresses the urge to credit the WCDZ for this injustice*
At any rate, we dont take down User:Katthew because its a user page, and therefor not subject to NPOV rules. Yours however is. The wiki isn't the place for you to have flame wars with people you don't agree with, even if they are Katthew. --Zaruthustra-Mod 05:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
This isnt a flamewar, just the creation of a counter arguement and enlightening those who, after only reading the User: Katthew page wonder why some people dislike Katthew.

--FiringSquad- 03:30, 5 March 2012 (GMT)

Ok, your page is still flagrantly POV, and pages on the wiki are supposed to be NPOV. If you want to argue about katthew do it on a forum or at least on talk pages. It has no place here. --Zaruthustra-Mod 18:12, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - I see no reason for this to be here. — g026r 20:24, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
  • %*(&#&@&*( - ....G026r u dont have to BUT... I'd REALLY appreciate it if you elaborated just a LITTLE bit more on that....Hell you could even win a prize.
If you want a further explanation, read the ones that other people who don't think this belongs here have given. They sum up my opinion fairly well. — g026r 05:10, 8 March 2006 (GMT)

Delete. Despite the protestations of the author, it clearly is a flamewar. scootah

  • Keep - It's a nice page IMO. Nothing wrong with it. That's about all I can say without getting my vote deleted. Eddo36 00:33, 16 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - Me thinks this is a funny post. It is useful in providing another side of the arguement. I see that the use "Katthew" does not object to this thing being here. I have read criteria 9 and i see that the whole "humerous suggestions" also has about as much sense to do witht he UD game as this page does.--Smiteme

Moderator: Kept (11 votes to 9 votes) but moved to User:Firingsquad/Katthew so that it conforms to the wiki policy on User pages. The Katthew page is now a disambiguation to either User:Katthew or Firingsquad's version. --Nov W!, Talk 05:00, 27 March 2006 (BST)

Iron Cross Brothers

Reason. I am Jewish and find a page glorifying Nazis and Nazi beliefs offensive. The idea of this page existing is disgusting. Please delete this page swiftly. Saromu 02:51, 22 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Delete. This is a sick, twisted group. When the Creedy Defense Force got on to them, they changed it to Communist-favored. This is horrible, and should not continue. This is offensive and immature, and condones Hate Crimes. Erados 15:48, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
Erados again: They reverted back to the original SS page, deleting the "delete flagging" that I tagged on to it. They're being total immature idiots about this page, changing it to take the heat off them but making things worse in the meantime, and so on. I'll keep this edit updated with what they're doing. - Erados 16:15, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
Guys, that was obvious satire. Its ridiculous to claim that they're trying to propagate both nazi and communist ideas, since the two factions spent most of their time trying to murder one another --Zaruthustra-Mod 01:55, 23 February 2006 (GMT)
Furthermore, they made a very good point. Especially since communism has been responsible for over 7 times as many deaths as Nazism has. - KingRaptor 05:27, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete. Firs pro-nazi page with SS soldiers images, and now pro-communist with Stalin a CCCP flag. This page is offensive and propagates nazism/comunism opinions. --Wojanton 16:11, 22 February 2006 (GMT)*
  • Keep There are no valid reasons or ground for deletion of the Iron Cross Brothers wiki page. There are pictures of generic German soldiers in jet black 1930s era uniforms with jackboots on. If the page was taking on the style of blatant outright NAZIISM, then it should be deleted! But, there are no swastikas anywhere, there are no racial slurs, no hate phrases, no text anywhere that indicates affiliation with Nazis, nothing. There is nothing offensive on the wiki, there are no hate phrases or anything of the sort! Clearly none of this can be seen, and that means that there are no valid no grounds for removal of this wiki! Others are worked up because of the pictures of generic German soldiers. Atomini 16:38, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - I hate Nazis as much as the next guy, but A.) Atomini is right, they don't overtly mention Nazism or have any actual racist stuff on their page and B.) "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it." -Patrick Henry Voltaire Evelyn Beatrice Hall. They may be horrible people espousing horrible ideas but they have their right to espouse them.--'STER-Talk-Mod 16:48, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
A) It has already been established that the soldiers in the pictures are SS officers and therefore the page does "mention" Nazism; and B) No one is going to find these people and hold a gun to their heads saying they can't say whatever they want to say; however, we don't have to let them say it on this wiki, simple as that.Mrdbeau 16:57, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - Whether this is overt nazi propaganda is completely irrelevent. They could be throwing up the deutscher gruß and we still couldn't ban them. A quick skim through the wiki policy discussion and rules will show you that we don't actually have any policy on offensive material, questionable or not. PS: That quote is a common misattribution of voltaire, actually from Evelyn Beatrice Hall. Knowledge is Power.--Zaruthustra-Mod 17:32, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
Gah. Google has failed me.--'STER-Talk-Mod 17:41, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
That is simply ludicrous. I can absolutely 100% guarantee you that the first racist group that was put up on this wiki would be jumped all over in SECONDS and would be deleted. Mrdbeau 16:57, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
1930's German soldiers were Nazi though. The page isn't German. He could have picked German soldiers from before or after Nazi Germany. But he specifically picked German soldiers from the Nazi Germany era. I would be ok with it if it was changed to German soldiers from WWI or before. But Nazi soldiers are not. Change it.
It almost sounds like what you're saying is that history offends you. The page is a good faith edit that has no discernable ties to nazi ideology. Its merely a RP that uses period military flavor. You might find the whole thing in rather bad taste, but that has no bearing on whether they broke any rules (which I will reiterate, they didn't). --Zaruthustra-Mod 01:39, 23 February 2006 (GMT)
Then perhaps the rules need to be modified... I'm amazed that people find it odd that the "period military flavor" they chose to use was 1930s/40s Nazi military flavor. How many other years of military history have their been and how many other nations were fighting during that period, again?? Mrdbeau 16:57, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete (or at least back off) - I'm not Jewish, I live in America and none of my family members were hurt during WWII, but I'm still very offended by this. Even if you didn't mean to come across as Nazis, at least respect that people are offended by this and change it.
  • Keep - Despite the fact that yes those are WWII era German soldiers, some German soldiers didn't like the Nazi party, some just fought just because it was their duty to their country, despite what people seem to think, not every single German soldier believed in Hitler's ideas. But they had no choice to fight. And if they are doing this just to 'get' you. Then you're just playing into the game in their shock value. Don't prove them right by deleting it. That means they got you. PS: None of uniforms on the soldiers in the pictures have swastikas on them.


Again, it's been established on their discussions page and on this page that those soldiers are, in fact, SS soldiers. Considering the secret police were primarily responsible for rounding up Jews and sending them to concentration camps, I'd have to believe that they probably supported the Nazi regime.
That is true. I agree with Rogue on the fact that some soldiers didn't support the Nazis, they just didn't want to suffer the same treatment as the Jews through desertion. It was those soldiers that overlooked things. But this page can still be deleted or at least make the creator be forced to modify it. We just have to overwhelm their votes. We still have reason to get it deleted - it's highly offensive to... obviously not all, but some people. Including me. - Erados 03:07, 23 February 2006 (GMT)
Don't ever Play Well of Souls then, the biggest guild there will piss all of you off. I think they put the ranks like this because people like you all will Freak out over it... Sad sad sad. ---Rogue
  • Keep I realize that fascism is an unpopular viewpoint, but people have a right to hold and express what political views they please. Evelyn Beatrice Hall quote applies. ---Ivan Romanov
Even if you do not think it should be taken down because the ideas and images shown are not directly Nazi you should at least agree that it would be civil to take down because people take offence. Saromu 02:06, 24 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete Their only defence weighs on technicality. So there isn't any overt Nazi imagery but the language and the 'spirit' of the wiki goes beyond confessed love of Nazi cosmetic. The absence of swastikas racial slurs, hate phrases does nothing to alleviate the sinister connotations. Infact it has done the opposite and encouraged a pro-Nazi reaction http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=432236 This in itself should be sufficient grounds for deletion.

Their protests are well recognised as standard techniques adopted by rightwing/extremist groups operating in Western Democracies. They know they are protected by free speech laws and they take advantage and abuse them to spread hate.

Entertaining the notion that they really are well balanced and tolerant people, what happens if a Nazi element hi-jacks their group and takes it over as it's own? They have just offered them an instant infrastucture and introduced Nazism to Malton.

Is the wiki is satirical? Just where is the satire in Nazi imagery within a zombie game? ... Ironic, sarcastic, witty? The wiki entry is none of the before listed, it is entirely out of context.

The site is entirely inappropriate in Urbandead and must go. While you have rights of free speech and to have an opinion, you don't have the right to spread hatred whether intentional or not. Any reference to extremism whether intentional or not must be moderated or removed. Lesterunlimited (no wiki entry yet.)

This is worth addressing. Lets get to it.
Paragraph one. The "sinister connotations" are questionable at best. They use period fascist flavor for the entry. The thing closest resembling nazi ideology is the part on "purity", but it still doesn't even come close to being antisemitic. As for Herr Himmler, the ICB aren't responsible for people's insane character ideas.
Paragraph two. What hate? They have openly stated that they aren't nazis. If seeing nazi uniforms makes somebody antisemitic they were probably bound to come around to it anyways.
Paragraph three. If you see a secret nazi infiltration of the wiki let me know.
Paragraph four. Nothing about swastikas is satirical, everything about the link we were discussing was. Straw man arguments are fun and easy, but you're just distracting attention from the issue.
Five. This isn't Germany. We don't have rules against hate speech, and even if we did this probably wouldn't qualify. If you want to force a consensus on policy we would love to hear from you, but this isn't the place to do it.
Conclusion. With all that said, all of that is irrelevant because they aren't breaking the rules. We are moderators, not social crusaders. Our job is enforce the rules people make. So I would strongly encourage everybody to make the rules in policy discussion and follow them here, not the other way around. It helps us avoid coming to places like this. As for you, I strongly suspect you are just a sock puppet of one of the other opinionated users here, as you joined yesterday and immediately started supporting this deletion. --Zaruthustra-Mod 02:28, 24 February 2006 (GMT)
We were in Ft. Creedy when they came in so we all saw it. That's why we're here complaining. Saromu 03:18, 24 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep. This seems to be a legitimate group. They are not in violation of any established wiki guidelines. They are not posting pornography. They are not directly attacking any other group on their wiki page. There is literally nothing here that justifies their removal from the wiki. Further, in the event of a "nazi infiltration" of the wiki, we have the tools to deal with such an event should it occur, (should we decide to deal with it), and I have no intention of getting bogged down in precedent should any situation require it. What ideology they display or espouse is really not the point at all. Does the page break any current rules? No? Then why are we trying to delete it? -- Odd Starter talk | Mod | W! 00:03, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep: This is a litigimate group page. While many may not like their chosen theem, there is nothing that prevents them from choosing that. --RedKnight 03:18, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep: - All I see are a bunch of generic German soldiers and rankings. It's just a group with a WWII-era Wehrmacht (spell?) theme. They have not broken any rules, they are not promoting hate speech of any kind, and they do not exhibit any Nazi ideology whatsoever. If you're offended by it, then you can go jump off a cliff for all I care. - KingRaptor 05:24, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
You should revise your history knowledge KingRaptor. These are not generic german soldiers. The one on the left has a dagger that was carried only by SS officers. And the one on the right has a symbol of SS on his collar. So these are clearly SS officer and Waffen SS soldier. --Wojanton 10:10, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete : "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

So much of the history of the struggle between good and evil can be explained by Edmund Burke’s observation. Time and again those who profess to be good seem to clearly outnumber those who are evil, yet those who are evil seem to prevail far too often. Seldom is it the numbers that determine the outcome, but whether those who claim to be good men are willing to stand up and fight for what they know to be right.

This wiki entry is so fundamentally wrong that I feel ethically and morally obligated to vote for its deletion and encourage others to do likewise. I cannot condone the existence of anything that will polish the image of the SS or that of the Nazi party, no matter how indirectly and obliquely.

Let us take a closer look at what is really going on here:

This wiki page is not directly promoting hatred, true. This wiki page is not promoting Nazism since there are no nazi symbols, entirely DEBATABLE.

Are there nazi symbols in that wiki entry?

It generally accepted that the uniforms that are displayed on the wiki page are easily recognisable as those that were worn by the Schutzstaffel (more commonly known as the SS) of Nazi Germany. That being, then I would like to point out the uniform itself serves as a symbol of Nazism, the same as the nazi flag. It is it such a wonder that there is such a hue and cry right now?

Reference for Nazi Uniforms: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_uniform

Was the SS part of the Nazi party?

The Schutzstaffel("defense squadron"), or SS, was a large paramilitary organization that was a principal component of the Nazi party. The SS was led by Heinrich Himmler from 1929 until it was disbanded in 1945 with the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. The Nazis regarded the SS as an elite unit, the Party's "praetorian guard", with all SS personnel selected on racial and ideological grounds.

Reference for the Schutzstaffel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS

Have the SS committed atrocities?

On September 30, 1946, the judges of the Nuremberg Trials (Tribunal) sentenced the SS-organization, declaring it a criminal organization. The judges underpinned this sentence by stating that "the SS was used for purposes which were criminal, involving the persecution and the extermination of the Jews, brutalities and killings in concentration camps, excesses in the administration of occupied territories, the administration of the slave labour programme and the maltreatment and murder of prisoners of war" (IMT, 1946, Vol. XXII, p.516, in: Höhne, 1969, p.3).

Yes, but this is only Role-play, we only borrow the 'look' and parts of the 'doctrine', so it's ok?

If it looks like a duck, if it sounds like a duck and it feels like a duck, then is sure as hell IS a duck. You people fail to realise that this is a way of romanticizing Nazism. They have nice uniforms! They are so cool! By idealizing their uniforms, you are inadvertently polishing the nazi image and are contributing to making it more socially acceptable. It's just a small step you will say, but it's a small step in the wrong direction. Perhaps you do not realise it, but this is exactly what you are doing. Let us not forget all of the impressionable 15-year-old people who are being exposed to this, and who do not have the same sense of historical depth and judgement as an adult. You are representing 'cool' nazi look-alikes, but fail to mention that the group you are parading as where responsible for shooting unarmed civilians in the back of the head and of committing numerous other atrocities. Do you really want your image to be associated with such a heavy baggage of pain and blood?

Final comment: I am shocked at the response in favour of keeping this wiki page. Are we doomed to repeat our errors, once again? It seems to be the case, since we are forgetting the important lessons of our past. -Sam Roberts

  • Delete: From their OOC disclaimer: "This is merely an outward image, an appearance of our group, and we in no way incorporate the ideals, theories, or practices of Naziism into our group be it ICly or OOCly."

Interesting how someone can maintain an "outward image" or "appearance" of Nazis, yet because they do not overtly "incorporate their ideals, theories, or practices" into the group, then apparently things are alright. I suppose I will start a group called the "Klansmen" and have people dressed in white robes all over my page... but wait, they won't have hoods on and they won't be burning crosses. And of course, at the bottom of my page, I will put something about how I don't hate all black people or Catholics or anything like that; I simply want that "image" to be what is associated with my group.

Some of the opinions presented here in defense of these people are a joke and it's a shame that people cannot see this group for what it really is. Mrdbeau 07:12, 25 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Keep While I too, dislike the nazi theorium, they do have a right to excist in a democracy. The problem comes in when they stop just alking and start acting on what they say. "Speach is meaningless! unless you take action things will never change!" I can not remember where I heard that but I did in some form. Anyway, they ahve the right to excist and unless they do something IRL they ahve the right to excist. Stupid? Yes, They have the right to excist? Also yes.

And by this I excorcize my right to vote. - --ramby Talk 11:36, 25 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Delete The logic in separating 1930s German Soldiers from the Nazi regime is a flawed one. As the design, make up, goals and ideals of the German Army under Hitler's rule in Germany were creations of the Nazi party, they are definitive parts of the Nazi regime, and thus cannot be separated. It has been mentioned that such imagery as the Iron Cross are not Nazi related, and thus should not be considered as Nazism, statements of this type are flawed as well. While their origins, as was the origin of the swastika, did not originate in Nazi Germany, the Nazi regime usurped them for its own purposes, thrusting them onto the world as symbols of their Government, and thus their cause and ideals. Unfortunately, the misguided souls that have created this site have failed to grasp that the connection that symbols of the German Army have to Nazism is so direct, that to separate them is to trivialize horrific events in world history, and do a disservice to those who died by the hands of the Nazi Party, and those soldiers and citizens who gave everything, even their lives to end these atrocities. Shantzman 4:20 pm, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
Comment Some points:
  • The Socialist Worker's Front of Malton isn't up for deletion, despite its obvious Communist references.
  • This wiki does not have any policy against groups following a Nazi/Communist/what-have-you theme. As such, there is no basis for deleting it.
  • Freedom of speech is completely useless if it only applies to people whom we agree with or don't offend anyone.
  • They are not in anyway promoting the Nazi ideology, they do not support gassing of Jews, Aryan supremacy, etc. etc. Whether their use of the uniforms promotes the Nazi image is questionable as well.
Oh, and since everyone likes to quote historical figures while making a big deal out of a group who otherwise would have been a bunch of nobodies, here's a quote for you, courtesy of Martin Niemoller:
"First they came for the Communists. And I didn't speak up then, because I wasn't a Communist."
Squashing of dissent is squashing of dissent, regardless of who the recipent is. - KingRaptor 17:00, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
Comment A counterpoint.
While agree entirely about your points with regard to the Socialist Worker's Front of Malton, you seem to be failing to grasp the major difference between the two. Communism is considering a valid method of government, still in use in North Vietnam and China, whereas Stalinist Communism, the style most people see as Communism in its entirety, is not. Similarly, while Facism is a legitimate idealogical system of government, used in various forms in history, Roman, Italian, German etc. German Fascism is again unfortunately causally connected to Nazism, you simply cannot claim to be one, without the other, simply because they were bread out of the same pot. If this group wanted to use a generic fascist model in their group, I would have no issue with it. Shantzman 17:46 25 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Delete. This Brotherhood already is spawning actual nazi minded copycats in the game. That may or may not be part of the brotherhood. These individuals are already changing the whole concept of a Zombie Apocalypse experience into a military human vs. human strategy game. That is not what the creator of this game intended. They shout out Nazi propaganda during the game, thereby changing the whole feel of the game. I for one no longer feel like a survivor, trapped in a barricaded building trying to stay one step away from being eaten. I like the whole zombie feel, if I wanted to play a war game I would have found a different game to play online.

They have the right to free speech yes, but this is a Zombie Apocalypse game. The Nazi concept adds nothing to the game and if it adds nothing then it shouldn’t be here. Role Playing is a game of the imagination. In this game we imagine ourselves in a world similar to, “Night of the Living Dead? “Dawn of the Dead? etc. Add the Nazi element and it distorts and changes the entire feeling of the game. It no longer is a Zombie Apocalypse game. It just becomes another common strategy war game. My question is what does the Nazi content add to the game?

It is a human vs. zombie role-playing game, if we continue to allow groups with imagery that is other then that. We loose the entire concept of what we are playing. All I can say is I am loosing my interest in the game, and I’m still relatively new. It has lost its feel; it’s suspense, no longer do I worry about waking up and being eaten. Instead I log on to see "Sieg, Heil!" “Hail Adolph Hitler?, and other dead concepts of Nazism. This group may not be the ones doing it, but it is the egg from which it hatched. What’s next? White Supremacist groups, KKK, Aryan Nation, Al-Qai'da. Once this happens it’s no longer a Zombie game, and I am only interested in playing a zombie game. This is not about politics or belief, it is about turning the game into something entirely different. Cult 13:28, 25 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Delete. I'm with Cult here. Nobody's denying their right to free speech--unless one of us is acting in his or her official capacity as a governmental employee, that's not an issue. This is a private forum, and we have the right (rather, its owners do, whoever they are) to decide for ourselves who may or may not speak here. I approve in general of a very liberal speech policy, but groups cloaking themselves in the dress and manner of racial hate groups deserve as little toleration on our parts as they give their targets. I would never deny their right to pass out fliers on a street or engage in peaceful assembly or petitioning in public, but in this private forum we may demand at least a modicum of civility and respect for others. We don't have to do so, of course, but I think we should. Enoch the Watcher 22:02, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep...sortof.

I agree with the arguements put across against the culture of Nazism, even such a shallow dip into it as this group. However, what bothers me is that it was initated not because it was offensive or that at any stage the Iron Cross Brothers have promoted nazism or fascism or anything like that, but because they made the foolish mistake of invading Fort Creedy, and claiming it as theirs. This seemed to annoy some people, who then playerkilled those whose group was the IC, and then turned round and initated this attack. Although i can't definitively prove that this OOC attack is connected to the IC ones, i urge you to read carefully the discussion logs on this page, if they haven't been deleted already, and see how the initators of this move to deletion show more concern for their sovereignty over fort creedy, and eagerly snap at ICb statements to leave. I suggest that this page not be deleted, but only so that these people do not get away with this act of metagaming. I suggest, however, that the page also be wiped, and that although not deleted, it also not incorporate this offensive imagery any further. Vote: Keep, but then wipe. --Vextra 21:34, 25 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Comment If you are willing to go the extra mile and remove all aspects that could link your wiki entry to Nazi imagery, then I would be willing to change my vote to a KEEP. --Samroberts 22:53, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - All other points have been established and I agree. However:

"Comment Some points:

The Socialist Worker's Front of Malton isn't up for deletion, despite its obvious Communist references. "

Communism in itself isn't bad. What Stalin did with communism was bad. Communism makes everyone equal (which is also why it fails, since to be equal, no-one can have power, and therefore no-one can lead), whereas Nazism is a branch of Facism. Facism is (as I hope you're all educated, since it is so hotly debated) about governments having an iron grip. I noted that their page has changed to "communism" and is now 'ironic'. They say it is ok to follow Stalin, who also did atrocities. It seems to me that they jump from one idealism to another without any thought for others, and whether they offend people or not. If you had been put in a "Gulag Labor Camp" (as they talk about in their latest page), would you want someone to parade the Soviet flag about and praise the works of Josef Stalin? If you would, I sincerely suggest you see a psychiatrist, since you probably have deep mental scarring after coming out from one of these horrific places. Horrific, like the Nazi concentration camps, or even the British ones (yes, we did invent them, sometime during the Boar War I believe, correct me if I am wrong). So with no direct ties with nazism (other than the knife and SS badge), and with new blatant pro-Soviet iconography and text, this group should be deleted on grounds that they have no thought for others and a terrible disregard for subtlety. If they want to use German soldier pictures (or now Red Army pictures), the least they could do is make sure they check history, find out facts about the new group they are (not) portraying or even use the discussion board to find out how well recieved they would be.--HVLD 22:14, 25 February 2006 (GMT)

Comment - I cleaned this page a bit, I didn't change anyone's vote, except replacing Do not delete with keep. It was impossible to read what was said. --Brizth W! 22:26, 25 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Keep - I think people are wildly overreacting. I can't help but laugh at how "evil" it is to create a small group like this in a free HTML MMO. The page clearly does not violate any rules. There's nothing more to it than that. (Although you've gotta admit, if there's one thing the Germans were good at it was designing stylish uniforms.) --Sindai 23:11, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete There is a tension here between people who will cry censorship when nazi references are banned, and those who contend any nazi reference is offensive. There seems to be little inbetween; there is no compromise between the opposing views.

That being said, the reasons for deleting have largely already been stated, and I just add my own two cents.

First, the context of nazi references is important. The ICB does not seem to be spoof along the lines of Hogan's Heros. Rather the ICB could be at best a well-intended but poorly thought-out idea for a group that comletely fails to consider the power of the ideas conveyed with nazi imagery. More likely, the nazi theme is used to deliberately provoke and anger people. Whatever the case, this is not a forum owned by the ICB, they can go create a axis/allies roleplaying game somewhere else if they really want to.

Further, this is not about the pc police getting their knickers in a bunch over someone else's perceived slight. Simply said, the ICB is low-rent, and there is nothing wrong with wanting to disassociate from all things ICB.

So what are the options?

One possiblity is to do nothing, and let the ICB show itself for what is ultimately may be; a bunch of punks cloaking a message of hate in the First Amendment. Perhaps the ICB might exist in the UD as they do in the real world; sticking to themselves in cities, in the country and in prisons, but always running against everyone else who doesn't fit in with their group. But wait, the UD is not the real world.

Another possiblity is to discuss these issues, and that is happening here for sure. But how much energy does everyone have to spin off on these issues? How long will a debate continue, and will it do any good anyway. Does such a debate actually belong in a game like UD? Will it add anything to UD, or will it detract from the whole?

As I mentioned at the start, the two sides are polarized, and everybody already has their minds made up. I say the ICB should go start their own game somewhere else. Beerhunter 23:21, 25 February 2006 (GMT)

The thing that worries me is that this isn't about nazis, or nazi ideology, or nazi symbols. Nor was it ever, nor should it be. Its about policy, and voting delete on this sets an awful policy precedent. Don't like CDF? Say their group offends you and get them deleted! Why not, all the rules are totally subjective. As long as you have enough group members you can do whatever you want, because we did away with that pesky rule of law. Just boot kick anybody you don't like off the wiki using superior numbers. --Zaruthustra-Mod 01:34, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
Zarathustra, what bothers me is that some people are making this out to be a "CDF problem," when it isn't at all. Saromu, for one, is not affiliated with the CDF and there are others that have voted to delete that have absolutely no relationship to us at all, either. If anyone truly thinks this is a "CDF problem," please sign up at our forums and look at the two threads dealing with the ICB. You will plainly see that when the ICB made the statements about "taking over Creedy" and so on, we simply laughed at them on our forum. It was not until the issue of the overt images of SS soldiers and Nazism came up that people started to react negatively to the group. I believe that part of the reason for the reaction on our forum was due to the large number of Europeans we have in our group, including someone from Poland, a few others from eastern Europe, and quite a few Brits. Nevertheless, the titles of the two threads dealing with the ICB on our forums are "Houston, we have a problem" in the General Forum and "Iron Cross Brothers" in the Diplomacy sub-forum under the Public Access forum. To be completely honest, if someone has not read either of these threads, they are speaking from a very ignorant viewpoint. Both of those threads plainly exhibit that the ICB's actions in-game have absolutely nothing to do with this deletion request. Furthermore, nothing was brought up about the Nazism issue until Dirtbagdan made the following statement while in the fort: "LOL... Hanover, I'm not Nazi but I do look like one. I love the look, but the first thing people think when they see it is 'Nazis'." (We have a screenshot of this, by the way). Separating the "look of the Nazis" and being a Nazi (and furthermore intentionally trying to look like a Nazi) is a distinction which only threatens to minimize exactly what Nazism represents. Mrdbeau 03:05, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
I have no interest in the forums or game. Anything that was said in them is strictly irrelevant. This isn't a popularity contest, its a deletion request for a wikipedia entry. Anything else is just whistling dixie. You're reading things into my posts I think. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:36, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
Perhaps you need to reread your post. The fact that this is not a popularity contest is precisely the point, yet in your former post, you imply that this action is a popularity contest and the CDF simply did not like the IC actions of this group, so we wish to have them deleted. You have absolutely no evidence to support that and, in fact, the evidence contradicts your opinion. This action was initiated by a CDF member because we became aware of their existence through their in-game behavior. Had we become aware of them in any other capacity, I have a feeling the reaction by the CDF's members would have been quite similar. Mrdbeau 06:10, 26 February 2006 (GMT)

That was hyperbole. I used CDF as an example because it was the first thing that came to mind. I never made any accusation. I'm not going to argue about this, its just getting this entire thing further off track. --Zaruthustra-Mod 06:54, 26 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Delete Ok so we let this group continue with their overt Nazi style imagery because they are only STYLING themselves on 1940's German soldiers, not the Nazi's themselves. Then another group comes along who decides they want to use the swastika because it oringally had Hindu origins and meant good luck. Do we allow that? Do we hell!

The (possibly unfortunate) fact is that both the uniforms and imagery of 1940's German soldiers and the symbol of the swastika have both been irrevocably tainted by their association with the Nazi movement. This is always going to be the first thing that pops into peoples heads and it will ALWAYS be offensive to someone or other. By no means should we ban the members of this group from the game. They should however go away, grow up, develop some sensitivity to other peoples feelings and come back with a group which DOESN'T offend and polarise. Gordon 09:23, 26 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Keep - Personally I believe in the concept of absolute free speech, people should be able to say what they feel no matter how hate filled, perverse or discriminatory it may be. That said this is the Urban Dead wiki not an open forum, so why should we allow it? Because the closest connection to the Nazi party are a couple of vague military symbols from the WW2 era. German WW2 Military does not equal Final Solution, German WW2 Military does not equal Elderly Euthanasia, German WW2 Military does not equal Social Darwinism. There are is no racial connotation within the article and the swastika is neither present nor mentioned. This article is in no way more offensive than a German WW2 war memorial. In addition to this the article is obvious satire as referenced by Zaruthustra above. Kripcat 09:56, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
Re: Satire - I find it hard to believe that the page was mere satire given the guy's statement (see above) that he likes the look of Nazis. If someone wishes to be satirical, they should at least introduce some elements of irony, derision, or wit; whereas this page did not do any of that and, in fact, romanticized the look of Nazis. Mrdbeau 18:51, 26 February 2006 (GMT)

Comment - This is what this page has brought to a Zombie game. This morning I logged on to this "# Herr Himmler said "Death to all non-Nazis!" (2-26 09:32 :: 17 minutes ago)" , this has absolutely nothing to do with the storyline of this game. It ruins it's playablity, and distorts it concept. Imagine your playing Dungeons & Dragons, an you DM throws Star trek character into the mix. It ruins the whole essence of the game. It's no longer a fantasy game of Swords & Sorcery. Cult 10:01, 26 February 2006 (GMT)

This is still irrelevant. --Zaruthustra-Mod 18:14, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
He's just a Griefer taking advantage of the fact that this is happening around CDF, I'm pretty sure that if this didn't happen he would still be griefing, but just under another name. --Rogue
  • Keep - I'm really not happy about saying keep here. Why? because I don't think its tactful to have a group in our lighthearted and fun game that features imagery of SS officers, and iconography used heavily in Nazi Germany. Also I think its incredibly weak to say that they are in no way referencing Nazism simply because they don't have any ethnic slurs or Swastika's on the page. Hitler restored the Iron Cross in 1939, like the swastika, the iron cross now has some very ugly stains on it.

However, just as the WCDZ may bother people, or griefers in the game may be a bother, they are allowed to stay, and that is how it should be. I agree that This group is being needlessly offensive, but thats their choice to make. I'm not happy about this all, but I think we have to let them decide if they want to change the page for us. I still think their page should change, and I would be very happy if the ICB did something civil and diplomatic, like changing their name and imagery, so that they didn't have oblique references to nazism, and I wish that they wouldn't try to skirt the issue by saying that SS officers and the iron cross have nothing to do with Nazism. -Banana Bear4 00:14, 27 February 2006 (GMT)

  • Keep - I have nothing deep or inspiring to say other than the fact that this is a game. Is it insulting to some? Sure, but so are a lot of things that go on around here. --Lucero Capell 04:00, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete. Even Chairman Mao would be offended by this Paper Tiger. --Maggot Therapy 08:58, 28 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - Although I do find the nazi imagery used quite distasteful, it's not good enough reason for deletion. The main reason being that there are no rules against it, not in the game nor here. However, I do believe that the owner(s) of the group should take the initiative and remove the parts that have offended people. If the page didn't have the SS officers and the ranks I wouldn't even have noticed it. --Cepholo 22:55, 28 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - I hate this group. Seriously. A lot of my relatives were killed in the Holocaust. However, this groups can exist. For people that say this has no place in the game, I disagree. In any actual outbreak, there are Nazi's who would survive. There are people who would turn to Facism. In Urban Dead, my characters are a reflection of me. They are and behave like I would want to during a zombie outbreak. One heals, one kills. The best solution to this is probably in gameAnd my characters and the members of my group will kill ICB members on site. So should everyone else who thinks this group is wrong. I already killed a leader a while ago. I asked about the group. I researched the group. I said, "When I get the AP I am going to kill DirtBagDan." And the next day I did. I encourage everyone to do the same.--Killa Foola 00:09, 2 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep --Specialist290 21:57, 6 March 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: 17 Keeps to 13 Deletes. Kept. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 00:28, 13 March 2006 (GMT)

The Dukes of Dulston

Reason: Yet another request by me in an effort to sort out what groups really are active, or even still exist, within Dulston. One such group is the "Dukes of Dulston". While I only recently removed their link to Dulston's surburb page their talk page shows signs of players questioning their existence... but no replies to these statements. I would therefore suggest that this survivor group no longer exists (they are not listed on the game stats either, so that would also imply fewer than 10 active members). If this group does exist I hope they will notice this request, if not I would ask that both their group page and talk page (here), be deleted. --Mobius187 9:17 AM, 21 Feb 2006 (EST).

  • Delete - Seems to be gone. Oh btw, I added the delete tag to the page. --Brizth W! 22:35, 21 February 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: Deleted. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 00:28, 13 March 2006 (GMT)

6 redirects to one page

Reason: All these pages have copies of the information on Category:Items. I would either delete them all or possibly leave inventory (since that's the only reasonable name to describe the information on these pages. Dcvortex 11:30, 18 February 2006 (GMT)

  • They don't all have the same info, they merely all redirect. Admittedly Inventory and Item List have nothing linking to them save this page; but there's still the Go box. Items has ten pages linking to it, excluding here and redirects. The point of redirects is redundancy, so that no matter what version of the name for something you put in your link or URL you'll still get the page you're looking for. Keep.--'STER-Talk-Mod 15:17, 18 February 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: Kept. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 00:28, 13 March 2006 (GMT)

Dulston Dead

Reason: Dulston currently has a glut of groups apparently associated with the suburb, and as I'm trying to sort out both Dulston and Pescodside I figured I would follow standard procedures by requesting that this page be removed from the Wiki if no one speaks up for it. Previously I removed its link from Groups section for Dulston and no one has stepped in since to restore it. Also, the group is not listed on the UD game stats site, showing they must have fewer than 10 active members. If this group is active I'm hoping they will speak up. This is my first request of this nature, so if it is incorrect let me know. -- Mobius187 9:33 AM, 15 Feb 2006 (EST).

  • Delete - I dont think it exists anymore. I never saw any indication of their presence when i was in Dulston in late october, and i was present in the suburb until January. --Grim s 23:32, 17 February 2006 (GMT)
  • Delete - Agreed. I had a character in Dulston for quite some time and never found evidence of organized horde activity. I'm not saying we should delete all groups that don't exist anymore--no one's suggesting we delete DARIS--but nonexistent groups that we've never heard of, sure.--'STER-Talk-Mod 15:20, 18 February 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: Deleted. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 00:28, 13 March 2006 (GMT)


Reason: Unfortunately, I have reason to believe the material I previously thought was public domain is actually limited use, and until I ascertain otherwise from the archives, I'd rather it be taken down; as I am the original poster of the content, may I requisition speedy removal, if it is not a burden? Thank you. -Blaine Segwich

  • Speedy Delete --RedKnight 08:19, 18 February 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: Deleted. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 00:28, 13 March 2006 (GMT)

Carrion crow

Reason: Completely useless. Describes typical feral zombie behaviour, and we already have a page for that in the glossary (Feral). --Grim s 18:45, 11 Feb 2006 (GMT)

  • Merge - Merge it into the Feral page then. --Nov 03:48, 12 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Moderator: Merged. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 00:28, 13 March 2006 (GMT)