Warriors Wiki talk:Characters

Family Tree Unnamed Parents
Okay I'm not sure if it's just one user or something, but someone keeps changing unnamed parents from male and female to both unknown genders. A discussion about it should have been brought up first. So for now, all changes should be reverted until this discussion is finished.

Anyways, why does their genders have to be not known? It's physically impossible to have two mothers or two fathers (the family trees display genetic relations, not fosters) I'm not anti anything, it's just that the family trees show genetic relations. And yes I'm aware of the fact there is transgenders, but really without medical intervention (by Twolegs, nonetheless) it's physically impossible for cats to switch genders. They are not a species that do this.

So, the discussion is should unnamed/unknown parents be listed as male and female, or both unnamed?Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  21:46, May 22, 2017 (UTC)

these cats aren't just cats, they're essentially little furry humans (wasn't that said by an author too or am I just imagining things). gender isn't tied to yr parts, anyway. say there was an actual trans cat in the series (I wish...) wouldn't it be pretty crappy to call them male despite what they're presenting as. all in all I don't see how listing them as grey boxes is really that much of an issue, and in any case we could at least remove the unmentioned, not referenced at all parents (say fallowsong and sweetbriar's parents) to avoid at least some of this.

and I don't think it's purely genetical anyway? when was that even decided? some of those trees do indeed show foster kits. or at least they used to, anyway. (i think i remmeber brokenstar being on lizardstripes idk) 22:05, May 22, 2017 (UTC)

I say we remove uncited/non mentioned parents from the family templates, definitely.

Don't really have a set opinion on the other part. I do think it's reasonable to say every cat has a mother ('cause I mean, cats gotta get born somehow), but listing as a gray box anyway wouldn't be too much of an issue. I know that people can identify as something without physical alteration, so, one could switch genders without that still. though, I really doubt it'll actually ever get confirmed into the series, because of harpercollins

Honestly, we already use an unspecified gender for character articles, so if you ask me, it's fine with me just keeping it how it was changed to. (which tbh I will revert any and all changes to he/she instead of they lmao) They've been said to be little, furry humans by the authors multiple times, so in all honesty, it's actually better and not an assumption to keep the gender as unknown. Also Stealth, do not revert them. They are perfectly fine as they are and don't contradict any cited information. =/

I just think it should have been discussed first before making sudden changes is all. But yes I do agree that removing those parents that are never actually mentioned in the books is good. It'll at the very least make family trees coding and tweaking a little easier.Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  08:26, May 24, 2017 (UTC)

Comments?Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  03:56, June 3, 2017 (UTC)

Okay we will keep them as gray boxes. What about removing unknown parents? The ones that are on trees just to complete them but are never mentioned in books? Like Flashnose's and Daisytoe's parents, or Sweetbriar's and Fallowsong's parents. Or unnamed mates? Like Flashnose's mate or Frostfur's mate.Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  06:44, June 13, 2017 (UTC)

I don't think we can remove the totally unknown mates without it looking weird, unless someone wants to alter the entire tree ig. as for the parents, is it possible to use the 'missing generations' thing maybe like what was done for cloudstars descendants or something? 15:31, June 13, 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, not too sure about that. I've done a couple of trees with most mates gone, and it doesn't look too bad. I can only suggest for like Flashnose's and Daisytoe's parents that it is a single gray Unknown instead of two Unknowns. But yeah, I do think yours is a good suggestion if the missing mates are too weird.Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  04:08, June 14, 2017 (UTC)

if that could be done with every tree without it being too much of a hassle, I'd definitely go fo it. I'd be happy with the one grey unknown too. 04:37, June 14, 2017 (UTC)

Hm, maybe we could do something like what was on... was it Windstar's tree? There was an "unknown" box with a gap? Could that work as well? ...or is that the same thing here and the point of what you did went over my head again?

I don't understand what you mean. Maybe show an example?Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  22:00, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

Jayce?<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  03:29, July 1, 2017 (UTC)

Foster Family Tree
So I think someone mentioned above we used to display foster family relations on trees. I'm wondering if we want to try to do that again. I'm pondering the different options on doing this, but I do believe it is possible for every character with a foster relation. So, what does everyone think?<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  06:11, May 30, 2017 (UTC)

Would it be a whole different tree or will it be added on the orginal tree? 02:21, June 4, 2017 (UTC)

That's part of this discussion.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  02:41, June 4, 2017 (UTC)

It would be more reasonable to make to separate trees, since there's situations were there's only one foster parent and it would be a little weird to have a stray boxes (the ones with the names in it) floating around, if you get what I'm saying. 02:45, June 4, 2017 (UTC)

I'm alright with it, but it does need to have already been cited on their articles first. Like, Lilyheart is Violetpaw's foster mother when she came to ThunderClan initially, but Snowbush wasn't their foster father, since there's nothing stating that nor did we see it in the books.

I did test family trees of Thunderstar foster family. A separate tree does seem to be best. (especially since I cannot figure out how to do those special dotted line that Brokenstar once had on Runningnose's tree :/) It'll be good if we are doing separate foster trees to put the different trees under different subheadings, like " ====Genetic Tree==== " and " ====Foster Tree==== "<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  06:48, June 6, 2017 (UTC)

Anymore comments?<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  02:00, June 16, 2017 (UTC)

I like those. =O The only question I have is this: will it be indicated somewhere on the template's page itself that the lines on certain boxes represent a fostered connection, not a direct blood connection? Like with Thunderstar, Acorn Fur, and Lightning Tail, for example.

I really tried hard to find a line, but the family tree template only supports the solid and dashed lines we already use. I went through every key on my keyboard and there is only two dotted lines keys that we could use, but those aren't enough to make a basic tree. We could do the mate lines, but we can also try the Template Chart, which is literally almost the same except you swap out 'familytree' with 'chart'. There is also some changes when it comes to keys for lines, but these are really uncommon lines we use.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  21:59, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

What does everyone want to do? Do the normal family tree lines, or have those trees switch to chart template (which is practically the same as the family tree template) and use the dotted lines for foster links.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  03:32, July 1, 2017 (UTC)

I'm cool with using the chart template - I've used it before, and it's pretty easy to work with so why not :)

Character Ages
Y'know, this was a nice idea when it started, but I really think we should remove character ages from articles unless there is clear proof as to the passage of time. Let me use Cherryfall and Molewhisker as an example; their age cite is from The Fourth Apprentice, and that does not state their current age. I'm gonna be blunt, this series has very little in terms of consistent time passage, and I really think we should start removing all ages that cannot be 100% confirmed; such as a direct statement from Kate, Vicky, or within the series itself (such as someone saying "[name]kit is three moons old", or something like that. With each book, we experience more time, and these ages are also becoming outdated. I've removed some of the ones with expired cites (old books do not reveal anything other than them being born, and unless we have a solid confirmation [the timeline I guess can be used, but again, it's not totally 100% cited yet]), and I'm not even sure we should still have these.

And if you yell at me saying we're removing hard work, it's not like they can't be readded with a proper cite to back it up.

Not sure how much my opinion on this actually counts since I'm so inactive, buuuuut Jayce has a point. Half of these ages aren't accurate or aren't properly cited. I actually think it's impossible to find accurate ages for these characters...the series is way too inconsistent. Cats appear as full grown cats in one book and then in another book released later in the same time period, they're just being born. Even saying it's an approximation doesn't really excuse it imo; there's far too many conflicts. <span style="">12:56 Sun Jun 18

I agree with removing ages entirely for cats that have never had their age mentioned, but, if it has been stated, then I think it should be put as "[age]+ Moons" (eg. "Age: 48+ Moons) (unless it was stated as being 8 Moons once and now the cat is a warrior or something, then I think you should remove its age), because you can never be sure if time has passed since the stating of a character's age. Although, like Sootopolitan Berry, I have been inactive and, unlike Sootopolitan Berry, this is my first post on the Project Characters Talk Page (excluding my join request, of course!), so my opinion will, most likely, be unimportant. -- 16:32, June 18, 2017 (UTC)

I think that ages should be removed from characters who are still currently alive, as there's the passage of time still and all that. However, even if not direct proof, with a few double cites there are some ages that can be confirmed and so I think it might be smart to keep the ages of deceased characters on those pages until proven false.

I don't think they should be removed entirely. They should be revamped yes, but not removed. I've been working hard on the Timeline and most of the seasons are cited now. I made this suggestion earlier with Spookycat but I think maybe we can try an age template. Like, we tell the template a character was born at (referencing warriors timeline), Year=3, Season=1 (leafbare), Moon=3. It figures it out for us and for living cats, it compares to what time the series is currently at (Year=11, Season=2(newleaf), not sure about moon but I will definitely check if we do this) and we change what the 'current time' is when a new book in the series is released. For deceased characters, we tell what moon they died, like Year=3, Season=4(Leaf-fall), Moon=2. It's just a basic idea but it could work well. It's better than doing it ourselves, math can be so hard ><<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  22:07, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

there's a few kits and such that have the right ages (because they're dead) but more are wrong currently than right. those should be removed because they're incorrect, and any other wrong information would be removed immediately. people outside the wiki don't take much stock in the ages as it is because of how thye are right now. 22:11, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

I'm actually up for removing them from the still-living cats.. because the passage of time isn't always 100% clear in the books, and even context clues isn't always accurate. That's not saying your work isn't going unnoticed, Stealth. Trust me, I'm so happy with your progress on the timeline and I'm very impressed. It just doesn't seem right to have these ages shown on articles when many of them are incorrect. We remove all wrong information when we see it, so I don't see how this is much different...

Well, I think we should remove the ages from living cats for the time being (and perhaps some of the deceased characters too), since in a lot of cases it is false information. I think we could talk about re-adding them later if Stealth and the others finish up the timeline and get it properly cited. At that point, we could double cite the ages (to where they were born or their age was stated and the timeline page), and it would be easier to see if the ages were up to date referencing off the timeline. I understand if we decide to remove the ages completely because they're never going to be 100% accurate, but I think having the approximations is useful. 23:44, June 21, 2017 (UTC)

I agree. I don't like that the ages listed are not accurate either.

Founding Leaders
HI GUYS ARE YOU GETTING TIRED OF ME YET?

Anyways, I was reading Long Shadows out of boredom, and I noticed something. We changed the page name for Lightning Tail due to him being called Lightning Tail post-death (one of the reasons, anyways).... but we have no cites for Riverstar, Shadowstar, and Windstar being called these names post-death. The only characters we have those cites for are Thunderstar (recently found in Pinestar's Choice), and Skystar (I think in Shattered Sky??). Isn't it false representation to continue to have these pages at their leader names, when there's no cite whatsoever to say that they were called such at death? I know everyone hates the issues regarding their names, but it's a bit hypocritical to use his post-death name for renaming Lightning Tail, but not for these other cats.

That's true. I heard it sometime before, but I forgot. If the leaders are called River, Wind, Shadow, etc in a canon book, then it would be an assumption to call them a name not mentioned in canon. (also the skystar thing was in hawkwing's journey, or some Vos book)

Well, Riverstar, Windstar, and Shadowstar are canon names... but the problem I'm raising is that these cats are called River, Wind, and Shadow post-death, while their articles are named so by the names they had while they were alive. There's nothing to prove that they were called by their leader names after they died. We do have cites for them being called by the first part of their names only, even if the book was released before Dawn of the Clans, Moth Flight's Vision, and Thunderstar's Echo.

imo we should just name them all like river/riverstar as the article, (except for skystar i guess) makes everyone happy since the erins can't decide lul. 22:03, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

Okay well if we go by the logic of having the article name the same as what they are referred to the latest in canon books chronologically wise, yes they would be just their first part (minus Skystar he is referred to his leader name in Hawkwing's Journey). I think the description part should keep it as Wind, or Windstar for example (because it's confusing), and maybe mention in the trivia about the confusion over what they are called in StarClan.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  22:13, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

Logically, this makes sense. However, we do need to remember that Long Shadows was written 7 years prior to Moth Flight's Vision, and 9 before Pinestar's Choice. If anything we can ask the Erins, but this is the most recent and remember that they only appeared in one chapter in Long Shadows while in Moth Flight's Vision they appear several times with their leader names. So basically I'm gonna get yelled at but this is how I see it. 22:14, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

Idk if this matters or not, but in The Warriors Guide it calls them as Windstar, Shadowstar, Riverstar, Thunderstar and Skystar when it's showing all the leaders of the Clan. 22:25, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

Icy, I don't think it's very fair to use that argument though. We renamed Lightning Tail based on the name he had after he died. If we ignore one instance, but allow it for another, it's a bit hypocritical. It really doesn't matter when Long Shadows was written; it's the only book that depicts Windstar, Riverstar, and Shadowstar post-death. Also, Shypaw, unless I'm mistaken, it only talks about them while they're alive?

In my opinion it does matter due to the fact that we are talking about an entire series, a super edition, and a novella vs a book written in 2009 when it did not focus on the old Clans, like the books we have now. I know that goes against every logic we have but we also must take that into consideration if we're looking for factual evidence on the wiki. 23:17, June 21, 2017 (UTC)

Imho, I can see both sides. Because like, a prime example of a super outdated book is Secrets of the Clans (also from 2007, a little bit before Long Shadows), and it contains stuff that errors on how the warrior code was created, and stuff that's listed in the controversy section of that page. All of that stuff is written so long ago that a lot of it just doesn't align with current books. (it's worth a mention that this book does list them with the -star suffixes on their respective sections) But yeah, I agree with Icy that it's at least a point to consider that these books are really, really old when a lot of the current plotline most likely wasn't developed, and it conflicts a lot...

Gosh this is hard. I can see both points of views but it's hard to make one, justified opinion. I think the most recent books, Hawkwing's Journey and Pinestar's Choice, prove that the Erin's current plot is that their names do end in -star. I don't want to disregard Long Shadows too much but it was published a long while ago, and was completely contradicted by Secrets of the Clans not long before it. I think we should consider that the Erin's plot changed overtime and it looks more likely their names end in -star than singular. I mean, really Shadowstar, Riverstar were never called Shadow or River at any other point in their life according to Dawns of the Clans, I think that says something. Considering also it was originally said that they did not take -star names, then they did, I think Long Shadows was going on that plot point before it changed.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  21:42, June 27, 2017 (UTC)

I am agreeing with you both here. I think that it is necessary to use all of this information and think this through logically, we do not want to have false information on this Wiki that is contradicted by several other things. 00:33, June 28, 2017 (UTC)

It still doesn't change the fact we have no cite for their StarClan names ending in -star.

I pretty much agree with you on this one. Also I think we should do what David suggested.

I will pretty much bring up my point before - that book was written a long time ago prior to when we had several, several books based on the ancient Clans. I am not sure if we can count that as valid, because we have also not counted a few things as valid before. 18:50, July 3, 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Icy and Stealthfire here. Considering Long Shadows was written 8 years ago and how much the series changes, I think they should stay with the -star ending. <span style="">09:40 Wed Jul 5

August FA
Time is flying. So there are a few on the FA list, and I am assuming we can go for one of those, except both need heavy editing. I actually think Darktail would be good for August, as the article is very detailed and well written. 18:50, July 3, 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Darktail, but it appears that his TAS section isn't done yet, so that needs to be finished first. He also has no quotes from TAS or SS, and I definitely think some of those should be added

Gorsepaw
So I was looking at the disambiguation pages and it says the 3 Gorsepaws are Gorsepaw (TPB), Gorsetail (P3), and Gorsetail (NP), but on neither of the Gorsetails' pages does it ever mention them or list them as being an apprentice or being called Gorsepaw, so I think this disambiguation is unnecessary and Gorsepaw (TPB) should be renamed to just Gorsepaw? Thoughts? <span style="">12:21 Wed Jul 5

I think that was from the missing kits thing. Since those cites aren't valid, Gorsepaw (TPB) can be renamed Gorsepaw again.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  04:47, July 6, 2017 (UTC)