CWCki:Community Portal

From CWCki
Revision as of 01:57, 27 March 2010 by MoarLurk (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Community Portal is designed to be a public forum to discuss CWCki related affairs for site wide concerns, policy, that sort of thing.

Please consult the archives to make sure your concern hasn't already been posted before:

CWCki:Community Portal/Archive 1
CWCki:Community Portal/Archive 2
CWCki:Community Portal/Archive 3
CWCki:Community Portal/Archive 4

So Chris has discovered the CWCki (finally)

As you can guess, he'll have to pry those pages from my COLD, DEAD HANDS before I consider deleting them. It's not surprising that Chris is targeting those particular pages, though maybe he's being pragmatic in that he knows he won't get the entire thing taken down.

Expect a video statement from me defending the CWCki and our refusal to comply. Much is at stake here, people, we shall not submit to Chris. CWCki policy refuses to censor itself (the only exception when there is a clear threat of direct harm as a result of something on the CWCki) and we shall not cave in to Chris's demands.

This is our hour, guys. Chris has discovered the fruits of our labor and we shall not go down without a fight. --Champthom 07:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

  • We will not vanish without a fight! We are going to live on! We are going to survive! Today, we celebrate our CWCkindependance Day! --T K 19 08:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • On second thought, I changed my mind about a video. As per "CWCki is not ED", we're not so much mocking Chris but trying to explain him. While a CWCki saga would be interesting, I'd rather risk possible "lulz" than CWCki's reputation as a (mostly) reliable and open source of Chris related information. In other words, let's not feed into Chris's ego at the moment by not responding in the positive or affirmative to his threat. If he does respond in some way, well, we're take it from there.
If one thing comes out of this, I really want to hear what Chris's opinion of the CWCki is. I wonder how far he's looked into the articles and I'm guessing if he's only seen the articles of people personally connected to him, he hasn't delved far. --Champthom 11:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


Guys, I totally know how this will all go down. He's going to send some complaints, which won't work. Then he will register one or more accounts on this wiki and start editing, but of course with his edits we can all determine who he will be. Finally, he will include this website in a future installment of Sonichu, probably using a retarded plot like the survivors of the 4-Cent Garbage building assault have formed a remnant organization called CWCki to use as a hideout, and he and all the mary-sues will come destroy the trolls once and for all. Chris will give himself new powers, Heather Dalley (or the Wallflower) will be gruesomely killed off and mourned for exactly ONE panel, CWCki will fall and Chris will have certain users horribly executed and claim moral victory for himself. After all this, nothing will have changed. --Ninjaclown 09:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Didn't Chris already ramble previously about how trolls are good because most of the trolls are just documenting his life and acting like the paparazzi or something? Oh, wait, we hit the limit of his attention span. --wwwwolf (wake me when you need me) 10:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

  • We need to find that exact quote, because at exactly midnight on 12 March 2010, that's gonna be the featured quote :3. --Champthom 11:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
“ It is good to have my own trolls. They may try, and sometimes succeed, in getting true, hard, honest information from one, and they may later twist the truth for their evil purposes. Just like the paparazzi. And, yet, they still, document the truth. And that text, audio, photographic, video, etc., type of information, is what separates the impostors from the real, true, honest individual. ”
Chris, on what we do here, 03 August 2009.

I was thinking about fucking with him. Delete those pages a few seconds before the deadline and put them back up shortly after midnight. He already hates us, so why not goad him on by exploiting loopholes? Until he comic murders us, we're his main villains. P.S. I'm glad that we were the direct cause of Chris' misfortune and pain. I love seeing him hurt. --OFSheep 12:31, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

  • What about "Booby-Trapping" pages? We could link the edit buttons of the said pages to hard-core gay porn. This should do the trick. Griffintown 14:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
    • If we do that, which might be a good idea to deter Chris from making edits, we'd need to have a legitimate (i.e. non gay porn) way to edit the pages, in case something needs to be added or changed on those pages. Maybe have a fake advert on the side that will link to the edit page instead. But something that wouldn't interest Chris, so he won't click on it. 37 Rb 85.468 15:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
      • Chris used paper strips to hide a side of his computer monitor when he uploads on his shitty site CWCipedia so he won't see the porn. I have a better idea; what about a "Pop-Up" window covering the edit page of all the articles? You want to edit? You must close the Phalus-Enhanced window that had just popped on your screen. That would be quite a deterrent for Chris and a minor hassle for us. Griffintown 16:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
        • And for those of us with a pop-up blocker, it won't be a problem at all. --BreadGod 16:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
        • I support this. Having gay porn come up every time he tries edit warring would end this quickly. We can expect the CWCipedia forces surender within less than a week of the ads coming up. --Edward 17:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
          • CWCki is not here for trolling him. Except with the truth. --T K 19 19:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
“ As per "CWCki is not ED", we're not so much mocking Chris but trying to explain him. ”
Cogsdev, just a few paragraphs ago.
  • I'm with cogs all the way on this one. We don't need to shit all over the CWCki in an attempt to piss Chris off. We exist. That's all we need to do.--Beat 19:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Actually, I said that but Cogs would be flattered in either case :3. TK said it better than I ever could. For that reason, we shouldn't try to turn CWCki into a trolling weapon. Doing so would turn the CWCki into something it isn't, at least as I see it. Something might go down but the CWCki itself won't be involved, just the persons involved, per say. If CWCki is going to be involved, it will be what we've always done and as TK put, have always done - troll Chris with the truth. --Champthom 20:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • You misunderstand. I support the gay porn links for use as a defense mechanism against Chris fucking with the pages. You know he will try with at least a few pages, and even if we don't go with that idea of gay porn links, I think we should do something to stop him fucking shit up. It shouldn't be harder to handle then any of the regular vandals here, but it'd be a good if we could somehow stop it happening in the first place. --Edward 21:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Remember his edits to the ED page. He didn't do much except blank it a couple of times, and the CWCki is way too huge for him to significantly damage. He might even give us some gems, remember shecameforcwc.jpg? We might get something nice like that.--OFSheep 21:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Any edits Chris attempts to make will be A) Pathetic B) Funny or C) Informative. Also, Chris never attempted to alter the Asperpedia to my knowledge, even though you don't need an account to do so. Either way, I don't think we need to take any precautionary steps. --T K 19 22:07, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Dont cave in to the basterds wills we shall stand as one--Wintermute 22:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • As much as I would have loved stashing defensive porn everywhere, an "Open Door" policy will bring much more material to us. T K is right; looks like our "muse" will delivers us fresh material at our doorsteps this Friday. We better act nice... Griffintown 22:54, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Just leave him to it, document his edits and then revert them. Whatever ensues will be hilarious. JerichoJack 23:30, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
    • For added hilarity, may I suggest changing the article of the now to the Homos article? This may provoke Chris into making another attempt to "Sort out fact from fiction" at the best and make him rage at the least.--MoarLurk 00:14, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Worth a shot. I know its a gamble, but if theres anything we know about Chris, its that he hates da homos, and especially hates being called one. It'd probably get us quite a lot of information. We thought we pretty much had Chris and his ideas of reality all summed up, and then we discover he honestly believes cartoons are real. I remember thinking, 'How the fuck did we not know that by now?' So who knows? Maybe we could get something fresh out of his stance on homos yet. --Edward 00:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
    • He went back and forth constantly during the Asperpedia saga, what with curing them and blowing them up and appoligizing the very day afterwards. I doubt we'll get anything more interesting than him blanking the Homos article and leaving the line "I am STRAIGHT YOU GODDAMN HOMO TROLLS!" on that front. --OFSheep 01:58, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
    • You never know with Chris. Failing that, what about the article on Snorlax? We could always use more information on her. Or he'll just blank it and replace it with "LEAVE MY MOTHER ALONE" and then we'll put the rule 34 the drunk drawfag made of him and Snorlax on his userpage. It's a good day when the best case scenario is "Chris tells us more information" and the worst case scenario is "Chris becomes angry".--MoarLurk 02:14, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Clarification

Based on a post someone made on Krapple, I think I might need to clarify what I was saying.

There's two basic approaches to how we can react to Chris:

  1. we fight him
  2. we ignore him

Any plan more or less boils down to one of these two, as I see it. Let's say we decide to turn this into a struggle - then we're going to self consciously self censor ourselves, which is something I refuse to do (save for someone's personal well being is at stake, see Wallflower). In fact, I'm not a fan of some of the edits people have made before. I personally doubt that Chris will suddenly take credence of things said on the CWCki when they've been said before on ED, on the ED forum he supposedly reads, the numerous calls, e-mails, letters, etc. from white knights trying to tell him information, etc. It's implied in pretty much all the sweetheart articles that Chris's sweethearts are all trolls. Yet Chris still believes that these were all TRUE and HONEST women who were attracted to him and suddenly died for various reasons. Aside from documenting Chris, CWCki serves to dispel misconceptions about him and the trolls that surround him so we don't have faggots spouting the same memes over and over.

Okay, so we really don't need to self censor - there really doesn't seem to be anything indicative that Chris will take what we say with any more creedence than say, ED or any faggot who gets through to him. Chris bringing attention to CWCki makes us a very valuable target for white knights. No, not faggots who genuinely want to defend Chris, I'm talking about faggots who want to gain Chris's trust and will assume that Chris will see their CWCki edits and reward them handsomely so they can get their 15 minutes of e-fame. Vandals get shot down usually fast here on CWCki but it's a bit of a bitch still.

There's a reason why people trust CWCki over ED and other sources about Chris. It's not because we look legit or anything like that. It's because we have ways of doing things. Edits are not whims. I heard some EDiot make fun of us because we use "citation needed" because we're that serious. If you're going to make an outrageous claim about Chris or claim he said something, you better be prepared to say where and when. CWCki is serious business. Probably part of the reason is because we're mostly independent of trolling - this isn't PVCC where if you piss someone off, you're banned. We're not Krapple either. CWCki is generally free to do its own thing. People are allowed to express themselves freely.

So what does this mean? It means that CWCki should stay CWCki, not an elaborate trolling pawn. It is far better that we ignore Chris or at most stand our ground and remain a valuable, less biased, accurate source of information about Chris than to devote our time and energy into making the CWCki into an elaborate way of trolling Chris. I'd rather not see people censor themselves and go to great lengths just to troll Chris with CWCki when such efforts could be used more constructively.

Let's see how Chris responds. If he puts up a fight, then we might do something. If not, then we can carry on as business as usual. In fact, we should be trying for business as usual. March Mumble Madness is still on, and plenty of the Mumble chats still need to be transcribed. Don't worry about Chris discovering shit, just focus on the stuff you'd do any day. You CWCki admins are what ultimately make the CWCki so great, and I personally admire the time and dedication many of you have put in.

In the event Chris and/or white knights vandalize CWCki, jerkops, in addition to myself, Cogs, and Clyde will be on high alert for the next week or so.

In many ways, we are trolling Chris by not giving into his ego - the problem sometimes with creating villains for Chris is that it feeds into his delusion that he's some sort of hero and that he must defeat his villains to achieve his ultimate prize. In short, preserving the CWCki as it is and maintaining its integrity is our number one priority. Anything else is secondary.

Good night, CWCki, and good luck. --Champthom 11:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

  • Yeh, it seems to me the correct response to all this is as little response as possible. Personally, I reckon that anybody expecting some kind of apocalyptic confrontation is going to be sorely disappointed. I mean, practically speaking, what can Chris do? Rage and complain a bit, try to blank a few pages perhaps, maybe put a curse on cogsdev. Not much else. Then the laziness will kick in and he'll go find some other way of making an ass of himself. As for the notion that he might actually learn something from reading the CWCki...well, if there's anything I've learned from reading and contributing to this site, it's that Chris believes what Chris wants to believe. There's not a hell of a lot here that he wants to believe. Dkaien 18:48, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


  • I do agree that the CWCki needs to stand up against the vile manchild, because as soon as he sees that the CWCki isn't going anywhere, you know he's going to go on a warpath like he did with his ED page, and the ED website. But on the other hand, actually doing something may spread more fuel on Chris's fire, and that's something no one wants. Chris will think that this is just like the ED page, and this is like an arch rival he has to overcome again. My advice(if anyone is interested), I wouldn't do anything to provoke Chris, and just be polite about it, and not get into trolling him, because that may make things worse, and I agree it would ruin the CWCkipedias reputation, and I respect the CWCki too much to see that happen. But knowing Chris, he will do anything to take down the CWCki, and he's going to do it any way he can, so, at that point we would need the cavalry to come in and do the trolling for the CWCki, and put Chris in his place as always. But overall, I don't think he can do much at all aside from more Jewtube videos and BAWWWWs on his own CWCipedia quotes. Sadly for Chris, the CWCki isn't going anywhere, and for Chris, that may be the biggest insult of all. - Chris Pickles
  • Well, its after the deadline, and i'm not seeing any response from Chris. He must be taking his time. I'm going to bed now. Maybe when I come back something intresting would have happened. --Edward 03:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
    • He said Midnight Eastern Time, it's still 11 Eastern Time. --T K 19 03:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Plus, we don't know how long it will take him to realize that we aren't removing the articles. We can either post the "Chris, we have nothing to do with the loss of the Wallflower" note further down on this page or make Bob, Snorlax, Lies, or Homos the AOTN so he may be inclined to "assist" in expanding those articles..--MoarLurk 04:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
      • It's 20 minutes past midnight, eastern time. Once again, Chris failed to keep a promise. --BreadGod 05:21, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
      • Chris seems to check in on the internet at least once per day--he did his like forty minutes before the deadline, so we'll probably get our reaction whenever he does his next sweep. Could be that he's gone to bed and will check when he wakes up.--MoarLurk 05:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Posse commitatus

Any able bodied CWCki user who feels they can regularly monitor CWCki for recent changes in the next week or so, please contact me for a special assignment.

Current jerkops, please be on full alert. --Champthom 04:18, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

  • I'll be home all day tomorrow and I'll likely be available this weekend. I'll help out as much as I can. --Lime Madotsuki.png 04:42, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I'll gladly help. I don't really have anything important to do. --BreadGod 05:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Recently registered but very long time follower of Chris Chan (Back when ED and the sonichu home page was all we had) and lurker around here since the Cwcki's inception. Will also gladly help, I may be unavailable starting tomorrow for 2-3 days but after that I literally have all day every day free for a while. Hurrrr2 05:06, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • P.S. Contact info is available on my user page. Please contact me privately, guys, if you really want to help.--Champthom 05:12, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
possibly I get out of school early and will gladly help Message me on the details --Wintermute 06:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Reporting for duty Ma'am.I work from home and online anyway, so I have all day to monitor.-YawningSquirtleRedux 22:25, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The Response(s)

I was told to put this on the Cwcki yesterday. It's a little late

Dear Chris. We of the CWCki site have seen your demands and would wish to respond to them. First off, the CWCki's function is documentation, not trolling. We believe that your own CWCipedia does not fit all the criteria for being a wiki (only two people may edit) but is rather an online autobiography, and a rather one-sided one at that. We have filled this gap by creating an open and comprehensive documentation of you and your work.

Secondly, we of the CWCki pride ourselves in the accuracy of our articles. We strive constantly to attempt to check and double-check our articles for any errors. We have made no attempt to twist facts or lie in any way. If there is anything on our site that you believe is a lie, please let us know what it is.

Third, we never sent any message to your "girl friend", and we did not have any intention to. The person who sent the message is a third party member with no known ties to the CWCki.

Fourthly, since your "girl friend" ran away as quickly as she did, and since we go to great lengths to make our articles as accurate as possible, we are suspicious that you may have deceived her in some way. After all, if you were always telling the truth about yourself, why would she break up when she saw what she already knew?

Finally, we did not force your "girl friend" to leave you, she did that out of her own free will. We do not entirely understand why you are so angry at us for this. Hoping our further communications will be on more friendly terms, The CWCki

Well, could it hurt to make the Article of the Now into something from the Web of Life template(preferably Snorlax)? I'd like it if we could spit in his face at least a little bit before this is over.--MoarLurk 06:59, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Made some edits. --T K 19 07:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • It looks fine to me.
  • I love this. Quite the perfect stance the CWCki need to take. Griffintown 14:19, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • You should make Bob AOTN - that way Chris will probably make some sort of statement on ihs health.--LeninandMcCarthy 22:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Either Bob or Snorlax would make a nice AOTN, but I'd prefer Snorlax on the off chance Chris tries to edit her page. He seems to have forgotten that we know what she looks like.--MoarLurk 22:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • All right, now that we seem to have the message settled, how are we going to give it to Chris? Do we place it somewhere on the CWCki? Do we email Chris? Or are we gonna do something else?Kraken
    • We can put it right below the featured quote, he'll probably notice it there. Changing the featured article to Megan or SheCameForCWC.jpg is also an option.--MoarLurk 20:00, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Not to be a dick guys but c'mon, giving a formal message like this is contrary to the stance we're going to take. Giving Chris a response is feeding into his ego, even if it's a simple message. In any case, I have taken into your considerations for the Article of the Now, but personally, I was thinking Patti Chandler and with the most offensive fan art (one of the one where she's raping Chris or something like that) as the article of the now. Failing that, then maybe Snorlax. --Champthom 20:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Thinking about it some more, I was a bit hard headed. Tell you what - if Chris pushes the CWCki thing so much, we'll make a video of this in addition to the quote of the now. That's if Chris responds, mind you. --Champthom 02:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Chris's Demands

Well, I think it's clear that he didn't even click on some of the articles--half of them are stubs to begin with. Also, he's extended his deadline and doesn't get why Heather had her article removed. Also the Hambeast has a name now. Who wants to take action?--MoarLurk 07:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

  • As usual, Chris puts absolutely no thought into his threats or demands, and has no intelligence to begin with anyways. There's nothing he can do to the cwcki, once again, Chris is fighting against something that he just has no power over, and it's completely beyond his control. My advice, I think we do need to fire back at Chris with something, just to show that the CWCki isn't going anywhere. I think we need to add some stuff to the articles he's complaining about, and improve them, maybe add some more details and maybe even revise some of the pages completely. I think that would stick in Chris's side pretty good. It's not what I would consider "Trolling", but just to show Chris that the CWCki is boss, and we do not have to do anything he says just because he doesn't like it. I would hold off on any kind of video response or direct action from the CWCkipedia, I think silence will kill Chris more. --Chris_Pickles 05:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I disagree. While the theory is that giving him a response would just feed his ego, I think the discovery that the trolls made an entire wiki all about him was already enough to do that. I say we respond. I think we should use the letter to Chris seen above on the featured quote page as a way of telling him to fuck off. While we're at it, go about improving those articles as you said, and as was sugested, make Megan, or another 'Gal-Pal' the article of the now. If need be, we make the video too and put it with the featured quote. If he keeps quiet then we'll spare him the video and just leave him. --Edward 13:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
    • You know Edward, I changed my mind, I agree with you 100%. I do think we should come up with a formal address to Chris himself via the front page of the cwcki. Something special for both Chris, and avid readers of the cwcki. Something sophisticated and swarmy I think. Insulting him would be pointless, but I think if we made a direct, formal address that doesn't pull any BS, and just gets right to the point, that would be awesome. At some point, the CWCki has to make its stand against Chris(because we only have till the 31st until chris UNVEILS HIS WRATH ARRGH!), and make it aware to people that no one is backing down. I just don't know what that address should be though, I guess it's something left up to the sysop to decide on, but it should be something that's well constructed, and just pisses Chris off as well. I mean, the guy just made a video admitting he's so desperate he would pay for hookers and begging for a girlfriend. So, there's no real reason to hold back, but I say represent the best of the cwcki. --Chris_Pickles 03:11, 15th March 2010 (UTC)
      • I think we ought to make it obvious to Chris why the pages have just been protected--you just know that his ego is going to twist that in his favor.--MoarLurk 17:05, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I'd go with Snorlax for maximum damage--he put a lot of emphasis on ALL OF MY RELATIVES and Bob/Barbara have the largest articles. He's freaking out about this because he's afraid that his parents are going to find out that we know about them(He didn't think we knew what they looked like). Snorlax especially, since she's adamant about staying off the internet. For bonus points make "SnorlaxCameForCWC" the image of the now.--MoarLurk 18:47, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
    • SheCameForCWC.jpg is also another option. Imagine what happens when Chris discovers that the hated image has it's own article. Also, I know someone has Rule 34 of Jivin, so we could make that the IOTN. Failing that we can use the rule 34 Isabel made of Magi-chan and the "Redesigned" Asperchu!Magi-chan.--MoarLurk 19:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Thats not two Magi-Chans. That image is of Magi-Chan and Swift, the exact Magi-Chan duplicate that Chris created while attempting to retcon Asperchu. The image is actually called 'Hecameforswift.png.' --Edward 20:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Why don't we just pretend to follow up with Chris's demands again? Even though it has been done before, I think it could be interesting to see what his reaction would be if we took the stuff out for a day or two. Chaosakita 07:22, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
  • And having Chris switch into "Smug Mode" for a while? No way. Besides, he's creating the most Lulz when his whims are denied. Griffintown 12:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
  • NEVER COMPROMISE, EVEN IN THE FACE OF ARMAGEDDON.--Champthom 15:01, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
    • No. We do not negotiate with terrorists. --BreadGod 15:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
    • It's nowhere near as funny unless he's screaming or breaking the camera. I'm still hoping for a video where he's both naked and screaming.--MoarLurk 04:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Nah, giving into his demands, even as a joke, would just feed his enormous ego more, and we'd obviously see a video of Chris touting a "win" over CWCki. Standing against the manchild and essentially giving him a big "Fuck You" would be a lot more satisfying (And it might deflate Chris's ego slightly.....Well, we can dream) than a quick switcheroo. --Torvalr 10:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Page protections

In light of Chris's demands, I have opted to protect all of the pages he listed on CWCipedia. Reasons are twofold:

  1. to prevent Chris from editing them once he realizes that he can, you know, just get an account the pages.
  2. to prevent white knights, faggots, and other assorted idiots from complying with Chris's demands.

Whatever may come of this, CWCki will not comply with Chris's demands, as doing so would be a violation of the principles CWCki and wikis in general stand for.

I apologize for the page protections, but I feel this is a reasonable precautionary measure that may ease up the workload of our jerkops and admins who are already on high alert. If you feel you have information that must ABSOLUTELY go in the article, post it on the article talk page and an admin will determine whether to sort of it out.

Protections will last until 01 April, and depending on Chris's responses may be extended slightly. --Champthom 15:53, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

500 internal server error

500 internal server error is completely fucking me up, there are moments that I can hardly edit pages because of it. I'm sorry if we allready have discussion on it, but we need more. RachmaninovDESU 19:34, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

  • I agree that those errors are annoying the shit out of me. In fact, I got one just now when I was trying to edit this page. --BreadGod 22:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Thirded-YawningSquirtleRedux 22:28, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I know. This shit is annoying. Possibly the most annoying thing i've come across on the internet. And I've seen the 'Who broke the copier copier copier copier' ad. --Edward 00:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Guys, just refresh or whatever. This is nothing compared to how shit used to be when we were on 110mb. --Champthom 04:05, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
  • fixed? maybe Clydec 00:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I have learned to love those errors. It will slow down vandals and even Chris if they show up to mess with the CWCki. Griffintown 05:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Just wanna say I dig the new error pages. Funny stuff, nicely done. Dkaien 14:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

TV Tropes page?

Should we have a page on the various TV Tropes pages of Sonichu, and the fact that Chris is a god in the Trope Pantheon (under Disgraces, the God of Bile Fascination, to be exact)? He's fourth from the bottom on that page, but for the sake of simplicity I'll list his "god" info here, as exact as I can make it:

Christian Weston Chandler, God of Bile Fascination (CWC, Chris-Chan Sonichu, Ian Brandon Anderson)

Who knows, maybe this "amazing honor" can be used in the "Did You Know..." section if a fake Chris-appeasing main page is used once the deadline passes? Just an idea. --Kimo 22:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't. TvTropes doesn't have an easy revert function, so when he shows up to try editing it will be a pain in the ass to clean up. --LeninandMcCarthy 00:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
  • We already have a link to the TV Tropes page in the Sonichu comic article, I think that's good. People interested in these tropes can refer to TV Tropes article for that purpose. --Champthom 04:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Essay on CWCki

Someone wrote a pretty decent essay on CWCki for a totally legit college class and posted it on /cwc. Check it out. --Champthom 04:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

  • That person is made of win. --YawningSquirtleRedux 04:39, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
  • The gentleman deserves all the proper honors we can award him for this paper.Griffintown 13:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

So Chris thinks I'm Tito

if you like reading fake info, check the history --Cogsdev 09:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

  • (Removing my comment so I look less like a moron. Mostly just skimmed it because of WALL OF TEXT.) -- Borednewb 09:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
  • yeah, okay Batty. you didn't even try to make this look real. get the fuck out. --Cogsdev 09:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
    • just seemed to be copy/pasted from the transcribed videos, most likely just attention whoring. Brofose 09:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Only 25 pages till the 1,000 mark

Will we celebrate somehow? --Sonijew is back 06:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

  • I'll be sure to go get drunk, if that's any good. JerichoJack 12:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

CWCki and POV

This thread on /cwc made quite a stir, essentially with the OP complaining how we have POV. However, I think this is a fair accusation - that we're POV, that is we're biased against Chris.

Currently, it's clear that CWCki is POV by its nature and the nature of its subject. Trying to be unbiased about Chris is like trying to be unbiased about Hitler - most people are going to hate him and it's really hard to say anything nice about either one without being attacked for sympathizing with them.

Personally, I think that CWCki should more or less remain critical towards Chris but not outright bash him - it's alright to point out Chris, for instance, is a hypocrite based on the facts, but not that he's a "complete and utter failure" simply because of his hypocrisy. Any sort of judgment on Chris should more or less be left to the reader. As was the problem with Chris and race, CWCki really should try to present the facts about Chris in a way such that what Chris says mostly speaks for itself, with minor explanatory notes and allow the reader come to his own conclusion about Chris.

However, it is possible to be NPOV, but this is difficult and I think would force us to take a different tone in articles, ending up being bland and with less flexibility.

Mind you, I'm not saying we have to be nice to Chris, only that it seems that some expect us to be unbiased towards Chris and present information in an unbiased manner, which I think is not a totally unreasonable request but may not suit our needs. But nonetheless, I think it's a reasonable complaint and I think maybe we should address it (though it's unfortunate the person who started this thread did not bring it up here, but instead opted to go on Krapple).

Thoughts? --Champthom 07:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

  • I think, why bother? Who would really want to view an unbiased page about Chris? He is complete scum, and most people know it after barely skimming over these articles. I don't think he even deserves unbiased judgement. He threw that out the window ages ago. --Edward 09:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Champ, I think you have the right idea. NOTED is the thing, and we're not. EDiots put stuff in, you go round and change it. The tone is fine, and provided we don't wade outright into things, then CWCki can at least keep some degree of impartiality. We're here to document, not to actually troll Chris. That's what we have PVCC/cwc/edf for.

Being NPOV would be alot of work. Provided the humour doesn't go along the lines of "OMG FAT RETARD", we're probably doing alright for ourselves. --YawningSquirtleRedux 10:31, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Just clearing up a small misconception: NPOV doesn't mean "Good and bad views must be covered in equal measure". It means "If it's a fact that is covered in a reliable sources, it doesn't matter if it's positive or negative in tone - what matters is that it's a fact, and our job is to report it". In other words, facts speak up for themselves and we can't consciously choose to include either good or bad views, because that's what taking a point of view is all about. So yes, I believe we can be neutral; for most of the part, we're already there. --wwwwolf (wake me when you need me) 11:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

  • If anyone knows about this shit, it's Wwwwolf being our resident Wikifag and whatnot. RPOBLEM SOLVED.--Champthom 03:49, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
With NPOV, i think CWCki would become a TL;DR collection, i recall some pages with a sarcastic point of view in them, and delivered all the info correctly, for example, in the page for Sonichu's Edge we wuld have to remove the images, fan videos and remove "One can only imagine what the innocent citizens of Charlottesville must have thought as a fat, sweaty retard went puffing ...". To me, there is only 1 way to make CWCki interesting to read, POV is the norm.Basgon 06:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Memorandum on Jerkop powers

With the exception of Quality Control Jerkops (at which moment there are no active ones), Jerkop powers are limited to deleting, moving, etc. pages only in regards to vandalism (i.e. vandal creates a page entitled "YOUR MOM SUCKS BLACK COCK" or uploads over 9000 Goatse variants). Jerkops have no authority to use their powers for editoral decisions. They are welcome to initiate the discussion of merging, deleting articles, as any other user, but they cannot use their powers to execute such plans.

Ultimate power for deletion and merging of articles belongs to admins. Admins, ideally, will recognize the will of the community but it is ultimately their decision.

I do not wish to name names but a certain Jerkop who deleted a page recently went beyond their powers and uprightly so. True, it was a sucky page that I would have deleted, but nonetheless I would have handled the situation differently than they would have.

Jerkops who wish to have Quality Control privileges can request them and interview for the position. --Champthom 19:42, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

  • I'm not even a Jerkop yet, but is there any way I could be come a Quality Control one? Apostrophe 21:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

DVD Transcriptions

I'm working on transcribing the notes from the DVDs. I guess they're not absolutely needed, but would it still be ok to make a page for them? ChaosAkita 21:57, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Featured articles?

I noticed that Chris and anger and 2009 were both marked as featured articles, but there was no process of any kind; they just seem to have randomly gotten slapped with stars. If we're going to have featured articles, we need a rubric to determine what qualifies as "featured," and maybe a process to vote on what should be featured. See discussion here. Apostrophe 00:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Angelica 34

What happened to that picture of Angelica mass debating? It's off the 34 page, and a search of the term "angelica" on every type of page turns nothing up.Wise dude321 02:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found it. I went to the 110mb for the file. Also, I never want to do that again.Wise dude321 05:12, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Chris is ending Sonichu

The ad on top of the Cwcipedia says he's discontinuing Sonichu. Either that, or I misread it. Does this mean what I think it means? If so, should we rejoice? Mourn? ninjaclown 06:39, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

  • No he isn't. Need I remind you who controls the adspace? (Hint: It's not Chris)--MoarLurk 06:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://sonichu.com/w/index.php?title=CWCki:Community_Portal&oldid=78656"