UDWiki:Poll/Classifying Suburb Groups: Revision history

18 March 2011

• curprev 04:0904:09, 18 March 2011‎ Vapor talk contribs‎ m 39,905 bytes 0‎ Protected "UDWiki:Poll/Classifying Suburb Groups": scheduled [edit=sysop:move=sysop]

16 March 2011

• curprev 20:4320:43, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 39,905 bytes −306‎ No edit summary
• curprev 19:2819:28, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 40,211 bytes +8‎ →‎Detailed Summary:
• curprev 18:4618:46, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 40,203 bytes +1,096‎ No edit summary
• curprev 18:4618:46, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 39,107 bytes +3‎ →‎Detailed Summary:
• curprev 18:4218:42, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 39,104 bytes 0‎ →‎Summary of the Polling Results
• curprev 18:4218:42, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 39,104 bytes +3‎ →‎Summary of the Polling Results
• curprev 18:4118:41, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 39,101 bytes +3,611‎ No edit summary
• curprev 00:1500:15, 16 March 2011‎ MHSstaff talk contribs‎ 35,490 bytes +1‎ No edit summary

15 March 2011

• curprev 23:3823:38, 15 March 2011‎ ShadowScope talk contribs‎ 35,489 bytes +1,393‎ No edit summary
• curprev 05:0005:00, 15 March 2011‎ Pedentic talk contribs‎ 34,096 bytes +90‎ →‎I do wish to see the system changed. I am '''not satisfied''' with the current classification system.
• curprev 01:4401:44, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 34,006 bytes +52‎ →‎'''Survivor / Zombie / Independent / Dual Nature'''
• curprev 01:4301:43, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,954 bytes +52‎ →‎I would like to see Dual Nature and Combined Zombie/Survivor added as it's own separate category
• curprev 01:4201:42, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,902 bytes +52‎ →‎There should be an "Other" category for groups to use. If they want a more detailed description, they should create a one or two-word descriptor by their name.
• curprev 01:4101:41, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,850 bytes +103‎ →‎7. Type of Classifier
• curprev 01:4001:40, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,747 bytes +52‎ →‎Both are equally as important to me.
• curprev 01:3901:39, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,695 bytes +52‎ →‎There should be more group types added to the list of classifications
• curprev 01:3901:39, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,643 bytes +52‎ →‎Neither improved classification nor reduced conflicts are important to me at all
• curprev 01:3701:37, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,591 bytes +52‎ →‎The groups should decide how they are listed.
• curprev 01:3701:37, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,539 bytes +52‎ →‎I agree.
• curprev 01:3601:36, 15 March 2011‎ Axe Hack talk contribs‎ 33,487 bytes +52‎ →‎I do wish to see the system changed. I am '''not satisfied''' with the current classification system.

14 March 2011

• curprev 20:5120:51, 14 March 2011‎ Shatari talk contribs‎ 33,435 bytes +95‎ →‎'''Survivor / Zombie / Independent / Dual Nature'''
• curprev 20:4520:45, 14 March 2011‎ Shatari talk contribs‎ 33,340 bytes +131‎ →‎I do wish to see the system changed. I am '''not satisfied''' with the current classification system.
• curprev 16:2616:26, 14 March 2011‎ Paddy Dignam talk contribs‎ 33,209 bytes +77‎ →‎Neither improved classification nor reduced conflicts are important to me at all
• curprev 16:2316:23, 14 March 2011‎ Paddy Dignam talk contribs‎ 33,132 bytes +93‎ →‎I do not wish to see the system changed. I am either '''satisfied''' with the current classification system, or I do not care what classifications are used.
• curprev 10:5410:54, 14 March 2011‎ Drunk Link2500 talk contribs‎ 33,039 bytes +151‎ No edit summary

12 March 2011

• curprev 18:5518:55, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,888 bytes +81‎ →‎'''Survivor / Zombie / Independent'''
• curprev 18:5218:52, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,807 bytes +177‎ →‎I do not think it is necessary to create a new category for these groups.
• curprev 18:4918:49, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,630 bytes +55‎ →‎There should be an "Other" category for groups to use. If they want a more detailed description, they should create a one or two-word descriptor by their name.
• curprev 18:4918:49, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,575 bytes +55‎ →‎Classifying groups based on play-style is more important to me.
• curprev 18:4718:47, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,520 bytes +55‎ →‎Both are equally as important to me.
• curprev 18:4518:45, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,465 bytes +69‎ →‎Only the language of the classification system should be changed
• curprev 18:4318:43, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,396 bytes +147‎ →‎Neither improved classification nor reduced conflicts are important to me at all
• curprev 18:4018:40, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,249 bytes +55‎ →‎The groups should decide how they are listed.
• curprev 18:3318:33, 12 March 2011‎ Amilius talk contribs‎ 32,194 bytes +58‎ →‎I do not wish to see the system changed. I am either '''satisfied''' with the current classification system, or I do not care what classifications are used.
• curprev 16:0716:07, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ m 32,136 bytes +92‎ →‎'''Survivor / Zombie / Dual Nature'''
• curprev 16:0516:05, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ m 32,044 bytes −92‎ →‎'''Survivor / Zombie / Dual Nature'''
• curprev 16:0516:05, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ 32,136 bytes +92‎ →‎'''Survivor / Zombie / Dual Nature'''
• curprev 16:0316:03, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ 32,044 bytes +174‎ →‎I would like to see Dual Nature and Combined Zombie/Survivor added as it's own separate category
• curprev 16:0116:01, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ 31,870 bytes +92‎ →‎There should be an "Other" category for groups to use. If they want a more detailed description, they should create a one or two-word descriptor by their name.
• curprev 15:5815:58, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ 31,778 bytes +92‎ →‎Both are equally as important to me.
• curprev 15:5515:55, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ 31,686 bytes +92‎ →‎The groups should decide how they are listed.
• curprev 15:5215:52, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ 31,594 bytes +92‎ →‎I disagree.
• curprev 15:4815:48, 12 March 2011‎ Father Thompson talk contribs‎ 31,502 bytes +398‎ →‎I do wish to see the system changed. I am '''not satisfied''' with the current classification system.
• curprev 03:5903:59, 12 March 2011‎ NORTHBOUNDSNOW talk contribs‎ 31,104 bytes +48‎ →‎I do wish to see the system changed. I am '''not satisfied''' with the current classification system.
• curprev 03:5803:58, 12 March 2011‎ NORTHBOUNDSNOW talk contribs‎ 31,056 bytes +308‎ →‎I do wish to see the system changed. I am '''not satisfied''' with the current classification system.
• curprev 03:5103:51, 12 March 2011‎ NORTHBOUNDSNOW talk contribs‎ 30,748 bytes +115‎ →‎I agree.

11 March 2011

• curprev 09:1409:14, 11 March 2011‎ Nic LesFlics talk contribs‎ 30,633 bytes +88‎ →‎I do wish to see the system changed. I am '''not satisfied''' with the current classification system.

10 March 2011

• curprev 03:5303:53, 10 March 2011‎ Penguinpyro talk contribs‎ 30,545 bytes +63‎ →‎Classifying groups based on play-style is more important to me.

9 March 2011

• curprev 22:1722:17, 9 March 2011‎ Mobius187 talk contribs‎ 30,482 bytes +110‎ →‎The groups should decide how they are listed.