CWCki:Community Portal

From CWCki
Revision as of 10:33, 25 June 2009 by Cogsdev (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

First! lol. Really, I love the new wiki. Easier to use than the old one. --Champthom 07:29, 26 January 2009 (CET)

Fun fact about CWCki

I was just curious what our ratio of users to admins are and right now compared to Wikipedia. Right now, we're at about 93 users to every admin, as opposed to roughly 6,000 users to every admin on Wikipedia. The moar you know. --Champthom 12:51, 18 June 2009 (CEST)

Minor project of sorts

Some older articles, like early videos sometime link to the videos instead of showing them actually in the article. Like, they'll say "Click here to watch the video" or they'll link to Chris's video by actually linking to an external video when it really should go to an internal link (as in an article about that video). One thing people can do is fix this. --Champthom 02:36, 16 June 2009 (CEST)


Categorizing videos - POLICY TYPE VOTE

When I normally establish some sort of policy, I try to be like a judge and using precedent (like Wikipedia guidelines) to establish some sort of ruling in our situation, like about notability for trolls and people like that.

However, I feel for a policy with categorizing videos is in order and we can discuss this in a democratic fashion.

The problem currently is that sometimes people will make videos for articles or it'll be hard to find videos because they'll erroneously be entitled "Captain's Log" when they're really just addressed to one person. For instance, CWC to Mr. Miyamoto-san was erroneously titled "Captain's Log, Stardate January 17th, 2009." Chris did not start the video with "Captain's Log" nor was he addressing his fanbase (two traits of a typical "Captain's Log" video). There are other videos like this, videos that really aren't Captain's Log but being attributed as such, even though they're really private messages to people.

I forget where this discussion arose but the current was based on this problem - Chris is usually too lazy to give his videos title, so you get videos like ECV 00095" which means nothing to someone trying to find the video. Personally, I proposed that we use AVDierten's names for the videos like "The Realization", "The Beginning", etc. The complaint was that it was too opinionated, focusing mostly on what Arjen was thinking and not so much about the video itself. So, instead, we pretty much called any video Chris made a Captain's Log. Problem is, that this was when Chris's videos were mostly addressed to his fans and that on a rare occasion would a video addressing someone would come out. In addition, I don't think it should be called a Captain's Log unless he says "Captain's Log" (though his earlier videos were in this format yet he doesn't use the phrase).

Of course, since then, we have a whole category of videos. Some are videos intended solely for someone. Some are leaked videos acquired by trolls. Some are just Chris doing weird and stupid shit. Things have changed and so has our system of categorizing.

So let's discuss a better way of categorizing videos. In my personal opinion, I think Arjen's names for the videos should be used considering they're the "standard" and a troll will usually know which video you mean if you cite "The Realization" or "Chrissy Lies Through His Fangs." We could find a way to slightly tweak the current system. Or we could just stick with whatever Chris names the videos.

The possibilities are endless. Put your thoughts here and let's try and come up with a new system. Discussion ends in one week, 12 June 2009. --Champthom 21:58, 5 June 2009 (CEST)

  • I agree for the most part. The videos categorised under "The Captain's Log" should be solely that - logs and updates by Chris on his life, not ones such as the Miyamoto video or ones to Ivy. Sonicow 02:22, 6 June 2009 (CEST)
    • Actually, I think maybe we can split up the current video template (which is now being generically called "Captain's Log") - actual Captain's Log videos and a template for miscellaneous videos. --Champthom 00:17, 13 June 2009 (CEST)
  • That last comment above got posted as I was typing up what follows below. I'll just say in response to that most recent suggestion that it seems like a good, obvious idea at first glance, but that when you consider how thin the line actually is between a lot of Captain's Logs and a lot of other videos, it wouldn't make much sense to split the two groups so completely apart like that. Check out my frickin' treatise below, do some more pondering, and come on back, ya hear? Llort 00:43, 13 June 2009 (CEST)

I guess I found this discussion just in time, since I've really been wanting to put in my 4cents! I actually have a lot of ideas for organizing the Template, which I've been slowly modifying on my way through "re-transcribing" all of Chris's videos. (About halfway there, at this point!) Anyway, not all of these ideas agree with one another, but here goes:

Plan zero (just some ground rules):

Any video that includes a majority of the following features - Chris introducing himself, mentioning the date, addressing a wide audience, saying "Captain's Log" - should be classified (or re-classified) to the Captain's Log section. Sometimes, Chris will say "Captain's Log", but it won't really be one, and sometimes, he won't say "Captain's Log", but it clearly will be one, judging by all of those other features. So, that's my suggestion for sorting them out. I should add that for non-Captain's Log videos, I'm against using AVDierten's naming. Those are a form of artificial designation, and they should be officially adopted only grudgingly, if at all. I'll keep thinking about alternatives.

Plan one:

Keep all titles the same for now and just massage the current categories so that - again - they're less artificial. For example, I really don't think that there should be an "Animals" category. When you stop and think about it, Chris doesn't really make "videos about animals" (unless they're Hedgehogs); it's just that a number of his more random videos happen to mention animals in some way. These can all be re-distributed among "Trolls", "Gal-pals and Sweethearts", and "Other", I think. And while "Animals" is being dismantled, "Ivy" might almost be a category worthy of creation apart from all other "Gal-pal and Sweetheart" videos. I've been focusing on the Captain's Logs, so I'm really not sure how solid any of this plan is, even though it sounds solid to me now.

Plan two:

Radically opposed to plan one, this alternative suggestion is that the entire template be totally re-formatted to simply present all of Chris's videos in chronological order. This would remove all decision-making as to what - yet again - artificial groupings to shove his videos into; everything would just be in one long list. On the one hand, this would make it significantly harder to browse by subject. But on the other hand, this would make it extraordinarily simple to browse all videos by date of release, as there currently seems to be no way of doing. It all depends on people's priorities.

Anyway, I'll be around if there's some tweaking to be done to these ideas or whatever. :3 Llort 00:38, 13 June 2009 (CEST)

  • You make an interesting point about artificial designation but the issue here is about usability as well. I have to spend a while to find videos sometimes under the current system because I have a fuzzy notion of when videos come out. Let's say I'm looking for this video - I don't think in terms of "I'm looking for the video for the video from August 2008" but rather "I'm looking for the video where he says 'IN DA EAR.'"
The formal result of this, at least for the time being, is to just stick with the system we have now because it'll be a bitch to rename everything and fix links and that sort of thing. Maybe we should just do a better job of having key words from videos like "IN DA EAR" or "I'M NOT A PEDOFORK YOU DORKS" redirect to the appropriate video. --Champthom 16:55, 17 June 2009 (CEST)

English usage?

While I think we can agree we won't use Moonspeak here, but what about English usage? Could we use American English because a majority of trolls are American? I don't mean to be an Amerifag but it's annoying as hell to add unnecessary vowels to words when spellcheck says it's wrong. --Champthom 07:25, 27 January 2009 (CET)

if there is an american english setting, i can't find it, the language code is simply "en" for english... i didn't even know mediawiki featured a spellcheck system, i thought that was my browser --cogsdev/vedsgoc 10:53, 27 January 2009 (CET)

    • Err, that's what I mean, with Firefox. I use Firefox and everything comes up misspelled when I see words like "colour" and such. It's not a huge ordeal, and I know Wikipedia uses British English but I think we should stick to American English. --Champthom 10:02, 28 January 2009 (CET)
      • I refuse to use anything less than the TRUE and ORIGINAL English. It's a minor point anyway, but I don't see any real reason to stop spelling things correctly. --ZAPPED 14:59, 2 February 2009 (CET)

I, for one, have no problem seeing either being used interchangingly. Although I write American, I'm cool with whatever version. Da_Nuke 05:20, 25 February 2009 (CET)

Well I'll say since the TRUE and ORIGINAL Sonichu creator, Jimmy Hill is English... I'd say whatever the fuck you want to spell it seems right, bith are acceptable forms of ENGLISH spelling.--UncleBastard 05:35, 25 February 2009 (CET)

since the vast majority of our users are americans, it's best that we use american english in the articles. --cogsdev/vedsgoc 05:30, 17 March 2009 (CET)

  • SO SHALL IT BE WRITTEN, SO SHALL IT BE DONE. --Champthom 16:33, 17 March 2009 (CET)

Possessive of Chris

It's Chris's. From the very first page of Skunk & White's "Elements of Style", third edition: 1. Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's.
Follow this rule whatever the final consonant. Thus write
: Charles's friend
Burns's poems
'' the witch's malice
Exceptions are the possessives of ancient proper names in -es and -is, the possessive Jesus' and such form as for conscience' sake, for righteousness' sake. --Champthom 02:09, 7 February 2009 (CET)

Ages?

Has there ever been a page concerning the warped ages of the Sonichu comic. Because they're really fucked up.--gourmetpickle

  • Do it. It could be incorporated into an existing article, most likely Sonichu 8 would be a good spot, but yeah, it'd be a good thing to discuss, both the age change thing and how some Rosechus are older even though the only known ones were made during the rainbow thing. --Champthom 02:55, 9 March 2009 (CET)

If Chris ever found CWCki

Since this was discussed in Mumble - I think Chris's mind would be blown at the size of the Wiki, documenting every single thing about him and everything he cares about, but I think there's a good chance he'd say "IT'S ALL LIES AND SLANDER!" I think there's a 5% chance he'd get an account and try and edit shit, then we'd be like "OH CHRIS, LOL." --Champthom 05:28, 18 March 2009 (CET)

  • i hope he'd add to it and try to portray himself in a more positive way. although we aren't that harsh to chris on here, now that i think about it --cogsdev/vedsgoc 22:23, 24 March 2009 (CET)
  • His input would be valuable going by the precedence he set from the ED article. Mall Conductor Bear 07:46, 1 May 2009 (CEST)

Suggestions for Featured Articles

I've been adding them lately to feature articles that I think are really good, but so far I've run out of ideas what to feature that are interesting in a "Huh, I did not know about that" way and have lots of information. I felt like changing the new one to Rosechu mostly because I ran out of ideas and not to mention I couldn't get Fail or Yawning Squirtle to go with a nice format for the front page.

Anyways, as I'd rather avoid pages I've extensively worked on, leave suggestions for pages you think should be featured here. --Champthom 02:55, 25 March 2009 (CET)

  • Don't worry about wether you've worked on them or not. Worry about wether they are fun to read and if they will make people interested in reading the wiki. :3 (and I'll be thinking about featured articles) RachmaninovDESU 11:39, 29 March 2009 (CEST)

The Scrapbook

PandaHalo has finally delivered and she has delivered us the Scrapbook of Fail, scanned. These are high res scans (well, better than the the images we have now) and I will be uploading all of it here. In the process, I will remove the lower res images since they're shitty images he got from his PSP from images from his computer. --Champthom 03:42, 25 March 2009 (CET)

Something buggy with the site

This diff on this site gets some bug and won't show the diff. --Ritegroic 14:46, 13 April 2009 (CEST)

  • It's not a bug, it's either PHP or MySQL timing out because the page is gigantic. There's not really much that can be done about it as long as the site's hosted on 110mb. --Tumbleweed 22:43, 13 April 2009 (CEST)

Audio Recording Transcriptions

These definitely need to be done for the mumble and psn chats, either that, or brief summaries for each so you know what you're downloading. --Tumbleweed 22:41, 13 April 2009 (CEST)

  • There quite a few summaries of these in the corresponding PVCC threads. That does mean getting it from the old database I believe, because they changed forums or whatever... RachmaninovDESU 22:58, 13 April 2009 (CEST)

If Chris Discovers CWCki - Policy Vote type deal

UPDATE

Not sure how pissed Cogs would be if I told what she had in mind for this, but she came up with a solution that is the best of both worlds, in that we neither have to deal with Chris fucking up CWCki yet would be easy enough for him to use and we don't have to worry about him finding out sensitive stuff. Sorry if you felt like you voted in vain but trust me, this is gonna be awesome.

Details to follow in good time. --Champthom 23:28, 4 May 2009 (CEST)


I have here a sort of message Chris should he ever discover CWCki. Clyde and I believe cogs have stated support for showing Chris our fine wiki and I think this message is a good policy on how to handle Chris should he ever discover CWCki.

Obviously you are free to edit the policy and perhaps we should do a vote of sorts to determine if this should be official policy or not and moved into the CWCki portal.

Voting will end 01 May 2009 (since that's an easy date to remember). --Champthom 19:04, 28 April 2009 (CEST)

  • Okay, I'll extend it until 07 May 2009. --Champthom 21:28, 2 May 2009 (CEST)
Prithee, where do we vote? Fat Nigger 11:54, 3 May 2009 (CEST)
    • Right here, dude. Just say "Aye" or "Nay" or "Yes" or whatever floats your boat. --Champthom 17:05, 3 May 2009 (CEST)
  • I think the message is pretty cool, but I'd say the system you are proposing is too complex for Chris. He's going to shut down or ignore it as soon as he sees it. Shouldn't we just let him edit articles? We always have the original version backed up, so we can then edit his edits again to have them show both our and chris's view. (if we show chris this letter, we are running the risk that he starts sperging because he doesn't understand, and won't really edit anything at all. If we just let him edit freely we're motivating him moar. Remember, it's a tard we're working with. ^^) RachmaninovDESU 16:12, 3 May 2009 (CEST)
  • Aye to what RachmaninovDESU says. Axe 22:15, 3 May 2009 (CEST)
  • By all means, change the page to what you want to reflect it. I see what you're getting at, just you could express what you want than I can. --Champthom 22:20, 3 May 2009 (CEST)
  • Aye to this idea in general. --Mr Mittens 21:31, 3 May 2009 (EST)
  • Aye. Chris is likely to disregard the message, and spout the same old drivel about his words being twisted around. However, the prospects of him dropping new information, insight or drawings is too good to ignore. At worst it'll result in the creation of a 'Christian and CWCki' page. Mall Conductor Bear 06:36, 4 May 2009 (CEST)
  • Aye. --Delabonte 05:15, 5 May 2009 (CEST)

Remove Da update

Suggestion: Redirect this page to 2009 so we don't have to update 3 pages (including the template) every time something happens. Axe 08:36, 4 May 2009 (CEST)

  • Da Update should really be for current events that are too minor to be in the main timeline, or ongoing events, it's not being used properly now. --Robotnik 23:48, 4 May 2009 (CEST)
    • Agreed. We have to keep Da Update. It's a useful short-term timeline based on a classic running joke. --Delabonte 05:15, 5 May 2009 (CEST)

Sonichu Fan Comics

Just curious, are there any?--Jericho 18:15, 17 May 2009 (CEST)

Organization of emails

I've been pasting large sets of documents like Blanca E-mails and PSN Blogs and I want to make sure they're organized well. The way Chris E-Mails are listed right now is mostly chronological, which is fine but we can separate them by topic instead. I'm thinking of moving stuff out of Chris E-mails 2004...Chris E-mails 2008 in the following way:

This should make emails easier to find, easier to link for reference, and give them more context for losers to read straight through. We already have these emails not in the chronological lists:

Axe 00:11, 21 May 2009 (CEST)

  • well, i think the emails should be listed in chronological order, and grouped by topic and year. this allows readers to read up on a whole subject while also being able to put particular emails in perspective. --cogsdev/vedsgoc 00:43, 9 June 2009 (CEST)
    • I don't follow. Chronological and by topic, which comes first? Axe 11:25, 10 June 2009 (CEST)
  • Could we have both, with an option to choose at the email page? --Delabonte 16:03, 10 June 2009 (CEST)
    • this is what i mean, chronological order, but grouped by topic and year. two categories of email articles, one filled with pages named "2007", "2008", "2009", etc. and the other filled with pages named "Megan Emails", "Cole Emails", etc. --cogsdev/vedsgoc 23:13, 10 June 2009 (CEST)

Categorization of articles

“ The category structure is (ideally) a multi-hierarchy with a single root category. All categories (except root category 1) should be contained in at least one other category, and there should be no cycles (i.e. a category should not contain itself, directly or indirectly). The category structure should reflect a hierarchy of concepts, from the most generic one down to the very specific. ”
meta.wikimedia.org

as it stands, i can't easily assess the category structure because we don't have a root category. please discuss what the root category should be called, and start categorizing the categories. start with broad, general categories and then make increasingly more specific categories as needed. you can use DynamicPageList and CategoryTree to visualize the structure once the root category is in place. please refer to the metawiki page about categories for guidance. we'll have to develop some conventions for naming categories, so discuss that here too. --cogsdev/vedsgoc 17:33, 25 June 2009 (CEST)

Retrieved from "http://sonichu.com/w/index.php?title=CWCki:Community_Portal&oldid=14419"