Warriors Wiki talk:Characters

One-off cites
Wanted to bring up something that we have several instances of - from what I can remember, on Mudfur (mottled), Firestar (dark ginger), Jayfeather (mottled?), Tawnypelt's pale cite. As a standard though, when cats are mentioned many many many times, I think it's bad precedent to include these descriptors on their articles. Some of these cats has PoVs, books to themselves....take Mudfur, who's solid in his image appearance in manga, yet has one mottled cite, so it sticks yet contradicting that. While we haven't given images credence in the past, PCA has deemed to recognize that these images are official, so perhaps PC should too.

Flametail was mentioned as dark ginger in his very first appearance, but in the hundreds of mentions afterwards, he's just as ginger, and is reflected in his official artwork. The most notable case is probably Firestar, who is flame-colored. Fire provides light... and in his artwork (barring a nighttime shot in RP where the lighting ids dark) he is shown as bright. While nothing directly contradicts, I personally believe we should not be listing him as dark ginger, and everyone said to look like him made to be dark ginger, due to one mention in FQ based on everything else we have. Why should we continue to list these, when they contradict evidence to the contrary? If they are mentioned more than once, and nothing else contradicts, they would be valid, but in these and other cases I believe they're null. I believe we should alter the guidelines on descriptions officially in PC, to account for cases like this. Thoughts?

I agree, and I thought we were already doing this, with cases such as Nightpaw (RC) and Fringepaw, of those that come to recent memory. If they are contradictory to the basic description, and only mention once, they should be listed as a mistake imo. 16:55, December 29, 2018 (UTC)

I agree. I think there should probably be more digging into cites that count and do not count (broken cites, one off cites), but cites that appear once and conflict with the description and do not ever appear again, especially on main characters, should be taken into careful consideration and possibly removed. 01:11, December 30, 2018 (UTC)

Agreed^ 01:15, December 30, 2018 (UTC)

cases like firestar, probably. he's a significant character and has a very specific prophecy and such revolving around his pelt colour. cases like tawnypelt, no. they're just them being specific for once, and literally nothing has contradicted her pale cite (excluding the white in her images, but that doesn't relate to the pale here. just her having white in general.) artwork is not infallible nor the main source we are taking from, as well as much of it having some sort of error and is why we have the alt art going on currently. the books comes first; or else we may as well remove say violetshine's mostly white appearance in favour of the more black art, but that contradicts what the books have said she looks like.

if perhaps the character is consistently and for the longest time mentioned as something that contradicts what a one off mention says, thats fine, even though i think we've gotten most of those. but if it's not contradicted in any way, it should stay. so mudfur's would stay as nothing contradicts it aside from manga art (which I believe has white on him anyway?) 01:37, December 30, 2018 (UTC)

Things that are constantly mentioned should override one-off cites since they have been mentioned more than something mentioned once. However, if they don't have anything contradicting said one-off cite, then it shouldn't be removed, because there's nothing there. Basically what Skt said, but it's a case-by-case thing.

Any more comments?

I'm not sure we can remove Firestar's cite for being dark ginger. I found a cite in page 76 of Sunset (Leafpool's perspective referencing Squirrelflight): "The sunlight gleamed on her dark ginger fur, turning it to flame, and for an instant she looked just like their father." There are many other times during that arc that Squirrelflight is mentioned to be similiar looking to Firestar, so we can dismiss that cite that says he is dark?Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  23:17, January 4, 2019 (UTC)

The thing about that was... the sunlight hit her fur, and turned to flame, which made her look like her father. Like, the sun was making seem that way, which could be interpreted as further proving that her father is the color of flame, which is not Squirrelflight's color without the light hitting it directly. I'm not sure we take lighting subjective cites anyway, otherwise I'd throw out the bright cite that Fireheart has from Fire and Ice when they find WindClan, which would be first and trump the Firestar's Quest one anyways. Anyways yeah, really these would be case by case, but Firestar especially has a lot of evidence against him being dark ginger.

I would honestly say to purge all one-off mentions, especially if we do have something to contradict it. Even if it's art, if it's consistent throughout multiple instances, I don't see why we should keep it. Mudfur is actually a huge example; even if he is shown with white on him, I'm not liking the idea that it should be considered invalid all because he has some white on him. The majority of his pelt is still solid... and given that mottled was used once and only once, I'm perfectly fine with ruling that one at least as a mistake. Leopardfoot was also called mottled once...but mottled black makes absolutely no sense.

but does that include things that are just being more specific to their already listed description, (eg turtle tail's mostly white, orange and black version of her tortie desc, or tawnypelt's pale desc? that's an expansion upon her already tortie one.) or just the one off tabbies and whatever that aren't mentioned again? I think if we do go through with this, it's a case by case basis. 20:52, January 9, 2019 (UTC)

It is definitely a case by case basis. For this, I was wondering if we could possibly have something like PCA does akin to the alternate charart forums. Perhaps we can have the same thing and offer cites that we think should be removed, and have people vote against or for? 06:41, January 12, 2019 (UTC)

Hmm I agree, since these are all to be case by case that’d be a more efficient way of gathering consensus than making discussions for each one

Having a vote sounds like a good idea to me. 18:55, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

Unconfirmed Deaths
Many cats in the series randomly disappear. A lot... But some characters that are as old as Tallstar's Revenge and those SE have to be dead just based on cat lifespans. So cats like Piketooth and Reena have to be dead. Not to mention all the DotC characters and Field Guide characters. We could change their residence to unknown, which would make a bit more sense in my opinion. I'm not sure if we would give them the unknown residence blank, but that's a discussion for PCA. Thoughts?

15:49, December 30, 2018 (UTC)

Well, you could use the same argument for other characters, really. Mistystar and Mosspelt should be dead by now, but that does not mean SE characters should be. I think we are fine putting them as we last saw them, because there really is no confirmation otherwise. 02:40, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

Idk. See, cats like Reena and Piketooth are in books that were set a long time ago. Mistystar and Mosspelt should probably be dead by now, but cats from some older books are most definitely dead, such as Gorsestar. There should be a time as to when cats are most definitely dead, although that time might be arbitrary and I agree with Icy in the fact that it's kind of blurry as to when a cat is supposed to die. Apologies if I don't make any sense, I'm not exactly sure how to phrase this lol.

Hmm I kinda concur with Star. Like, cats with any reasonable doubt should stay as we last saw them, but DotC cats? Nooooo way they are still alive. Most of the cats that appeared in basically SH and before are dead dead, and we can even cite it to an academic cite of the longest lifespan possible for a cat.

And maybe we could set a limit, for example if a clan cat doesn’t appear for an arc they are considered unknown? while for rogues and loners we could just leave their residence the same unless they are from dotc.

02:54, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

I agree. For example, Reedshine should be dead, considering Mapleshade's Vengeance took place many, many years ago, and so would her kits. Any character from Super Editions like Tallstar's Revenge, Yellowfang's Secret, and Crookedstar's Promise must have died many years ago, along with the ancient novellas like Pinestar's Choice (I am thinking of Flamenose) So yeah, either their residence should be unkwown or if we have a cite for them it should say StarClan.Potato Flakin (talk) 18:19, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

putting it as starclan is an assumption. we know nothing of the faith (or lack of) for these cats. 20:44, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure since there are so many mistakes in the series on that subject (think Mistystar, Tallpoppy and should Graystripe still be alive?????). We could put a "likely deceased" or something along those lines, then treat them as if they are deceased?Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  23:19, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

I'd be fine labeling those cats as unknown or likely deceased, particularly those from DotC and the early super editions. I like Ari's idea of labeling them too if they don't appear in a while, cats like Copperpaw and Dewspots who kinda just fell off the face of the earth  02:17, January 1, 2019 (UTC)

So could everyone agree if a character doesn't appear for an arc, then it is consdiered 'unknown'? 15:38, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

I dont think we should count Mistystar as Mosspelt considering they appear in the most recent books. I do agree in the long ago books through such as TR and the DotC cats. I think we should at least list their residdnces as unknown considering they would pretty much be dead and havent been listed in any other series since. 11:09, January 7, 2019 (UTC)

I agree with labeling cats from DoTC and TR as most likely deceased (if TR cats were still alive wow they'd be ancient. also impossible the DoTC cats are still alive) 18:55, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

Issue is we do not even have a status that says "deceased" or "alive" so regardless what we do it would still stay the same, and we cannot change their residence to unknown because that is just an assumption - they could be in StarClan or the Dark Forest for all we know. 08:55, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Demotion System
So, Icy brought up something in PW that I found interesting--a downgrading system. And I thought I'd bring it up here, because there are some articles here that...may not be so deserving of their current status. Also, character pages are always changing so what was considered silver a while ago may not be currently. I would like to propose a system similar to what Icy has brought up. If an article is not deserving of its current status, then it should be downgraded, and it can always be re-promoted. Thoughts?

Agreed^^Some of these articles don’t deserve their respective gold or silver titles, and if hey aren’t being actively improved, they should be stripped of said rank and then given it back when the article is deserving of it. It’s misrepresentative to call these articles gold when they’re nowhere close to our best work

I agree as well, and it was always something that puzzled me when I first came across the wiki how many years ago; articles are constantly changing as the majority of the main cast are still doing things in the newer books; cats like Jayfeather and Bramblestar come to mind. Not saying these articles are bad! Just an example of a few that are constantly changing about every six months. 05:52, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

Was actually waiting for the discussion to conclude in PW before this was brought up here, but PC might be a little tricky matter. PW has articles that are absolutely poorly written as well as unfinished, while PC has excellently written articles that just are not complete. So this is a trickier system to tackle. 06:01, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

Hmm whereas PW will likely have things going from gold to started or planned even, PC might end up being more of a gold down to just silver or bronze. Even if it's excellently written, I believe gold articles should only be ones that are fully complete and quality work, so we could knock those down to silver and they can earn their gold back, perhaps? There are some PC articles that contain many issues such as bias, typos, sentence structure issues, not from the right PoV issues... those might get knocked down to bronze, I would think, as they're complete technically but not truly up to par.

Comments? 06:42, January 12, 2019 (UTC)

Would these require new nominations to get back up to their previous rankings? Also, given how this is a much bigger project than PW, how do we agree that an article should be deranked? Because if we're just adding and removing and whatnot, that would seem fairly opinionated. PW's articles run differently than PC's, so I'm not sure we should be applying the same ruling here as was done to PW. I'd like to know exactly what determines a downgrade, how it would be done, and what exactly needs to be done in order to get an article back to silver status. Also, what would this do for formerly featured articles? Many of the older ones are lacking, so would this mean they lose their former FA status?

They would not lose FA because you cannot really go back on a FA. I was thinking that for PC we could possibly follow what PCA does with alternate characters (such as the family tree and official art), have a forum and nominate some articles and why and then vote against / for. 17:08, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

Seems like a plan to me. Another question I have is what would determine something "eligible" to be downgraded? While I realize lack of history content is probably a major one, what would determine that? We'll use Finleap and Firestar for examples. Say if Finleap was missing his The Raging Storm section; would that count as something worthy of demoting for? Given The Raging Storm is still a new book, I wouldn't consider that really something to downgrade for...whereas if Firestar was missing his The Last Hope section, I'd be willing to consider that one, since The Last Hope is almost seven years old, whereas The Raging Storm is only a few months old, if that. Will we have a certain timeframe of history to go by to consider demoting an article?

Either we should discuss a system to go by it, or said nominee would include their reasons in a nomination. You could nominate it for the same reason you just said and people would vote yay or nay on it. It really depends on the outcome of the vote. 02:58, January 21, 2019 (UTC)

Eligibility wise, gonna say kinda what I said in PB for what would qualify one for a downgrade. Just add history incompleteness, need of quotes citing issues, and missing sections (like ceremonies), and character summary, since those are things PB doesn't have. If a nom passes we strip the status and it can be re-earnt with another re-nom. Personally, unless it's several sections from not the last arc, then missing history isn't as much of an issue. Imo it should be about the quality of what is there, for the most part.

Imo I feel like the whole thing should be on a case-by-case basis, since the whole "quality article" thing is very loose. Yes there should be criteria on which articles get nominated for a downgrade but I feel like the nominee should state reasons for said downgrade, because someone just looking at it may not see the reasons for downgrading right off the bat.

WarriorCat Website Family Tree
Since we are accepting it as canon, there's a few things Thunder and I have picked up that needs to be discussed.

(Tip for navigation: StarClan is about all dead cats and Clan affiliation is all alive cats).


 * There's a line going between the siblings Spottedpelt and Gorseclaw and the parents Cloudstar and Birdflight. Usually, if it's only trying to connect relations to distantly placed characters, it would be a different colour, but this one isn't. Does this establish Sweetbriar and Fallowsong as SkyClan descendants, or only siblings?


 * Mate lines show a heart in the centre. Crowfeather and Feathertail have a line, but does not show a heart. Is this a mistake or a confirmation they are mates? It is placed like they are mates, but there is no hearts.


 * Dappletail and Stormtail also have the same problem as Crowfeather and Feathertail do above.Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  00:18, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

We can also use the books for confirmation. There is no proof, especially in Crowfeather and Feathertail's case, that they were mates, alongside no confirmed proof that Dappletail and Stormtail were mates, nothing said outright. However, what I assume "mates" are is the heart, considering Hollyleaf and Fallen Leaves have the heart and are confirmed mates, but do not have kits, which was claimed that the heart symbolized. 00:27, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

Wasn't there a cite in Leafpool's novella about Crowfeather and Feathertail being mates?Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  00:28, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

Just checked and it seems so. However, I do think that should be considered a mistake, due to the fact that we saw Feathertail and Crowfeather's relationship from the moment they met to the moment Feathertail died, and in no way shape or form were they considered mates at any point. Feathertail had already died prior to them going back to the Clans, in which Crowpaw asked her how their relationship would be like. 00:33, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

Agreeing here^^ Books come first, also in the case of Pinestar having Birchface and Frecklewish listed as actual siblings, instead of half-siblings, when Pinestar's Choice says otherwise.

In regards to the first question, I don't think the line symbolizes SkyClan descendants, but rather just the sibling relationship between Fallowsong and Sweetbriar. I think the line just needed to go somewhere and it just happened to cut through Cloudstar's family tree. A quick scroll through the full family tree can show that happening all over the place. For the "mates" concern, I think the lines w/o the heart just symbolizes feelings for each other, but not actual mates. The heart is reserved for mates, I believe 00:39, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

I get that it's seen as Canon but as far as descriptions on the family tree goes, I think that it should show an actual cat instead of a colored box. That doesn't seem to be like it should be an exact horse of the color because the books/authors could say something different then from what this 'icon' shows. 05:08, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

then they an just be changed to whatever the books say. most of the icons are pretty specifically clear on what their colours are, even if some are unfinished. 05:19, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

I just don't feel like an icon is enough though. It's just a colored box and as far as I saw there isn't a key for the family tree either. 05:23, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

I'm sure people can deduct colours in a sensible way. we have chararts for characters who've been mentioned with only a coloured body part so I don't see why this is that much different. 05:24, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Skt. Sorry Mink, but I think this is enough to qualify a solid description for the character.Potato Flakin (talk) 05:28, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

I mean I spoke with Spook and Thunder on this and as Spook said in discord. By putting what colors you think the icons are is assuming. I just don't think that should be done. 05:30, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

We can colorpick them then. It isn’t like all these descriptions are horribly wrong from the original descriptions besides a few like Crowfrost and Morningflower. But we can just make alts for those. If we’re going to make this an official citr, shouldn’t we make all of it official?

05:34, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

My thoughts: we need to accept the vast majority of the site as canon or not at all. We can’t change cherrypick what to take; so if we take the kin cites, and not the icons, well....either way it goes, it should Hebrew one way or the other. I think they’re enough to count. Kinda how we do with manga, only use them if there’s no other cite, but I do think they’re clear enough to add

Why are we considering this canon? We pretty much disregarded the old family trees, and while the new one seems to be more accurate, what gives it more credibility? Did an author endorse the new tree? When Vicky has said that Su's Missing Kits is not canon, why do we consider parts of it canon when it's put on an official site that has had problems in the past with publishing accurate information? 14:07, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

But Ivybreeze, people have made charart for characters that are mentioned with a colored body part and like Skt said it isn't that much different. I mean most of the trees are accurate so.. I think it's canon, and it is on the official website.Potato Flakin (talk) 15:19, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

To answer credibility, this one comes from Working Partners directly, not HarperCollins, and Vicky at least was somewhat involved in it's creation. Admittedly the old website was totally inaccurate, but that one was disavowed by the authors, while this one is endorsed. But anyways WP pretty much trumps all in terms of canonicity, while the label official website doesn't hold much credit, who published it does. And we're probably going to have to tweak most of those chararts anyways, with what limited description the icons do have + our blank redos

I definitely think the family tree is canon, as it is on the official website for the series, and the website was endorsed by the authors. We should consider it valid on the wiki as well. The family tree gives us more clarity than the books ever did. I also think the icons for pelt colors are good enough to cite for characters whose descriptions were previously unknown. Some of them are different from the known descriptions, I agree, but I also support making alts for those certain characters. 17:34, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

All right, it does seem like we should consider the information canon if all that is true. Thanks for clarifying, Spooky. In that case, I do also support using the relations on the tree as long as we put information from the books first (for example, keeping Birchface and Pinestar half-siblings) as well as using the pelt color on the icons for the kits, as all but two or three for the other characters are accurate. 17:41, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

SLiding in here to say that Newtspeck was called newtfrost on there. if we are considering this canon, theres a lot going on. (Also Spotpaw, Snappaw and Flypaw are shown as being black Malina457 (talk) 19:41, January 6, 2019 (UTC)Malina

Some of them aren't done, mostly the new characters.

20:06, January 6, 2019 (UTC)

Feathertail and Crowfeather were never mates, we have main arc books that prove that, so that is a mistake, and I removed that ages ago based on that. Anyways, we should be using this, but I'd say definitely be careful how we list things and keep it as clear as possible as to not cause confusion. ​

Are the black cat symbols place holders or actual error though Malina457 (talk) 00:44, January 7, 2019 (UTC)malina

Actually now having a closer look at the tree, Dovewing and Bumblestripe have a similar line as Stormtail and Dappletail do, a line with no heart. We know they were once mates but never had any kits, so maybe the line is indicating a kitless mateship or former kitless mateship?Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  02:32, January 7, 2019 (UTC)

Another note: I'd say former mateship, since Fallen Leaves and Hollyleaf have a heart and they could like, be mates in StarClan. Hollyleaf's Story didn't indicate a mateship, so they would be mates currently.Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  02:34, January 7, 2019 (UTC)

imo we should probably only list "former" and whatnot if we have 100% proof they are no longer together. In this series, I'm not sure dying seems to really separate them, since we now have at least two examples that disprove this (Bluestar and Oakheart, and now Fallen Leaves and Hollyleaf). Plus, adding "formerly" and whatnot in the character infobox just gets crowded.

Any other comments? 08:53, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Character navigations
So I made up some navigation boxes (I don't know if they have an official name), and basically, the idea is to put them on those of characters who are alive in the series, and each one would retain to their respective Clan. For example, Bramblestar would get the ThunderClan one only, which in turn would show all the current ThunderClan members. Same deal with say, Tigerstar, who would get the ShadowClan one only. Thoughts? You can view it here at the top of the page. 03:55, January 12, 2019 (UTC)

I like it, but... what exactly is the point of it, if I may ask? 03:56, January 12, 2019 (UTC)

Hmm I like it too, but if you could change the blue insides to something more complimentary. For color scheme, I think these'd have to match our normal set of hexes, as well. I kinda think they're meant to be just an easy nav of currently alive cats, if I get the gist right, which would help a lot for people, I'd think.

Changed the colors. And yes, I meant for them just to provide easier navigation for the current characters alive in the series. Thought it'd be neat addition. 04:04, January 13, 2019 (UTC)

I am not sure. That would just require a lot of changing, so although I very much like it, I just do not think it is necessary on our pages. 06:46, January 13, 2019 (UTC)

This is a good idea, and I do know a lot of Wikis that have these types of navigations but I don't think it's very practical for Warriors. Especially since some of the cats listed on those templates aren't even in the current cast. Warriors is way too nonlinear for something like this, I feel. —

Ah, man, I'm not even sure how this would work given out current cast list. When I jokingly made one, I kinda just wanted it to be a catch-all for Clan cats and didn't mean anything by it.... but the fact you took it and expanded and want to use it makes me happy and I'd totally be willing to help figure out how to make this work. I think it's practical and could be pretty useful.

Hm. We can easily use AutoEditPages to append this quickly to a bunch of pages, and also to remove it in batches, so the changing it out might not be an issue. If we just do it based off the most current books each time, it'll just match the allegiances, which will cut down how many cats there are, I'd think

Sorry, I still do not see the point. I will have to disagree on adding this. 01:17, January 14, 2019 (UTC)

This is a good idea and I think it could prove to be very helpful, so I'm all for adding it. If a character is left out of the allegiances we can just quickly take it out with AutoEdit, like Spooky said^^ 19:36, January 14, 2019 (UTC)

Rippletail
Or Buster, now, if you will since becoming a KP. Anyways we did something for Beetlewhisker in which we have the tabbers and /Appearance errors, so we could do the same thing here, perhaps? Whether he was meant to be included or no, he still did appear. Since a reprint won't be fixing it, we should document it since it's a major appearance. Not really a fan of the whole replacing them with each other thing overall anyways, seems like saying "Slatefur said" when Rippletail said something is just inaccurate regardless of who was supposed to be in it, because that's not who was etc... but this would help that a bit. Wouldn't mind terribly just altering then leaving those TSWarning tags everywhere and having Rippletail himself in the histories, and just use a few more of these tabbers to sort things out. Thoughts?

Probably best like this, though I'd leave Slatefur in the histories since he was the one who was supposed to appear, and keep the warning for character such as Berryheart, Tigerheart, Sparrowtail, etc, who appeared in the book with Rippletail so people know that Slatefur is the one who is canonically one the patrol back. 03:58, January 13, 2019 (UTC)

I believe we mostly agreed on this when we discussed Beetlewhisker as well, so go ahead. 06:47, January 13, 2019 (UTC)

Can do for the tabber, but also for the second part; due to the wording of the cite we have, Slatefur was meant to be the one in the patrol, but wasn’t actually in it. Shouldn’t we be putting Rippletail in all of these histories, and then just leaving the warning that it was a mistake and it should’ve been Slatefur, when it wasn’t? Personally seeing a disconnect between appeared and meant to appear, if you get what I mean

Okay this is what I meant, thanks survey person for articulating it much better than I could.

yeah I think slapping a tabber on his page and leaving it as what it was written as everywhere else will do. 22:28, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

Character adjectives
Another user has brought up character adjectives on Firestars talk, and it got me wondering. Instead of removing them entirely from the pages, should we include these adjectives in the character's trivia? Like saying Neglecting it as a whole seems kinda off putting to me, since they are a part of the character, and I feel it'd be cool to list adjectives like that. —
 * He has been described to be handsome. [ref]

Perhaps it would be better to list in the personality and traits section? The original concept for that was that section to include stuff like the adjectives + other description tidbits that had normally gone in trivia prior. Just hadn't really gotten implemented anywhere yet rip.

It was removed due to it being biased. And there really isn't any reason to add handsome to a character's description. It's non-physical and very unimportant imo.

it seems pretty subjective to me because it's obviously gonna change depending on the character who's saying it.....so I don't know if I can agree. 04:19, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

Firestar's is different. He has been referred to that in the allegiances, not by another character. I believe that this could be added to his personality and traits section and cited with "in the allegiances". 17:06, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

I still feel it's subjective, but since it's not physical, it definitely shouldn't go back into the main description. I'm not even sure I'm okay with it being mentioned anywhere, since it's really not a physical or noticeable part of a cat's description. (such as long fur or green eyes)

Maybe we can put it in the personality section and word it as "he has been many times noted as handsome" or something. So we're not outright saying he is, but noting that it's been mentioned as part of the allegiances.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  06:00, January 21, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, my idea was to include them in trivia or somewhere else on the page. Obviously not every compliment should be added, but I know some characters have been described as beautiful or handsome in the allegiances. —

Now that we are talking about possibly removing personality and traits... how about this goes in the trivia instead? 01:02, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

Family Tree
There has been some changes made to the colours of the family trees so it is colour-blind friendly.

Right now though, it seems a little wierd to have unknown-gendered cats to be in italics. It makes sense for all the "See more"'s, but not the cats. For a good example of what I mean, see Frostfur's tree and scroll right, can you quickly spot the characters with unknown genders?

Paleh and I have talked and we have come up with some ideas. We cannot change the colours as they are already, either the grey has to be significantly darker or change the pink to a completely different colour. Another colour could work but we don't know what would work right now.

Some other alternatives are using gender symbols, border changes, unique background patterns, and leaving the "See More"'s as they are and having unknown-gendered cats as both pink and blue, so one diagonal half is pink and the other diagonal half is blue.

So what do you think?<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  06:09, January 21, 2019 (UTC)

I'm pretty impartial on whether or not the italics are changed to something else or not. I don't mind them changing but I don't really think they're a huge problem. Other than just removing the italic, changing it would have the benefit of differentiating the "See more" links from the cats with unknown genders though.

I made mockups for the different looks that could be used instead. See here. I can add more if anybody else has more ideas. If they are changed, personally I like either the symbol ones or the pink and blue the best.

I like the symbol ones, and perhaps use the dual symbol? I also think we could keep the italics for just the See Mores as well

I like the symbol ones. 01:02, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

Personality and traits
Case and point: I do not think we should use them. Although we have a personality and traits on the warriors website, perhaps we can add warriors website into the history/put it in the trivia. The reason I do not think we should have a personality and traits is because each way, it can be shown as extremely biased. Personally, I believe Needletail is toxic, manipulative, and emotionally abusive per the books I have read. However, someone else can see her as a martyr due to her sacrifice for Violetshine. Someone may see Firestar as too perfect and write that down, which could scale out into an all out edit war if someone believes Firestar is not perfect due to the fact he broke the warrior code so many times to help out.

Basically, what I am trying to say is that from whoever is writing the article, it is going to be extremely biased and I see no way on how we can do it from a non biased perspective, including the fact that the only way we see personality is from other characters or from the narrator. Thoughts? 15:01, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

I 100% agree. My little expansions on some of the personality sections have even be called biased even though they were entirely based on what was said about the character in the book. To be on the safe side and avoid more conflict, I believe we should get rid of them. However, the traits on the official wwiki site (the 4 adjectives) can be implemented in some way, since those are descriptions straight from the authors. That’s just my opinion about the whole thing. It’s far too easy to write something biased even if it was without intent. 15:25, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

Given the books are typically written in a "pro-one Clan" and "anti-another Clan" narrative (typically pro-ThunderClan), it's pretty difficult to gauge a true unbiased writing when it comes to personality and traits, imo. It's definitely even harder to write these when every person sees books and characters differently. Plus, I actually think these would have required citations (or at least Spooky's original idea did, and this entire thing was her thing), and context clues/common sense have never been valid sources. Firestar and Needletail are perfectly good examples of bias and people reading the same thing but coming up with completely different outcomes.

Yeah.... my original concept was for this to be basically soley clear TUG attributes (which aren’t nearly as PoV based) and things like warrior ceremonies. And completely cited, of course. They haven’t been turning out that way though, so we should not do them imo. If anything relationships with others would be much easier to cite than personality, which in and of itself will always be biased. Mainly the lack of cites is the issue here, though, because it’s easy to write something, but harder to back each phrase up, which will make it more encyclopedic.

Yeah it's really hard to gauge someone's personality as their is way too much opinion and bias, depending on who's reading it and who's perspective they are reading it. The best we could do is the website and the ultimate guide.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  01:41, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Character ages
This was brought up awhile back, but we'd put it on hold because of the timeline discussion at the time. Can we remove the ages from articles? A ton of them are terribly inaccurate, and until we can get the timeline done and be able to calculate reliably from that, I think we shouldn't have them. To make them not appear we can just comment out the code of the template itself, so no mass editing to hunt and remove etc., and we can add them back when we're ready. Thoughts?

Yeah.. these should be removed unless there's a cite regarding their age from one of the Erins. Besides, the Erins may not be accurate with the cat's age but still, these should be removed.Potato&#61;) (talk) 00:22, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

yeah remove it. the only ones I would keep are kits that are said to be x moons old. 00:23, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

I agree that we should remove them, but I also think we should keep the kit ones since those are the least complicated ones 01:48, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

I feel like we had a discussion close to this before.... I say just remove the coding from the template itself for now. Most of the ages are horridly wrong, based on assumptions, or contradicted in one form or another.

Agreed they should be removed. 18:38, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

I was thinking we could just nuke it only temporarily until we can clean up the timeline then start writing note type refs (such as the type Brackenfur has for his Fireheart mentor cite) to explain why we got that and how it makes sense. Citing to a book doesn't do much, so until we can write up proofs for the ones that are legit and recalculate the ones that aren't they should go. We could possibly make a page in PC's namespace to dedicate to it, such as how PW has that for events, and then re-implement it once people have munched on most of them.

Removing it temporarily sounds good, although I would eventually like to see ages in place once the timeline is finished. 01:01, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

Well all except pre-Into the Wild books are actually accurate and good. So if you want, just remove pre-Into the Wild character's ages (like Crookedstar or Bluestar) and then do the rest of the characters?<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  01:42, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Character pages
So we took up a community survey and got some input, and I was able to solve almost all of the character page concerns with this. Basically, it's using the original concept for character summaries up top (it was only ever supposed to be 2-3 paragraphs max, even for main cats), condensation of living book list, history overview by arc (and I do mean overview, as in max at 4 paragraphs an arc for main cats + a quote, and yes it's possible) because we then have the detailed description in a tabber. Which as always will have all the details, but this is meant for main cats to avoid scrolling and crashing on mobile, and only some cats will have this.

The kin is also in a tab, because some of the kin is getting extremely long in lists, and we already have the direct stuff in the infobox. There's also the detailed description, which basically strips the main top one down to pelt + eye color + only very important things, and leaves all the other stuff in it's own section. Not for every cat, but cats like Spottedleaf do need it. Ended up with art sections next, and then after that ceremonies and leader info, then trivia and quotes after that. Quotes also has a 'See more' like we do for kin, not for every cat, but for cats like him we'd need it. And lastly, SEs are below the main arcs, per several requests for chronology.

Anyways yeah end of wall, but essentially this is a culmination of what the original concept should've been, survey responses, and minus personality per two sections above this. It would alter a lot of things (on anything above a supporting cat), so I'd be happy to write up a new PC character tutorial for it. Personally, I like how it's able to provide everyone with what they want as a compromise. The most important thing for making this work is to stick to the lengths (1-3 paragraphs max up top, 3-4 max per arc), and we can use most of the character summary content we've already made for the arc summaries, minus any specific events. Thoughts?

I really like this idea, it would definitely shorten the pages and make it easier to read.

01:40, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

I'm really glad the twitter page did the survey, and I'm very pleased with these results! This layout will main character pages super sleek and concise now. My only clarification would be for the living/dead section in the charart info box. I notice you're condensing them into arcs, but what if a character dies mid-arc, such as Cinderpelt and Yellowfang? Would they still be listed as living in "The New Prophecy"/"The Prophecies Begin" respectively? Other than that, it looks very good! 01:52, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

Ah it’s only condesnsed for if said cat is alive in all 6 or appears in all 6^^ If they don’t it reverts to by book, but it’s more of an optional condensation that’ll only be on some major cats, and most articles will stay as is

Love the way this looks. It looks so much less cluttered now and is a lot easier to read through. 18:38, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

This looks great, but would this apply to every single character? 00:59, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

Halftail's Rename
I was talking to Echo about this, due to having a question and they suggested to bring it up here. So since Halftail was previously named Sparrowpelt but renamed due to his stumpy tail/half a tail I was curious as to whether since Berrynose and Finleap also lost their tails whether this would give them the trivia in the interesting facts section. I personally feel like it wouldn't hurt to add it honestly since they quit naming cats like that after Brightheart. Thoughts? 10:29, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

Noting renames like that because of accidents and whatnot isn't really what trivia is for... it's not even interesting and not worth noting, imo. Cats just lost their tails; it doesn't automatically mean they'll be renamed "Berrystumpytail"...and whatever you'd come up with for Finleap. It hasn't even been discussed for years and one of the last instances I can even remember it being important with is Deadfoot in Tallstar's Revenge, who embraced his name proudly.

^ Agreeing with Skye. It doesn't seem important to note in the trivia. 18:38, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

Could probably note that "his original name was Sparrowpelt prior to having his tail bitten off, which led his rename to Halftail." 01:00, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

Hm. I'll concur with Icy

Idk, I think noting the cause of renames would be interesting enough. Doesn't necessarily have to be in the trivia. Though putting Berrystyumpytail in the trivia could work since it's an interesting tidbit about the character imo. —

Any more comments? 08:52, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Is Cite used for Mintkit's and Marigoldkit's Fox death valid?
The only evidence suggesting it could of been a fox is that Yellowfang heard a distant sound of a fox before finding the kits' bodies: ''"Then she heard the bark of a fox from somewhere up ahead, and quickened her pace. I hope it hasn’t found the kits...." - Chapter 39.''

However, even if a fox was in the area, it doesn't grantee it killed the kits. It's just an assumption on Yellowfang's and the Wiki's part. Even Yellowfang wasn't completely certain: “I found them like this,” Yellowfang replied, her voice shaking. “It must have been a fox!”. - Chapter 39.

The language used here, shows Yellowfang is simply making an educational guess, not a witness account. If she did personally see the fox, it would be more certain wording such as: "It was a fox.".

And then when Brokenstar "found" the bodies along with Brightflower, he claimed there was no fox scene in the clearing: ''“Yellowfang, I can only pick up your scent,” Brokenstar mewed quietly. “Come back to the camp with me.”. - Chapter 39. ''

Brokenstar is obvious not a reliable source. However, Brightflower, Russetfur and Frogtail, all went to that clearing and none of them countered Brokenstar's claims of there being no evidence of Foxs.

If Brokenstar's confession of killing Raggedstar (Into the wild) is considered a valid cite for this Wiki - Then I think so should his confession of killing Brightflower's kits on the same page. Brokenstar even gives a motive of them being "too weak": "Those kits were weak. They would have been no use to ShadowClan. If I hadn't killed them, some other warrior would have." - Into the Wild, Page 261 Mellowix (talk) 19:24, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

It really isn't valid imo, and we should be listing Brokenstar as their killer. If we can't assume Rowanclaw and Nettle killed each other because they were fighting on one page and ended up dead next to each other on the next, then this can't either, due to an even larger leap in logic. Her thinking it was a fox =/= it was a fox, when she didn't know at that point Brokenstar had murdered them. Assumptions can't stay.

Like Spooky said, Yellowfang assumes a fox was the cause of their death, but that isn't valid enough to prove it. Brokenstar's confession in Into the Wild sounds vaild enough. So, I think their cause of death should be listed as "Killed by Brokenstar" instead of "Killed by a Fox". Besides, Brokenstar has killed many kits, like Blossomkit, Mosspaw , Volepaw , and Badgerfang , so it would be more logical they were killed by him anyway.Potato&#61;) (talk) 23:24, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

Glad this was brought up. I completely agree and always had an issue with the cite - there is no concrete proof that Marigoldkit and Mintkit were ever killed by a fox, but more proof that Brokenstar outright said he killed them. 01:01, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

I second Icy. There is more concrete evidence that Brokenstar killed them than a fox. I can read through the Yellowfang's Secret chapter subpages to double-check, but I think there's no doubt the fox cite is invalid. May I change their cause of death real quick with your permission?Potato&#61;) (talk) 22:00, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

I'd say wait until the discussion is concluded before changing anything, Potato. I think we could change it, but definitely note somewhere about the fox (say, in the trivia)...

Any more comments? 08:52, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Current status
Per discussions above (the one about cats being listed as unknown), I think that we should possibly have a status part in the template, such as "Status: Alive," "Status: Deceased," or "Status: Unknown," which could probably clear up the issue with long-lost cats, and any other issues. I believe this was brought up before, but I do not remember why it was archived. 01:05, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

It should probably be "status unknown", if only for the sole fact we still don't have any mentions of them dying.

That is not what I am bringing up. I am bringing up a discussion on if we should have a general status tab. 04:42, February 1, 2019 (UTC)

Owlfur a father?
I've been double-checking some cites for family members and have found no direct cite for Owlfur being the father of Dawnbright and Mallowtail. The most we have is he is mentioned to be mates with Softwing (Crookedstar's Promise page 405/chapter 34) and she is with her kits, but he is just kinda sitting next to them, but seemingly being protective of them.

So can we take sort of acting like a father to his mates kits as proof he is their father, or is he not their father?

Also feel free to look around and try to find a different cite that confirms he is their father, I tried my best but I have missed things in the past ><<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  01:51, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

I'd definitely say that's proof enough for me... do we have anything on the official tree/website that can either support or deny this? I know they hadn't totally finished the tree yet, hence why I'm asking.

Hmm I’m gonna be that Person and say we shouldn’t list it due to lack of proof. Even if it’s very probably true, an assumption is still an assumption. If the books or tree don’t say it, then we shouldn’t have it.

I've just discovered that Falling Rain is the same. No cite for having kits, but a clear cite over who his mate is. In fact, Dove's Wing reacts to mentioning her mother, but nothing is said about her reaction to Falling Rain's mention. So it might be more likely he's not their father.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  03:40, February 1, 2019 (UTC)

Unknown Fathers?
On the Official family tree they are showing unknown fathers, such as Graystripe's, Poppydawn's, Pebblefoot's/Minnowtail's and Swiftbreeze's fathers. They are shown as Unknown with a question mark instead of their pelt colour, but are still acknowledged nonetheless.

I just assumed without asking (I'm sorry, I won't do that again!) so I'll ask now. Do these count as cites to these cats having a father? Even if they aren't named? Or should we just ignore them completely?

I do want to point out the same Unknown picture is used not just for these unknown fathers, but also a few unnamed kits we already have cites for in the series (Floss's/Smoky's kits and Blue Whisker's kits) so I honestly feel like we cannot ignore them based on that alone, but what do you guys think?<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  21:48, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

For those of us who can't get the tree to load, could we start adding screenshots of what you're talking about and for cites? I honestly have no clue what symbols you're talking about, since I can't see them myself. That tree is way too content-heavy for my laptop to load.

there isn't any proof they even are fathers, (don't expect those in charge of wc to care about gender stuff but whatever) plus while they obviously had to have them with someone, there's no name, pelt colour, even being alluded to in the books at all. we shouldn't add them, otherwise we may as well truly just start adding things like kit ranks to everyone because obviously they were one once, even if it's never been said or alluded to. 22:07, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry Snowed! Here's Flashnose's and Willowpelt's mates and Blue Whisker's and Floss's kits, as well as Blue Whisker's mate.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  22:10, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

i'm just going to add that blue whisker's kits are a different case simply because they are seen within the book, unlike any of these mates. 11:36, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

Hm, thanks, Stealth. Now that I've seen them.... I kinda feel these are just placeholders, not actual indications of anything... the only one that wouldn't make sense as a placeholder is, as David says, Blue Whisker's kits, due to the fact we saw them in Moth Flight'S Vision.

Oh I just spotted this. For those who cannot see the tree, Sharpclaw has no father shown at all. Really odd detail, as I think he is the only one shown like this?<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  20:43, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

I think nightstar and clawface are shown without even a mother. 21:14, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

Yep, in fact there is a lot of no-parents being shown here. I think that kind of helps with my point. They achnowledge their is another parent with Swiftbreeze and the others, even if that is all they give, but these guys do not have that acknowledgement at all.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  21:24, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

i'm mostly against it because these cats arent referenced ever, and even cats like flamenose who spawned from like a facebook post or something eventualy ended up being in the books. there's just nothing to it, and adding "unknown cat" seems really pointless, because we could do that for every cat. but we don't, because those cats are never mentioned like these guys. 21:30, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

(disclaimer: my brain's not working properly rn so i might be misunderstanding the point of this discussion) I kind of feel like they should be included and cited. Only for unknown parents in the family tree though, not any other unknown parents. The reason I think that is because to some extent, them being listed as unknown on the tree has some implication that that cat is not (likely?) any of the cats that are already on the tree. If they're placeholders, it's likely that they're placeholders for cats that aren't on the tree currently, such as unknown kits that we actually know about. This seems like valuable information in some cases, such as with Graystipe since his dad was retconned and that's worth noting. In the books if the parent is unknown, we just literally don't know anything about them and they could be anybody, so there's no value in listing it in those cases.

Mapleshade's Description
There has been a lot of bias over Mapleshade's description for a few years now. She has been called ginger-and-white, and also tortoiseshell. Vicky confirmed Mapleshade's a tortoiseshell, but her icon on the family tree contradicts that. Her icon depicts her as ginger-and-white. Now this brings her true description back into questioning again. So.. should we swap Mapleshade's description to ginger-and-white? We can count how many times she was cited as ginger-and-white and tortoiseshell, but should we just swap based on her tree icon, or keep Vicky's word? Thoughts?Potato&#61;) (talk) 21:55, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

no. she's far more consistently called a tortie and white than ginger. 22:00, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

I don't see why we shouldn't keep Vicky's word. I'd be more for that than using the tree, given they've already said that it'll be updated. Not sure what it is with people and wanting to basically nullify an author's word with this fandom these days... Vicky used to work on the books, and she wrote Mapleshade's Vengeance. I think she knows what color Mapleshade is.

To my mind, it's 2 valid external cites against each other. I think we should do a count of each instance (like we do with Millie and Gorsetail and add those in as cites and see what it turns up.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  22:04, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

She’s called more tortie than the other, yeah^^ I mean we could detail the mistakes more to include exactly how much more she was mentioned as tortie in the books, for further proof, since it does rather flip flop in canon. In cases where we have conflicting external sources we should have books trump it, since one isn’t any more valid than the other

Just gonna add in this one from Vicky, which again states Mapleshade is a tortie. This wouldn't just affect Mapleshade; it would completely contradict what Vicky says about Patchkit and would nullify her statement.

Yeah I'm thinking we stick with tortoiseshell, but make sure to clearly point out why. It won't stop everybody trying to vandalise the page, but might stop some people. I'd say we put it in the mistakes section, but maybe also something in the main description as well (maybe extra cites? I know it could become more cluttered but having more than one cite might have people stop for a moment.)<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  22:22, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Hmm.. We already sort of acknowledge the change? She's had that alt charart toggle for a long time and its plastered everywhere, and I've never seen any vandalism myself. I personally think it's fine the way it is, maybe just add the second description at the top and say like "Mapleshade is depicted as both [tortie desc] and [ginger desc]" or sonething. —

Also, on Vicky's cite, we gotta stop tryna write off author statements as "noncanon." I hate this idea that the author's statements are "headcanons" - especially since Vicky created this series and worked on it for 13 years both as an editor and author. —

I've thought of something maybe a bit unorthodox, but hear me out.

I'm going to talk about Doestar: her description is a little all over the place and unorthodox, but we still consider it all canon. She is mentioned as fawn-and-white, have a cream-coloured tail and cream-and-fawn quite seperately, yet we still have merged all this information together into her description and basically made her a tortoiseshell.

I'm wondering if we can do the same thing for Mapleshade. Ginger-and-white is just one added colour away from being tortoiseshell-and-white, in which she is. In fact, look at her chararts. Someone could say that cat is ginger-and-white, and still be accurate.

Heck, Vicky practically made her kit Patchkit tortoiseshell-and-white, just by adding a little bit of black fur to him, even though he is constantly mentioned to be ginger-and-white.

Tortoiseshell-and-white is basically ginger-and-white just with added black. If Doestar can have an extra colour added to her, Mapleshade can too. Tortoiseshell-and-white is basically an addition of black onto ginger-and-white, no matter how it's worded. So Mapleshade could be both, the only thing we'll need to change is remove it from her mistakes section (and maybe add an invisible note to her description). She's mentioned so much to be either that I honestly don't see why now.<font color="#0F52BA" face="Segoe">Stealth <font color="#FF0000" face="Segoe">f🔥re <font color="#0067A5" face="Teen">❤Warriors Forever!❤  22:12, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

I do not think we should combine ginger and white. They are clearly meant to be separate things. If they were the same thing, I would imagine Mapleshade would be described with other instances of pelt colors. 04:41, February 1, 2019 (UTC)

Can I please join this project?-PinedapplePinedapple (talk) 12:18, February 1, 2019 (UTC)