|
|
| Line 15: |
Line 15: |
|
| |
|
| ==Nominations for Historical Status== | | ==Nominations for Historical Status== |
|
| |
| ===[[Dia de los Muertos]]===
| |
| "Dia de los Muertos was the high point of zombie might. Seriously; say what you will about the super-hordes of Mall Tour or Shack or LUE or whoever - I am not denigrating their accomplishments by saying this - but they operate and are successful due to numbers and not inter-horde co-ordination. DdlM was the the first successful, major inter-horde activity.
| |
|
| |
| At this point in history, zombies were on a roll. The RRF had wiped out Ridleybank for the first time, and then taken Hildebrande . . . we were moving fast and furious, and Giddings was "impregnable". We washed upon and devoured everyone.
| |
|
| |
| Then we set our sights on Caiger and got our asses kicked. "---Jorm
| |
|
| |
| Dia de los Muertos is, undeniably, a historical event, as mentioned by Jorm. Other reasons for its historical nature have been mentioned on the [[Talk:Dia_de_los_Muertos|Talk Page]].
| |
|
| |
| However, Dia de los Muertos has not been voted as a Historical Event. It has instead been unilaterally declared as an 'Historical Event' by Jorm, because Jorm believed that the electorate will likely not vote in Dia de los Muertos, having not experienced it itself. I was afraid of getting in an edit conflict with him over this, so I did not seek to correct this. However, I do believe that this situation does need to be fixed. This is indeed a historical event, it just needs approval.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 05:57, 7 April 2010 (BST)
| |
|
| |
| :This page is ineligible for nomination as it was declared an historical event prior to the voting policy being voted in on this wiki. All current group and event pages that held the category when the policy passed were 'grandfathered' in. I'm removing the news post about this and will archive this pointlessness in a day or so. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 06:06, 7 April 2010 (BST)
| |
| ::I wrote the policy, Iscariot. There was no 'grandfathering' intended or implied in policy. That being said...if grandfathering is a precedent on the wiki, I will happily withdraw this pointless.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 06:08, 7 April 2010 (BST)
| |
| :::There was a misconduct case against a sysop for removing groups that didn't pass voting. Precedent established. Until I get round to removing the whole idiotic notion of historical being a limited category based on popular vote all of this will continue. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 06:11, 7 April 2010 (BST)
| |
| ::::Link me the Misconduct case. In addition, link to me your proof it was declared a historical event before the passage of this policy. Because I distinctly remembered Jorm declared it a historical event ''after'' the passage of this policy.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 06:12, 7 April 2010 (BST)
| |
| :::::[[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/UDWiki:Administration/Misconduct/Archive/Boxy/2009|I found it.]] And quite frankly, I don't want to drag this argument out further (because while I remember Jorm adding it, my memory might be faulty, and it is possible somebody removed it and Jorm added it back it)...so just archive this.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 06:28, 7 April 2010 (BST)
| |
|
| |
| ===For===
| |
| 1. As above.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 06:03, 7 April 2010 (BST)
| |
|
| |
| ===Against===
| |
|
| |
|
| <!-- | | <!-- |
