Talk:Chris-Chan

From 1d4chan

Why was this page deleted? And is their any way I can view the archive? User:Rollen

Because Root wanted it gone and he's the boss. And it's intentional if something is deleted it can't be viewed, that's...kinda the point. --139.168.112.51 21:21, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Basically? Root felt there was no real reason for the page to be around - which I can't entirely disagree with, considering his tangential at best relationship to /tg/ - and there was a general sentiment that he belongs more on Encyclopaedia Dramatica, CWCiki or any of the other lolcow milking stations that deal with his brand of buffoonery. Also, IMO, there's a point where things go from 'lulzy' to 'creepy voyeurism', and the whole Chris-Chan affair has long passed that point. --Ow, My Sanity. (talk) 21:47, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
You're welcome to get on the discord and be mad about it. But it probably won't change.--Piroko (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Root flexed badly, but take heart; Kiwifarms keeps better tabs. No need to add more shit here. Also, Free Chris lol. --SaltyMan (talk) 10:54, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Is this article saved in any archive?[edit]

Is this article saved in any archive?

As we literally just said above, no. That's the point of deletion. --139.168.112.51 05:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

How about a compromise?[edit]

Chris-Chan is mentioned or referenced on several pages on this wiki. I think that perhaps this page should include a single short paragraph giving a simple summary of who they are and explaining why we don't want to talk about them. I think it should go something like this:

"Chris-Chan is a person who has become famous on the internet for all the wrong reasons. They are the artist of a terrible Pokemon/Sonic the Hedgehog fusion fan comic, which is the inspiration for Don't Zap to the Extreme. They suffer from untreated autism, sexual frustration, and one of the worst cases of Narcissistic Personality Disorder in human history due to being raised by awful parents who enabled their behavior and refused to get them the help they needed. Basically, they are the kind of person that every well-adjusted autistic person is glad they didn't end up as. As a result, they engage in a ton of childish and disgusting behavior, which we will ABSOLUTELY not describe here, and have gradually lost the ability to tell fiction from reality. They have attracted a following of internet trolls who have made their pathetic life even worse by playing cruel pranks on them as well as a ton of voyeurs who constantly watch them to see what new lows they will sink to next. That is all you need to know about them. We will not provide links to any further information about them. Please do not add anything else to this page." --174.208.132.124 09:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

In a perfect situation I would agree that would be good. Unfortunately, we are hardly in a perfect world, especially if recent developments are anything to go by. CWCKI and Encyclopedia Dramatica do far better and still allow access to the article. --Lord Of The Lemmings (talk) 00:42, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm in agreement with Lemmings. Let the page just die. --Konrad13 (talk) 00:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Maybe a good idea to remove the banners?[edit]

If my lurking has been accurate the "heresy" and "sick" banners are generally used as brags more than as warnings or actual indicators not to read the article. Therefore I thought it best to remove them since this is in clear "we don't want to talk about this" territory. It also means the page is less easy to find which is a good thing imo.

I would vote to keep them personally, or at the very least the "sick" banner. And please sign your posts. --Konrad13 (talk) 21:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Apologies for not signing. I'm new to editing wikis. May I ask what in your opinion is the value of having the banners? Baksteen (talk) 21:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I think that Chris-Chan, despite how horribly his saga ended, was an integral part of meme and 4chan-like culture. There were many references and jokes about him before the big event. I think Root needs to pull himself off his high horse and stop trying to moralize to us about the whole CWC situation. Yes, CWC was tricked into it by an even worse person, but he already was showing he was thinking about it and chose to do it. Root is just being overly-sensitive.

An interesting perspective, but the general consensus is that now Chris is an (alleged) Rapist, there's an ickiness to keeping the page up. CWCKI does a better job than us anyway --Lord Of The Lemmings (talk) 14:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

The Great Purge[edit]

I'm currently undertaking an effort to orphan this article (i.e. make it so nothing links to it) so Root can finally delete and salt it (assuming creation protection is a thing here, otherwise so he can just delete it). Anyone who wishes to assist in this endeavour may, or you can tell me why this is a bad idea. Kirbanzo (talk) 06:14, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't think you should.--2600:1700:F5B0:CE30:E959:2F61:6805:1974 08:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
I can agree with removing some of the links and maybe replacing them with more appropriate ones, but keeping the article itself around might be a good idea to avoid a new/ignorant/misguided but well-intentioned user from re-creating the page and being whacked. Plus, as it is, it's not really all that much of an issue (no edit wars, few to no trolls so far, etc.) --Ow, My Sanity. (talk) 09:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Sanity is correct. I took efforts to either remove links or add NOPES in any context which mentioned Chris-Chan. A wholesale purge seems unneeded. --Lord Of The Lemmings (talk) 17:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

This is goddamn bullshit![edit]

-This whole thing is fucking bullshit! Chris deserves to be mocked more than ever for what he did, but well-meaning cowards are censoring everything about Chris jokes now, doing a damnatio en memoria on Chris-Chan jokes and banning people who make them! This 1d-4CHAN, our schtick is edgy humor! Who's the fucking retard behind this censorship!?

My dude it's not that serious. --Gidofter (talk) 01:13, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Everyone thought the same until Chris became a felony. Although I and some of the users would love to mock him our own ways, but he has gone too far this time. And archiving more of his recent bullshit could only attract unnecessary attention, encouraging further unrelated editing made by outsiders.--TheSpoilerHeretic (talk) 01:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

-That's retarded. It's not rewarding him by making fun of him, and it's SJW bullshit to pretend otherwise.

I don't think its really that bad. All things considered we can still make fun of Luke --Lord Of The Lemmings (talk) 02:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

-It's not right to have to settle for censorship. I don't give a fuck about Luke, I care about this Orwellian history rewriting bullshit going on with Chris!

>Root deciding he doesn't want to talk about a literal motherfucker on his website is literally 1984.
I think Root's overreacting a bit to but calm the fuck down anon. --2001:8003:1D0D:301:31DC:19E1:593F:3C3C 10:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)