Category talk:Recruitment

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Help Desk

  • Need help figuring out how to use / follow / get the most out of the new advert guidelines? Post here!
  • Previous discussions? Look in the archives(2 3)!
  • Try reading this guide for a quicker result!

question

how do i join a group do thay meet you i need help on the game am a newbie—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jose (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Basically, just contact the group via their wiki page and they should be happy to give you further instructions. Most of the time you'll travel to their location within the game if you're interested in joining the group, since most of the groups are local to a specific region or suburb of the game. For the nomadic groups, they'll give you information on where to meet them at the moment. In the meantime, you should be fine to survive in the game as a newbie for as long as you need to. I started off alone in the game with all of my characters for at least their first few weeks, and had no issues making due. —Aichon— 03:17, 10 April 2010 (BST)

Aesthetics

Looking over the big ol' block of text at the start of the category, I get the feeling that improperly-formatted ads crop up so often due to the imposing nature of so much rules text. I'll probably knock up a more user-friendly approach to the rules tonight, provided I'm not shouted down. Anyone else feel this page could do with a sprucing up? For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 14:10, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Yep, spruce the shit out of it. It's ugly. --  ▧  : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 16:19, 2 April 2010 (BST)
Agreed. It's extremely imposing for newbies and throws them for a loop (or else puts them off entirely) quite often. If we can provide just a simple block of text to copy/paste here, some simple instructions for what to do on their template recruit page, and a few other guidelines for what is allowed in terms of height/width, etc., then we'll be good. Right now though, it's monstrous. —Aichon— 22:47, 2 April 2010 (BST)
While you're at it, move the contents list lower. Makes it more readable. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 22:49, 2 April 2010 (BST)
How does that look? I tried using the colour progression from my previous rehash of the SugHead template, though I think the bottom one is a little off. I might try it with all of the contents of the recruitment page as well, see how it stacks with the table of contents. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 01:12, 3 April 2010 (BST)
The color progression is fine, but the text needs cleaning up (looks like you just copied what we had, which gives us a good starting place, but it still needs work). For instance, in the second box, all of the italicized stuff should go (you wouldn't believe how much it confuses newbies), and it really should be just a block of code that they can copy/paste and swap out a few keywords for. The third block of text needs cleaning up as well, in terms of what all it says. Right now, it's too wordy and too "wall o' text". If we could condense it down, that'd be nice. As for the fourth box, I really don't like the phrasing that some of it uses (e.g. "as a rough guideline"). Make it a concrete statement or else don't have it at all.
As far as the changes you made though, I like them. And in response to Ross, I'd keep the TOC where it is. Bumping it down would bump into some ads and would also detract from the point of the page by making the entire top part being about the rules of the place. I'm almost tempted to suggest we pull the guidelines out to a separate page where we provide full instructions. —Aichon— 05:09, 3 April 2010 (BST)
Condensed. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 20:34, 3 April 2010 (BST)
You mind if I tweak a few things with it? I really like the way it's looking, but there are a few grammar/typo issues, as well as some other stuff I'd shift around a bit (e.g. the info about categories needs to mention <noinclude> and should probably be in its own code box as well; I have some ideas for how it could be done). —Aichon— 22:10, 3 April 2010 (BST)
Sure, work away. Don't you be stealing my European vowels though! Grr! Argh! *shaking fist* For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 22:12, 3 April 2010 (BST)
Actually, as I started working on it, I realized I had a lot of ideas for changes, some of which kinda contradict what I was saying earlier, in fact, so I'm setting it up in my own Sandbox and should have an example up in a bit. It's a bit longer than what you have, but gives them a step-by-step set of instructions broken down similarly to how you did it...kinda. —Aichon— 02:40, 4 April 2010 (BST)
Make it pretty. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 02:42, 4 April 2010 (BST)
Here. It's not any prettier than yours, but I tried to give comprehensive instructions while making them approachable and clear. A few issues I saw people having before were confusing what code goes where and forgetting to put the categories on their recruit page. By providing a clear delineation between the instructions that apply to the recruit page and those that apply to the Recruitment page, I'm hoping we won't have as many mistakes of that sort. It's definitely longer than your idea, Mis, but I'm hoping it makes up for it by having instructions that are spelled out a bit more (especially when it comes to the categories). Thoughts? Parts that can be cut? Bad ideas? —Aichon— 05:49, 4 April 2010 (BST)
Few spelling mistakes is all, otherwise perfect. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 05:54, 4 April 2010 (BST)
Feel free to correct my "mistakes" if you'd like. :P I didn't see any American English spelling mistakes, nor did my spell-checker alert me to any as I was typing it up, but if there are any, or if you just want to add the extra vowels you folks use, feel free to do so. I've got no problems with that. Before we go changing things, any other opinions from the peanut gallery? —Aichon— 06:41, 4 April 2010 (BST)
Yeah, Aichon, that looks good. - Goribus 04:12, 15 April 2010 (BST)

Magic Words for timestamps

I just now noticed that a few groups were using the {{CURRENTMONTH}}, {{CURRENTDAY}}, and {{CURRENTTIME}} magic words in their templates so that they could circumvent having to update their timestamp. The rules for the page say no included templates, but the magic words are not technically templates, yet they still are handled like an inclusion and require processing by the server. Plus, they clearly circumvent the spirit of the guidelines by allowing the ads to be posted ad infinitum, even if the groups go bust. I was thinking it might be prudent to contact the groups and ask that they update by hand instead. Thoughts? —Aichon— 09:27, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Wipe their ads, and tell them to re-add them without the magic words. As you tell them, they're templates in all but name, and are a pretty blatant circumvention of the guidelines. Linkthewindow  Talk  10:11, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Awwwwww. :( For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 22:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Pull 'em. --Papa Johnny 22:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Since all three of the groups are updated by wiki regulars, I'll be nice and get in contact with them and give 'em a week to change them, rather than deleting them outright with no notice. Misanthropy, consider this me contacting you. :P —Aichon— 03:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Consider it changed as of several hours ago. :P For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 03:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

You people suck. Moreover, this is in breach of no rules and I maintain that we have every right to use this method.

Format for Posting Adverts:
It is the group’s responsibility to update the timestamp to prevent the advert being deleted. Updating the timestamp may and should be done at any time while the group is still recruiting.

We're still recruiting and will be recruiting until such time as we or (more likely) the game are no longer around. I instituted this update method because I didn't want to have to make some bullshit form-stamping edit every so often for absolutely no useful reason. The timestamp is being updated, why should you care what method we use? Answer: You shouldn't.

Format for Advert Content:
No templates are allowed in your advert for technical reasons.

The "technical reasons" alluded to would be the template inclusion limit. The variables used are not expensive and are subject to no such limit, thus this does not apply. Nice try though. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 08:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

While perhaps not in the spirit of the rules, I see no harm in the use of the magic words as long as the group is still active. A messege on the group's talk page (similar to the current Recruitment page warnings) every 3 months I think wouldn't be too much hassle. --Maverick Talk - OBR Praise Knowledge! 404 08:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I disagree Revenant, you lack a timestamp entirely. Displaying the current time and date in no way replicates the function of a timestamp, which is used to record specific dates. Further, if we're going to play "abuse the wording" I would argue you don't meet this part either: It is the group’s responsibility to update the timestamp... since it's automated and requires no edits by the group. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 17:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Splitting up Recruitment

At the moment, Recruitment is so big it's unwieldy. It takes close to twenty seconds to load on my 1.5mbs broadband, and it would be unfair to assume that everyone has this internet. Also, with groups spread across different letters of the alphabet, it's difficult to find a group for a particular type of character.

I'm proposing that we turn this page into a disambig for three new pages:

Rules, etc, will remain on the main Category:Recruitment page. A reminder will be on all of it's subpages to check the rules.

This should make load times a bit more reasonable and make it easier for new players to find a group. Also, thanks to SA for providing the motivation to write this post :D. Linkthewindow  Talk  10:25, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I like this idea. But I'd propose that death cult-type groups go in both Zombie Groups and PKer Groups. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 13:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Letting them double up is effectively extra/unfair advertising. We need to set up the disambig pages so that it's clear which one each group should fall under. —Aichon— 22:41, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
It used to be like this! I didn't like it when it was changed to the current mess and definitely support changing it back :D --Karloth Vois ¯\(°_o)/¯ 15:50, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Better. Do eet. Do eet naow. -- Rahrah doesn't remember the age of blinking text. 17:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
As Aichon. Most death-cultists seek out life on purpose so much they're pretty much the same as "ordinary" PKers anyway.--Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 18:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Vouch - :D --Haliman - Talk 17:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Going off what I was saying earlier, I'd just make it "Survivor", "Zombie", and "Other", and define the first two as groups who fight for and exist almost always as that side (e.g. traditional survivor and zombie groups, while death cultists are out, since they play as humans sometimes but fight for zombies). The third category would be for everyone else, such as PKers, death cultists, life cultists, dual nature, etc. I think that would fall in line with most people's expectations better, and it should deal with almost all of the fringe cases. —Aichon— 18:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
For On the condition that Aichon's idea is what happens.-- Adward  18:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Not actually a voting section, oh ze whoomanneeteee, get zis up for voting -- Adward  18:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Voting on mundane stuff like this is stupid. I've never seen the point for pages like this, Suggestions, etc. Consensus is a much better system.
That said, Aichon's idea is much better then mine. Linkthewindow  Talk  05:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
What he said. -- Rahrah doesn't remember the age of blinking text. 18:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

What about dual nature groups? Zombie groups that also pk when alive? Groups that claim to be survivors but PK (Like The Barrciade Enforcement Patrol?) We have 31 adverts. Thats not a huge amount. Why make the system more confusing for newbs? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 20:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Groups that claim to be survivors but pk will be allowed to list themselves as survivor groups - we don't need the unnecessary drama. 31 ads is still a massive scroll bar, and I don't see how changing this will make it too more confusing. I'm assuming a noob knows that a "survivor group" is. Linkthewindow  Talk  05:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
  1. Keep <Is this how we should vote? I agree with the idea, as it will better organize the recruitment page. My reccomendation, add an Other page or separately add the PKer-zombie, Zker, and so on. An other page would be nice.--Supercohboy 15:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

hELP REINSTATING?

Hi,

Just wanted to put the DK13 advertisement baqck in place now that i have internet again :) Can someone please help me? Im sure last time i edited the page i got a slapped wrist, so if someone could put the advert i8n place for me, i can just keep it updated!

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/DELTA_KILO_ONE_THREE/recruit

Thanks guys!!! --T13 01:53, 31 March 2010 (BST)

If you can add a signature to your recruit page, I'll go ahead and post it for you. Just edit the page you linked and add in your signature there. I'd prefer not to post an ad that doesn't have a signature at all, even if you have plans to fix it later. —Aichon— 04:28, 31 March 2010 (BST)


Thankyou Aichon!!! I presume by signature you meant timestamp? So i put one in :) I will check back here later this evening, see if the advert is in place, and then presumably delete this series of posts? Cheers! --T13 19:21, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Category:Recruitment Rules Voting

Amendment to Page Rules

Given the relatively low traffic of the game overall now compared to its heyday, individuals now seem to spend a lot more time on maintenance and appearance on their groups' wiki sections, including recruitment ads. Couple this with the relatively high rate of groups crashing and burning quickly, and this page is often full of a mix of well-pruned ads for active groups, and dead ads for groups that haven't yet expired for a full two months, but inevitably will. I propose reducing the linger time from two months since the last timestamp down to one month from the last timestamp, before an ad is removed. This will have minimal effect on active groups, due to both their activity keeping the ad alive, and their ability to re-add it if it's removed, due to the fact that, well, they're still active. This will only have a genuine effect on housekeeping as it will allow for the pruning of ads sooner, rather than waiting for them to hit the two-month mark when it's clear they won't be updated. No other inclusion rules will be amended by this, simply the length of time a timestamp will keep an ad on the page for. Just a cursory vote should settle this, there's no need to go to A/PD for it.

So, there's actually no policy or guideline regarding how long these things are up for vote, last I checked (though I may be incorrect). While I'd prefer one week, just to get it done faster, two weeks would probably be better, just to give as many people as possible a chance to chime in while also avoiding any allegations of trying to railroad the changes through. Thoughts? —Aichon— 00:28, 27 July 2010 (BST)
Give it one. Every group on the page has been notified already. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 00:29, 27 July 2010 (BST)
Give it two. Especially as you've directed them all to the wrong page, and this is the kind of thing that could be included simply on the main page. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 15:53, 27 July 2010 (BST)
I did? For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 15:55, 27 July 2010 (BST)
Yip. Category, instead of category talk. You could of even linked this specific header. Ive added it to the news box. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 15:59, 27 July 2010 (BST)
Oh I thought you meant I'd linked something completely different entirely. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 16:01, 27 July 2010 (BST)

For

  1. That Misanthropy guy makes sense to me. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 03:54, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    I'd never known this to be a problem,... and had never really thought about it. Perhaps, instead, we could do away with the two month period, and timestamps altogethor,.... and do a once a month cleanup, like the Great Suburb Massacre,... just for ads instead. And I'd be willing to oversee that myself if people are interested, and once it's hashed out.... -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 04:01, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Way too complicated, the timestamp method is nice and simple. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 04:03, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Wouldn't you have to check the space somewhat regularly to verify the timestamps, and remove the outdated ads? My suggetion requires this to be done not necessarily more than once a month. My suggestion seems to save time, not add to a burden... -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 04:06, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Aich and I tend to check it regularly anyway. Your way would require contacting groups and waiting for replies, the current system is instantaneous. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 04:08, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Yeah, Mis, myself, and sometimes a few others (Rooster sometimes, when he's around) keep it tidy on a regular basis. Adding extra overhead just creates more work. It's not so much a matter of doing the work of cleaning, as much as it is being allowed to clean them out regularly. Two months leaves us with a lot of groups that only lasted for two weeks at a time. —Aichon— 04:18, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Well, one month is still two weeks to long isn't it? -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 04:24, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    It's all about striking a balance between getting rid of inactive groups, and not having to constantly hassle groups about their status in-game. A month is ideal for this. Linkthewindow  Talk  13:04, 24 July 2010 (BST)
  2. As Misanthropy. —Aichon— 03:57, 24 July 2010 (BST)
  3. I'm pretty sure I suggested a one-month period last time we did this. Still a good idea. Linkthewindow  Talk  06:44, 24 July 2010 (BST)
  4. As Link. --Maverick Talk - OBR Praise Knowledge! 404 09:08, 24 July 2010 (BST)
  5. As Misanthropy. That guy really do make sense. Technical Pacifist 11:41, 24 July 2010 (BST)
  6. For it, provided all currently listed groups are notified on their talk page, as not everyone is going to catch the subtle difference in the small print. -- Spiderzed▋ 14:39, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Out of about 40 groups currently advertising, only 11 would be affected if we enacted it right now. Looking at those 11, I can tell you right now that none of them have a great track record of maintaining their own ads. Five of the groups are veteran groups that regularly let their ads expire and then simply repost them sometime later, four of them are veteran groups that let them expire about as often as they remember to renew them, and two of the groups are brand new and have never renewed their ads. —Aichon— 00:07, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    If this is this is something this user is interested in seeing happen, I'd be willing to contact all the groups currently advertising. Otherwise, slap a notice on the front of the recruitment page, and be done with it? -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 00:14, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    I'd probably contact them myself when it comes up - it's 15 minutes of work to C&P some notice on ~40 group talk pages, and that's taking the time for the original write-up into account. -- Spiderzed▋ 00:22, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    At that, I'd be willing to make your job easier. A-M and N-Z. You take one set, I'll take the other. -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 00:30, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    I'll take N-Z. That way I don't have to contact my own groups, which would be... bizzarre. -- Spiderzed▋ 00:42, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    Mis is already on it,... never mind.... anyway,... if I had A-M,... I'd have to contact my group.... -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 00:46, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    Done. Figured it made more sense coming from the author. For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 00:52, 25 July 2010 (BST)
  7. -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 22:59, 24 July 2010 (BST)
  8. Sounds good to me, if groups don't like going onto the wiki often then that shows they don't really care about advertising their group.--Raddox MurTangle 00:55, 25 July 2010 (BST)
  9. It makes sense. --Austin Hunt 01:59, 25 July 2010 (BST)
  10. One month sounds good. I do believe that active groups should be able to have at least one single person visit the wiki twelve times a year. G F J 11:08, 25 July 2010 (BST)
  11. Sounds like a plan. --Dawkins DAWKINS IS WATCHIN' [T][P!][W!][♞] is currently: having his arm torn off by a zombie. 17:56, 27 July 2010 (BST)
  12. I like 1 month. I actually wouldn't mind 1 week either. Asheets 20:18, 27 July 2010 (BST)

Against

  1. Hmm. I'm not big on recruitment page but I like 2 months cause it means less hassle for groups that don't like going on the wiki. Maybe change the rules to say that groups may have their recruitments removed without notice if they aren't on the stats page? -- 06:56, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Wouldn't that mean that the groups most in need of recruiting are effectively not allowed to recruit? —Aichon— 08:44, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Well, that's the reason why I said may, hopefully if it happened it would be used with more tact than to just kill the recruitment if it's been a week since signing. Ah well. -- 08:52, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Also, lol @ this vote! -- 08:58, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    It doesn't get much more definitive than that! —Aichon— 09:12, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    Is it possable to put these kind of votes on the wiki news template? -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 22:57, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    I don't see a reason to, honestly, since any involved parties would have this page watched already, and this voting isn't governed by any policies. It's more or less just tradition. If we wanted to get technical, aside from the concern that people would get upset over it and try to start an A/VB case, there's really nothing to stop us from just changing the guidelines unilaterally and then acting on the new guidelines as such. —Aichon— 23:53, 24 July 2010 (BST)
    I see. Like in the case DDR presented, it seems foolish to have it decided by one person. Whatever though... -∞ Poodle of Doom ∞ 00:32, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    The point of putting it on the community page is mainly to raise awareness. "There's a recruitment page?" Plus it encourages more people to get involved in the maintenance of the wiki. We don't want to have to rely on Boxy forever. (On a side note, I only have 2 pages on my watchlist.) --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 13:15, 28 July 2010 (BST)
  2. Against The recruitment page is much smaller than it used to be, and now encompasses only one city. 2 months is fine. Plus I'm massively drunk. Thank god for spellcheckers.--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 01:16, 25 July 2010 (BST)
  3. Against Well, as you asked. I understand why the wiki-maintainers would want to make this change, makes perfect sense from their side. But as a user of this page it's already a hassle having to remember to update the dates every two months, let alone one month. Of course, if other members of my groups weren't so fucking lazy I wouldn't be the only one doing the updating. Such a hassle to be updating things with deadlines, am so busy already, weed doesn't smoke itself you know! x --  ▧  : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 02:18, 25 July 2010 (BST)
    Goddamn it I love you Clitoria. Marry me. -- 16:01, 27 July 2010 (BST)
    Clitoria Revolution? I'm sure I've seen that. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 16:15, 27 July 2010 (BST)
  4. Super Against - Both against the policy and against DDR's suggestion. As Ross.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 00:33, 27 July 2010 (BST)
  5. Against - Two months is fine, and I'm also the only member of my group that checks it, I'd go with without making a hassle even more annoying. --Umbrella-White.pngThadeous OakleyUmbrella-White.png 16:34, 27 July 2010 (BST)
  6. Against - Makes a ridiculous amount of work for groupies. --VVV RPMBG 18:56, 27 July 2010 (BST)
    Having to update a timestamp six more times a year is ridiculous? —Aichon— 23:21, 27 July 2010 (BST)
    Having to remember to do it is more of a hassle than actually doing it. I hate doing it, even six times per year, yet alone 12. Just having to remember is a ridiculous amount of work! --  ▧  : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 16:50, 31 July 2010 (BST)
  7. As DDR. You don't see the C4NT updating every month, yet we're as active as can be, despite our numbers having dwindled... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 07:36, 28 July 2010 (BST)
    The point's not really about group activity, it's about actively maintaining a group's ad. When you come to this page looking for something to join, odds are you're going to be turned off on a group that hasn't fixed it in months, so it's not really going to hurt any group to update more often. Also C4NT aren't on the ad page anyway! Tongue :P For hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee 12:19, 28 July 2010 (BST)
  8. Against - I can't speak for The Fortress here, but I don't often remember to check to make sure our Ad is still up. It's a bother to see that it's been down for a month just because we don't loiter around the wiki. Why not use the stats page to check group activity? Most groups that have been around a while are on there somewhere ... ~ Prep Fortress - BS 21:18, 28 July 2010 (BST)
    Yeah, if a group isn't on the stats page, it should have to update, but if it is, then you know they're active, even if not on the wiki. --VVV RPMBG 21:28, 28 July 2010 (BST)
  9. Against - Basically the same thing as my mate above me; Just check the stats page to see if they're active or not. Paul Henderson 16:24, 31 July 2010 (BST)
    but active groups with <10 wouldn't show up. --  ▧  : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 16:47, 31 July 2010 (BST)
  10. Against - The Fortress are very active, but I can still see this being a problem, to us and other groups.(in my own opinion) Puppiemaster 18:46, 31 July 2010 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Category_talk:Recruitment&oldid=1750733"