Difference between revisions of "Talk:Chris's Big Night Out"
(questioning "Reaction" section) |
|||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
One final objection: do we really need a "Reaction" section? This seems like recentism at best and a strange sort of anonymous name-faggotry at worst. I don't totally object to the information included within this section being a part of this page, but I think that whatever's there that's worth saving should just be incorporated into the main summary section. [[User:Llort|Llort]] 17:41, 13 June 2009 (CEST) | One final objection: do we really need a "Reaction" section? This seems like recentism at best and a strange sort of anonymous name-faggotry at worst. I don't totally object to the information included within this section being a part of this page, but I think that whatever's there that's worth saving should just be incorporated into the main summary section. [[User:Llort|Llort]] 17:41, 13 June 2009 (CEST) | ||
*Yeah, definitely NOT reactions. Sets a bad precedent and we really shouldn't be documenting what people think about it (unless it's like that radio station, in which case that's a pretty notable thing to document). But seriously, we shouldn't be documenting what random fuckers on PVCC and /cwc/ for that matter think about this video or any video. --[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 18:58, 13 June 2009 (CEST) | |||
Revision as of 12:58, 13 June 2009
Date?
Unless this video was just shot - as in, within the past two hours - the events of this video did not take place on 13 June 2009. At the most recent, this all must have taken place yesterday evening, even if the video wasn't uploaded until the wee hours of this morning. This may sound like splitting hairs, but I'm trying to keep our content TRUE and HONEST. Llort 08:12, 13 June 2009 (CEST)
- Yeah, it took place yesterday, my mistake, just looked at my desk calendar to see and forgot it was technically yesterday. --Champthom 08:27, 13 June 2009 (CEST)
Classification
I'm not sure about putting this with the Captain's Log videos. I think they should be reserved for videos he releases himself. As there may be more videos of this type coming, IMO we should create a new template for troll videos featuring Chris (the date vid would go there, for instance). What do you think CWCki? --Delabonte 16:56, 13 June 2009 (CEST)
- That's a valid suggestion, but I think we'd better wait to see what does come in the future. For right now, shoving it into "Other" strikes me as perfectly acceptable, since, well, "Other" is an awfully flexible category. I think it would look a little silly to have a new template with just two troll-made videos in it. We can cross the "new template" bridge when we come to it. Llort 17:30, 13 June 2009 (CEST)
Title?
Why is this page called "Long Island Iced Tea?" What's wrong with calling this page by the video's actual title: "CWC Grip n' Sip"? (Technically, I think we should call it "Grip 'n' Sip" if we use the original title, since the "CWC" is redundant and the " n' " is a typo (or style error) for " 'n' ", but my point remains the same.) Llort 17:37, 13 June 2009 (CEST)
Reaction?
One final objection: do we really need a "Reaction" section? This seems like recentism at best and a strange sort of anonymous name-faggotry at worst. I don't totally object to the information included within this section being a part of this page, but I think that whatever's there that's worth saving should just be incorporated into the main summary section. Llort 17:41, 13 June 2009 (CEST)
- Yeah, definitely NOT reactions. Sets a bad precedent and we really shouldn't be documenting what people think about it (unless it's like that radio station, in which case that's a pretty notable thing to document). But seriously, we shouldn't be documenting what random fuckers on PVCC and /cwc/ for that matter think about this video or any video. --Champthom 18:58, 13 June 2009 (CEST)