Difference between revisions of "CWCki:General"
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
Though his morality has been mentioned on several other pages, I think it would be best to have one page dedicated to his morality, or lack there-of, and where it comes from, mainly his ego. [[User:Melainia|Melainia]] 21:07, 15 September 2010 (EST) | Though his morality has been mentioned on several other pages, I think it would be best to have one page dedicated to his morality, or lack there-of, and where it comes from, mainly his ego. [[User:Melainia|Melainia]] 21:07, 15 September 2010 (EST) | ||
: Frankly, if it's coming from his ego, it should be mentioned on the [[ego]] page. This is, however, unless there's enough to justify a major Chris and page.--[[User:Blazer|Blazer]] 20:37, 15 September 2010 (PDT) | : Frankly, if it's coming from his ego, it should be mentioned on the [[ego]] page. This is, however, unless there's enough to justify a major Chris and page.--[[User:Blazer|Blazer]] 20:37, 15 September 2010 (PDT) | ||
:: I don't really think Chris's morality needs its own page, as it would end up being a documentation of all the times he's been a horrible person (huge list), and all of the reasons behind it (troll speculation). These issues are already covered rather in depth on Chris's own page, the White Knighting page, the pages on Chris's Lies, Things Chris Has Ripped Off, Women's Rights, Homos etc. I feel a page purely about what a bad person he is is redundant (and self-evident besides). [[User:Sygerrik|Sygerrik]] 09:46, 16 September 2010 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 11:46, 16 September 2010
| 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.
Da update is used for Chris updates...but what about other updates?
For example, I don't think the Lucas video game pictures should be on the update, but it should be noteworthy. Should it placed in da update or no? Also if you're wondering what pictures, I'M WORKING ON IT. Clydec 21:33, 9 September 2010 (PDT)
- Where should I stick the pictures? I uploaded them with Lucas commentary on them. Clydec 12:42, 10 September 2010 (PDT)
- I think either the list of Chris's games article or the video games article. Leaning towards the video games article, if only because the list article is already pretty damned huge. Dkaien 14:07, 10 September 2010 (PDT)
Image purge project
According to the Spongepedia (also hosted by dreamhost), 500 internal server error may be caused by TOO MANY IMAGES. In any case, I'm sick of seeing shitty images that do nothing to enhance articles as well. please tag images that are useless on their talk pages for deletion. kthx Clydec 20:45, 10 September 2010 (PDT)
- Based on what you told me about the Spongebob wiki, their problem was also due to image size. Perhaps if we work on resizing images down to less than 30kb?--Champthom 13:34, 11 September 2010 (PDT)
- Eh, the 500 errors are a configuration/setup issue. I highly doubt images are the root cause. --Anonymax 13:44, 11 September 2010 (PDT)
- No, it's a general agreed consensus that the 500 internal server error is occurring more often nowadays. It has to do with an increasing amount of SOMETHING. I'm going by this only lead right now. Clydec 19:09, 11 September 2010 (PDT)
- I mostly get 500 errors on pages that are large - that is - the body of text is large. Images really seem to have a negligible effect on whether a page 500's for me or not. We should think carefully about whether going about an image purge will largely be a wasted effort and/or do more harm than good towards error fixing (generating more edits - which may also form part of the problem). --Anonymax 20:06, 11 September 2010 (PDT)
- No, it's a general agreed consensus that the 500 internal server error is occurring more often nowadays. It has to do with an increasing amount of SOMETHING. I'm going by this only lead right now. Clydec 19:09, 11 September 2010 (PDT)
- Eh, the 500 errors are a configuration/setup issue. I highly doubt images are the root cause. --Anonymax 13:44, 11 September 2010 (PDT)
Overlooked interview?
A couple of weeks ago, I noticed on the talk page for Chris-chan_Discusses..., the subject of a previous interview was brought up, and Champ said he didn't want to put it on until they had a youtube version for it. A year later, someone did. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR_PrPHC2l0 The video doesn't have many views, and I don't believe it has an article for it. I'm not sure if any of this is relevant, but I wanted to draw attention to it in case it needs an article or some other mention.--Austin 06:03, 11 September 2010 (PDT)
Chris and diligence article?
Christian's work ethics and his laziness are rightfully infamous, but there isn't an article dealing with it en detail. I'd make it myself but due to stress and my poor grasp of English I'd rather hear the opinions of others on it before making a crappy attempt. --Maximilian Graves 07:58, 15 September 2010 (PDT)
- Strangely enough, I was thinking the same thing. Though with how lazy he is, the article would probably grow to be almost as large as the article on sex. Melainia 21:04, 15 September 2010 (EST)
My response to the site administrator.
Just a few days ago, a member of our forums decided to claim that we were involved in attacks on your wiki. We were notified by the administrator of your site on a locked topic supposedly thanking us for our actions placed on PSPownsYou (or PBML) and also requested action on another supposed participant named Level1isbest. I just want to point out that we have no intention of harming your site and that the involved parties are a bunch of fucking trolls, but then again every person on Newgrounds does it for the lulz, not including school shootings (Jeff Weise). Sorry for any inconvienence. Tateos 16:25, 15 September 2010 (PDT)
Chris and Morality Page
Though his morality has been mentioned on several other pages, I think it would be best to have one page dedicated to his morality, or lack there-of, and where it comes from, mainly his ego. Melainia 21:07, 15 September 2010 (EST)
- Frankly, if it's coming from his ego, it should be mentioned on the ego page. This is, however, unless there's enough to justify a major Chris and page.--Blazer 20:37, 15 September 2010 (PDT)
- I don't really think Chris's morality needs its own page, as it would end up being a documentation of all the times he's been a horrible person (huge list), and all of the reasons behind it (troll speculation). These issues are already covered rather in depth on Chris's own page, the White Knighting page, the pages on Chris's Lies, Things Chris Has Ripped Off, Women's Rights, Homos etc. I feel a page purely about what a bad person he is is redundant (and self-evident besides). Sygerrik 09:46, 16 September 2010 (PDT)