|
|
| Line 25: |
Line 25: |
| --> | | --> |
|
| |
|
| === [[Bashing Back: The Battle of Pitneybank]] ===
| | ''There are no new events up for voting.'' |
| This siege has been one of the largest in recent times. Although it only lasted a month, it should be considered for historical status as it was the first large siege to occur after the January 23rd updates, showing just how greatly the update aided the zombies, as until that point survivors had been able to hold out against them through strength of numbers. --[[User:Blanemcc|Blanemcc]] 11:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| :Note: TO clear up a misconception, I didn't make this page. Blanemcc did. {{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 01:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| {{HistoricalVotingRules}}
| |
| ====For (Battle of Pitneybank)====
| |
| # I fought through the entire battle. It was truly a great event for survivors and zombies alike. --[[User:Blanemcc|Blanemcc]] 11:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # I was there as well. I think that this is a an important siege because of the mid-siege rules change and also because the survivors held out for so long. --{{User:Hhal/Sig}} 11:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC) EDIT: Why is this under REMOVAL of historical status? --{{User:Hhal/Sig}} 11:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::I've moved it as it was in the wrong section. {{unsigned|Garum|}}
| |
| # Yes, large enough, long enough, and involving enough people to count as historical, plus the barricading rule change makes it noteworthy. [[User:Garum|Garum]] 11:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #: A fair amount of details have been left out of the article and I can easily assume a fair amount of No votes probably came from those who may not have been there... But anyways I am voting '''yes''' because to those who did show up at the seige and never fled, it was truly an epic battle....I congratulate both survivor and zombies sides again for such a memorable seige! --[[User:DrakonMacar|Chaplain Drakon Macar]] 17:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::Actually so far only 1, maybe 2, of the no voters weren't at the siege, everyone else was.--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 17:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::Eh...I stand by what I said to those that were not present...--[[User:DrakonMacar|Chaplain Drakon Macar]] 15:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # It was an important seige because it lasted so long and because it resulted in a major zombie buff that required a change in survivor tactics. The page does need improvement though.
| |
| # I loved it, it was a fun time. --[[User:Fgon50|Fgon50]] 20:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # It was so good! Best fight ever, even though we lost! - [[User:CrazedDoc|CrazedDoc]] 21:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # It was good fun, despite the negative (from my POV) ending, and definitely important. It gets the basic nomination just for being a huge battle, but in addition to that it has huge historical importance due to the fact that a massive horde-conglomerate was able to overcome one of the greatest and most coordinated survivior efforts in Malton history! Plus i was there, which doesn't make it more important, but it definitely makes it more interesting to me, hehe. Regardless, it's definitely a historical event, and deserves status as such. --[[User:Catman03|Booleanearth]] 01:55, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # Yes, for reasons listed above. May need to be edited for more NPOVness, but otherwise should be considered historical. [[User:Kanoneziel|Kanoneziel]] 06:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #[[User:Moran|Moran]] 20:28, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # YES! I fought as both a survivor and zombie in farmer, moorish, and giddings... Sure the article could use some rewriting, but the event is most definitely deserving of historical status.--[[User:Hellalame|Hellalame]] 23:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # yes, Its important to the timeline of UD--[[User:Worthog117|Worthog117]] 22:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # I don't care weather the article is well written or not. I participated in this even from the begining before Creedy fell all the way through to the fall of Morrish. Weather you like the article or not the event is an historic one. Record numbers of survivors and zeds were present during the duration. I feel that the people that participated deserve some recognition for it. It was a well faught battle that was great whatever side you were fighting on[[User:Mr NoName001|--Mr NoName001]] 22:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)]
| |
| # Most certainly. It was a magnificent battle.--[[User:54sr|TheFireChief]] 03:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # This battle was a Major Standoff versus the Bash. It was a great fight for survivor, and a massive and well rewarded victory for zombie. We cannot forget this event.[[User:Skritz|Nazdreg]]
| |
| # It was a fun battle.There was one of the largest zombie hordes vs one of the largest survivor force which created a great siege. [[User:tom1504|tom1504]]
| |
| # I'm definately for having the Giddings siege as a historic event, although the article does need tidying up. Either way I'm still for remembering it, it was fun to be involved in. [[User:Mirasta|Mirasta]] 22:08, 4 February 2008 (GMT)
| |
| # Very good fun, the most fun I have had playing UD since joining July 07 as part of the Yahoo blitz[[User:Jj4022|jj]] 04:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # Lived and died at Gidding for most of the seige. Best event i've heard of and seen in my admittedly short playing time. [[User:Rddr|Rddr]] 18:46, 5 February 2008 (GMT)
| |
| # Definitely counts as historical - a month long pitched battle between 1000+ on each side. However, also needs cleanup and a move to a NPOV title (Battle of Pitneybank or Battle of Giddings would be appropriate.) -[[User:Aidan Swart|Aidan Swart]] 11:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #YES. I was in the Battle of Giddings Mall, and hell, it was a damn long siege. It was huge, and definitely deserves historical status.--[[User:31337roxxor|Shotstol]] 00:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # It was incredibly dramatic. The first location to halt the Big Bash 2, right when it looked grim as ever once Creedy fell. The way things changed right after the update also added to this monumental and exciting siege. Perfect. Besides, did you see how quickly four suburbs fell in half a week? GG [[User:Pr0stSh0cKeR|Pr0stSh0cKeR]] 13:12, 9 February 2008 (PST)
| |
| # It was a time when a division of angry, tired survivors in their bloodsoaked & tattered rags, with half-empty guns, made a real stand. We stopped just about every damn group that thought "Oh yeah, this will be just another cakewalk". It turned out that Kevan even needed to change rules in order to break the stalemate. Didn't help his head from getting shot off a few times, though :D so yeah, it was one hell of a battle. I hope NW, Rangers, C4NT and many others mention and remember it with pride. [[User:Milberto|Milberto]] 19:44, February 8th, 2008 [CET]
| |
| # As said above this was a great example of survivors giving it there best against some of the baddest zombie groups in the history of UD.--[[User:zinker|zinker]] 16:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC) {{user:zinker/sig}}
| |
| # Very entertaining siege for both sides in this conflict and it lasted a month, it deserves historical status. --[[User:Pvt human|Pvt human]] 12:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Needs fixing, could someone please fix the POV problem with the article aready? most of the no votes are there because its POV. [[User:The man|The man]] 13:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # This was an epic battle, and is worthy of recongnition for many reasons. [[User:Creeping Crud|Creeping Crud]] <sup>[[Undeadites|<span style="color: Green; background-color:{{{3|transparent}}}">U</span>]]</sup> 19:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # The battle is more than worthy of being historical.--[[User:Jleggitt|<span style="color: gray; background-color:{{{3|transparent}}}">Jleggitt</span>]]<sup>[[Malton Rangers|<span style="color: green; background-color:{{{3|transparent}}}">MR</span>]]</sup> 20:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Defenatly a major event in Urban dead--[[User:Dnaguy|Dnaguy]] 19:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Have no idea what the drama is about on here, nor do I care. The battle was indeed epic though and should be historical.--[[User:Lord Wulfgar|Lord Wulfgar]] 23:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #: the "drama" is not so much over the event itself: it is over the article, which is atrocious. it is incomplete and basically a kind of editorial piece. and a bad one at that. and it is totally biased towards the survivor side. i mean VERY biased, it's sickening. it doesn't even have the merits of the Battle of Blackmore piece, which was a piece cof the history itself, and was at least entertaining, funny and all said and done, for all its flaws, nowhere near as one-sided as this. this article is not worthy of serious consideration. period. [[User:WanYao|WanYao]] 08:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Lets just say you could do a whole lot worse than the most recent siege of Giddings Mall for historical events. The article's POV aside the event itself deserves the status for several reasons. First of all the sheer numbers involved aren't matched by many other events and the boneheaded rule-change in the middle definitely changed the way things are played. Lastly the event affected all the surrounding suburbs to a degree. [[user:Richter|AidenFury]] 09:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #'''For''' It was epic. Lots of people involved. --[[User:Heretic144|Heretic144]] 02:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #'''For''' The battle might only have been a month but many other zones fell in about 1 or 2 days! Do i need to say more? Ok i will then, just because the zone was fighting back better then so many other many people from other 'burbs came to aid in the battle because they really wanted to bash back at BB2. They did lose the fight in the end but it was worth it! (I might sound like i don't like Big Bash 2, but what i mean is because of the "We ruin suburbs in 1 or 2 days"'ness they have i think it is Epic that they pushed BB2 back for a month, thats like 15 or 30 days more then other suburbs was able to) --[[User:TheGuyWithHisPantsOn|TheGuyWithHisPantsOn]] March 3 2008
| |
| #'''For''' -It was truly remarkable, and a fight to remember!! Worthy of historical status--[[User:Airborne88|<span style="color:green">Airborne88</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Airborne88|<span style="color: purple">T</span>]] [[Zomcon|<span style="color: green">Zom</span>]] [[Malton Inhumane Society|<span style="color: maroon">MIS</span>]]</sup> 12:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #'''For''' [[User:Jordan Salafack|Jordan Salafack]] 10:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #'''For''' Important event for both sides in the game. --[[User:Meridian100|Meridian100]] 16:54, 2 April 2008 (BST)
| |
| # --{{User:Secruss/Sig}}20:42, 16 June 2008 (BST)
| |
| # -- [[User:Ioncannon11|Ioncannon11]] 21:10, 16 June 2008 (BST)
| |
| # Big fight, lots of stuff happened and it got documented. --[[User:Insomniac By Choice|Insomniac By Choice]] 09:16, 7 July 2008 (BST)
| |
| # I defended Giddings and the Morrish Building before they fell and my character lost his life defending it. It was a very memorable moment in UD [[User:B0ba Fett|B0ba Fett]] 01:43, 10 July 2008 (BST)
| |
| | |
| ====Against (Battle of Pitneybank)====
| |
| #This article is in no way good enough for historical status, an article will be written up that is more acceptable to everyone involved instead of this horrible example of everything that an article shouldn't be. The event might be historical but this article doesn't give any realistic information on it nor is the title one that actually describes the event in any real way(no one refers to it as the Battle of Pitneybank, or Bashing Back). '''''This article is far from acceptable'''''--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 11:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:May I remind you that what you are voting "no" on is the battle of giddings altogther? This isn't a vote for whether the article is NPOV or not its a vote for whther or not the battle should be considered historical or not.[[User:The man|The man]] 13:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::i voted against the ''article''. i would be likely to vote FOR the event. although i think it was a part of a much larger event which was the Big Bash vs. Survivors (led into epic battle often by the likes of C4NT, the CC's etc. etc., who proved themselves worthy opponents and leaders in all battles we have fought) in the winter of 07-08, but whatever... the article should go to the recycle bin... then we can deal with the ''historical stauts'' of the event.... --[[User:WanYao|WanYao]] 08:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Sorry, no. Not with the article in its current state. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [[CGR]] [[Project UnWelcome|U!]]</sup> 12:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #As long as POV stuff like "survivors were inexcusably uncoordinated and showed no respect for proper tactics" remains on the page, I will vote against. It would be okay to say "survivors were uncoordinated", if one also provided an example to back up the claim. What exactly is "respect for proper tactics"? The article should be NPOV for acceptance. --<span style="font-size:90%">[[User:Funt Solo|Funt Solo]]</span> <sup style="font-size:70%">[[Mod_Conspiracy|QT]]</sup> [[Image:Scotland flag.JPG|18px]] 12:50, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:May I remind you that what you are voting "no" on is the battle of giddings altogther. [[User:The man|The man]] 13:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:Survivors were uncoordinated at certain stages in the battle so that statement is true. At Farmer, we lacked the coordination to repel the horde. At Giddings we lacked the coordination to re-secure the SE corner, and at Morrish... well, at Morrish there was no coordination at all since many defenders were killed quickly whilst Giddings survivors ran for the hills, leaving the mobile groups to die off. --[[User:Blanemcc|Blanemcc]] 12:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::The blatant lies like claiming that survivors managed to empty the mall of 100+ groups of zombies don't help much either, biggest group survivors ever emptied out of the mall was about 70-80. This is why we wait for things to be done properly instead of attempting to be the first to publish. We aren't the Post.--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 12:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::I should probably also point out that there's little NPOV in the article, it swings from one extreme to another frequently.--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 12:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::Blanemcc, the word "inexcusably" is the key to the POV nature of the statement. I feel sure that any survivor could come up with an excuse for not being coordinated, so a lack of coordination amongst survivors is not impossible to excuse. Anyway, it's only a single example to illustrate a point. --<span style="font-size:90%">[[User:Funt Solo|Funt Solo]]</span> <sup style="font-size:70%">[[Mod_Conspiracy|QT]]</sup> [[Image:Scotland flag.JPG|18px]] 13:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Definitely not in it's current state. Chaotically POV. The "Conclusions" section is mostly BS, and for those parts that aren't total BS, the battle had no special significance in proving them. Also, I'd like to see the survivors take back the mall before even considering the declaration of the event as historical. --{{User:Midianian/Sig}} 13:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #The article is a pile of crap. It needs, at the very least, a complete rewrite. History should be made with as little POV as possible, and this article is filled with POV to overflowing. --[[User:Grim_s|The Grimch]] <sup>[[Project UnWelcome|U!]] [[Project Evil|E!]] [[We are Trolls!|WAT!]]</sup> 15:45, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #mmm, nay, article should be definitely rewritten --[[User:Duke Garland|<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>]] [[LCD|<nowiki>[</nowiki>]][[User talk:Duke Garland|talk]][[Signature Race|<nowiki>]</nowiki>]] 16:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Needs work. And a lot of it.--{{User:Suicidalangel/Sig}} 16:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Everytime a mall tour hits an area, doesn't count as a historical event. Sorry.--{{User:AnimeSucks/Sig}} 17:50, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:But the point is that we held them back for an entire month. I'm not sure anyone has held that long against any other Big Bash or Mall Tour. --{{User:Hhal/Sig}} 17:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::big effing deal blackmore 1 was longer... this sort of battle happens every day in malton.----[[User:Sexualharrison|Sexualharrison]][[Image:Starofdavid2.png | 18px]] [[Image:Boobs.gif|18px]] 22:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #While the event itself is clearly deserving of historical status (I mean, how often do two groups of 500+ duke it out for a month?), this article is just plain horrible. Most everything in it, title included, is a NPOV nightmare. A new, more respectable article must be made before my "yay" is given. --[[User:JoTheMonkey|JoTheMonkey]] 19:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #It should have hiostorical status but the page needs to be entirely rewritten. It should be more dramatic and add more elements to its writing. --[[User:Mrangers2|Mrangers2]] 20:34, 2 Febuary 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Lots of POV in the article. I hate POV--[[User:Finis Valorum|Finis Valorum]] 20:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Way too POV. It needs to be guarded against people adding random bits of POV bullshit to it. Blanemcc, I'm glaring in your direction here. I at least had good intentions, and attempted to remove the POV- I wasn't always, or some would argue, even usually successful, but I tried to reduce the POV. {{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 00:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:List of what this article needs:
| |
| #::1.Move to a NEUTRAL page name
| |
| #::2.Rewriting to remove POV
| |
| #::3.Time to see what the real implications are of it. {{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 00:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:Hah. You're the one who made the page (thus deciding on the page name), and you're the one who wrote the Conclusions section - arguably the most POV bit of the lot. For you to be blaming Blanemcc is laughable. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [[CGR]] [[Project UnWelcome|U!]]</sup> 01:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::Hell no. I didn't make the page; BLANE did. Look in the history. I didn't make the page, I was just its most fervent contributor. And I had a bad day the day I wrote the conclusions bit. I'm sorry about that; but everyone has an off day once in a while. I would've replaced it; but it was changed before I could do anything.{{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 01:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::There's always some excuse, isn't there? In any case - whether it's true or not (and severely doubt that it is), the fact remains that you wrote it, and tried to pin the blame on Blanemcc. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [[CGR]] [[Project UnWelcome|U!]]</sup> 02:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::::I wrote most of the framework; but people constantly came in and rewrote it and added on. If you look at the page before other people started editing it, you'll see that I had it NPOV. And if you look at the page whenever I edited it, I always went to great strides to remove the POV from their contributions. Don't blame me since you're getting in on the ass end of the page's creation and you only have rumor and your own bias to go off of in the terms of POV and who wrote what. {{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 02:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::::I wondered how long it would take you to lapse into ad hominems. On the topic of your "NPOVness" - I think [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Bashing_Back%3A_The_Battle_of_Pitneybank&diff=1007299&oldid=1007184 this] speaks for itself. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [[CGR]] [[Project UnWelcome|U!]]</sup> 02:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::::::Yes, yes it does, you're right, it does mean you're an asshole. {{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 02:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::::::I don't really see how your POVness relates to me being an arse. But sure. Why not. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [[CGR]] [[Project UnWelcome|U!]]</sup> 02:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::::::::Because I already addressed that. I admitted that was a POV edit, I was merely having a bad day and was pissed off. Why is it, cyberbob, that whenever I stop editing, you stop editing, and when I come back, you come back? Is it just to piss me off that you remain on the wiki? {{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 02:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::::::::Oh no. I'm not falling for that red herring. We're discussing your attempt to lay the blame on others for the POVness of the article when you - whether you had a "bad day" or not - are in fact the main instigator of this shit. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [[CGR]] [[Project UnWelcome|U!]]</sup> 02:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Needs to be re-written - [[User:Whitehouse|W]] 12:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #The event is historical, but the write-up sucks. I would suggest not calling it 'The Battle of Pitneybank' -- we can't call every single important event 'The Battle of Suburb-name', there have been battles in Pitneybank before and there will be more in the future. The Battle of Santlerville is called that because it was over Santlerville specifically, not over a specific building or group of buildings. These events turned from the battle of Creedy to the battle of Giddings to the ruin of Spracklingbank with a quickness. [[User:Karaburma|Karaburma]] 23:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #As everyone else - this is historical, but the write-up is absolutely terrible and ridiculously far from NPOV. If some serious revisions take place, I'd change to a for. {{User:Sheana/Sig}} 01:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Any page that gets to be historical usually will get protected and therefore immune from any revision. The page got NPOV problems, hence it probraly should be fixed. If we got lots of people screaming about how the article is evil, it's NOT NPOV. And, besides, the last thing I want to do is have Blackmoregate II.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]] 02:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:Historical events do not get protected, while historical groups are. The reason being is so people can edit the event for clarity, NPOVness (althought the article should be at least acceptably neutral beforehand), spelling + grammar, etc. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 18:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Needs to get NPOV'ed. --<small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;background:#ffffff;padding:1px;">[[User:Zombie slay3r|<b><span style="color:#0000cd;">Z. slay3r</span></b>]] • [[User_talk:Zombie slay3r|<span style="background-color:#0000fa;color:#ffffff"> Talk </span>]]</span></small> 17:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Against. Way too POV. --[[User:Orm Tostesson|Orm Tostesson]] 19:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #The fight does deserve historical event status, but the page needs to be completely redone. Make it more neutral and you'll get a For vote from me. --[[User:Another alias|Zombie in Pajamas]] 21:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #I agree with the multitudes about it being too POV. Perhaps we can strike Creedy and Farmer from it since they were hardly epic and didn't meet criteria #2 and just condense it down to the siege of Morrish and Giddings. --[[User:Kingdem|Kingdem]] 8:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # I was there, and yes it was epic and is worthy, but the article seems to be written from zombie POV. needs NPOV. --[[User:N41X|N41X]] 16:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:I assure you that we've been attempting to get the Basher side as well but said attempts have been unsuccessful so far, we're trying, we are, but some zombie players are not being very cooperative...--[[User:DrakonMacar|Chaplain Drakon Macar]] 16:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # Too recent. --[[User:Saromu|Sonny Corleone]] <sup>[[ The Ridleybank Resistance Front|RRF]] [[DORIS]] [[Caiger Resistance Front|CRF]] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a8pHj7V9k pr0n]</sup> 00:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #: I'm sorry but that sounds like a fairly stupid reason to oppose this. I mean, if you don't like the article or something than that's one thing, but who says something can't be historically important just because it's recent? --[[User:Catman03|Catman03]] 02:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::Because things can still be added to it since it is still recent you thick fuck. Use your head and think before you say something. And learn how to comment on votes. --[[User:Saromu|Sonny Corleone]] <sup>[[ The Ridleybank Resistance Front|RRF]] [[DORIS]] [[Caiger Resistance Front|CRF]] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a8pHj7V9k pr0n]</sup> 02:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::You mean learn how to do things like speak courteously when with others? Chill out, hes as entitled to his opinion as you are. --[[User:JoTheMonkey|JoTheMonkey]] 04:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::::Sonny's infamously rude and obnoxious: don't expect him to behave in any way reasonably. --<span style="font-size:90%">[[User:Funt Solo|Funt Solo]]</span> <sup style="font-size:70%">[[Mod_Conspiracy|QT]]</sup> [[Image:Scotland flag.JPG|18px]] 16:23, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::::Meh, he may be rude but the too recent comment is just another example of this not meeting Crit 2 of the voting requirements, we don't know if it has effected how the game was played yet because there hasn't been another real mall siege since as it's been ''too soon for another one to happen''.--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 18:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:::::Just because my way with words is often blunt and to the point doesn't mean I'm any less right. Karek hit it right on the head. And the reason why I choose rude over kind is because if I was kind you would have never read what I said. --[[User:Saromu|Sonny Corleone]] <sup>[[ The Ridleybank Resistance Front|RRF]] [[DORIS]] [[Caiger Resistance Front|CRF]] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a8pHj7V9k pr0n]</sup> 20:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Historical status for a disputed article? Brilliant. [[User:Sanpedro|Sanpedro]] 03:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #The article sucks. It's another example of survivor bullshit machismo.--[[User:Jorm|Jorm]] 08:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #The battle of Giddings or however you wanna call it is historical in mine eyes but I agree, the article is beyond good nor just.--[[User:MisterGame|MisterGame]] 16:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #After reading that article, I can only say: My eyes! ''My brain!'' ''My eyes *and* my brain!!'' AAAAAAAAAAGH!! --[[User:Specialist290|'''Specialist290''']] [[User talk:Specialist290|{{c|black|♠}}]][[Ghetto Cow|{{c|red|♥}}]][[User:Specialist290/Huey P Long|{{c|black|♣}}]][[The Malton Mirror|{{c|red|♦}}]] 21:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Too soon. --[[User:The Hierophant|The Hierophant]] 14:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Withdraw''' - I've got an idea. How about we wait until the article is '''finished'''? There are still edits going to this very day. Once it is all set and popular opinion says it is ready, why not protect the page, and '''then''' put it up for historical event nomination? Until then, it's pointless to vote on the event. --[[User:Akule|Akule]] <sup>School's in session. </sup> 16:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Against -- too soon, and really not that big a deal. also I vote against anything that has south park photos from now on!! ----[[User:Sexualharrison|Sexualharrison]][[Image:Starofdavid2.png | 18px]] [[Image:Boobs.gif|18px]] 20:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| # [[User:DanceDanceRevolution|DanceDanceRevolution]] 04:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #:What are your reasons? --{{User:Hhal/Sig}} 01:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #::That's not needed here.--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 07:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Against -- I took a break from the game before this long awaited clash took place. So I wasn't there splattering all the shiney trenchcoats with the remnants of fresh grey matter... I'm sure it was epic, though... But... this article sucks ass and is NOT worthy of historical status. GOOOOOOOONG, next rewrite... --[[User:WanYao|WanYao]] 15:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #Against -- Har Har... No...--{{User:WOOT/sig}} 16:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
| |
| #--[[User:Druuuuu|Druuuuu]] <sup style="font-size:70%">[[User:Druuuuu/Ocular|Oc]][[User talk:Druuuuu|T]][[Red Rum|RR]]</sup> 21:26, 28 May 2008 (BST)
| |
| #Huh -- What? No, let's not. --[[User:Vandurn|Vandurn]] 13:34, 23 June 2008 (BST)
| |
| #The event, like the Bash before it, would earn Historical status on this wiki, however, the current state of the article forces me to vote against. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:15, 23 July 2008 (BST)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Archives== | | ==Archives== |
00:53, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
12:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)