From CWCki
Jump to: navigation, search

Community Portal
Forum News Policy
Help Technical General

For discussion that doesn't fit into the other community pages - though do keep it related to the CWCki.

"No shit is too minor"

This is something that's been on my mind for a while and I feel like getting it off my chest now. It's about our motto "No shit is too minor." I get this impression that people think it means "We have a duty to document every facet of Chris, we must know everything about Chris, if Chris takes a shit we need to document it and keep track of his bowel movements." I think that isn't the case.

First off, "no shit is too minor" is something someone just came up with one day and I thought it suited us well. It's not something I came up with or anything, but I've liked it because what I've always interpreted it as is "We shouldn't overlook things about Chris." At times, people can be like "Oh, we don't need to worry about this recording, we've looked over it before," that is that they will overlook material about Chris or not think it's important. I think the "no shit is too minor" in that as wiki editors we should dig through the content we do have and try and find new insights about Chris in it. For instance, when I first watched the The 24th Wedding Anniversary Special I didn't think much of it. I was like "Okay, Chris is rambling on and doing Animal Crossing shit, who cares?" But then I watched it another day and noticed that he talks a lot about his parents and how they met, that's some pretty significant information. It doesn't mean we have to analyze his choice of font in the video, or we need to do a Freudian analysis of his music choices, but merely we shouldn't overlook things.

Anyways, I could go on but what I think we need to do is not to overlook the little things, that's how I've interpreted, rather than "Chris has a bowel movement, we need to document it and we need to know Chris's regularity" which is how I see a lot of people interpret it as.--Champthom 05:25, 27 January 2012 (PST)

  • I agree completely, and encourage you to consider getting a new motto. I think the current one brings out people's spergy side. --Old meme 06:28, 27 January 2012 (PST)
    • as i have said before, once you start leaving out details its like cancer. its all or nothing eventually. Either include everything because you never know what is or is going to be important (Elvis died on the crapper), or just dont include anything. if chris is irregular, well that sounds unimportant, but down the road that simple detail could help someone figure out something else. Logic requires detail for extrapolation of facts. more detail, more extrapolation, more facts....-~ Slimz ~-. 07:03, 27 January 2012 (PST)
    • a possible new motto would be "Just the facts" or "The devil is in the details"
    • No, cancer would be filling up the CWCki with too many pointless details. Champ's rant was all about how we DON'T need to write about every little trivial aspect of Chris's life. It's fine to leave stupid shit out, and that's what we're trying to do. And, that is also why we are having this discussion about a possible new motto. That said, I think you have some good ideas for possible alternate mottos, and I highly encourage Champ if he's reading this to consider them. Also, you have to sign all your posts, not just your first one. --Old meme 07:55, 27 January 2012 (PST)
      • Define what is 'stupid' clearly... What facts should be left out? COnjecture, that should be left out.. Opinion, that should be left out... But NO FACT no matter HOW MINISCULE should ever be left out, lest it be gone forever. The simple things, the details, the minutia, thats where the truth of Chris really lies....-~ Slimz ~-. 09:12, 7 February 2012 (PST)

Linking quotes

Ok so i was reading the PS3 article over and notices that chris is quoted saying 'I'd throw away the cure for autism' where the word autism is linked to the autism page. well on the Pixelated_PS3 page (where the video lives that the quote comes from) autism is is also linked to the word autism.. ok here is the issue, when quoting chris on a page other then the one that has the original video, should we link the quote to that page directly? i mean we seem to link all kinds of stuff to all kinds of stuff but a barely see any quotes linked back to the source of the quote. Just asking what the protocol is for that?

  • We usually do link back the quotes in the article text around them or in the quote description. I don't think that there is any set in stone policy about it, but I can't really think of any instance where a quote's source has not been linked in the article somewhere. If you can though, by all means show me where. --Old meme 07:55, 27 January 2012 (PST)
  • if i run across it i will rectify it, the source is linked in the citation on the page i was talking about so there is a link, Chris is obviously quoted often so im sure there are quotes on pages with no back links. i guess creating citations for quotes is the best way to go.

Megaupload and Filesharing sites

I've noticed that in quite a few articles that include things for download the link that lead to recently shut down file serving sites have been closed. Is it a priority to fix these? Granola 06:42, 13 February 2012 (PST)

  • Yes, it is a priority (and a quite large one at that). I am currently fixing the ones that I can and moving the ones that are still working to Google Drive. Drive will probably never shut down and the files will never be removed. Please feel free to do the same to any download links that you find that are not on Google Drive or are broken. Pyromcr 8:18, 21 July 2012 (CST)

Chris and violence

Chris and violence have a long relationship. He has not only threatened violence, but also responded to threats of violence. He has performed tasks under the threat of violence and requested that tasks be performed with violence as an alternative..

The point here is that anger is one thing and violence is another. Chris has enough of a relationship with different areas of violence, that i believe that it deserves an article in the Chris and series.

Violence itself should not be lumped with anger. Anger is an emotion where as violence is an act (or in many cases the threat of an act) anger deals with how chris feels toward a specific situation where as violence deals with how Chris acts. im not a great christorian but i know enough to understand that 'Chris and violence' is a subject that deserves a page on this wiki... slimz - ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐ 05:31, 9 March 2012 (PST)

  • First, we already have the Death Threats article, so that kind of counts. Second, Chris is pretty much incapable of violence anyway (unless he gets his hands on a gun, but why would he buy a gun when that can go into vidya?), so anger and threats are all he's going to get. While I agree that he does seem to resort to violence pretty often, I have to say that he often channels that anger into various things we already have articles on, whether it be the Curse-ye-ha-me-ha or the death threats previously mentioned. Boriki 20:42, 22 March 2012 (PDT)
    • Im not entirely convinced. The article i was thinking about is not just focused on chris DOING violence, but how he perceives violence, his bigotry regarding violence, and how he reacts to threats of violence. Basically chris is a bully, a pussy and generally has no empathy.slimz - ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐ 05:01, 23 March 2012 (PDT)
      • Sounds rather pointless to me. The Chris and series in general just seems to be a way to take potshots at Chris nowadays, but they do have their place and they do cover a lot of things that would be hard to place into other articles. Chris and the law for instance I think is a page we needed to have. It could have maybe been placed into the Jerkop article, but it would have been wildly out of place. Now Chris and Violence on the other hand is something that very easily folds into articles like Death Threats and Curse-ye-ha-me-ha, or even Chris and anger. Really, if you want to go into Chris's perception of violence, most of what you'd come up with would be ninety percent speculation anyway. You can try to write up the article yourself, and if anything is salvageable and CWCki appropriate we could make it into a Chris and anger subsection, but it's hardly appropriate for its own article. --Old meme 06:38, 23 March 2012 (PDT)


I've been thinking, what would you all think of a page covering "A-Logging", that is thinking that Chris is worse than Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot combine and deserves to be punished? I think this issue is sort of the opposite extreme of White knighting which we deal with. Now, I bring this up here because I ask - do you think we should have a formal article about it, ala the White knighting article, or perhaps we should make a policy about it to elaborate on NPOV? I think we get a lot of grief that we tend to foster A-Logs, that people will read the CWCki and think Chris is an awful person who has committed crimes against humanity (which really isn't the case). Or perhaps we should do both? My concern with an actual article on it is that A-Logging hasn't really impacted Chris trolling the same way white knighting has. A-Logs don't really fuck things up, they just make normal trolls look bad.

I think we should try to be more neutral towards Chris, critical yet fair, as I believe that ideally we should be presenting information about Chris as "This is what we know about Chris" rather than "Chris is x, y, z (and they're all bad things"). So, what do you all think? --Champthom 04:59, 29 April 2012 (PDT)

  • Yes. We need an article like this. A legitimate article like the White Knight one that explains in detail just how stupid the whole idea is, and with examples of what has resulted from it. In particular, I think we should point out that A-Log managed to get his own Encyclopedia Dramatica page from doing so. That will deter this sperginess if nothing else. While we're at it, I also think that links to this page should be added into the CWCki's welcome message so that new users are directed to it, and it should get linked on the front page, at least for a little while, so that as many thirteen year old youtubers as possible see it. I also would not object to A-Logging being made a temporarily bannable offence, just so we can get rid of those that ignore it. I know the forums are already considered a hive for sperginess, but that's a reputation that does not need to be attached to actual wiki users. --Old meme 06:11, 1 May 2012 (PDT)

So is anyone else going to do this, or will I have to? --Old meme 02:11, 10 May 2012 (PDT)

  • I'm currently hopped up on caffeine so I'll write out a rough draft, once I'm done I'll post it here and you can all edit it.--Champthom 02:17, 11 May 2012 (PDT)
  • I've started a rough draft here. By all means edit it and comment on it.--Champthom 02:50, 11 May 2012 (PDT)

Activity meter

I was wondering if we could setup an activity meter, kind of like the defcon or the homeland security color system. It would theoretically measure how active chris is. Just thought ot would be a nice graphic that we could update when his activity level changes. slimz - ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐ 09:26, 30 April 2012 (PDT)

  • One of the few ideas Slimz has ever had that I'm fully behind. --Old meme 06:12, 1 May 2012 (PDT)
  • After missing years of CWC news, I'm using the CWChronology as a gauge for activity. Axe 01:53, 10 July 2012 (PDT)
  • I'm not a fan of this idea because if it's low activity, people will get pissed and it'll worsen discontent. Plus it's subjective, Chris posting a few Facebook posts every now and then is pretty good activity nowadays, though it'd probably be considered low than the days where Chris was releasing something every day.--Champthom 05:31, 10 July 2012 (PDT)

Index of terms

I think an index of terms that are used often would be useful. Things like: Solid Chris Liquid Chris China Pickle true and honest fans gal-pal sweetheart

Now i know that the terms for the most part each have an article, but a single page of Chris-centric vocabulary would be nice. thoughts slimz - ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐ 07:34, 9 May 2012 (PDT)

Audio articles?

Someone on the CWCki Forums suggested that audio versions of articles, namely the "Chris and..." series be made so people like himself could listen to articles while he's working or driving to whatever. I suggested he post the request here, but I figure I'd help him out and post it here for him. My only concerns are 1) do you all think there is sufficient demand for audio articles (in other words, would anyone else besides this guy be interested in them?) and 2) does anyone here have a pleasant voice to read an article with?

I don't think it's a bad idea, I mean it would make Chris accessible to the blind and people who don't feel like reading articles and would rather listen to them, but it's not like it's a huge, huge priority. I'm mostly posing this here to gauge responses, namely if anyone else would be interested in audio articles.--Champthom 09:26, 30 June 2012 (PDT)

  • there are a few problems
  1. This is a wiki and its always changing
  2. The "Chris and" series is one of the first most people read
  3. It would be very boring unless it was all rewritten in novel fashion

The CWCki forums

I looked for it, and it was gone. What happened? - Murderdartxker 18:07, 18 November 2012 (PST)

Kacey Calls

So the Youtube channel that had all the calls was banned and all the Mediafire links to the files are dead. How can we replace the videos let alone get the files back? This is a massive part of CWC history that was just destroyed and needs to be recovered.

Pyromcr 05:38, 5 December 2012 (CST)

  • I've got a handful on my computer. I'd ask on the forum. As I recall someone else has brought this up in the past. While there's some great stuff in a couple of the calls, the vast majority are duller than dishwater. --Lumber 18:38, 5 December 2012 (PST)
    • Upload them somewhere and fix as many broken links as you can. ~Pyromcr 09:54, 5 December 2012 (CST)
    • It doesn't matter if they're duller than dishwater or not. We're CWC historians here, and they're part of the historical record. I know there's been talk about "how minor is too minor" when it comes to recording Chris and his actions, but a trolling MP3 is an important piece of history and deserves to be re-uploaded and re-linked. --HCAndersen 22:26, 8 January 2013 (PST)

The state of things

I'll be honest, I and the rest of the staff has been doing a really lousy job keeping up with the CWCki. I don't think we need the number of mods and admins that we needed in the past when Chris was in full force but I think pretty much everyone on the staff is assuming that everyone else in the staff is keeping an eye on the CWCki and as a result, no one keeps an eye on the CWCki. I hear people will sometimes complain that Google will mark this site as an attack site and I'm wondering if it's because we're not banning people who do that sort of thing as it happens.

The big thing I plan on doing is auditing the CWCki staff, checking in on mods and admins for their current status and possibly downsizing the staff and/or replacing it with fresh blood. It's a first step towards trying to clean up on things.--Champthom 08:52, 24 June 2013 (PDT)

Breaking up Facebook article

I think the facebook article is too big and we need to break it up into sections. I'll try to make some example pages in my userspace. ChaosAkita 20:34, 6 September 2013 (PDT)

  • I'll break it up once we finished doing all the Facebook posts and fixing the links to the sections. Alan Pardew 03:15, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
  • I was about to think, maybe break it up by month? Even if Chris stop doing this by, say, the end of the month, it wouldn't be a waste to have a "September 2013 Facebook posts" article. --Champthom 08:04, 9 September 2013 (PDT)
  • I'm glad to see breaking up the article is a priority. I guess I'll check back in a couple of months to see if it's still a thing. ChaosAkita 19:21, 9 September 2013 (PDT)
  • I'm doing it right now. You want it, you got it. Alan Pardew 01:03, 11 September 2013 (PDT)

New Quote Box Colours?

Because of there are some Facebook posts which involve more than 3 users in conversations, (such as this one, which had 5 users posting) should we add more colours of quote boxes? Currently, there's only red, green and blue. I thought up of yellow and orange. Alan Pardew 01:27, 20 September 2013 (PDT)

Cleaning up Facebook page

Hi, I'm starting to try to break up the facebook page, while adding info from here. Just wanted to make sure there was no opposition to this. I've already created a separate section for August 2013 posts. ChaosAkita 11:18, 3 November 2013 (PST)

New facebook navigation bar

Unless anyone tells me no, I will be working on a couple of things:

1. Breaking up ALL facebook posts into pages based on months (since this is what Champ seems to want) 2. Working on a new navigation bar for the facebook section to accommodate the split pages

Facebook remains our largest source on Chris's antics, so I think it's incredibly important that his posts are displayed in a readable and organized manner.

Alright, I hope no one reverts my work or anything.

ChaosAkita 15:58, 4 November 2013 (PST)

  • Also here is my proposed new navigation bar User:Chaosakita/exampletemplate ChaosAkita 16:06, 4 November 2013 (PST)
  • I seem to have gotten the goahead from Champ, so I went ahead and replaced the navigation bar. Hope it doesn't bother anyone. ChaosAkita 07:47, 5 November 2013 (PST)

Facebook revamp

Looks like not too many people care about this so I'm going to continue with my plan:

1. I'm going to split up 2012 and 2013 into months (and abandon the existing 2012 and 2013 pages) 2. I'm going to continue transcribing pages from the imgur leak. This might take a while. 3. I already replaced the Facebook navigation template.

Also, here's some things I would like to do:

1. I would like the abandon the titles for each post. They are not that informative, and can be even be misleading. I also suck at coming up with them. On the other hand, I have no idea how I would separate each section 2. I would like to separate Notes and Status Updates. Not a huge deal, but it would make everything neater, I guess.

ChaosAkita 07:52, 5 November 2013 (PST)

Something Awful original threads

In the 2007 article there are links to the archived versions of the original SA threads about Chris. I think it would be very worthwile to have our own copies of these as an archive. Does anyone have a SA archive account, or know someone with these accounts who would be up for the job? The links are the following:

Wouldn't that be illegal? I'm guessing that SA has copyrighted that content or used some other legal precautions to prevent people from copying it and giving it to other people free of charge. - NegaCWC (talk) 22:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Could be, but we have quoted comments from dozens of websites and message-boards and have never really been in trouble for that. It would probably be best to ask first, but I think we'd get permission to mirror the threads due to the nature of this site. RachmaninovDESU (talk) 10:57, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
But as far as I gather none of those message boards and websites hide behind paywalls. If we were to put archived SA threads on this wiki than in theory we will be making SA lose money. Permission should definitely be asked before we put anything from SA on the CWCki, but I'm not sure if we should even bother about getting copies of those threads. Do they contain any interesting information about Chris that's not already documented on this wiki? If not than in my opinion it's not worth the effort. - NegaCWC (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Iirc they don´t contain interesting info about Chris himself, they do, however, contain very interesting info on the earliest spread of Chris as a web phenomenon, something which is very much relevant to this wiki. RachmaninovDESU (talk) 17:15, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I worked around the problem by adding a link to an archived version of the thread. The interesting thing is that the thread is started because of an eyewitness report on Chris that seems unrelated to Lucas taking the first pic (on the same day). Not sure if this is coincedence or if it adds up somehow. RachmaninovDESU (talk) 17:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
It would be nice to have at least a partial screenshot, say, of the first few posts (as opposed to a whole honking thread), making the more-or-less start of this whole 'project' as it were, up on a page here. At very least, it could be argued that there's a copyright exception/clause for documents of 'historical' nature? Giving credit for the source, of course. --Xavier orona (talk) 05:22, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Piping to Chris

So many articles start by piping to Chris. I find this annoying, and have removed some of these pipes, but I was wondering if it's a problem. Y0h 513nn R3n (talk) 17:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Removing the CAPTCHA as ineffective against retarding spam

Whenever we open registration, even for a brief period, we are bombarded by a similar formation of similarly assembled usernames creating their spam adverts as new articles. I think that it is obvious that the ReCAPTCHA system does not protect us in any meaningful sense against automated page creation. Meanwhile, I do find it rather inconvenient as a human user trying to shut out Google from my on-line life to need to enable Google and Gstatic in NoScript, complete a reCAPTCHA prompt and then disable it again if I wish to create a page that the CWCki would do well to have. I believe I had discussed the last time we had enabled registration that, instead of lowering the drawbridge on occasion, we require prospective CWCki editors submit applications that can be manually approved; I again point to CreationWiki as an example of how such a system can work. Naturally, we would ask for basic knowledge about Chris instead of real names. It hinders new aspiring editors when they cannot join, existing editors when they cannot create new pages without going through these hoops and it troubles us when we get so many noxious spambots coming in at once. There is surely a better way. ChanOfTartary (talk) 23:40, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I would support adopting ConfirmAccount to replace regular registration. In that way we can completely bin reCAPTCHA. A set of very simple challenge questions, from my memory, should eliminate most spambot registration attempts. --Little Owl (talk) 19:22, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
You should reach out to Marvin at Kiwi Farms about your ideas. He's the owner/admin of the CWCki. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Standards for inclusion

This is to continue the discussion that had begun on the main page. As a way to separate tetrad members from trolls worthy of an article, I would propose the following metric in evaluating trolls: that Chris has actively produced content relating to them, such as incorporating them into the Sonichu comic. Conversations on social networks are not enough. Truly influential trolls, such as the Miscreants, Chris's various sweethearts through the years or more recently the Idea Guys or Sockness, have inspired Chris to go to great lengths and produce substantial content. Common enablers like Sarah and Steve may get some occasional short dialogue on Discord or Twitter, but nothing like the old IRC logs or Mumble chats. Articles on those who are not significant enough by this standard to warrant their own article should probably be folded into brief mentions in their appropriate category. ChanOfTartary (talk) 16:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

It is something worth looking into, although there is a small risk that if we overlook an enabler who started small then suddenly become big a few months or years later, then we might have trouble tracing back their footsteps. The internet can forget as much as to never forget, but at the same time, we are dealing with more and more people going into great lengths to leave their mark in the Sonichu lore. --Little Owl (talk) 16:45, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
We could Move the existing pages for enablers who don't make the cut into the CWCki namespace. That would also allow for keeping track without needing to write formally for the general CWCki audience. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 20:05, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Should we still move the articles to the CWCki:Enablers page or just leave the preservation to the article history? Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 20:58, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
It is possibly better to leave them as article history. A simple search can find past references to an enabler from the Farms, but some enablers may well regard a CWCki article as some mark of honour or fame ensuring them a place in Christory. ChanOfTartary (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Makes sense. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 17:32, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Fan videos

I propose deletion of all fan videos sections as they add nothing of value to the wiki. - Klop|polK (talk) 08:21, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Not sure about removing all fan video sections - maybe if they're high quality enough and had effort put into them, they can stay, like some of the videos on THAT IS MY HOUSE. Agreed with your call on removing the reversal videos, though. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 08:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
I have to agree with Hurtful Truth Level, particularly since there are some pretty good fan videos like those VHS parodies by Mycalfelps. I wish they could finish reuploading them and also the "Greene County Conspiracy" trailer. --Little Owl (talk) 11:18, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I deleted all the reverse videos. Everything else has been left untouched - Klop|polK (talk) 11:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Chris and

I have proposed some changes to the Chris and articles, since they are major, more discussion is required. Here are the changes. You can discuss on the CWCki Discord too. - klop (talk) 15:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Chris and cosplaying could also just be renamed to Cosplaying, since it's not a significant aspect of Chris. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 20:16, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
I agree - klop (talk) 02:05, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Jerkops can now register new accounts

I asked Canine to set it up so that anyone in the Jerkops (moderator) user group can register new accounts. This should make it so we won't need to resort to fully opening registration and letting the spambots in. There should be a Create Account link in Special Pages that Jerkops can access -

Anyone wanting an account can PM a Jerkop on Kiwi Farms or Discord. They'd only need to provide an email address and user name. There's an option to automatically generate a password for them.

I could make a post about this in the Updating the CWCki thread on Kiwi Farms. Any jerkop who's open to being contacted about this, post your KF user name here and I'll tag you in the post. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 11:49, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Kolp1607 on the farms klop (talk) 11:57, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

The future of "corner icons"

Within the last few days, we have seen more "corner icons" being added to a number of articles, such as Rosechu and Sonichu (character), in addition to existing ones at Chris and anger and Jacob Sockness. I wish to gather opinions on the future of this feature, because I am not seeing any purpose of such icons on this wiki, other than being random pictures in contravention on our policy of not copying Encyclopaedia Dramatica. --Little Owl (talk) 17:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I think it’s getting way out of hand. I think very few article should have one. It just ruins the aesthetic if we just have one everywhere.PsychoNerd054 (talk) 18:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
In my opinion, I would prefer phasing them out completely: it just distracts the reader from the main content. I am sure that there are plenty of reasonable alternatives to corner icons, such as expanding said articles or adding more inline images. --Little Owl (talk) 21:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I agree, none of them add anything and distract users from the actual article. Complete removal is the best option. - klop (talk) 03:34, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


There is a group of individuals who keep malicious individuals away from Chris. They enable his fantasies to keep him intrested but don't harm him in any other way. Should this be a new category to classify people or be a subsection in the enablers article. - klop (talk) 08:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Just put them in the Enablers article. The main quality of an enabler is that they enable Chris’ bad habits, it doesn’t matter if it’s for good or bad intentions. PsychoNerd054 (talk) 13:26, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Did it, though as time passes we may need a full article for them. Also now that they have publically revealed themselves, should we call this the "Gatekeeping saga". They've been guiding Chris since atleast October 2019. - klop (talk) 01:15, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Are you proposing that they would be a new member of the Unholy Tetrad? (By which point they’d be the “Unholy Quintet”) PsychoNerd054 (talk) 05:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
No, they very clearly come under Enablers as you pointed out. I'm proposing we call this time period the Gatekeeping saga since they have an incredibly deep root in Chris's life. - klop (talk) 05:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Is it saga material? Usually sagas are for describing major happenings revolving around Chris. Gatekeeper stuff so far seems to be more about releasing material about the Sockness and Dimensional Merge sagas. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 08:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

New Template: To Do

Taking a page from The Cutting Room Floor, I think we should have a template that list things that should be added onto articles, that should work better than just having incomplete templates on several pages without an explanation. Does this sound like a good idea? PsychoNerd054 (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

It sounds like a useful idea. I suppose if a user has any suggestions but are too lazy to do the work themselves, they could always give some brief pointers on what could be done, so someone else can chip in later. Rossticus (talk) 21:21, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

"xth year of organised trolling"

Little Owl mentioned on Talk:2021 that use of the phrase "x year of organised trolling" is kind of outdated now, especially since we tend to discourage people from getting involved with Chris directly. Should articles about years still say "organised trolling", or should they just say "x year since Chris' discovery"? FokkerTISM (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I would say "x years since the discovery of Chris and the Sonichu franchise", because Sonichu is a very important part of the CWCiverse. Without the cringe-fest that is Sonichu, Chris would be just another fan of Pokémon and Sonic. --Little Owl (talk) 19:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Agree on "discovery", I feel that while trolls and Sonichu are key aspects of the lore, for brevity's sake just "Chris's discovery" is sufficient. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 00:17, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I feel that there should be a point where organized trolling stopped. 2010 or 2011 fit that pretty well. I think that every article from 2007 to 2010/2011 should keep the "x year of organized trolling," but the years after that can be changed. Superspongebobbros (talk) 01:43, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I just updated all the articles from 2011 to 2021 to say "x years since Chris's discovery" rather than "xth year of organized trolling."Superspongebobbros (talk) 20:23, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Adding a Manipulation Disclosure to all Chris videos?

Should we edit the Template:Infobox/video to insert a message pointing out that most videos were the result of troll manipulation? Something along the lines of:

Manipulation Disclosure: The views Chris expresses may or may not be his own. Many of Chris's videos were orchestrated behind the scenes by trolls putting ideas in his head or goading him to act out; the majority of these interactions was never released to the public.

Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 00:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Adding it to *all* videos seems like overdoing it. I'm pretty sure most people who spend an hour on the CWCki without any context at all will realize that half of Chris's life has been fabricated by trolls. Since videos Chris makes of his own volition seem to be the outliers, maybe an infobox disclaimer for videos Chris wasn't manipulated into making would be more helpful. With that being said, contextual textboxes should only be included if they're necessary, and I don't think any are warranted for this sort of thing.

Abaddon (talk) 01:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Which videos are of his own volition can be hard to determine, though. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 01:08, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
For that reason alone, adding in an infobox for videos possibly-maybe-not-manipulated-out-of-Chris-by-trolls would be an addition which could be untrue for certain videos. Abaddon (talk) 01:22, 23 January 2021 (UTC)