Category talk:Historical Groups
Obtaining Historical Status
A policy is in place which outlines the method to attain historical status.
|
Nominations for Historical Status
When nominating a group, please add a note to Template:Wiki News and add {{HistoricalGroupVoting}} to the top of the group's page.
New Nominations
(To The) Four Winds
The group has officially disbanded after losing its fight against dwindling numbers and the shock and void left by the death of the well-loved and highly active player behind Brother Angst. (To The) Four Winds was created in September 2006 as an entirely, totally, 100% mobile revive group, with no home suburb whatsoever. As far as I am aware, it was an entirely new concept at the time and we believe we were the first pro-survivor group to run from suburb to suburb managing revive points and helping local groups rebuild their homes. We somewhat set a model, with groups following suit later, such as the Dribbling Beavers detaching the mobile Bouncing Beavers during the Second Big Bash. We started by following the Big Bash step by step. At our best in late 2006, we were able to attend requests in 2 hours maximum time, despite being only 29. During the Second Big Bash, even with numbers no higher than 12 (and usually much less than that), we were quick, good and respected enough to feature, with others, in Uncle Zeddie’s “Radio Survivor” episode 31 (http://radiosurvivor.blogspot.com, “Darth Zeddie” episode, around min 2:10; March 31st 2008). We have now gone, but we think we set a premiere in a way of playing the game and we also changed the survivor’s mentality from deeply suburb rooted to more mobile minded; thus, for what I believe to be these main contributions to the game, I nominate the group for Historical status.
- Yes - Nominator's vote. Besides, I think being the first truly mobile reviver group is historical. --Aureus 14:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- For - The group's name still pops up in conversations now despite being a force so long ago. I'm for it. 14:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 15:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - Definitely. I considered putting a survivor character in with you guys, but never had the organisation. --Karloth Vois ¯\(°_o)/¯ 16:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea - I've heard of you, you've been around a long time, and you have a legitimate claim to being historically significant. Good luck!--GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 16:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea --RahrahCome join the #party!16:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- No-Axel27 16:36, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- glad to see you're not bitter that your zergling infestation has been rejected. :D --Karloth Vois ¯\(°_o)/¯ 17:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - Explanation done by those before me.-- Adward 17:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - I love these guys. Getting behind the lines and dishing out needles while everyone else is pulling triggers and waving cocks? How dare you! --Paddy DignamIS DEAD 17:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea - Nice to have some legitimate claims come through occasionally. —Aichon— 19:35, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea - Historical for the new ideas it supplied. --TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 19:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Aye - For the above, as well as an impressive track record of going beyond the game. --Private Mark 20:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- For - It's been a while since I heard the name, but as I remember it anyway means something. Good luck with the historical status, though I'm pretty sure you won't need it :P RinKou 21:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea - As Karloth --Haliman - Talk 22:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - Obviously. --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - They deserve it. --LithedarkangelMeth!The Great Meth Man 23:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - This group definitely meets Historical Group criteria. --ZiPMH+LUE 23:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea - -- The Rune Carver/ Hejsa 23:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - Original, highly-skilled and contributors in major events. Good enough for my endorsement. --Papa Moloch 23:48, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes --Paul Power 00:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea -- 01:00, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea --Bob Boberton TF / DW 01:51, 12 December 2009 (BST)
- No - Sorry, not taking the claim that you created the mobile survivor group model seriously at all. Were you around these events? Yes, I vaguely remember you. Did you do anything in and of yourself to contribute, style or mould the game in a previously unknown way? Not that I can see. An old and well liked group you are, historical you are not. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 06:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yea I remember them. My non PKer alts have been revived by them numerous times. --Kelly_U RR talk 09:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes Former member myself, I found there was no other group which implemented the reviving of the worst suburbs (in the fullest meaning of reviving, not only de-zombifying) better. We were known by many groups in many of the suburbs, we were there when it mattered. --Moran 12:39, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes Another former member who joined after being helped a lot by this group. --Enniskillen 13:34, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes these guys were the real deal. fun to play with and fun to kill.----Sexualharrison 21:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
- YES I have seen your work. Cheers!--Roland 00:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- No -Hibernaculum 04:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- No never heard of them --Athur birling 23:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- No - I've never seen you in-game, and only heard of your group from the wiki. --ZsL 01:34, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes - worked alongside you guys a couple of times years back. Great group Sanpedro 02:38, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- yes/whatever - --Truezombieboy 08:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- YES _ One of the most effective mobile revive groups. Loved working with you guys!--Jim Bim 11:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes Any group that even tries to suggest that survivors do more than polish guns behind EHB cades is game changing in my book. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 11:17, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes Worked with them as a Dribbling Beaver then joined up with them. --Primo Beer
- Yes My character enjoyed the necessary slaughter of these healers from time to time--C Whitty 15:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- No - They existed, sure. But they didn't do shit. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 18:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes --Hawke2019 03:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yup --WanYao 07:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Voting Over. With 40 votes, of which 34 indicate approval and 6 indicate disapproval, (To The) Four Winds has achieved a percentage of 85% and has passed the vote to become a historical group. —Aichon— 21:32, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- WHY HASN'T THIS BEEN ARCHIVED! --Thadeous Oakley 08:32, 3 June 2010 (BST)
Escape
I was told I had to do this through here, but I'll keep it short. Escape is over - it was always designed to end on June 1, something that was heavily advertised throughout the duration of the movement. If you could pass me on this so I can go ahead and start writing my memoirs, I'd be most appreciative. -Captain Video 05:56, 3 June 2010 (BST)
- Yes - Definitely one of the most interesting and highly publicised events in a looooooooong time. -- 06:10, 3 June 2010 (BST)
- Hell yes - Absolutely. --Sophie ◆◆◆ CAPD 06:22, 3 June 2010 (BST)
- Why? - I'm leaning towards a yes for the reasons DDR mentioned, but aside from being highly publicised I'm not really seeing any effects from the event. You know, aside from a whole lot of zombies in one place, which was funny as hell. --Maverick Talk - OBR 404 06:39, 3 June 2010 (BST)
- I understand your point, but events this big are few and far between nowadays. In fact, that's an understatement, since as far as I know, this is the largest gathering of people I've heard of in two years, since March of The Dead and the apparent Battle of Barhapolis. In a game where numbers are declining and group actions en masse aren't as spectacular (particular in roleplaying value), I found this thrilling and exciting. -- 07:30, 3 June 2010 (BST)
- Oh, hell yes - Lots of publicity, huge turnout, unfortunate results. --TheBardofAwesome 06:41, 3 June 2010 (BST)
- Yes - Same reasons as DDR. μnholy®eign 06:52, 3 June 2010 (BST)
- Yes - It was interesting and even though I did not participate, the numbers were large enough that it deserves a mention. --Travis Wells
- Yes - Most certainly. --Thadeous Oakley 08:31, 3 June 2010 (BST)
Recent Nominations
- Guardians of the YRC - Failed
- Assylum - Ineligible and therefore Failed
- The Church Of The Beyonder - Failed
Previous Discussions
There are 3 archives for this page.
General Discussion
Things Best Forgotten | |
This Category talk page has an archive. |
Voting Succeeded
Things Best Forgotten | |
This Category talk page has an archive. |
Voting Failed
Things Best Forgotten | |
This Category talk page has an archive. |