CWCki:General

Community Portal
Forum	News	Policy
Help	Technical	General

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3
• Archive 4

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

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 - https://sonichu.com/cwcki/Special:CreateAccount.

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)

Gatekeepers

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)

Kind of late, but I like the idea. Holdek (talk) 04:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Doxxing

In the light of the Suitress policy, I've been thinking about how this site treats people's personal info in general. While people like Bella and Sean Walker definitely deserve to be exposed for who they really are, and people like Michael Snyder and Megan Schroeder have been doxxed by Chris himself beyond the point of no return, I can't think of any reason to display the real names of people like Copitz and Doopie, especially in light of Chris becoming a sex criminal.

Doopie never wanted to get involved with Chris, while Copitz's worst crime was just hanging out with a known internet celebrity years ago. Now that Chris's crimes are revealed to the mainstream, this kind of thing can have a real impact on people's lives. I propose we systematically remove this kind of blanket doxxing from articles unless there's a clear reason for it. --4CentUser (talk) 15:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I think we should hammer out what a clear reason would be. I don't think it should be based on whether people deserve it, that can get messy. Maybe go by how much of the person's name Chris used. Like he's used first and last names referring to Michael and Megan. Whereas with Doopie and Copitz, he's used first names. Hurtful Truth Level (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I like this idea, and I think we should consider these things in this era where more and more people are being aware of Chris. I think in the case of Suitress, Chris only used her first name on one occasion, and that was in the one where he promised not to rage at Everfree. He had never used her full name. People only learned of her full name by Bella leaking it everywhere. Therefore, I think it's much easier to handle her being anonymous on the site. Megan can't get this treatment since she's been established since day one. PsychoNerd (talk) 18:40, 21 October 2021 (UTC)