CWCki Improvement Thread

[Bronchitis that Lingers]

Like others have said, a Chris and Gender page is needed (or updated) with references to previous things he's said/done that foreshadowed the emergence of his Female Soul. I think this would be an informational page, as well as "proof" that he's not faking the whole lesbian transgender thing. I know there's a lot of people who don't believe he's doing this for anything other than china, but as we look back through his teenage years and early 20's, we see that he's always been more on the feminine side of things. He wasn't "trolled into it", either, although the Jackie saga probably helped open the door to the cross-dressing world ("Jackie" could have very well known he had these feelings inside, and nudged them out of him). This page could possibly put some of the arguments about his gender to rest, at least for some readers.

 

[Anchuent Christory]

To me everyone who bothered & abused Chris is a wanker, a-log, ween or whatever terminology kids use these days. The thing is, it really doesn't matter how cleverly or obviously someone trolled Chris.
You guys are basically arguing about who is the bigger/lesser arsehole. A debate clearly worth having & arguing about, innit.

This seems to be the main point of contention here, you're not the only person to have the "all or nothing" attitude, whereas the rest of us believe in shades of grey.Does anybody have a divine right to right to prod Chris? No, I don't believe so, so yeah, I do sort of see that argument.
But then there's a massive difference between sending him an email pretending to be Shigeru Miyamoto and trying to convince him to burn his house down.

For me personally, I have the opinion that anybody who casts themselves out into the internet in an attempt to gain fame or adoration with something as laughably bad as Sonichu is setting themselves up for a piss-take. You're essentially painting a target on your back.
Shaky moral ground? yeah absolutely, particularly in light of some of the more unpleasant shit that's been directed at Chris.

I've often stated that I've never agreed with people pretending to be girlfriends, and nobody's rated me dumb or autistic for that. Like anything, it's a matter of voicing your opinion civilly.

And yeah, like any internet community, there's gonna be assholes, if people are pm'ing you with dumb shit, just report them.

 

[Peter Capaldi]

Anyway, about that wiki: does anyone else think it might be a good idea to remove some of the real people's last names? I think nothing of importance would be lost if we just referred to Megan, the high school gal-pals, etc. by first name only, or first name plus last initial.

I probably will get flak for this, but I agree that we should think over whether to censor out certain names or not. To be honest, it isn't funny when weens go and take Megan's name and try to troll Chris with it, obviously failing in getting a response but still dragging Megan through the mud, who I think deserves some rest after having had all that crap before.

 

[MrTroll]

It's too late for that. Everybody knows Megan, Michael Snyder, Mary Lee Walsh, and other high-profile innocent bystanders who got dragged into Chris's life. Removing their names from the CWCki wouldn't do anything because they're still plastered all over various chan-related sites, reddit, youtube, ED, even the Kiwi Farms, and easily found by googling.

 

[Anchuent Christory]

It's too late for that. Everybody knows Megan, Michael Snyder, Mary Lee Walsh, and other high-profile innocent bystanders who got dragged into Chris's life. Removing their names from the CWCki wouldn't do anything because they're still plastered all over various chan-related sites, reddit, youtube, ED, even the Kiwi Farms, and easily found by googling.

Particularly when it was Chris himself that plastered their names everywhere, they're known because Chris was an asshole to them, not because they're on the wiki.
As the saying goes, putting something on the internet is like pissing in a pool, once it's in there, you can't take it out.

 

[nad7155]

Does the CWCKI have some not so TRUE and HONEST CONTENT on it???

Yes.

But the old articles are like artifacts. You can update it, but it will always be there via archive.

 

[Peter Capaldi]

Hmmm... Still, I kinda feel we should be the better people and atleast partially remove it. But I do get that, yes.

 

[Kosher Dill]

I'm not under any illusion that hiding the "civilian" names would magically delete everything from the internet. But it might remove at least one unwanted Google result from the first page for these people and discourage the very laziest weens, and it doesn't really cost us anything to make the change.

 

[Dr. Meme]

I think we should change all mentions of Chris on the cwcki from he to she so that it more properly reflects his lifetime of being a lesbian female trapped in a male body.

 

[champthom]

I really don't want to write a wall of text, but as I am still technically an admin on the CWCki (I'll get to that in a second), I feel like I should chime in on things. For starters, while I have no problem with you guys talking about ways to improve the CWCki on here, I encourage you all to bring these points on the CWCki itself. People who edit the CWCki or are involved in it might not have an account here just as some of you might not have an account on the CWCki. It's extremely easy to sign up for an account, I think we no longer have registration issues and if there are, let me or Marvin now. Well, more Marvin, he tends to handle more of the technical stuff.

I don't deny it - the CWCki is pretty bad now. I'm not going to point fingers, a lot of it is my fault. It reached a point where I stopped caring. Well, not so much stop caring, I think it was the point I originally started the forums. I originally started the forums as a means of letting people discuss Chris so recent edits wouldn't be clogged with edits to discussion pages that were just speculation and chat about recent Chris stuff. The forums were meant so people could do that stuff and I could focus on editing the CWCki. Funny thing of course was I spent far more time on here than I ever planned to and ignored the CWCki.

Remember though, the CWCki wasn't always bad. It was pretty revolutionary when it started. By pure happenstance, I was the first registered user on the first MediaWiki incarnation, so I decided to edit the hell out of it. Seriously, I would spend hours on it every day, trying to set up a base and trying to institute some process for wiki editing. Before the CWCki, there was no good central source for Chris information so you would hear people claim stuff about Chris and there was no real way of verifying what was true or not (like an old one - Chris puts peanut butter on his dick to make it bigger). I aimed to emulate Wikipedia than ED in terms of process. Completely unsubstantiated stuff wouldn't fly, you had to cite stuff from Chris to verify a point, etc. So why is the CWCki bad now?

1) Lack of admining - this is, well, my fault. Technically an admin on a wiki is just a technical kind of guy, though on the CWCki, I felt like I was an editor-in-chief. I feel like I was able to provide a guiding hand towards an acceptable standard of quality. As I became less active, I wasn't there so bad stuff tended to stay and that fed off to more bad stuff in articles until most of it was complete shit.

2) Decision making process - let's say you saw something on the CWCki you didn't like. Let's say you don't like a very popular article that dozens of people have meticulously edited and people have opposing views on whether to let it stay or not. You could do the proper thing and suggest it be deleted, then I would allow people to debate whether it stays or not. Or you could go on PVCC, in the CWCki thread, bitch to Cogs about the article and she'd delete it promptly without discussion. Often times things on the CWCki were done not as a result of actual editor concerns but people who have long since lost interest in Chris who see something on the CWCki that they think is "spergy," complain to Cogs, and it gets removed instantly. And I don't mean these people are editors who happen to edit PVCC as well - these are people who have never edited the CWCki, who have no interest in Chris, who might go to the CWCki to see what's happened with Chris and see something they don't like and instead of putting up a persuasive argument, they just go to Cogs who never really gave a shit about the CWCki at all.

Likewise, admins other than myself would do things without taking into account the due process system I set up where you deliberate what happens and have the community involved. For some reason, there was a page dedicated to some Twitter circle of mock Sonichu accounts (this might have been when we had a fan works section). Cogs unilaterally deleted it, I think she might have even said the reason was "yiff in hell." I'm careful when I do things unilaterally as I know I will set a precedent which Cogs inadvertently did. A week or so later, /cwc/ wanted to raid the CWCki - this was when there was radically different mods on the time who were hostile towards Cogs and PVCC but because they couldn't attack neither, the CWCki was the closest thing. Their excuse was we had a mod who was a furry, he never mentioned it on the CWCki. Thing is, he was an excellent mod, he had Wikipedia editing experience, so he actually knew what he was doing and to me that was more valuable than knowing a lot about Chris. But he wanted him removed and our failure to do so was "protecting" him. They argued that if we allow furries, we will allow pedophiles and if the CWCki allows pedophiles, we are awful people and deserved full justice. They cited Cog's deletion as precedent. Long story short, the mod stepped down voluntarily though I refused to demote him out of principle. I really don't care if people are furries or whatever on the CWCki, it really doesn't matter if you're a competent mod.

3) Politics - a lot of the weird point of view on the CWCki is often times a result of politics. Often times I had to bite my lip to do something because Clyde wanted to. He wanted to take up valuable real estate on the front page with a PSN tracker. I always refused to use the CWCki as a trolling device but he insisted it be there to piss Chris off whenever he saw it. It wasn't totally useless, it was pertinent information, so it wasn't technically put there to spite Chris, but you had to look at a useless thing on the front page because Clyde wanted it there on a whim and my refusal to do so made it look like I was working against him. I'm not trying to talk shit about Clyde or Cogs, BTW, I'm just saying that often times I would have to bend things to accommodate their whims because I'm low man on the totem pole, so to speak. There's a "Chris and the industry" article on the CWCki, not sure if there still is. It's a well written article, I like it, except I don't think it's totally factual. Problem is Clyde loved it and insisted it stay in hopes Chris would see it and get discouraged (this was back when there was some hope that Chris would read the CWCki in its entirety someday).

Not totally political, but a few of you commented on the weird perspective on the CWCki, namely that trolls tend to be highly praised when that wouldn't be the case anymore. I think now it seems weird they're highly praised but there was a time when people actually respected the trolls. Liquid was considered a saint when he did his thing, people did fanart of Clyde and Ivy and other trolls and sweethearts. When Chris became inactive and people became bitter about "hoarded content," they started to pick apart the trolls and trying to get as close to doxxing them to express their discontent with them "hoarding" potential Chris content that would bide them through the inactivity. I never got along well with Clyde but at the same time, I don't want his article to become "Clyde is just an ordinary guy, here's his address... ." I have a feeling people would start trying to doxx previous trolls which is something I really don't want to see happen. A lot of them have long moved on and are trying to do more positive things in their life and I think some of them feel haunted by the fact they were involved with Chris and don't want that hanging with them for the rest of their life. Also a factual page would be a bit more dull. Saying Clyde is an ordinary guy isn't as pleasurable to read as a whole thing about how Clyde avenged his brother and stuff like that, when the latter is closer to what Chris thinks anyways.

4) Bureaucracy - I've never been a personal fan of bureaucracy. Bureaucracy can have a place, I sorta tried to establish a system on the CWCki similar to Wikipedia where things had due process. If a notable article was going to be deleted, someone would suggest deletion and if I agreed with the notion, I would set up a discussion and then respond. Problem is we usually never reached a general agreement so bad pages would stay on because it was easier to just go with the status quo.

Someone mentioned the use of the word "alleged" on various articles for statements that really aren't introvertible. On Wikipedia, that would be considered a "weasel word" and would be stricken out. On the CWCki, it's a different matter. There's certain guidelines on what's a reliable source. It certainly isn't me or Marvin saying something about Chris is pure fact as that would be a terrible precedent. We don't want to present anything heard from Chris as pure fact, as he does have a tendency to bend facts to suit him, and the fact that people might not support something being stated as true in the CWCki without absolute proof. So that's why things like the hooker are "alleged" - we have some sort of evidence which is probably from Chris that he saw a hooker, but the person releasing it is not willing to confirm that it's true. The fire thing should definitely change as we have a third party news story about it. I personally don't doubt Chris saw a hooker, but just because I think that doesn't mean it's factual for the CWCki.

5) Inertia - sorta related to the last one - people have brought up about how the tone of the CWCki is about Chris in 2009. A common complaint on PVCC is that people were fucking up the CWCKi with their sperginess and that they should just lock the pages as they were. Funnily enough, that's more or less what's inadvertently happened. And of course now the problem is that things are very outdated. I tried to bring up the point about Chris and gender - he now identify as trans but this wasn't communicated anywhere in the CWCki. Someone said that there was a blurb in "Chris and sex" and that should suffice when really, it probably reflected how he viewed his gender circa 2009. I think some people are afraid of screwing around with the base of the articles, which were written around then, but at the same time we don't want people to totally rewrite articles. Imagine someone like ADF (who was a CWCki editor, actually) who wanted to rewrite the main Chris article to show that Chris is a bourgeois fascist based on his political beliefs and rewriting the entire article to suit his personal beliefs. That'd be a bitch to fix. But it's also a bitch to rewrite the article to bring it up to date and clean it up especially when some old timer might revert the whole thing. People sometimes take things personally when their edits are reverted and get really discouraged and stop editing. Wikipedia has a similar problem but it's also true on the CWCki. The old editor are well meaning, I just think they prefer to side with the status quo and not have the boat rocked too much. It's a pretty normal human tendency, I think.

Though the thing to be careful about is we don't want to constantly rewrite the CWCki to suit the mood of the day. 2009, people legitimately hated Chris and A-Logging was considered the norm as no one wanted to be a white knight. Now that's changed considerably but in a year or two, the mood might change even more and it'd be a bitch to constantly change to suit the current mood.

6) Tone - one of my focuses on the CWCki was readability. I felt if I wanted people to use the CWCki, the articles would need to readable and entertaining. So instead of dry, encyclopedic style writing, it was more of an essay peppered with humor which made it enjoyable to read. The nice thing is that the articles were so readable, people would say they spent hours just reading articles. Problem is that there was also a tone of persuasion in the articles. It was a bit self serving - 2009, there was still a possibility of some loose cannon getting through to Chris and totally fucking up organized trolling. So there was an unofficial attempt at trying to convince people that Chris wasn't a poor victim of circumstance, that he has negative traits and this was often exaggerated for rhetorical effect.

Problem is that people didn't read this with a critical eye and didn't pick up on the humor so they came out of that thinking that Chris is worse than Hitler and Satan combined. I sometimes feel like I'm responsible for A-Log - he probably read the CWCki and though to himself "Wow, what Saddam did is potatoes compared to what Chris has done."

7) "No shit is too minor" - this was our motto ever since some guy decided to put it on the front page and I thought it was clever. My attitude was that it meant we shouldn't overlook the little things and something minor might bring about some new perspective about Chris. Unfortunately, I'm in a small minority as 99.99% of people tend to think it means that we have to obsess over everything trivial about Chris. Frequently someone would say on a discussion page "Why do we have a page about a homework assignment Chris did in high school?" and the response would be "Well, no shit is too minor." As a result, for a while, we had on the CWCki all the pornographic stuff that the trolls posted on CWCipedia to piss off Chris but nobody bothered to save Vivian's Audiobooks. There's all sorts of minutia that's on the CWCki but important stuff has more or less been lost to time. You know the deal with seeing the forests for the trees? No shit is too minor leads to people taking a magnifying glass and looking a tree trunk with it.

Work - I don't know how to word this one. It's sorta related to inertia and "no shit is too minor." It's far easier (and more fun) to write a new "Chris and..." article than it is to rewrite an existing one. It's far easier to make a new page about an anime Chris mentioned once and writing a detailed explanation about it than to fact check stuff. People love writing essays and things but few people wish to do grunt work like spell checking, grammar checking, transcribing, etc. So articles look like shit and we have tons of essay articles while good really don't add anything.

I'm not sure how much more I can do to help the CWCki and maybe you can see why I became discouraged. So for those of you who want to improve the CWCki, here's what I'd suggest is pretty much edit articles for style and grammar and spelling. I think a style manual should be put in place in terms of what makes a good page and what doesn't. This is something anyone can write out and if it's good enough, it can be made into official policy. Not to increase bureaucracy but perhaps we can kinda define a guiding tone for the CWCki. I don't want it to be what I think or what Alan thinks, maybe just an overarching philosophy to create a consistency. Probably a concerted effort to unify tone in addition to style between articles so it's more uniform. Likewise I can work with Alan (I hope to God he's still an admin because he never told me if he isn't ;- to try and hammer out a way to streamline the bureaucratic process as a policy for admins and moderators.

The CWCki definitely needs work, especially in light of the fact that Chris is active again but we have a fraction of active editors compared to the glory days. I encourage you all to become CWCki editors and help improve it.

 

[Anchuent Christory]

I've always liked the fact that the cwcki makes straight faced references to clearly preposterous events, and this obviously assumes a certain level of intelligence from the reader.
At the very least it's a good depository for factual documents such as emails.

 

[asperhes]

Thanks for your feedback. Your thoughts have been inputted and accepted for better improvement. Thank you for your time and efforts.

For starters, while I have no problem with you guys talking about ways to improve the CWCki on here, I encourage you all to bring these points on the CWCki itself.

Where? How? The article Talk Pages? Why would a CWCki editor not have an account on the forums? This thread seems like as good a place as any for a general discussion about major overarching issues facing the CWCki. But I guess it would make more sense to take opinions on specific issues to the CWCki pages in question.

Let's say you saw something on the CWCki you didn't like. Let's say you don't like a very popular article that dozens of people have meticulously edited and people have opposing views on whether to let it stay or not. You could do the proper thing and suggest it be deleted, then I would allow people to debate whether it stays or not.

A debate? Where? How and where would this suggestion be made, and how would a debate be conducted? This is fascinating to me since the CWCki's been a ghost town for the past year and I've seen almost no dialogue about anything.

Likewise, admins other than myself would do things without taking into account the due process system I set up where you deliberate what happens and have the community involved.

Holy shit, a due process system. Deliberation! Community involvement! That would be really cool. But as you mention, bureaucracy can be a killer.

There's a "Chris and the industry" article on the CWCki, not sure if there still is. It's a well written article, I like it, except I don't think it's totally factual. Problem is Clyde loved it and insisted it stay in hopes Chris would see it and get discouraged (this was back when there was some hope that Chris would read the CWCki in its entirety someday).

It's still there. It doesn't seem entirely without value, but if it's not accurate, it should be made accurate. The CWCki seems to be moving away from attempts to bait Chris, and this should continue.

Also a factual page would be a bit more dull. Saying Clyde is an ordinary guy isn't as pleasurable to read as a whole thing about how Clyde avenged his brother and stuff like that, when the latter is closer to what Chris thinks anyways.

I don't know why anyone cares about the secret identity of Clyde or Liquid. All that matters is the persona and the bizarre stories that Chris believed. Some people have expressed confusion about what's real and what's not; I think if you read carefully the CWCki tells you this, but with the passage of time, newbies could conceivably be confused if Panda was a real person who died in a brushfire, or if The Wallflower was really sleeping with a real person named Surfshack Tito, or what. So there might be some places where issues could be clarified, but ultimately, if you understand the difference between Harrison Ford and Han Solo, you should be able to understand what's happening. The humor needs to be maintained.

Someone mentioned the use of the word "alleged" on various articles for statements that really aren't introvertible. On Wikipedia, that would be considered a "weasel word" and would be stricken out. On the CWCki, it's a different matter. There's certain guidelines on what's a reliable source. It certainly isn't me or Marvin saying something about Chris is pure fact as that would be a terrible precedent. We don't want to present anything heard from Chris as pure fact, as he does have a tendency to bend facts to suit him, and the fact that people might not support something being stated as true in the CWCki without absolute proof.

I support this emphasis on having proof, not only because Chris is a liar, but because the trolls can be too. People have gone to great lengths to fabricate documents by and about Chris. Trolls trolling trolls. Sometimes it comes down to whether or not the troll with the data has a history of being a bullshitter or an attention whore. It's a tough call sometimes. A troll on this forum claims to have received a 1000-word description by Chris of his visit with the hooker. So we have to ask whether the troll is lying, whether Chris is lying, to what extent Chris is delusional, and to what extent Chris misremembers. We then have to cross-reference it with other mentions by Chris and trolls of the hooker. We have to listen to what Marvin says. Then we'll have the "truth."

Imagine someone like ADF (who was a CWCki editor, actually)

Oh my holy lord.

The old editor are well meaning, I just think they prefer to side with the status quo and not have the boat rocked too much.

What old editors? It's the Mary Celeste, man. The halls echo.

People love writing essays and things but few people wish to do grunt work like spell checking, grammar checking, transcribing, etc. So articles look like shit and we have tons of essay articles while good really don't add anything.

Speak for yourself, I love this shit. Building a new article from scratch is tough work. Personally, I think the articles are in good shape overall in terms of grammar and readability. I think you're too negative about the general quality of the CWCki. The base is solid, but it's gotten really big and neglected. In terms of tone, we really need to answer the question: What is the CWCki for? What is our relationship with Chris? Why do we think it's important to keep all this information in the public eye? If Chris isn't Hitler, what is he?

 

[deeman]

Just keep it funny, guise!

 

[champthom]

Where? How? The article Talk Pages? Why would a CWCki editor not have an account on the forums? This thread seems like as good a place as any for a general discussion about major overarching issues facing the CWCki. But I guess it would make more sense to take opinions on specific issues to the CWCki pages in question.

Some people have no interest in discussing Chris. They want to just edit the CWCki and that's all they are interested in. Likewise, there are people who come here who have no interest in editing the CWCki. Remember, this is no longer the CWCki Forums, it's the Kiwi Farms. CWCki isn't even in the name anymore. People shouldn't need two accounts to participate in dialogue about the forum. There's the community portal to discuss overall CWCki changes and talk pages are designed to talk about changes related to particular pages.

I realize many of you read the CWCki but I've had a major problem with outsiders determining policy. It pissed me off to no end when Cogs would do something major on the CWCki on the basis of what people on PVCC wanted. These are people who have no interest in Chris and have no interest in editing, they just view anyone who reads or edits the CWCki as "spergs" and have a low disregard. There was discussion over debating deleting the CWCki on the basis of a dozen PVCC users who haven't been involved with Chris in years. It's like if Null decided to shut down the forums on the basis of a thread on /cow/. In a capacity as an admin on the CWCki, I have no issue with people wanting to talk about this sort of thing here. But I don't want to shut out people who actually edit the CWCki from the discussion.

I don't know why anyone cares about the secret identity of Clyde or Liquid. All that matters is the persona and the bizarre stories that Chris believed. Some people have expressed confusion about what's real and what's not; I think if you read carefully the CWCki tells you this, but with the passage of time, newbies could conceivably be confused if Panda was a real person who died in a brushfire, or if The Wallflower was really sleeping with a real person named Surfshack Tito, or what. So there might be some places where issues could be clarified, but ultimately, if you understand the difference between Harrison Ford and Han Solo, you should be able to understand what's happening. The humor needs to be maintained.

The secret identity issue is an issue because people forget that these are real people behind these figures. There are people who get very bitter against these people because they think they "ruined' Chris because they are genuinely upset that Chris is no longer wearing that striped shirt, wearing a medallion, and saying things like "DYKES DYKES CHINA." There are people with absolutely no lives who view Chris as their only form of entertainment and are upset when the quality of the "show" diminishes. The more pressing issue is that these people are now working age and don't want to stupid stuff they did when they were younger to haunt them. There's a prominent figure in Chris's life who no longer has a wiki page, mostly for that reason - because they graduated school and they don't want the fact they're connected to Chris and their #1 search on Google was their CWCki page to interfere with their job search prospects. I think the unfortunate thing about our age is that you can do something stupid online and it'll essentially follow you now for the rest of your life. I'm a softie, I really don't like seeing people suffer because they've done stupid shit in the past.

I once wanted to have "it's not our fault if you're autistic" as a thing. It should be clear that the stories are ridiculous and absurd and shouldn't be taken at face value. People have used the term kayfabe to describe it, which is some wrestling thing. Problem is people don't read it with a critical eye and take it at face value and seriously though Chris was callous when he reacted to certain situations.

Someone once told me that the CWCki needs to be more scientific and dry and that humor should be removed. I realize that they don't want lame jokes in it, but I focus on readability over formality and think that humor can make the articles more readable and enjoyable to read.

I support this emphasis on having proof, not only because Chris is a liar, but because the trolls can be too. People have gone to great lengths to fabricate documents by and about Chris. Trolls trolling trolls. Sometimes it comes down to whether or not the troll with the data has a history of being a bullshitter or an attention whore. It's a tough call sometimes. A troll on this forum claims to have received a 1000-word description by Chris of his visit with the hooker. So we have to ask whether the troll is lying, whether Chris is lying, to what extent Chris is delusional, and to what extent Chris misremembers. We then have to cross-reference it with other mentions by Chris and trolls of the hooker. We have to listen to what Marvin says. Then we'll have the "truth."

I've found it curious, on here and on the CWCki itself, that people sometimes respond to information in different ways. People will flat out reject if Marvin was to release something about Chris but they might believe an anonymous post on /cow/ about some encounter with Chris with some amazing claim like "I saw Chris in public and he was taking a shit in front of GameStop and flinging his shit into the store yelling 'JULAAAAAAAAAAY.'" There was a case of Gamer Paulo, a guy who posted on /cwc/ (as /cow/ was called) about his side of the GAMe PLACe which included some unflattering things about Lucas & Mimms and about Megan that strayed from the present notion of Chris. People from PVCC were pissed off, because the guy was saying unflattering things about Lucas and Mimms who were active PVCC members, while people loved what this Gamer Paulo guy was saying because he was more or less revealing content outside the trolling establishment. It's like how some people who distrust the government and say mainstream media is full of lies supported by the government instead listen to conspiracy theory channels that have equally biased and warped information.

I remember when that happened, I wanted to leave it up with some disclaimer and let people decide from themselves but Clyde was strongly against it.

Speak for yourself, I love this shit. Building a new article from scratch is tough work. Personally, I think the articles are in good shape overall in terms of grammar and readability. I think you're too negative about the general quality of the CWCki. The base is solid, but it's gotten really big and neglected. In terms of tone, we really need to answer the question: What is the CWCki for? What is our relationship with Chris? Why do we think it's important to keep all this information in the public eye? If Chris isn't Hitler, what is he?

I'm glad you're more optimistic than I am about the CWCki and that you genuinely enjoy editing. Most people don't though - like I've said, PVCC would bitch and moan about the CWCki. I'd tell them "Go and edit it yourself, it's a wiki" and the response is "No, I can't do that, it's overrun by spergs, if I edit some sperglord will revert it and then say how Chris is worse than Hitler." The goal of the CWCki is ultimately to be usable. I've felt that we need to be reliable for people to want to use us as opposed to going elsewhere for information about Chris that may be less objective. There are a large segment of people who feel that the CWCki is completely run by spergs and there's no point reading it as it's just people going on about how Chris is the worst human being in existence and is incapable of doing anything right, ever. As such, they will go elsewhere for information.

I don't mean to be pessimistic but obviously there are concerns with the CWCki, as shown in this thread, and I am not going to say that everything is great when it's not.

I think one thing would be to build up our user base though that's a challenge for any wiki, as most people aren't interested in editing wikis and sometimes people feel overwhelmed by bureaucracy. I would rather have someone who knew nothing about Chris but understand how wikis work and can write well while remaining objective as opposed to someone who knew everything about Chris but can't write for shit or be remotely objective. I think the tl;dr of my post is that it's been neglected and needs some attention now.

 

[Marvin]

Heh, this isn't really about improvement so much, but I always crack up when I read the wardrobe section of Chris and fashion.

Some people have no interest in discussing Chris. They want to just edit the CWCki and that's all they are interested in. Likewise, there are people who come here who have no interest in editing the CWCki. Remember, this is no longer the CWCki Forums, it's the Kiwi Farms. CWCki isn't even in the name anymore. People shouldn't need two accounts to participate in dialogue about the forum. There's the community portal to discuss overall CWCki changes and talk pages are designed to talk about changes related to particular pages.

I realize many of you read the CWCki but I've had a major problem with outsiders determining policy. It pissed me off to no end when Cogs would do something major on the CWCki on the basis of what people on PVCC wanted. These are people who have no interest in Chris and have no interest in editing, they just view anyone who reads or edits the CWCki as "spergs" and have a low disregard. There was discussion over debating deleting the CWCki on the basis of a dozen PVCC users who haven't been involved with Chris in years. It's like if Null decided to shut down the forums on the basis of a thread on /cow/. In a capacity as an admin on the CWCki, I have no issue with people wanting to talk about this sort of thing here. But I don't want to shut out people who actually edit the CWCki from the discussion.

We're not determining policy, so much going over very broad, shared goals for editing. I don't think it's any worse than a couple of my friends having a chat on IRC about some improvements we'd want to incorporate. And when we actually do go to apply those changes, we'd work within the regulatory framework of the cwcki, of course. Mostly I prefer to talk on an actual forum, instead of a wiki page, because wiki pages kind of suck as forums. When our plans start getting more serious, we can move them to the community portal.

The secret identity issue is an issue because people forget that these are real people behind these figures. There are people who get very bitter against these people because they think they "ruined' Chris because they are genuinely upset that Chris is no longer wearing that striped shirt, wearing a medallion, and saying things like "DYKES DYKES CHINA." There are people with absolutely no lives who view Chris as their only form of entertainment and are upset when the quality of the "show" diminishes.

Eh, I think we can handle this issue pretty easily. If it's not related to Chris or cited in Chris canon somehow, then there's no justification for having it on the cwcki. And then we can just remove it.

Like, for example, if you claim to have found the real Panda's info, like, what impact does that have to the story? And furthermore, in the context of "cwcki proof", do you have any? No? Well, then I guess it's not staying up...

 

[Le Bateleur]

The main issue I feel the CWCki has is that it trickle-feeds a steady stream of mentally challenged newfags into Disco who think that Chris is a rapist Klansman and a potential spree-shooter.

These low-information simpletons then clog up Disco with their moronic samefag psychoanalysis of Chris, to the soundtrack of yet another embed of Goodbye Horses.

I'm all for the thing being funny and easy to read, and I agree that ultimately these cretins are themselves at fault for their failure to critically appraise the information presented - but surely there are some ways to improve the CWCki before another @Chipmunk With A Banana rolls off the metaphorical production line?

 

[Clown Doll]

The main issue I feel the CWCki has is that it trickle-feeds a steady stream of mentally challenged newfags into Disco who think that Chris is a rapist Klansman and a potential spree-shooter.

Imo the quality of the Chris discussion forum is of much lesser importance than that the wiki stays funny. Yeah, Chris isn't as terrible as the wiki often makes him out to be, but I believe that being a little 'pointy' towards Chris is often the funnier alternative than giving him a break.

If someone's being an retard, they're going to be one no matter how the wiki's like. Plus, you could think of it as a tard early warning system if they don't understand that the culture of the wiki and the forum is a little different.

These low-information simpletons then clog up Disco with their moronic samefag psychoanalysis of Chris, to the soundtrack of yet another embed of Goodbye Horses.

As someone who loves to make critical observations of Disco, I very much understand that whole thing, but my personal standpoint is that the Discussion is the rubbish bin that the good stuff are picked into the CWCKI from, and not the other way around, ergo Disco is there to serve the purposes of the wiki and not the other way around, therefore the quality of Disco is less relevant.

 

[Flowerwall]

I will say that, from a mostly outside perspective, I've almost always gotten the in-joke perspective from which the wiki is written. I'd venture that in some ways it helped my enjoyment of reading it, because it's more like reading a narrative than just taking in cold facts. I agree with @champthom that there needs to be SOME degree of entertainment involved because it makes the pages more palatable, but I also agree that the jokes need to be 1) funny, and 2) not so abundant that they choke the readability or clarity of the page they're supposed to supplement. The times I didn't always get the joke mostly stemmed from things getting convoluted, so using the humor more sparingly could be just as helpful as not using it at all.

Personally, I've never edited the cwcki, largely because I didn't really think it was my place to. I'm just an outside observer that's fascinated by this strange alien of a man, and it always seemed to me that the people that were 'involved' were always the ones to maintain the wiki. (That said, I have made at least one contribution, but only via pointing out a previously unnoticed connection here on the forum, and someone else later added it.) If the wiki is in need of editors, I'm available if anyone ever wanted some help. Documents have always kind of been my thing, so even if I didn't go so far as to generate original content I could still clean up existing pages.

One more thing before I wrap up: In regard to whether or not pages that describe Chris circa 2009 should be rewritten to reflect his current self, I'm also of the opinion that going that far would wipe out the perspective of what he was like back then, and I think that's too important to toss out. Instead of trading one for the other, I would regard the two versions as exactly that: separate version of Chris. We could have both descriptions and just separate them by noting which version of Chris we're talking about, which would simultaneously preserve the old point of view and further emphasize just how much he has (or hasn't) changed over time.

 

[knux]

Sorry if this has already been answered but is everything relevant that is posted on the forums, eventually added to the CWCki?

I started reading the CWCki years ago and then joined the forums when they were still the CWCki forums. I found from reading threads that when Chris content was posted, often people involved in events would provide insight or additional info. But you had to dig through the threads to find it. I was just curious if this ended up on the CWCki?

 

[Marvin]

Personally, I've never edited the cwcki, largely because I didn't really think it was my place to. I'm just an outside observer that's fascinated by this strange alien of a man, and it always seemed to me that the people that were 'involved' were always the ones to maintain the wiki. (That said, I have made at least one contribution, but only via pointing out a previously unnoticed connection here on the forum, and someone else later added it.) If the wiki is in need of editors, I'm available if anyone ever wanted some help. Documents have always kind of been my thing, so even if I didn't go so far as to generate original content I could still clean up existing pages.

Heh, after a hard day of trolling Chris, no one wants to edit the cwcki.

Sorry if this has already been answered but is everything relevant that is posted on the forums, eventually added to the CWCki?

I started reading the CWCki years ago and then joined the forums when they were still the CWCki forums. I found from reading threads that when Chris content was posted, often people involved in events would provide insight or additional info. But you had to dig through the threads to find it. I was just curious if this ended up on the CWCki?

It really just relies on people on here to do the legwork to put it on the cwcki.