Warriors Wiki talk:Characters

Oakfur ~ Silver Nomination
Weell, the votes ended, and I managed to get this to load so... I love this dude, he's pretty awesome :P Comments? (I'll get another quote if I can) 23:26 Fri Feb 17

Psh, he's from ShadowClan, of course he's awesome. xD Could you possibly expand Sunset and Twilight? 04:33, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

Of course! Because all ShadowClan cats are epic! But I can't expand either of them. 18:58 Sun Feb 19

Add another quote? 06:01, 01, 03, 2012

I don't think I can. I couldn't find any that really described him. 13:45 Sun Mar 4

CBV? 15:01, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

Vote is up! 03:52, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Frogleap ~ Silver Nomination
I added bronze status to him...Comments? There isn't to much to expand, if I'm not mistaken. 23:33, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

Try to see if a couple more quotes can be found. Perhaps some dialogues? They really help tie the article together. Also, in the history, I've noticed incredibly vague phrases such as "Frogleap is seen with Loudbelly tracking through the reedbed." Why are they in the reed bed? Try to see if you can expand on these kinds of phrases without detracting too much from Frogleap himself. 00:23, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Moonflight--try to expand/detail the article where you can. Near the end, the history says something like, "Frogleap is seen rushing into battle, but he is pushed back by Hailstar." Could you explain which battle Frogleap was rushing into and detail that whole paragraph in particular? 01:29, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

I added another dialogue quote, and fixed up the history (I read the book, and the history was mess up on the article), and detailed most of it. 06:18, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

Could you perhaps make the paragraphs longer? I know there isn't much to go on, but give it a shot ^^ 12:34, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Are you still working on this, Stoneclaw? 15:01, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

Yup, I'll start now! I forgot that I had this nomination up. 02:41, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

I can't make the paragraphs longer, but I did expand the overall history y so little to make it seem as if the paragraphs are longer. 02:46, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Owlstar - Silver Nomination
Haven't done this in a while. All he really needed was some quotes. 13:40, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

I think it looks great.

It looks wonderful, but maybe add a cite or two in? 12:36, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Citations are fine...CBV? 15:01, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

Vote is up! 03:52, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Pineclaw ~ Silver Nomination
I think he looks good. I'll try to find a quote or two more if there are any. Comments? 14:07, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Expand his history if you can anymore. 23:12 Sun Feb 19

I added the little more I could find. 15:00, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

CBV? 15:01, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

Vote is up! 03:52, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Mothwhisker ~ Silver Nomination
I believe I am doing this right... It looks as detailed as possible, in my opinion, for such a minor character. ^^ So, any comments?  ~Pouncey!  "Aloha!" "You're  Hawaiian?" "No..."  x3 16:59, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Can you detail the second paragraph in his history a bit more? :3 19:06, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Add another quote if you can and expand his appearance. 23:04 Wed Feb 22

I read the article, and I find that the history's somewhat choppy. Can you try to smooth out the history? If you can't, it's fine, it might be just me. -- 03:43, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

I'm having a little trouble getting the book, but I'll have it hopefully by Monday :x I'll work on smoothing out the paragraph, but the quotes and detail might have to wait a bit. ☾ ~Pouncey~ ☽  18:20, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I added more detail to his appearance and history and added a quote. 22:22, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

CBV? 15:01, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

Vote is up! 03:52, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Cedarheart ~ Silver Nomination
I worked a lot on his article, and I think he's ready. :) Comments? 18:16, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Hmm...looks good, Misty. For Starlight, could you possibly expand on he and the rest of the patrol did when they confronted Brambleclaw? Also, can you find another quote? Try looking in Battles of the Clans, if you can. 18:20, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Added a new quote, and expanded as much as I could into Starlight. 18:44, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Can you still try expanding Battles of the Clans some more? 04:51, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

Expanded Battles of the Clans as much as I could. 02:06, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

CBV? 15:01, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

So sorry, Misty! However, this has already been voted into silver status.

Ebonyclaw ~ Silver Nomination
I worked on her article a bit more, and here she is. Comments? 01:34, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

Whoop whoop! Go females with -claw in their name! :3 Expand The Rescue and is it possible to find one or two more quotes? Otherwise it looks fine.

Is there a main quote that describes her personality more, like one of the ones that said she was a good warrior despite being a kittypet? 05:17, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

Yep, Ebonyclaw is awesome. x3 I can't expand The Rescue anymore, sorry. Those were the only times she was mentioned/seen. Switched the main quote and I am now looking for more. (quotes are my worst enemy o.o) 02:07, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Added a new quote. >.<  22:53, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Working Revamp
Okay, so I got an idea while looking at another wiki, here. There's a template in the top that says a user is currently working on revamping the article, and only minor edits should be made without permission of that user. If someone wanted to add something, they'd have to contact the user in question. I was thinking we could have these. For example, Shelly is editing and revamping Brackenfur, so we could add it to his article until she's finished. 04:28, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and the text in the template says, ''This article is currently being reworked by USER in order to achieve a better status. We ask that edits to this article are only minor or gramatical in nature until this warning is removed, in order to not disrupt the major revamp. Should you wish to participate in the revamp, please contact the editor at work.'' There's a link to the user's talk page where it says, "the editor at work". 04:30, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

That wouldn't be half bad of an idea. Case and point for me: I just rewrote almost all of Brook's history. I wouldn't want a user coming in and messing up what I worked hard on. I mean, it may seem like a user is "claiming" an article, but, it would cause less edit conflicts. 8D 04:31, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

You know, I really like this idea. I support this. Good idea, Oblivion! 04:35, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

I support this idea too. I agree with everything that has been said above ^^ 04:52, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

I agree, good point Oblivion! Could we also have a thing where if 2+ users are working on it together, it could say "This article is currently being reworked by USERNAME, USERNAME and USERNAME ". I <3 this idea. 8D 05:16, Mon, Feb, 20, 2012

Great point Loonie! Agreeing what was said 100%. 14:50, February 20, 2012 (UTC)

This makes sense to me.

Good idea Loonie! :) 22:54 Thu Feb 23

This is a great idea! I actually wonder why it wasn't brought up before. 09:33, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

This is a good idea, however what concerns me is the fact that a user cannot edit something within the article without consent of the person who nominated it at that current moment. In fact, that is like "claiming" an article. True, you wouldn't want someone to mess up your work, but is "your work" really your work? Keep in mind that articles are the result of multiple contributors editing the article over many months or even years. Yes, Cloudskye did rewrite Brook's history, but what about the other conventions of the article? Such as family, description, citations, etc. This somewhat sounds like putting a user's name on the article and then claiming it as their own for a moment in time. I'm sorry, but this seems too much like claiming an article to me. 17:56, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Atelda here. She makes a great point. This is a wiki, and wikis are made up of active contributors, not one single contributor. We cannot limit the editing of a user, because our combined edits is what forms a good wiki and a maybe even a good article. 18:12, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

(Holly's about to shoot herself in the foot) Yeah, in the way it's currently suggested, it could easily be seen by others as someone claiming an article. But rather than tossing out the idea entirely, maybe we could just say, "This article is currently being worked on to achieve a higher status." Or something along those lines. 21:10, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

Yes. We don't want anybody to be claiming it, but I agree with what Holly is saying.

But isn't that what we're doing to all articles? Don't you edit an article to make it better? 21:14, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

Yes. What are you saying then? 21:15, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I can see where they're coming from, though. Say if someone wanted to nominated Firestar for silver status (yes, I know he's already been nominated and all), and they rewrote the entire article before nominating it...and someone else nominated it before they got the chance. Now, if I were the editor of the article, I would be peeved, since I'd put a lot of work into that article. Having someone else nominate your work and taking credit for it is just unfair. 21:19, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with what Cloud is saying. That would be unfair.

I'm still with 'teldy here. We have to assume goof faith, right? So it's not like every user is going to destroy your work the moment they hit the publish button. We simply can't prevent users from editing. And things can't be perfect either, if a user kinda ruins something, well, life's got challenges. 21:26, February 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * assume good faith* Oops. Dx -- 21:27, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I can see having this if you don't want someone to nominate the article after you worked so hard on it. •Cheshire• ♣Happy St. Patrick's Day!♣ 21:29, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, and taking credit is quite unethical, however has this happened? I'm going to quote Kitsu in a previous discussion: "It's one thing to let others know you're doing heavy edits to avoid conflicts, but understand that in defense of this idea that someone can "take an article from someone else", since when has anyone ever owned an article on this wiki?"

In any case, project members are encouraged to help out each other in improving the articles so they can attain the certain grade.

To put up a template that says something like "This article is currently being worked on to achieve a higher status." would mean that we'd probably have to put a template on every article. What I mean is that every edit I do to an article is to have it achieve a higher status whether it be to take out an unprofessional phrase or add in a family tree. All articles are being worked on to achieve a higher status. 21:41, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I see what you mean Atelda. •Cheshire• ♣Happy St. Patrick's Day!♣ 21:43, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

When I said that, I meant putting that on a page that was undergoing a nomination (for example, the three that I'm working on right now, Talonpaw, Hollowflight, and Sol's Father). If anything, I'd rephrase what I said before as, "This article is currently undergoing a nomination for a higher status." Either way, you have a good point, Atelda. 22:03, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

That would make sense so that there is no "double" nominations which I am not sure that has happened. •Cheshire• ♣Happy St. Patrick's Day!♣ 22:05, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

Atelda has a valid point, and I like Hollydapple's suggestion. Besides, it's sorta discouraging users to edit pages when that sign is up basically saying not to edit the page unless your so-an'-so. 00:14 Mon Feb 27

Well people on the wiki try to contribute and I don't really think that there should be a header saying not to make a lot of changes. Users have the right to edit a page whether or not it is being worked on by another user, that is unless false information is being inserted into the articles. But I actually don't know where I stand on this idea. The only idea I could see is something saying "This page is currently being nominated for --- status. Please don't nominate it as it is currently being done." though I don't see the use for that really. 00:21 Feb 27

I see no point in putting up a template saying this article is currently going under nomination. But again, each user has the right to edit an article, major or minor edit, going under reconstruction or not, they have that right. Each article is under property of the wiki and PC, not a single user. 01:28, 03, 03, 2012

Macgyver - Silver Nomination
I rewrote some of his history, added a main quote, and three supporting quotes. Comments? 04:45, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

Can you try expanding the last paragraph of his history? Looks great! 06:16, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything to expand on, though, the fact I'm trying to read that part off a nook surely doesn't help. :P 04:10, February 22, 2012 (UTC)

Honestly I don't see anything to improve on. Well done!

Chez, please don't comment if your going to say it's nice, it's unneeded. And if you don't comment they know it's fine. (No offence) <span style="">00:03 Mon Mar 5

Runningnose ~ Silver Nomination
So I looked through his history and thought it was pretty good. I also added some quotes last night. Comments? 14:55, February 22, 2012 (UTC)

Expand all sections of the history if yu can. <span style="">17:03 Wed Feb 22

I expanded as much as I could. 22:45, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

The article looks good, but could you change the main quote? To me, it seems like it describes Littlecloud more than Runningnose. 01:50, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

I switched it with one of his quotes. If you want me to remove it, I will. 16:50, March 10, 2012 (UTC)

Is it possible to expand Long Shadows? 08:22, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

Adding Ages to Character Charts?
Hey everyone~ I'm here to do what I do: make suggestions.

I'm of the opinion that, for characters we have this information on anyway, we should include ages on charcats. (For dead cats, it'd be the age they died at.)

In example, on Firestar's chart it'd say that he is approximately 7 years of age.

We'd only do this for characters we know the ages of, without guessing at it, and doing this would allow us to provide even more information on characters than we already do. Not to mention, with out handy Events Timeline, it'd be a snap.

Comments? 00:15, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

I love this idea Shelly! But of course, only some cats will get ages. You have my support. 00:37, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, only some cats: the major characters. I like this idea. <span style="">00:38, 25, 02, 2012

I like it! 8D Where would it be added though? Just on the Charcat? I think thatd be the best place. And can we just put unknown for the age, rather than leaving it off? Anons will probably eventually start to ask why there's no ages on some, but I think it'd be fine if it just said unknown. But anyways, great idea. ^^ 00:39, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

^^ Yeah. It'l bring up contributive edits for sure. 00:41, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

I like this too! 8D I agree with Paleh for it to be on the charcat. @Rowan, this isn't about getting edits up, but for improving the articles. 00:44, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

-Shall be the pessimistic one- While this is a good idea, don't you think it'd be a bit odd to add in ages of only a few characters, meanwhile about maybe 65% - 75% of the characters would be missing this information? Only few characters would have this available information, thus I'm not convinced of making it a part of a characters article.

There's also the bit about years. Since all character articles use the terms used within the books, wouldn't it be odd to use a "human term"? An easy substitute is that would be using the term, "moon", however that'd also add a bit more precision to our estimates. And even with the timeline, I feel like we'd still be guessing at the age of a particular cat.

Anyways, my little outtake on this idea. Don't get me wrong, it's a great idea, but I don't think we should carry out given the pros and cons presented currently. 03:42, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I understand your concerns, and I'll carefully debunk them in order:

1: How many of our character articles ever have everything there may be to have on them? Some have post-death residence, some don't, all depending on whether or not we actually know where they ended up when they died. This is the same exact concept. Nothing different. Making it a part of the character articles will allow us to provide all of the information we have on characters, which is our job.

2: Sure, we can go with moons if you're concerned about terminology. But I think approx. years or even approx. seasons would work as well. Not everything we do on here has to follow Clan vernacular.

3: Our timeline has the information down as best as we know it, which is the best that the books provide, which is as accurate as it's going to get. We know that Firestar is 7, nearly 8. Dovewing and Ivypool are both 1, nearly 2. When Lionheart died, he was approximately 5.

I still think that this is a good idea, in short. 04:13, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Strange. I suggested this months ago and it got shot down :S  04:37, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

I refuse to be shot down. ಠ益ಠ 04:38, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

XD We all love Shelly's argument mode. But, this is a great idea. In my opinion, this could actually really improve the articles. And maybe, when they find out all these ages, people will stop tormenting Firestar's age xD 09:31, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, Shelly. Dat face. Both Shelly and Atelda have good points. If we decide to go through with this it would be a terrific addition to character pages. 01:31, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

Shelly's points have proven that this is still in the running for going in the charcats. I agree still. <span style="">01:35, 03, 03, 2012

I agree with this idea. 14:56, March 3, 2012 (UTC)

So shall this go to a vote or can we just do it? 01:48, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

It's a simple matter to resolve, but shall the ages be in moons or year? Also, we have a citation (how to cite it will be a different matter if decided on)? Otherwise, we need only to add it to the template and add it to the characters. 01:57, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

I think moons, with years in parenthesis. Or seasons would work better, even... And yeah, citations are important. Adding it to the templates should be easy, too. 02:02, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

Sol's Father - Silver Nomination
Sol's father wins Parent of the Year. It isn't like I, uh, already had the information needed for this in the back of my mind thanks to a certain other nomination. Sarcasm aside, I rewrote the history and added quotes. His article was already fairly complete, so...yeah. Let me know if you want me to change the main quote. Comments? 02:00, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about this, guys, my browser bugged up on me. Dx 02:01, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Can you switch the main quote to a different one, possibly? That one seems more like a Cinders quote then one for Sol's Father. I mean, yeah, it's got good information, but, it just doesn't seem like a good main quote. The other ones you have on there are excellent, and the article is very well detailed for him only appearing a few pages. 21:03, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Cloudy. About the main quote, I was sort of thinking that as I put it up, but I decided to leave it in on the off chance someone else might think it worked. Dunno if this new main quotes is any better. It shows what a loving parent he was. While I'm here, I might as well mention there aren't any other quotes--any of the others I saw would just be...excessive, decadent? The rest is just Cinders complaining about what a good-for-nothing he is, and the article really only needed one of those, to show their relationship. 03:28, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

His page looks good to me. Maybe reword 2nd paragraph? 00:23, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Done. 02:08, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Wing Shadow Over Water ~ Silver Nomination
I kid you not, there is nothing more that can be done with this article. I've maxed out everything, and there are only a few times where she speaks. Comments? 22:26, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

You're right. =) It's all good. 23:18, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Something Of Importance
Hey, everyone. This is pretty important, so you might want to take a read.

I was just going through some articles and I checked Dustpelt's page, seeing that there was a missing citation. I decided, on a whim, to go through and check the other citations to make sure they matched up with the books.

Only one out of six was factual. The rest were fabricated.

This got me paranoid about the citations on the descriptions of every other character page. ... I know it's a big thing to do, but I think the project needs to start the process of going through all of the character pages and checking to validate citations. I'm sorry, it's a big task, but it needs to be done. Withthe whole of the project working on it, it shouldn't be too hard.

Likewise, I think that from here on before a page is given silver status, all citations must be validated by someone other than the person that wrote the up. Just a suggestion. 06:13, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

We should go over all the citations within the articles if there are false references. And it shouldn't be so much of a bother to look at the citations during a nomination. Good point to bring up, Shelly. However, to make sure all citations in the descriptions (and maybe even in the family section) are correctly cited, we need all of the project to help. And a note for citations, it's much easier to use the abbreviated version of the citations, thus why we have the template. 06:22, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help with this. You're right; it is a big task, but the whole point of this site is to have factual, certifiable information about Warriors. 20:48, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I'll help out as well, since a.) I have all the books, and b.) I have nothing better to do. This is something that should have been brought up a while ago, but it's never gotten this bad before, to where multiple articles have had false references put in them....how we didn't notice, I'll never know. I think each cite regarding description should be carefully looked at from here on out. 20:52, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I'll help out as much as I can as well. I own Beyond the Code, Into the Wild and The Forgotten Warrior, but I also go on amazon.com and books.google.com. 20:54, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I would be glad to help with this. I have a lot of the books, so it would be no problem. I can see why you would be worried.

I'm all in this too, I own all the books but one, so I'm in. 8D <span style="">23:58 Sun Feb 26

If we decide to do this (since I see no reason not to) where would we even start? And just to clearify, are we just checking descriptions or are we checking all cites on character pages? 00:00, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I advise hitting the random page button and just checking the cites on any character pages you come across. 00:06, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

That would make sense to me. Obviously don't check cites for the books you don't have. :3 00:08, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

For the record, if you can go back in the page history and find an edit that attributes a citation to a user, do so. Parties responsible for these damaging edits need to be punished. We now have proof at the Erins use our website. We cannot tolerate misinformation, falsification, and rumor mongering. 22:31, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Great idea Shelly, you have my support. I have all the books, and'd be more than happy to help out. <span style="">09:54, 28, 02, 2012

Yes, indeed. Although this is pretty late, I think yes. xP 12:53, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion
I figured making a new section rather than just commenting would get this a bit more attention.....

Anyways, due to the false cite problem that was recently discovered, I've been trying to think of a way to show that the page's cites have been verified. I was thinking maybe we could put a template of some sort at the top of the pages saying "This page's references are of questionable authenticity" and that only reliable members (maybe such as members of the project?) could remove it. That way we know that the pages are checked. Or maybe we could make a new template that has the cite in it, but also shows that it's questionable whether it's a real cite or not. I don't know, I just think we should have something so we have a way of knowing when the references have been checked (or haven't) on some pages. Those are just some of the ideas I came up with. Feel free to shoot them down. 22:15, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

I acctually like this, becuase it gives an option for people to do even if they don't own the book and question the accuracy and veracity of an article. 22:39, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Wow. You know it's a good idea if Kitsu supports it. xDDDD

I like it too. It would be a nice addition to the page, and we'd be able to narrow down those references that are false, most of them added in by Wikia Contributors. It's actually quite annoying, because most of the time, they look like good edits, when in fact they're not. Excellent idea, Paleh. 05:56, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

This sounds good, all though it would be a bit confusing- expecially for newer users, it sounds like it could work. As Kit said, it gives users the option to put the reference up, even if they're not 100% sure it's factual. Good find Paleh. <span style="">09:50, 28, 02, 2012

This does sound like a good idea to me. I agree completely. 21:24 February 28, 2012 (UTC)

Wonderful idea, Paleh, I agree with this. 02:40, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

I like it. It would work well, looking at the all the links in the articles, and it would provide something for us who are looking for something to do on that spare weekend. I'd say also having a category for it, to point out all articles that would need work. I'll fiddle around with a box later, if more people agree, when I'm less tired and it's not 10:30. xD 03:27, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Although, we could make a page, with all the articles that haven't been looked over. <span style="">00:34 Thu Mar 1

Woah Kit actually supported one of my ideas. o.o Thanks guys. And Sweet, that'd work to a certain extent, but what stops more false cites being added? If we made a page it'd have to be constantly updated everytime a cite is added, unless the person who sees it first has the book to check. 15:31, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

If we could get a list of people who are participating in the "cite" thing, maybe we could assign people to articles, and have them check the cites maybe, every 2 weeks? There are a lot of character articles, but if a lot of people participate, I think it'd work. <span style="">13:20 Sat Mar 3

I agree with Sweet ^^ Maybe we could add a category of users participating and a category for the pages that need citation checks...or whatever we're calling them =P 12:57, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Gorsetail (NP) ~ Silver Nomination
Hey guys I am gonna nominate Gorsetail. Comments?

Expand history a tad and try to find some quotes that define his personality. 12:04 February 29, 2012 (UTC)

To add on what Chez said, I would suggest adding expanding the history on how he escaped when the Clan cats saved the trapped cats, and that would be added as the last paragraph of the history. Also, the overall history could use a tad more detail. 00:47, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

M'kay just give me a week. A week is fine right?

A week is fine, but a nomination usually should only be up for 3 weeks total. (Just a heads up) <span style="">00:19 Thu Mar 1

xD Okay make that 2 weeks!

Umm...The Z Guy was banned, what would happen now? =S 22:50, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

I think the nomination is declined... 22:51, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

If it's okay, I'd be happy to take this on. 00:22, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Go ahead, Holly. 18:14, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, to whoever that was. ^^ x3 I did my best with the quotes and rewrote Dawn. Stone, he doesn't appear when the Clan cats are escaping, but I detailed the history. 19:34, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Thornclaw ~ Silver Nomination
I rewrote and expanded many sections of his history, and add a quote. Comments? 02:23, March 1, 2012 (UTC)

Could you change the main quote? And are there any other quotes at all? 02:00, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

I changed the main quote, and put the former main quote as a normal quote. For the current main quote, it may not be Thornclaw speaking, but it shows that he has a patient personality, if that's fine. 17:42, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

(I feel really bad saying this) But could you detail/expand all of the sections of the history anymore? <span style="">13:02 Sat Mar 3

I already expanded some sections before I nominated the article, but I'll get to expanding the other sections (mostly the ones in PoT and TNP) once I re-read the books I have. 04:15, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

Scorchfur ~ Silver Nomination
I'll get some quotes this week. (Sorry, I'm really busy with stuff, and my internet is slow) I'll expand BotC this week too, along with some other sections. Well, comments? <span style="">23:32 Sun Mar 4

Anything that can be added as supporting quotes? 23:50, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Could you detail Eclipse and Fading Echoes a bit? 23:52, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Er, Chez, I just explained I would get quotes... And Skye, I'll do that tomorrow, or some time this week. *Life's being hectic* <span style="">00:17 Mon Mar 5

Bumblestripe - Silver Nomination
I've been stalking this page for a few weeks. No, I'm not ashamed in the slightest. xD I rewrote the sections that needed it the most--Night Whispers, Sign of the Moon, and The Forgotten Warrior, but I will get to the others soon. I'm working on the quotes (I'll do them tomorrow when I have more energy), and I changed the main one. Well, then. Comments? 03:23, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

Just letting you guys know, I got the quotes in. 01:12, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Can you expand Long Shadows? 15:02, March 10, 2012 (UTC)

Done. 00:38, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe cite the first line of his trivia? :3 08:37, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Done. Wow, the things that slip my attention.... x3 23:49, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Rainstorm ~ Silver Nomination
He mostly just needed a quote. I added a Main Quote, but I'll get to adding another quote. I also gave him bronze status. Comments? 04:13, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

Anything to add in Sunrise or Fading Echoes? 15:25, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

I can't really expand anything... 16:41, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

I added a dialogue quote and added a Hollyleaf's Story section. Comments? 02:37, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Are there any other quotes at all that you could add? 02:40, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

I added another quote, there are others, but they don't describe him in any way. 03:53, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Leaving...
I hate to say this, but I'm leaving PC, or at least taking a break. I just don't feel I've contributed enough. I'll rejoin in maybe a month or so time, and see how I go, but for now, I'm sad to say I'm leaving. I'll still contribute to votes and stuff, but otherwise, sorry. <span style="">06:15, 07, 03, 2012

Oh, DJ...I'm really sorry to hear that you're going. You have contributed, don't try to tell me otherwise. I hope you decide to come back soon! Either way, thanks for all the work you've done. :) 00:07, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Holly for that. I do hope to come back soon. <span style="">03:17, 09, 03, 2012

Vicky's Facebook
Hi all. I think this has been addressed before, but I cannot remember a solution. When I click the link on a reference that says "Revealed on Vicky's Facebook Page", it takes me to her page, which means I have to navigate around to find the fact in question (or maybe search;I'm not sure as I don't use Facebook). I would suggest someone taking a screenshot and using that in the reference link. Perhaps something like this:

Revealed on Vicky's Facebook pageScreenshot

Kind regards, 10:33, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

That's a good idea. I know when I link to Vicky's facebook, I actually link to a Warriors Wish thread, most of the time...and all of that info comes straight from Vicky's facebook. A screenshot would be a good idea, since it's something solid that never actually goes away, unless someone photoshops it - although why anyone would do that is beyond me. 18:59, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

I think we should do this, for reasons already stated above. ^^ 00:09, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

I've already started that. Look at the ref for the cats on the cover of Forest of Secrets. Simple, quick and not photoshoped. 18:08, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Cloudy, perhaps you should provide a link to Vicky's Facebook as well, and add the screenshot as superscript? 20:17, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Well, unless it's been permalinked (as in a link on someone else's wall) I'm not sure how to do it without linking to the normal facebook, and having users search for it. xD That's the best I can do for now. 20:34, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Well, like this: Revealed on Vicky's FacebookScreenshot

05:52, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

Hiatus
I'm sorry guys, but I need to take another hiatus. There is way too much going on, and I'm sick with the flu, which is why I haven't been editing. When my schedule becomes a bit more free, I'll return. But there's no time right now. :c it doesn't help that I have a 101.2 F fever. 15:13, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that, Maple. Feel better soon~ 18:08, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about all that, Maple. I hope you get well soon! 22:53, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Snowflake, Icicle, Cloudy and Sniff
As I was reading Shattered Peace over again, something dawned on me. Willy and Minty's kits, and their genders. Now, I looked over the entire trilogy, and could not find a cite for their genders, and very vaguely their descriptions. I mean, quite honestly, I can't tell their descriptions from looking at where the references are. It's supposed to be page 24, but if you look at the picture, you really can't tell a.) their genders, obviously and b.) their descriptions.

Quite honestly, the most we know is the fact they're kits of Willy and Minty. We don't accurately know their descriptions and genders. So, what should be done with their pages and chararts? Should it be removed? I've never actually seen this done to so many articles at once. 09:34, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

I'd think that the descriptions would stay since they're comic-only characters and for those we can rely on the images in the comics for descriptions. However, if the genders are never mentioned, remove them and the chararts. I'd mark the chararts for deletion, too. Just be sure there isn't even a passing mention of gender for them. 01:21, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

The thing is, Shelly, with the pictures, you really can't even tell which kit is which. They're never individually named. 01:27, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Isn't one named and noted to look exactly like his dad? 01:31, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

I think those are the ones from The Lost Warrior, not Ravenpaw's Path. I read the sections where they were shown, and I've never even seen them named outside of when their mother introduces them to the other cats. 01:33, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Links
This might have been brought up before, or it might just be my memory playing tricks, as it usually does in PC matters. Are we supposed to use links like this:, or like this:  ?

Since both output the very same result, and both link to Warrior, with "W" capital, it doesn't seem to matter, so, naturally (^_^) I prefer the second one, as it reduces the amount of typing required, though not by much. Thoughts?

19:16, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

I prefer the first. It's hard to explain, but it just feels better knowing it links to Warrior rather than warrior. I know it's not really a good reason, but... why not? 19:32, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter. Either way brings you to the same page, though occasionally a redirect page is needed. It's personal preference. However, what I don't want the need to edit every article looking for links that are potentially "wrong" after this discussion unless everyone thinks there is a need for that. 23:26, March 9, 2012 (UTC)

I know, and I don't go through articles looking for that. If I just happen to see it, then I'll change it. I've seen lots of others doing it. 02:04, March 10, 2012 (UTC)

I use the first one, since that's how I've always linked pages. I'll edit articles to do just that, but, I also format them too. Personally, I think the first one is a lot more professional. 02:06, March 10, 2012 (UTC)

I use the first one, since that's how I always saw others doing it when I first came around. I just like to know that's how I've written it. But I don't have an issue when others use the second. 03:38, March 10, 2012 (UTC)

Toadstep
In Toadstep's trivia, he is mentioned as mistakenly being described as a golden tabby. Curious, and suspicious because of the false cite thing, I checked the reference, and this is what I saw:


 * Toadstep nodded, withdrawing a pace or two into the clearing, his gaze still on Lionblaze as if he felt the golden tabby was likely to spring at him without warning.

Now, that sentence definitely does not refer to Toadstep as a golden tabby. It's most definitely referring to Lionblaze. I figured I'd ask before I went and did this, but: Should his trivia be removed, and his image along with it? 13:51, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Pesonally I think so, since it isn't referring to Toadstep, and if it isn't, it shouldn't be in his trivia. In his trivia it says it could have been Lionblaze, but since it (obviously) is, it should be removed in my opinion. 13:53, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

I think it should be, since it's pretty obvious that the sentence was referring to Lionblaze, not Toadstep. 17:18, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it should be changed. In his trivia, it said he was "most likely confused with Lionblaze", which he was, for his trivia, as Chez said. 08:32, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

That's not referring to Toadstep. I think someone was mistaken when they put that on his article. I think both the trivia statement and his image should be removed. 15:46, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Double Links in references
Hi, I do remember that we eliminate double links from articles, but do we also do the same for references? 12:05, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so. If two different things are able to be cited in the same place, both still need to be individually cited. Just my guess, though. 12:52, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

I think Shelly's right. As far as I know, since each reference is for a different thing, it should stay linked. It would make a lot more sense to have each reference separately linked... 05:18, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Mapleshade ~ Silver Nomination
I was playing around with TFW, but, other then that, most of it was already completed. She's got good quotes, and her history's pretty detailed. 01:09, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe expand SotM? It looks great. 22:20, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I can expand SotM. I looked up a lot of this before I nominated it. 21:25, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Jagged Lightning ~ Silver Nomination
Quotes are being added now, and SoTM is being expanded as well. I love the Ancients~<3. 01:28, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

SotM expanded, and quotes added. 02:25, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

join
I'm Midnightcf 02:41, March 15, 2012 (UTC)midnightcfMidnightcf 02:41, March 15, 2012 (UTC)and i want to be in the community i read all the warrior books and would really like to join the warriors characters project. it's ok if you don't accept it but i'd really appreciate it. i love the warrior series

thank you,

Midnightcf 02:41, March 15, 2012 (UTC)midnightcfMidnightcf 02:41, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Welcome, please read the guidelines and refer to the FAQ if you have any questions. 03:55, March 16, 2012 (UTC)