Warriors Wiki talk:Characters

=Discussion=

Badgerpaw - Badgerfang?
K, I know probably no one's read it yet, but after Badgerpaw's death, they refer to him as Badgerfang, at least more than once. Would this be enough to have him renamed as Badgerfang? 00:33, October 9, 2012 (UTC)

Oooooooh, would that mean he gets a warrior image as well? xD That would be amazing. Anyways, if he's //called// Badgerfang, then I don't see why not. As long as it can be cited... and I used the browse inside and found at least three mentions. That's good enough for me.

Sorry, but I don't think that that's enough, he never had a ceremony, and it was basically a nickname. If we did that, then we might as well make Heathertail a leader charart and categorize her as a leader, from the game she was playing when she was an apprentice. Sorry, but that's my opinion. =3 00:42, October 10, 2012 (UTC)

Now that I'm finished reading the book, I think his page should be renamed, after his death they only call him Badgerfang. 21:54, October 10, 2012 (UTC)

That still doesn't make it more than an honored nickname. Badgerpaw died an apprentice, technically still a kit. Unless he was seen in StarClan as a warrior and there he answers to the name Badgerfang or something, I wouldn't change his page name. 22:39, October 10, 2012 (UTC)

I say no as well. There was no ceremony; Flintfang only called him Badgerfang after he died. Just because Yellowfang (wow, a lot of -fangs here) called him Badgerfang does not mean that it is his official name. It was done to honour him. 02:59, October 17, 2012 (UTC)

Flintfang does say, however, that he gave him his warrior name before he died. It doesn't say a nickname, or anything of the sort. It actually says his warrior name.

Well I haven't read it to really understand the situation enough, but if it really did say what cloudy said, then I'd fully support making that his name. 18:59, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, so what the heck would his rank be after that? I don't believe he was ever made an official warrior, even if he got a new name, however he did get the name. And currently he has a switch template between kit and apprentice, since he was still kit age. So would he have a switch between warrior and kit then? Or all three? o.o 19:15, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

I read that part today, and I fully believe that he should be considered a warrior. A medicine cat's word is about as law-abiding as a leader or deputy, and Flintfang asked her if it was ok, in which she replied that it was, and no cat questioned them. I think that even Brokenstar nodded his head in agreement. 23:16, November 2, 2012 (UTC)

I think that he could be renamed so that he is 'Badgerfang', but I'm not sure about the image situation. 01:14, November 3, 2012 (UTC)

If he would get the page renamed then I think he deserves a warrior image. x3 04:34, November 12, 2012 (UTC)

Well after thinking this through a bit, I think he definitely should get a warrior image if we're changing his pagename and listing him with a warrior name. The question is, he was still a kit, not even apprentice age, so what should be done about his switch template he has now? Should it switch between kit and warrior? 18:56, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure a switch between a kit and warrior would be best. 00:30, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

Sooo, what's going on with this, guys? Have we come to a conclusion?

I think so... 05:21, December 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'm still not convinced. You guys, we've read the full details of Badgerpaw's death. I know Vicky said to trust the SE's over the Field Guides, but nothing in the SE really contradicts what we saw of Badgerpaw's death in Code of the Clans. Flintfang didn't give him a dying apprentice ceremony. All we know is that Badgerpaw told his mentor that he wanted to be called Badgerfang in StarClan and then he immediately died. And, from what we can see in Yellowfang's Secret, Flintfang honors that wish and calls him Badgerfang, but that still doesn't mean he was a warrior. He never completed his training and he did not have a dying apprentice or warrior ceremony as far as we've seen. I'm fine with listing him with Badgerfang as an unofficial post-death honored nickname, but I don't think the page name should be changed or that a warrior charart should be made. 16:46, December 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, in terms of the warrior image: the warrior blanks clearly show an adult cat, which Badgerpaw was not. 16:47, December 3, 2012 (UTC)

But it doesn't change the fact that Yellowfang acknowledged the name, as did Brokenstar, I believe. A medicine cat's word means just as much as a leader's does, at least in the Clans it does.

Also in terms of images, the apprentice blank also shows a 6 moon+ cat (looks more like 9 or so to me honestly...), which Badgerpaw certainly was not also... .-. 12:11, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

I would just like to call it as I see it here; just want to throw my 2 cents in so we can get this wrapped up. I think Flintfang maybe sent him to StarClan after having done some form of a "dying apprentice ceremony", as Bluestar did on Brightpaw/Lostface. Only there was no leader present. (If I remember correctly Where's Code of the Clans when you need it ) The title of the CotC section is also called the smallest warrior, but I doubt that means anything =/ Yes, he's definetly too young for an image; the images do show full-grown cats. But Yellowfang and Flintfang both called him Badgerfang.

And if we were to rename the page, why not have a redirect page? There's an idea. Or at least, a decent one. 03:27, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

No, in The Smallest Warrior Flintfang did not perform any ceremony. 03:29, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

However he said in YS (I believe. I haven't actually read the book) that he gave him the name Badgerfang before he went to StarClan. And that he went to StarClan as a warrior. Both of those things clearly contradict CotC. So we can't just go by what CotC says, since there is a contradiction. I'm not sure which we should go by, but you can't say it didn't happen cause we didn't see it in CotC, since clearly Flintfang's saying things happened that we didn't see. 21:28, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

All he says is he gave Badgerpaw the name. Not that he performed any ceremony. I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced we should present it as anything more than a nickname that was honoured by a couple of cats. Nothing in Yellowfang's Secret contradicts CotC. And on the next page after Flintfang says this, Brokenstar says "That's a shame he would have made a great warrior", meaning he wasn't a warrior. Even though Brokenstar acknowledges the name, or at least he doesn't correct Yellowfang when she calls Badgerpaw by it, he still doesn't regard Badgerpaw as a warrior. 23:00, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that warrior name does not necessarily mean warrior. Rainfur had a warrior name, but he was a rogue. Pricklenose did, too. You could even say elders count for having a warrior name but not being one. I think he could just be considered an apprentice that has the name of Badgerfang since that's clearly what he was called. Not every apprentice has to have "paw" at the end of their name to be one. Boulder is a prime example, and even if he is a SkyClan cat, so is Egg. 21:48, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

What Breezy said there^ is a prime reason for us to change Badgerpaw's name to Badgerfang. There have been a number of cats who have been rogues and loner, and had warrior names, or leader names for that (Spiderstar). Apprentices don't necessarily have to have "-paw" anyway, like Boulder and Egg. So I'm for changing Badgerpaw's page name o3o. 10:15 Tue Feb 5

What's going on with this, guys?

I think it should be voted on. I still disagree. Rainfur had a name that was like a warrior's name, but he was still a rogue at the time. Pricklenose and Lowbranch lived the warrior life, but were not part of a Clan. Badgerpaw and Flintfang are, and are therefore constrained to the laws of a Clan. We have no confirmation that Flintfang ever gave Badgerpaw and semblance of a dying apprentice ceremony and if you want to go by honored nicknames then you might as well list "Jay" in Jayfeather's charcat and "Sweet" in Sweetpaw's. 216.57.241.236 17:40, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Why does he need a ceremony to be called Badgerfang? Why isn't it enough that he was called Badgerfang repeatedly after his death, acknowledged by both Yellowfang and Brokenstar? He's like the opposite of Millie, who went through her warrior ceremony without changing her name. A warrior name doesn't necessarily equal warrior. Rainfur is a valid example, since Firestar even said he was confirming his warrior name. I don't think he needs a warrior charart, but his page name should be changed. 21:35, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Except, as I pointed out above, after Badgerpaw's death Brokenstar, while not objecting to the name, says that he would have made a good warrior. Meaning he was not a warrior. It's just a nickname. And Rainfur was not part of a Clan and not bound by the rules of one, same as Lowbrance and Pricklenose. Having a warrior name doesn't make you a warrior. Or should we give Heathertail a leader charart and Lionblaze a deputy charart? 216.57.241.162 04:10, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not saying that he needs to be added as a warrior and I just said that warrior name =/= warrior. His page name should be changed, because that is clearly his name after his death. Jay and Sweet were one-time uses, but Badgerfang was called such several times. He was still an apprentice, but he was an apprentice by the name of Badgerfang. 17:23, March 15, 2013 (UTC)

Paleh's gone insane
Please don't kill me. ;w; Just getting them all out of the way at once....

Moving Spoiler Tag above descriptions
This has been discussed multiple times, and there's never really been a proper conclusion. Just archived for being up too long. Sooo here goes again. What do you guys think, should we move the spoiler tag up on all articles so we don't have to worry about spoilers in the description ever again? And if not, I also wanted to suggest that we find a place to put spoiler descriptions, as things like Brightheart's injuries do need a place to be cited, otherwise we're missing a lot of description about her and have nowhere to elaborate on what her scars and injuries look like. Personally I think we should just move the tag. It's more trouble having it there than it's worth, and it'll also help so nobody can complain about the chararts being above the tag and having spoilers (Briarlight). 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Really quickly, not stating my personal opinion, but stating another option is something like CHBW is doing: like on Nemesis' page, and removing the spoilers altogether. 00:28, December 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Ooh something like that^(what CHBW is doing) would be awesome, though it might be a bit annoying after a while. x3 00:31, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah it'd probably get a bit annoying after a while having it on /every/ page, however that is something that might be useful to have... perhaps for new books that come out, and major characters in those books. 00:38, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I like this idea, it seems great. -no more to add because she is a derp- 01:48 Sun Dec 2

Perhaps we should do something like CHBW for the characters of a brand new book for a while after the book is released and for characters with major spoilers in their descriptions or chararts (Briarlight). Then for the rest of the pages move the spoiler tag to the top, because having the CHBW thing (I have no clue what to call it) on every page would be annoying for anybody just trying to browse through random pages, especially if it's a character who the spoiler tag works fine for because of no major spoilers in the description. 03:18, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Paleh, we need spoiler tags moved and places to put things like Brightheart's injuries or Briarlight's broken lower spine or whatever. I like this.  03:44 Sunday December 2 2012

Perhaps I didn't explain my option very well. I don't mean to have that option and the spoiler tags. What I intend for it to do is replace the spoiler tags and only be used when a new book comes out. We'll get rid of the spoiler tags as the books have been out for several years/months now so it ought not be a surprise that there are spoilers. Also, that type of spoiler only works about three times if I remember correctly. Maybe only twice, so you won't have to fight it constantly when trying to edit that page. If we're moving the spoilers to the top of the page on every page, why not just remove them and just have spoiler warnings (more noticeable ones for that matter too) for when new books come out? 03:57, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I think either idea could work. We could either move the spoiler tags to the tops of the pages or use the thing on the other wiki. However, when it comes to only using it for newer books... I'd have to disagree there. A lot of users do come on here without having read the entire series. I've met more than one person in the chat that hasn't even finished the first arc yet and are here to look up something they missed in the books that they did read. So, to them, pretty much every page has spoilers. Heck, even Kit hasn't gotten past the Power of Three arc yet. Something about hating Long Shadows. Anyhoo, that's my opinion on the subject. I think Teldy's thing might work, but only if it's on every page, and for the sake of convenience I'm leaning more towards just moving the spoiler tag up. 20:13, December 18, 2012 (UTC)

No, spoiler tags shouldn't be removed altogether in my opinion. I honestly think moving them to the top of the page is the best option if the other option is removing them completely. It would be about as hard to move them all as it was to change the category names from series to arc on all the pages. And if we do move it to the top of the page, may I suggest making it stretch across the whole page? Since it won't mess with the charcat template when it's at the top of the page. It's a very simple coding change, and would make it look cleaner imo and make it a bit more obvious. 05:54, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Paleh's idea. Move it and change the width of the spoiler tags to take up the span of the entire page. It's not that difficult, and can very easily be done. If we all work on moving the tags, we could easily get it done in a matter of minutes, honestly.

Have we come to a conclusion on this?

Mmm, perhaps it's just the strict appearance change or something along those lines, but if we are to move the spoiler warning above the quotes and infobox, I'm more inclined to view it like the style or stub template. 04:18, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

Kestrelflight's description
In the cite we have for Kestrelflight's description, Vicky clearly states she made it up on the spot. Since it hasn't been mentioned in book anywhere, should it really be used as his official description? I mean it is from vicky, and we haven't really had anything contradict it, but she did make it up on the spot. Thoughts? 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I agree. If an author (not just Vicky) makes it up on the spot, that's not really legit, is it? But Kestrelflight is included in allegiances. The allegiances of at least Sign of the Moon and The Forgotten Warrior (I'm too lazy to check a ton of allegiances lists) describe him as a "mottled gray tom" and that's it. So a mottled gray tom is his description, if you ask me. But that is a source to contradict what Vicky says. 03:52 Sunday December 2 2012

If it's from one of the authors and they say nowhere 'I think' then I think that it should be counted as valid proof, most likely almost all of the questions we ask them are made up on the spot by them. 03:46, December 3, 2012 (UTC)

Mmmm *nods* That's kinda what I was leaning towards Ducky. It didn't say "I think" anywhere, and it was from Vicky. 09:31, December 3, 2012 (UTC)

An author is an author..doesn't matter who says it...but, I think that perhaps we should use the description he's called more often as his main, which would be the mottled gray description, I believe. We did that with Mapleshade.

Cloudy... unless I'm totally misunderstanding you your contradicting yourself. We used the tortoiseshell description for Mapleshade, which is what Vicky gave us, and the ginger and white as her alt. which is what she's commonly described as. Anyways, I'm going to agree with Duck, if there's no 'I think' then it should be counted as the offical description. 02:09, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Well cloudy, as I tried to say before in another discussion, his mottled gray alt is kind of just a partial description, not so much a contradiction. 03:40, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

No, I just said that a description is a description. We switched Mapleshade's because it was used far more often. Kestrel's main one is used once, and that's when Vicky said it, as far as I know. I'm not even sure what to do about it. What I meant, was that we used the one that was more common, and it was a coincidence that it was used first.

Have we come to a conclusion on this?

Official art pattern specifications
I can guess what most of your opinions will be on this, but it doesn't hurt to bring it up. Should we allow cites from things such as the manga or CotC for pelt pattern specifications. Such as Longtail being a pointed tabby, and things of the sort. It's just a clarification of what type of tabby (or tortie or whatever else you can think of) they are. It doesn't contradict it. Tabby types are also almost never described in the book. Only once has that ever happened. So this would really help add on to the descriptions and give a clearer image of the character for readers. So should we allow cites from there? 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

It's somewhat of an opinion based cite, especially since you're basing your opinion off of the illustrators opinion of what the cat looks like. Plus, for mangas at least, the illustrator has the relatively same style for all tabby cats so I don't think it would necessarily be accurate, of course that doesn't stop me from people basing their chararts off of the manga or CotC. 23:22, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Have we come to a conclusion on this?

Unofficial mentors specification
I think we should really clarify what does and doesn't count as an unofficial mentor. Like with Brackenfur, who was in a way mentored by Firestar. Or Willowshine or was partially mentored by Leafpool. I think we really need somewhere that clearly states what qualifies being listed as a real unofficial mentor. Not sure where to do that, or what, maybe the guidelines, just thought I'd suggest it. 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I mean, let's say a cat gets a thorn in their paw and the MC tells them to stay off it and not train their apprentice and some other cat takes them out for the day, I don't think that should count, but if they have something major that they have contributed to their education, then yes, they should be an unofficial mentor, in my eyes. 01:57, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Ivy and Paleh. Firestar was a major part of Brackenfur's education, even with Cinderpelt. If some cat teaches another how to catch a bird, that's it, that's not an unofficial mentor. If they train (or help train) an apprentice for a while, I think that counts as an unofficial mentor. And for the guidelines idea, I think that would be better, especially for newer users.

 03:58 Sunday December 2 2012

The problem with that definition, though, is that many times, especially with siblings, apprentices and their mentors train together throughout nearly their entire apprenticeships, like Dovewing and Ivypool, so much that they almost learn skills equally from both mentors. But Cinderheart is not Dovewing's mentor, and Lionblaze is not Ivypool's. It would probably work better if it was more along the lines of they are considered unofficial mentors if they official mentor is absent or lacking in something, which would work for Brackenfur and Willowshine. 04:13, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Have we come to a conclusion on this?

Official guidelines for descriptions
This is long overdue and has also been discussed quite a few times. Proper rules and clarifications need to be added to the project guidelines about what should and should not go into a description. Things such as the obvious "What counts as an alt?", and also things like whether age should be listed or not, or things like saying a cat's heavy, or has soft eyes. I'm not here to figure out what those guidelines should be, I really have no idea, I'll let you guys discuss and decide. I'm just saying they need to be decided on and added to the project guidelines.

Also, on the topic of descriptions, I kinda think it might be good to have alternate descriptions (the ones that would need a toggle) listed up by the main description. Like...

Mapleshade is a ragged,[4] large,[5] sturdy,[6] thick-furred[7] tortoiseshell-and-white she-cat[5] with a fluffy white tail,[8] a white muzzle,[9] a scarred head,[10] thorn-sharp claws,[7] soft,[11] sleek,[12] matted fur,[7] sharp, yellow teeth,[13] and amber eyes.[5] She is also commonly described as a ginger and white she-cat with a white tail.

Or something along those lines. Now I would think we would only do it for Majorly different descriptions such as Mapleshade, not minor ones like ^Graypool^. If the description's common enough to have the image up at the top, why shouldn't the actual text description also be at the top? 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I think this would be better (and, as I've said before, it would benefit the newer users) because, (this is me, referring back to the Fluffy kits, stubby tails section:) if a cat is a warrior, and they are mentioned to have small paws, or small ears, or soft fur, or whatever, that counts. But with kits, it should be different, so I think that would be better to have some sort of guidelines for each cat's description. And the "She is also commonly described as a ginger and white she-cat with a white tail." would be better, too, instead of just plopping it in trivia. Or, if we wanted to keep that in trivia, (if we organized trivia like Paleh suggested) we could put it somewhere.

 13:45 Sunday December 2 2012

I agree with official guidelines for descriptions, but I don't with the alternate descriptions, it's listed in the trivia, and it would confuse some users. x3 03:16, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

But having the toggle image at all is confusing to people who use the wiki who aren't users too. And they wouldn't know that they have to look in the trivia section for the reasoning behind the toggle. Having the description at the top would actually make it less confusing for some. 20:58, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

When I was a member here before (YEARS ago) this was discussed. We kept it in the trivia because having two descriptions was deemed as too confusing. So if we are definitely going to change it now, have the second description on another line below it to avoid the past confusion. Also, as far as the actual descriptions, I think there should be an order of where the descriptors go. For example, on many of the articles, a cat is described as 'broad-shouldered' before the gender, while on others it is described as 'with broad shoulders' after the gender. It's not a huge, huge deal, but I think it would make it more polished. Just something to think about. Echostar 13:34, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

Have we come to a conclusion on this?

Mentor reassignment ceremonies
I originally planned to ask this in PB for the chapter pages, but I think it might be suited more here. Why are new mentor ceremonies (like when Dustpelt was assigned Darkstripe as his mentor) ever listed on pages? They're ceremonies all the same, even if they don't change rank. I can't seem to think of any reason why they shouldn't be listed, so should we start doing them, or is there a reason not to that I haven't figured out? 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I can't believe we didn't already figure out this. Even if they don't change rank, they actually sorta do. Warrior to mentor, even though it isn't official. It should be listed, more than just, "Mentor(s): Redtail [1], Darkstripe [5]". And I agree that this should also be added to stuff in PB, like chapter subpages. Then after we decide what to do here, we can move this along to PB.

 04:06 Sunday December 2 2012

I think they should be added, if there's a ceremony for it. A mentor is a mentor, regardless of whom they are. Also, this would only go onto PB if we choose to add them. It would start here anyways. Regardless, would we use the normal ceremony template with this?

Family Tree names
Me and a few other people have been confused about this for a while, why are the family trees named the way they are? There seems to be no pattern, and half of them don't make sense. I think they should be named after the character(s) at the top of the tree personally. 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I have been confused (and still am) with these family tree names. Some of the trees are lame-o little, and easy to guess, but others are weird. And maybe the top of the tree thing would work, but wouldn't that make the Wind tree super-huge, if we did that (that's just an example)? I agree with the renaming of some trees, but the top of the tree idea... not sure. But it's not like that's our only idea we can use. Maybe we can come up with something.

 04:13 Sunday December 2 2012

I think most of the trees are fine, they list the most important/most well-known cat in the tree. But I think a few, like the P3 Kits Tree could be renamed to better suit the family. owo 02:27, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

Have we come to a conclusion on this?

Trivia
Got a few suggestions about trivia...

First off, what do you guys think of possibly breaking up the trivia into two sections, errors and fun facts (doesn't have to be named that, I just mean the things that aren't errors, like who the cat was named after, whether they have other clans' blood, etc.)? I guess it's not really all that important, but it might be nice to have it split up.

Second, I think we should combine all the trivia about what blood a cat had into one bullet point, rather than having one for each type of blood. Might also be good to do for description mistakes, but I'm not sure. We already combine the same description mistake into one bullet, so it might not be needed to combine them all. Definitely think the blood one should be though.

Lastly, how come we don't list in the trivia when a cat has an unnatural description, but we list it when there's a male tortoiseshell? Should we start listing when a cat's description is unnatural, or should we just get rid of the trivia on the tortoiseshell's pages? I don't think just one or the other should be listed. 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I'm starting to sound like a broken record here, but I agree with you, it'd be better to break it up into mistakes and fun facts, including interesting tidbits that the Erins themselves have stated. I think we should denote when a pelt pattern is unnatural. I was the one who added the male tortoiseshell, but it's an interesting fact, and so is an unnatural description. 02:03, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I think the trivia splitting-up wouldn't be half bad. Especially if you want to confirm something for something (I dunno) it would be easier to just have it all neatly organized for you, like, blood-relations here, fun/interesting facts there, and (yippee!) other stuff in that spot. I think we should always note if a cat has an unnatural description, beyond just the male tortoiseshell hoo-rah, because that's sort of important, especially with mating and that business.

 04:18 Sunday December 2 2012

Honestly I think that the trivia is fine how it is, I don't think it really needs to be split-up. Also, I think on some articles the blood is on one line, but yes I support having that on one bullet-point, and the unnatural pelt descriptions I think we should add them in. owo 02:34, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to agree with Duck on this one, and say that it's fine how it is. We should have the blood on one line and the unnatural pelt descriptions should be added in though. 04:40, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Duck on this one.. And also, have we come to a conclusion on this? This has been sitting here for quite a while.

It's a great idea for the main characters, but it's probably not something I'd like to see with the minor characters. 04:18, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

Multiple speakers in main quotes
Just wondering, is there a specific reason we can't have multiple speaker quotes as the main quote, or is it just cause it was never coded to have multiple speakers? Cause that can easily be fixed, and I kinda think it'd be nice to give that option if there's not reason not to other than the coding. 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I still think we should go with the one speaker main quote. That way the blue main quote bubble won't be huge, and it will be easy to find the important quote (since that would be the only one there). But, that's only my opinion. 04:21 Sunday December 2 2012

I think it wouldn't be half bad to have the multiple speaker quotes as the main quote, I was actually wondering on this awhile ago, some quotes really show a characters personality, but in order to get the point of the quote you need to see what another cat says, and some of those quotes would be better for main quotes. =3 02:38, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

I honestly don't know why we don't have that option. It shouldn't be that hard to tweak the template for the main quote. Multiple times, I've found that something more than one character had a part in saying would have made a great quote, but we really couldn't use it.

It detracts from the main character the quote is suppose to describe. You can always use the "[...]" to avoid having another character butting in. 23:22, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

But Teldy, in some cases you need both character's quotes to make it work. Like for example, this quote on Ferncloud's page.

Ferncloud: "Ashfur? Be careful." Ashfur: "Don't forget I've outrun a dog pack before." Ferncloud: "You had me at your side then." Ashfur: "And now I have you and your kits to protect. I won't let you down."

I personally think that'd be a really good main quote for either of them. (but if you disagree, let's just use it as an example, Ok?) But you can't just take one line out of it and use it. You need the full quote between the two of them. Other characters butting in isn't the problem, the problem is other characters having something to say that should be included in the quote. I really think we should just go ahead and add the coding to the main quote template and make it an option. 21:23, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

I think it should be an option. With Firestar, his quote is perfect, but for others, especially characters who don't really have a good quote by themselves, it should be coded as an option. Echostar 13:36, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know why this isn't already allowed. It's a wonderful idea, and we could really need it. Some characters are hard to find main quotes for without another cat's quote being in there too. 08:52 Tue Feb 5

Have we come to a conclusion on this? I know I'm all for it.

I don't really think it's all that great of an idea. Even if it could better explain personalities, having multiple speakers in a quote on the top of the page would be distracting and rather odd-looking. Even if it's just a few words from a conversation, a lot could be revealed about them and there's no need to have the whole thing at the top of the page. Stick it in the quotes section where it should be anyway. 22:41, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

New Family Template?
Was messing around and made a template that might be useful. Example here. It's not like essential or anything, just something to make things a bit quicker and easier if you wanna use it. 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Are you talking the See More part? 'cause if you are, I like that, and say we use it. xD

Huh? No, the template I used in that example. :b Lets you be able to do  instead of  :Firestar:  It's just something that may make things a bit quicker, kinda like the R template does. 03:45, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Ehhh, okay, the family template isn't bad, but then we ought to merge the status template with it. 23:22, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Erm, why? o.o Then we'd have to change all the current family sections out. This way it's optional, just something to make things a bit quicker. It works alongside the status template fine... I really don't see why you'd merge them. Plus, there was no way to make this work easily (that I could figure out) for characters without pages without making you have to type just as much. 21:17, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Except when something is optional, it's almost always changed to the most new and current standard for consistency purposes I assume. I also don't see how that family template makes it quicker when you're just replacing two colons. I think the family section is well constructed as it is right now because it's not that difficult formatting wise and it's editor-friendly. Also, by merging the status template with this, all I mean is to do insert the status template into the overall family template. You'd do basically the same thing you did with the R template, I imagine. 22:57, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

I dun think you quite get how the template works judging by what you're saying. o.o But meh, it's not really needed, but I've used it on other wikis before and it definitely does make it faster when doing say, a whole new page. But dun mind if it's not used, doesn't matter that much. 04:10, February 27, 2013 (UTC)

Then can you please reword your explanation? 04:18, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

Pronouns on characters without genders
This isn't all that important, just curious, what's the standard way we're supposed to use pronouns on genderless character's pages? (s/he, they....) 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Considering that "s/he", in my honest opinion, seems a tad unprofessional as it symbolizes uncertainty in the history itself, I think we should go with "they" as a pronoun for genderless characters' pages. -- Sta rry  00:50, December 3, 2012 (UTC)

'They', 'they're' and 'their' seems the better option. Seems more professional and anyway, 's/he' looks like a typo of 'she' to me lol. 05:12 Mon Dec 3

I agree with Berry on that note. xD S/he looks...really unprofessional. ._. I tried to add "they" once, and ended up getting told that was the "unprofessional" way...yet using "s/he" looks just plain stupid.

I agree that "s/he" looks pretty stupid, but the cats are singular and "they" is a plural word. I think if you really want to look professional, completely typing out "he or she" is the way to go. 22:33, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

"They" sounds good to me. x3 15:00, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

Except I have to agree with Breezey that "they" is a plural pronoun and is grammatically incorrect. However, I don't quite agree that completely typing out "he or she" would make it even more professional. In any case, why not use "it" and balance it between the character's name and that pronoun? "It" is a gender-neutral pronoun and it would be grammatically correct as the pronoun is singular. 17:26, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

Both "They" and "It" sound like they would work, depending I guess on the sentence. x3. But I guess 'It' would work because it's singular, like Teldy said x3.  Prussia:  The Awesome Time Lord 02:42, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

What's wrong with he/she? It doesn't look like a typo. 02:57, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

No, it's more of how professional it sounds x3. But if not, I have no idea. x3  Prussia:  The Awesome Time Lord 02:59, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

"They", as Breezey said, is grammatically incorrect, so I don't think it should be used. Cats are animals, yes, but "it" seems like a weird classification since they have human emotion. I think just using the character's name is sufficient, or "the cat". Echostar 13:40, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, but "Doctorkit is seen when Doctorkit is with Doctorkit's siblings when Doctorkit and Doctorkit's siblings are being apprenticed." doesn't sound right at all. "Doctorkit is seen when the cat is with Doctorkit's siblings when the cat and the cat's sibling's are being apprenticed." doesn't sound right either. "They" is a unisex term, and as I was taught, "they" can be used for any unnamed thing. "Doctorkit is seen when they are with their siblings, when Doctorkit and their siblings are being apprenticed." definitely sounds better. I say we just go with "they", "they're" and "their". <span style="">08:49 Tue Feb 5

Except as repeated before me, the pronoun "they" and other forms are connected with plural topics. We try our best to keep spelling and grammar top-notch in the content of are articles, and yet this is a clear, intentional rejection of that principle. 22:57, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

Not necessarily. They and it's other forms can be used as singular.

"Indeterminate gender – when they refers to an individual person of unknown or unspecified sex, as in, for example, "One student failed their exam". This usage is known as epicene they."

Used instead of the person's or creature's gender. It's perfectly acceptable grammar. <span style="">06:20 Wed Feb 6

But the problem with a singular "they" is that it is not universally accepted, even if it's common in everyday English. I think the name and "he or she" or "his or her" is the best way to go, since, even if that's a mouthful, using those pronouns is accepted by the majority of linguists. 03:37, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

Have we come to a conclusion on this?

I'm in favor of either spelling out "he or she" or using it. 04:18, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

I'm leaning towards using "it" over anything else.

Honestly, now I know this is getting a tad on the personal side, as an individual who sometimes sees themself an neither gender, the usage of the word it doesn't gel with me too well, as well as a friend of mine who sees themself as gender neutral all the time. We could just do he or she, but word their article in a way where if a pronoun can be avoided, then try to do so. 17:17, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

SkyClan Ancestors
Dunno if this goes here...but I was just wondering why there isn't a SkyClan ancestor category? They're seperate, I believe, and there's a category for StarClan cats and Tribe of Endless Hunting cats. Just wondering. 01:20, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Well, technically they're a faction of StarClan separated by space, are they not? SkyClan is still a Clan, they just live away from the other Clans. SkyClan's ancestors and StarClan reunited in Firestar's Quest and still mingle often. Leafstar got stalked by Spottedleaf just as much as Firestar did, if I remember SkyClan's Destiny correctly. 01:43, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

They're not called 'That Part of StarClan That Has SkyClan Cats', they're referred to as a different set of ancestors, despite the face that they reuinted in Firestar's Quest. StarClan and SkyClan's Ancestors are the same, but I guess it wouldn't hurt to have a category for them. <span style="">08:43 Tue Feb 5

What's going on with this?

I think a category would be good, they are still called SkyClan ancestors or something to that effect in SkyClan's Destiny, and they aren't called StarClan, it's the same thing as when we moved the Half Moon page. (Speaking of that I need to start a discussion on it) 22:32, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

Maplewhisker
Okay, so apparently this was discussed and I was being an idiot and archived it far too early for anything to really be said. It's the context of which the name Maplestar is used in Code of the Clans, and whether or not it should allow her page to be moved.
 * "SkyClan would be safe under Maplestar's leadership. And Robinwing would suggest that a new rule be introduced to the warrior code: that deputies replaced leaders when they lost their ninth life, as the cats most used to leadership and dealing with rival Clans."

It's talking like it happened in the future, or something close to that. I wouldn't normally say that she would get it....but it also mentions Robinwing suggesting a new part of the warrior code...so that's what throws me off. Since it wasn't really an entire discussion, I think it should be talked about. I moved the page, but felt uncomfortable and wrong in doing so, so I moved it back. What do you guys think?

I'd like some comments on this, please, if no one minds.

I think it should be moved back to Maplestar, the context sounds firm enough to have a cite for it, and with a cite the page would be moved anyway, so yeah. Sorry if I made absolutely no sense. x3  22:27, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

Thistleclaw: Tabby Alt or Partial Ddescription?
Ok, I'm not planning to join, but this is the best place to bring this up. This has been on my mind for a while, but I was unsure of where to bring it up (and I still am), but in The Last Hope on pages 159 and 288 and somewhere in Night Whispers (can't remember where), Thistleclaw is called a dark tabby, and he got an alt for it. However, it wasn't specified what kind of dark tabby, which I think means that he is a dark gray tabby, but I'm not sure. What do you think? original discussion found here, if you want to look at it. 22:42, February 22, 2013 (UTC)

As I said, he's also got another alt for it, where he's called a dark brown tabby. But, he's specifically called a "dark brown tabby". I do believe even Vicky said she'd imagined him as a dark brown tabby, and I think the mistake in BP reflects on that... Who's to say that this isn't the same kind of mistake? Regardless, we're kinda assuming it means "dark gray".... <crawls away 'cause I'm not in the mood to be told "you're wrong" and just says honest opinion>

Comments, guys?

I think we mentioned something about how soon it is mentioned, and isn't it mentioned much later in the books? And she did say brown, why would it change to gray? I think it should just stay an alt 22:53, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

I agree that it should stay, she has said brown before, and anyway, the default color for tabbies are brown, so even if he was described as a dark tabby, he has been called a dark brown tabby more than once, I, also, think that it should stay as a mistake. 22:30, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

Missing Fur Citations and Context
Hi all.

Well, I was looking at the cites in Blackstar's article, and I got to thinking about something.

I know we have standards for citations, and that one-off descriptions get added in as long as they don't contradict an often-used description. However, I feel this should be different in the case of missing fur.

Blackstar, along with the rest of ShadowClan, is mentioned with patchy fur in the battle at the end of Into the Wild. And never again as far as I've seen. And, well, cats lose fur all the time in battles. But it grows back, unless the cat is old and cannot grow fur easily or the area that's bald is over a scar (probable in the case of Spiderstar).

My point is that I think that cats should have more cites, spaced apart, of missing fur if we're to add them to their descriptions. Not, for instance, within a few days of each other in the book's timeline, since it takes fur longer than that to grow back. But maybe between two books or at least a month in the book's timeline or something. Specifically, I don't think that missing fur mentioned during a battle should be taken into account unless that's the only time we ever see a cat.

I mean, Firestar has lost patches of fur before. And those bald patches have never been mentioned more than once since his fur just grew back.

Take it or leave it, I felt it was worth mentioning. 01:17, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. My cats play fight a little too rough occasionally and pull each others' fur out, but they still have full thick coats of fur and they're geting up there is years. Yes, some cats never grow back fur in an area, like in the instance of a major scar, but fur loss and regrowth is common in fighting cats. 01:46, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with that. I think the same could be said for scars as well, could it not? I mean, right after a battle, yes there are bound to be cats with scars. But do they not eventually heal themselves? I honestly think unless they're mentioned multiple times, under multiple circumstances, then they should be removed.

I agree with Shelly and Cloudy on this. (Sorry this is so late!)  Unless it's mentioned multiple times in different books or whenever in multiple circumstances it should be deleted. <span style=""> 20:03 Sunday March 17 2013

Half Moon
Yeah, so I don't have the book yet, but from hat I've read in the browse inside and in the spoilers, Half Moon is only called Stoneteller in The Sun Trail. So I think that e should move her page back to Stoneteller (Ancient) because we actually see what her tribemates(or whatever they were called) called her. I'm bad at starting discusions. Dx  22:39, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

However, after death, she was called Half Moon, and I do believe for names, we go what they were most recently called in the timeline. Which, these are long before the modern arcs. I believe her name should stay as Half Moon, as that's what she was called post-death.

Yes, but if I remember correctly, only Jayfeather called her that, and Jayfeather knew her long before she became a sharpclaw, it's like if you have a friend that is known by a nickname throughout school, and later in life you see them again, you'll probably call them by that nickname, it's the name that you'd called them for so long, even if they go by their first or middle name now. But here we have multiple cats calling her Stoneteller, not just one calling her Half Moon. I don't know, that's just my opinion. owo 23:18, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, no. She was called Half Moon by Bluestar. Not just Jayfeather. That's why I said that. If it were just Jayfeather, I could understand it being a nickname. But, someone who probably didn't even really know her also called her Half Moon. Which makes me think that upon a Stoneteller's death, they revert to the name they originally had before they became Stoneteller.

Or we could do what we did with the original four leaders and list her under the most recently used name (recently as in on the canon timeline and not recently in terms of publication) but on her page (in her description at least) list both names. And next to her Healer rank on her charcat list both Teller of Pointed Stones and Half Moon. Seems like a simple compromise. We know for certain that in the afterlife we've never seen her called anything but Half Moon by anyone. And we know that in life all but Lion's Roar called her Stoneteller. So it seems to be the best compromise. 216.57.241.236 17:07, March 13, 2013 (UTC) (Shelly signed out because Verizon is a butt)

Cats of the mountains = Tribe of Rushing Water?
Hey, I hope I put this in the right place. Anyway, in The Sun Trail, the cats of the mountains refer to themselves as a Tribe, and at least once (I think when Shaded Moss dies?) as Tribemates, so are they to be listed as the Tribe of Rushing Water? 08:34, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Well, I think it's said that there's more than one Tribe of the Mountains...but I think that's besides the point. They did call each other Tribemates, on at least two or three occasions that I can think of... I don't quite know yet..did they actually establish themselves as the Tribe of Rushing Water yet, or just some pre-Tribe thing? I really don't know. I added "unknown", since it's not explicitly stated what they are, aside from them being from the Mountains.

Didn't Jayfeather tell Half Moon that they would be the Tribe of Rushing Water in Sign of the Moon? I think he did, but I haven't read that book in forever. 216.57.241.236 17:22, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I believe he did, but I don't know if that was a thought he had, or an actual conversation with her. It's never really said if they actually established themselves as the Tribe of /Rushing Water/ yet, though. I mean, the usage of the word Tribemate is pretty clear, but I don't know if it's ever said.

Well, can someone that owns the book check? And honestly, they call themselves a Tribe, they live in the cave, and their descendents remain in the cave and are still a Tribe. I think this falls under the "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck" rule. They are no longer ancients because they left that life behind, and no they haven't fully formed the ways and traditions followed by the modern tribe... maybe we could split up the tribe into Tribe of Ruching Water (Ancient) and Tribe of Rushing Water (Modern), like we do with LionClan and TigerClan? 216.57.241.236 17:33, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'd support splitting the Tribe into two pages, but if we are discussing that this needs to be moved to PW. Anyway, yes, they referred to themselves as a "Tribe" multiple times throughout the book, so I think that they should be considered as the Tribe. 01:12, March 15, 2013 (UTC)

(speak the name of the Duck and he shall appear) Alrighty, I agree, this now falls to PW, though that still remains with the question of what category to put on ancient tribe cat pages. 216.57.241.72 05:39, March 15, 2013 (UTC) =Nominations=

Twisted Branch - Silver Nomination
Comments? Be e   bs  05:28, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

Possibly re-word the last sentence of the first paragraph, and the second sentence of the second paragraph to make them flow better with the rest of the history. =) 00:58, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Anything else? Be e   bs  01:02, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

The last sentence in that third paragraph doesn't flow well. Reword it, or split the sentence up? 17:13, March 15, 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Anything else? Be e   bs  21:10, March 15, 2013 (UTC)

CBV? 01:34, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Petal (Ro) - Silver Nomination
Comments? 20:38, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

CBV? 01:34, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Mousewing ~ Silver Nomination
I added two more quotes and added the slightest detail in his history. Comments? 22:11, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

Most of his quotes don't quite show his personality, so perhaps change them or remove them altogether. 00:42, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Graywing (WC) ~ Silver Nomination
ThisguyisamazingIlovehimsomuch. *o* Anyways, I expanded and detailed his history. Comments?

yesheisamazingilovehimtoo Can you expand his history more, he was very major in TST? 00:46, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

All of his quotes are from the first few chapters of TST. Just a suggestion, but maybe add some from later to show what he was like on the journey and in the forest territories? He'ssosweetandjustaltogetheramazing 16:53, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Nettlespot - Silver Nomination
Everything looks good! Comments? 00:50, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Newtspeck - Silver Nomination
I love her name~ Comments? 00:51, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

In the third paragraph, do you think you could clear up what is going on a bit better? It's kinda confusing, especially when Red cries out. 17:01, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Fluttering Bird ~ Silver Nomination
gasp she should've been fluttershy Comments? Bb un   legs  01:06, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Bright Stream - Silver Nomination
Comments? 01:57, March 22, 2013 (UTC)