Is Chris Notable Enough For Wikipedia Now? (Is Chris Historically Relevant?)

Is Chris Notable Enough For Wikipedia? Is Chris Historically Relevant?

  • Yes

    Votes: 472 55.1%

  • No

    Votes: 81 9.5%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 87 10.2%

  • He wasn't before but now he is because he fucked his mom

    Votes: 216 25.2%
  • Total voters
    856
I think he does because of him being one of the most documented people in history, if not the most. If normal celebrities get their own Wikipedia pages then why can't Chris?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ
Ser Ciappelletto said:
I checked the Talk page and they are saying they want no mention of Chris raping Borb on the main page. Even the history section refers to him as "Sonichu artist."
Click to expand...
The incredibly ironic thing is, this is the most publicised and eventful situation that "Christine Weston Chandler" has ever gone through, with criminal cases, court precedings, the final verdict etc, they are all on Wikipedia for everyone to see, because they're all reported on and have news articles written by actual journalists.

So Chris in that sense is not excused for having his own sub section about this entire ordeal on Wikipedia, if those moron Wikipedia gatekeepers finally give up and just let people start writing one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CWC-Sands
Rin Shima said:
I think he does because of him being one of the most documented people in history, if not the most. If normal celebrities get their own Wikipedia pages then why can't Chris?
Click to expand...
Chris is definitely more famous than some of the minor celebrities on the site. If he hadn't tried to make his own page and been blocked for it decades ago he'd already have one by now.
 
All non-scientific wiki pages should be ignored since they are always biased in someway or another. I’m sure if Chris had one, people will constantly change it to make him look better or use it to trolls others by adding shit that isn’t true. Also, the e.d. And even the farms have better details on him than Wikipedia would ever have.
 
Monokuma said:
ngl i just want there to be an article so normgroids can easily access information so they stop calling him "chan"

it's how true-crime youtubers do their research, so they'll eventually jump on to looking for chris information and see "chris chan" and think it's his name
Click to expand...
I want to start spreading the notion that his name is actually "Chan Chan".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ace
Question: WTF would we want Chris on Wikipedia?!

It’s been infested with far left ideologies and is mostly 100% cancer these days, because admins and most pediaphiles see it as a battleground to push their BS.


Shit, I recall one article about gun control, that ended up going all the way to the Pediaphile version of SCOTUS.

The reason? Someone who doesn’t know anything about guns (a doctor of medicine I believe) had said something completely wackadoodle wrong about guns.

And since the doctor had been quoted by the NYT, (RELIABLE SOURCE!) some antigun pediaphiles insisted on using it, despite every actual firearms expert telling them its nonsensical.


TLDR: Any article about “Christine Chandler” would be 100% about “her art” and internet bullying and leave out anything negative or interesting.
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: LeDarkMemer, Lucario and Giovanni
The article would obviously be biased, but it might put some basic misconceptions right about Chris, like that Chan is not his real surname.
 
Chris is very arguably 'notable' for Wikiped, but I cannot imagine a finalized article being anything but a dry read if one version is ever allowed through.
 
Chris has always been notable enough for Wikipedia. That has nothing to do with it. The inner circle has taken a political stance against CWC, and that's the end of it. You would be hard pressed to find a group with a larger undeserved ego than high edit count wp editors. If you even mention how Aaron Schwartz disproved Jimmy Wales' bullshit notion about a small group of core editors providing a majority of content they go apeshit.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: hambeerlyingnreed and Elwood P. Dowd
If I was an admin I wouldn't want to have to oversee a Chris Chan page. The weenery would be never ending on the page, and it would be a full time job trying to maintain some sort of order. There's the CWCI. That's better than anything on Wikipedia. And the weens seem to respect it enough to not mess with it.
 
Literally no one needs to know about Chris and he's just another person the internet elevated to rock star level as a joke and a lolcow. Maybe there is relevancy to anti-bullying if anything. It comes off as ironic and funny to me when people make documentaries about Chris Chan as he is interesting and entertaining for lolz only, but he ultimately doesn't matter one iota in the grand scheme of things. I only showed his story to 1 friend once to make him feel better that his life was still better than Chris's although it had hit a low point. I don't have anything against him, other than pepper spraying innocents, other than elder abuse which is very wrong and he should have known better in spite of everything. It speaks a lot about the relevancy of his story that no one really covered it but Tucker Carlson in the mainstream since Tucker just wanted to use it to undercut transgender people although it really can't be used to do that, because Chris is not transgender. Transgender people don't rape old ladies because they are so thirsty for a woman. The cops had to make a decision about his gender and a responsible one and I believe they came to the right conclusion. As Chris is just a mentally disabled person, who is also very mentally ill, who was also groomed by internet trolls to be everything he is as a joke he is not relevant to the debate as to whether transgender women should go to female prisons or not. I don't have to believe everything and a guy who will do anything for literally any woman who comes on his radar including transition to a 'sissy-boy' because he's that much of a simp for a troll who says she's a girl and 'sissy-boys' are hot can not be taken seriously. Some people may really be biologically transgender. I would never rule that out as a possibility as nature makes many strange creations that don't necessarily fit the normal function of a species, but you don't have to believe every single person on earth about it every time in every case in spite of the evidence just to be PC. "He wanted to be supported by his woman." - so he's a woman. Women don't necessarily want to be supported and Chris has a major disability so of course he wants to be helped. People will take any excuse to dress someone up as whatever they want for their own selfish purposes. When I see Chris I see a boy who could never grow up because of his condition (by the way high-functioning for an autist is not very high-functioning - I used to go to school with a lower-functioning autist at high school who would scream like an animal if he just dropped his toy. If you're thinking of highly intelligent autists you're probably thinking of people with Asperger's which Chris does not have and you watch too many movies where Aspie's dress up as astronauts to get chicks and are holding Chris to those standards) and where the baton of raising him was passed to the internet, the internet raised him weirdly, wrongly and selfishly, since the internet is weird, insane, and un-caring. The irony is that people who would dress up a severely mentally disabled and socially inept person as a woman even encouraging him to take hormones for their own selfish reasons would also condemn the abuse of an old lady with dementia. The hypocrisy of such a thing is staggering, amazing and disheartening the disconnect people have with how they would treat an autistic man with the mind of a child to how they would treat an elderly dementia patient.
 
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
  • Winner
Reactions: Freya, FadeIntoBolivian, BigTubboWithLittleChina and 5 others
BaconWhorehees said:
Transgender people don't rape old ladies because they are so thirsty for a woman.
Click to expand...
Sure they do mate, just google the terms "transgender rapist" and you'll get a bunch of hits about trans people raping someone, usually in some prison cell. Just cause someone's a tranny, doesn't mean they can't be an asshole. Trans people can be killers, rapists, child molesters, just like regular people can.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ, BigTubboWithLittleChina, hambeerlyingnreed and 1 other person
I would say yes, but because the editors may liken this to the broader topic of mental illness. They'd have to reference some saga's and Chris' history in regards to money, dealing with other people, fascination with things, etc. Him raping Barb catapulted Chris to the mainstream media, in which overshadowed his past incidents, which to say, Chris has had few.

He'd probably be the only lolcow, if you take away Lindsay Ellis, to have a mainstream wiki, something other cows like Tooter, MovieBob and DSP wouldn't get.
 
Fapcop said:
Shit, I recall one article about gun control, that ended up going all the way to the Pediaphile version of SCOTUS.

The reason? Someone who doesn’t know anything about guns (a doctor of medicine I believe) had said something completely wackadoodle wrong about guns.

And since the doctor had been quoted by the NYT, (RELIABLE SOURCE!) some antigun pediaphiles insisted on using it, despite every actual firearms expert telling them its nonsensical.
Click to expand...
Do you have a link to the talk page (or at least, the Wikipedia article)? I really want to see this sperging now that you mentioned it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back