Warriors Wiki talk:Characters

Senior warriors and citing ranks
Wow I completely forgot to bring this up. xD Anyways, so I was discussing with Teldy about this a bit, and she said to bring up an actual discussion about it. I was editing a bit the other day and noticed a couple of characters who were in the senior warrior category, though I have no memory of them ever being mentioned. As it's a category, I can't add a cite tag to it, and even if I could, nobody could cite it to prove they are one. So I was thinking perhaps we could list them in the charcats like any other rank, and cite where it specifically says they're a senior warrior. But then we also couldn't cite those and not the other ranks, as it'd be inconsistent. So maybe we should just cite all ranks in the charcat? It'd be helpful with more than just the senior warriors too, for instance, characters like Pad, who's in the manga only which I know a lot of people have never read, is listed as a Loner, Kittypet, and Kit. However he's only a kit, and he was only in one book. So how do we know it's real unless you can read the book yourself? Am I rambling?

Anyways, so what do you guys think? Should we add the Senior Warrior rank to the charcat, and/or cite ranks? 08:54, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

I think it might be hard to cite where a character is mentioned as a SW, but it wouldn't be impossible to find. I'm not against the idea. 15:44, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

I also think it'd be a good idea to cite the other ranks (like kit, elder, etc.). 15:50, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it would be hard to find the cites, but in a way, that's kinda the point. So few SWs are mentioned in the series, and yet there's so many in the category. If it's hard to cite, a lot may be taken out due to lack of cite, which is the point. 00:45, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

That's true. I agree with this idea. 13:11, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

I agree, Paleh. I don't remember some of the cats in that category being called SWs... 01:15, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I agree we should cite the ranks. However, I don't know about adding the SW. In fact, I might put up an AfD for that category just because it will always remain incomplete. We basically know all of the SWs in ThunderClan since that's where the point of view is coming from. But we have not the faintest clue who's SW in the other Clans. I mean, yes, there's the ones who are older cats than some of the newer ones, but we still don't know for sure if they are SWs. Then there are the middle group where they've been alive a couple of books, yet they're not as old as others, and we really don't know. 01:20, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

Hmmmm true, it won't ever be complete, but then most categories won't ever be "complete". We probably won't know every Windclan cat for instance, or every Tribe of Endless Hunting cat. But you're right, the only ones we really know are ThunderClan. I'm not sure it's really needed. I'd support and AfD, but not necessarily cause it won't ever be "complete". 21:42, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

This sounds like a good idea. I have an idea for citing a character being described as a senior warrior. If one cat is newly mentioned as one, cats that are of similar age can have that used as their citation as well. That would make sense, since I'd think age pretty much qualifies a cat for a senior warrior rank. Oh, and yeah, I'm trying to be helpful to other projects now, so hi! :) 21:55, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

Ohai Ivy! 8D But it's not always about age. Usually, but not always, so it'd be assuming if we cited a cat as a senior warrior cause a cat a similar age is one. For instance, Thistleclaw and Tigerclaw established themselves as senior warriors fairly young, before Bluestar even, who was older than them. 23:42, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

I would cite the ranks, however, I still am against having senior warriors being added. While "being incomplete" is definitively not a legal reason to delete a category or disregard the rank, it's still pretty biased. I mean, we'd have most all of ThunderClan as senior warriors and maybe some RiverClan due to Crookedstar's Promise, but otherwise it'd seem we would be favoring ThunderClan. Plus, as Paleclaw said, age is a hint but not a fact. 03:33, May 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * When Ivystripe said "If one cat is newly mentioned as [a senior warrior], cats that are of similar age can have that used as their citation as well. That would make sense, since I'd think age pretty much qualifies a cat for a senior warrior rank." I disagree, unless you can provide a citation that verifies that "senior" status is contingent exclusively on age and not other (currently unknown) factors. 19:56, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

As this discussion hasn't been commented on for 18 days, is it safe to say that we should cite ranks? 03:15, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Of course! No senior warriors, but everything in the charcat box? 01:28, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's safe to say that you should cite ranks. It's a good idea, too. 02:00, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

I think we should start citing what isn't already cited... We've done it for names before, as seen with Harveymoon's kittypet name. We also do it for mentors and apprentices... I'd be up for it. 

Okay, so here's what I've gathered:
 * We're not citing senior warriors nor adding them to the charcat because the books are too vague on what a "senior warrior" really is
 * We are citing everything else though (for example Kit: Squirrelkit[1] and so on)
 * The cites will use the first page (or allegiance) that the character was called by that name, excluding mistakes where characters are accidentally called by their apprentice/warrior/leader name early

Good? Because no one's commented in forever and I really want to start this. 02:30, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Well I don't think it has to be the first time they're mentioned by the name, though it's be preferable. I see no reason for it to be a "rule" basically. Just something that's be good, but not required. It'd be like for citing mentors and such. It doesn't have to be the first mention, but it's good if it is. Otherwise, I think we're in agreement. 02:37, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it's like the descriptions. If you can't find something earlier, that's fine, and someone else will probably add it in. 03:37, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. I think we should add senior warrior in if they're mentioned as one, but that's my opinion. 03:44, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

You really think we ought to cite book appearences when the history is there? And the same goes for family as there is a family section already included in the article. As for SWs, I'm still against it as there's no clear definition on how to "obtain the rank". 03:48, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Oookay so apparently what I said was confusing to some (cough). I was not talking about citing everything, nor was I talking about citing the family. I was talking about citing just the section where it says NAMES (thus the topic of this whole discussion). I would not just out of the blue decide to cite everything... That's just redundant. 04:03, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... I guess citing names is a good idea. I know that many users try to add in Toadstep as an apprentice, though we haven't seen him as one. So, citing the names would of course, show that the name is not an assumption like many do with Toadstep as an apprentice. 17:50, July 4, 2012 (UTC)

Crookedstar as a Loner
Alright, I'm officially moving this conversation to where it belongs, which is here. PCA's been arguing about whether or not Crookedkit was a loner when he left RiverClan and spent a couple months on a farm with other loners.

The conversation started with whether or not the cats that went to sun-drown-place should have gotten loner ranks, and led to a discussion about Crookedkit.

I'm of the opinion that there's one huge difference between these cats:

The travelling cats left on Clan business, sent by StarClan to save their Clans, and thus never stopped being Clan cats.

Crookedkit left on his own without permission and by his own free will. Sure, he did intend to return at first, but once he gave up going to the Moonstone and just stayed with the loners at the farm, I see no reason to not consider him as having been a loner at the time. He was over nine moons old living outside of the Clans without holding any ill will towards the Clans, which fits the bill for loner pretty cleanly.

Thoughts? 22:26, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you. He was over 6 moons old and didn't have a specific owner or group.-- 22:30, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you on the cats who left for the sun-drown-place, but I don't necessarily think Crookedkit is a loner. He still had influence from "StarClan" i.e. Mapleshade during his time on the farm. 23:13, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but what does that have to do with being a loner? Ravenpaw is influenced and believes in StarClan, too. 23:54, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to always stick by my argument that he does not deserve to be classified as a loner. For one, Mapleshade said "If you stay here much longer you will be one", and that's when he decided to go back to his Clan. He did not want to be a loner and always considered himself a loyal RiverClan cat. He left to go to the Moonstone, not to run away and become one. He always had the intention of going back. Ravenpaw, on the other hand, never intended to go back, and so he hasn't. 00:01, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Why should it matter what he thought he was? He stayed away from his Clan, even after he abandoned his quest to go to the Moonstone. He forsook his place in his Clan, and when he returned he was punished for it. I'm still of the opinion that he was a loner. 15:31, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Frankly, I'd call him thinking he's not a loner as pure denial, and Mapleshade telling him that he'd be a loner if he stayed as her saying anything to coerce him back to the Clan. She lied to him plenty of times, why should this be any different? 15:34, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

And think about it. If Leafpool had left with Crowfeather, but the entire time she was gone she kept thinking to herself that she was ThunderClan's loyal medicine cat, would that have made her any less of a loner? 16:01, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Shelly, Crookedkit left his Clan, he knew what he was doing. -- ☛Duc kspl  ash☚  18:54, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

We labeled Graystripe a loner when he was actively trying to return to his Clan after being taken from it unwillingly, did we not? Why not do the same for Crookedstar, who willingly left his Clan and wasn't trying to return for weeks despite being perfectly capable of doing so? 19:35, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

You all make great points as to why Crookedkit would be or would not be classified as a loner. In my own person opinion, I believe he should be classified as loner. He was over 6 moons old, which means he wasn't a kit anymore, and he didn't belong to a specific Clan at the time. But, he still classified himself as a Clan cat, so a part of me believes that he wouldn't be a loner. I'm torn into two n this, but I think he probably would be classified as a loner. 11:42, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sticking to my opinion that he's not a loner, and that's not changing. He always intended to go back, he left in intent to communicate with StarClan, he always considered himself a clan cat, and as Ivy pointed out, he was told if he stayed much longer he would become a loner. Meaning he wasn't one at the time. And your point about Mapleshade saying anything to get him back doesn't really make much sense. Saying he was already a loner would probably get him to come back just as much as saying he would be a loner soon. She would have no real incentive to lie in that case as she did in other cases. And would you call any cat that went to the moonstone in the OS and stayed at Barely's barn for a point of time a loner? No. So Crookedkit shouldn't really be either. 02:13, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

No, except Crookedkit wasn't a going to the Moonstone when he was sitting around at the barn, gorging himself on mice and not going anywhere. As I pointed out, he gave up on his quest the moment he got to the barn and was shown how to eat. 02:16, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

And if we don't classify Crookedstar has having been a loner, then we cannot do so for Millie and Graystripe who were seeking out the Clans actively when we classified them as loners. 02:17, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Staying somewhere outside your clan doesn't classify you as a loner. And there's a difference with trying to find the clans, and never officially "leaving" one. Graystripe was ThunderClan then clearly left when he was captured. He was a kittypet for a time. Then he went to find the clans. He wasn't a clan cat at the time. However Crookedkit went on a trip to find the moonstone, never truly leaving he clan. They're totally different cases. 02:23, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

As I've pointed out several times already, Crookedkit gave up trying to get to the Moonstone shortly after he got to the farm. He was not trying to get to the Moonstone while he stayed with the loners. 19:14, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I've been thinking about this for a while, and I do think he should be classified a loner. True, he didn't officially leave his Clan, and he didn't necessarily consider himself a loner, but he did live with them for quite a while, fully aware that he should and could return to RiverClan. Even though he intended on going back, he procrastinated about it for quite a while. The loners acted like they wanted him around, while RiverClan didn't; that was enough incentive for him to stay as long as he did, and probably would have kept him there for even longer. 15:15, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

I already said my opinion, but that above basically concretes the decision for me.-- 20:24, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

Well, sorry to be argumentative, but I'm still not convinced he deserves to be called one. When Ravenpaw was forced to leave, he had no intentions of coming back, but we never once heard Crookedkit tell himself he planned to stay. 20:27, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

Then what does that say about Graystripe, who didn't think himself a loner, was actively seeking ThunderClan, and we still have classified as having been a loner? It doesn't matter what Crookedkit thought, he was away from RiverClan for an extended period of time for no reason after he abandoned his quest to find the Moonstone. He was a loner. 02:01, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

All I gotta say is this:
 * Graystripe was forcibly taken from ThunderClan, and if memory serves, didn't he eventually start to wonder if he was really a warrior of ThunderClan anymore?
 * Crookedkit was originally traveling to the Moonstone, but stayed with some loners for a while to help out with kits. He had every intention of going back; Graystripe didn't even know if he'd ever find ThunderClan again.

Argue if you wish. But Graystripe and Crookedkit are two totally different cases, and should be treated as such.

Exactly, Cloudy. Actually, it's a miracle that Graystripe even found them in the first place. I haven't read the second and third installments to the manga trilogy, but come on. Your home is being destroyed, you're taken to God-knows-where, don't you think he knew there was a chance he'd never come back? And that he wasn't technically a Clan cat while looking for them? I dunno. It'd be a lot easier if I had read it for reference but you get my point. 02:59, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

Have we come to a conclusion on this discussion?

I still don't agree that he should be listed as a loner, but if the majority think that he should be, I'll accept. 01:43, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, so I was re-reading CP, and Mapleshade said this to Crookedkit; ''"If you stay away much longer, he won't. You'll be called a loner." (Page 96) She said you will'' be called a loner, meaning later. He left the farm the same day, so now I say, no, he was not a loner. 21:14, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Harveymoon~ Silver nomination
Well, on his talk page he is graded started, so why not make him bronze? If I'm doing this wrong, please tell me. I've already added some quotes, I'm just going to work on the articles. 20:22, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

We only nominate articles for Silver and Gold. If you want, you can nominate him for Silver, and change his status to Bronze. Best, 20:24, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

I guess I'll do that. :3 13:20, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Can you expand SkyClan's Destiny? -- ☛Duc kspl  ash☚  20:28, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

I guess I did if you count rewording the part when they get banned. ^^ 13:15, June 13, 2012 (UTC)

Expand The Rescue. 00:15, June 14, 2012 (UTC)

Anything else for After the Flood? 09:03, June 17, 2012 (UTC)

Are you still working on this? 19:38, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been gone, I'll work on it. ❄Moss ❄  14:46, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Have you dealt with the concerns on his talk page? If so, I suggest you cross them out. Can you also detail his entire history a bit more? Jun 27, 2012; 15:25pm

I'll reword it as best as I can. ❄Moss ❄  23:20, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Smokefoot ~ Silver Nomination
Kay, I know this one isn't taken.

Anyway, all I could see to do was expand The Sight a tiny bit. Comments? 02:25, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Can you expand The Last Hope, Eclipse, and Fading Echoes any? ☛Duc kspl  ash☚  17:03, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Are there any more quotes? Expand The Sight/detail it. 00:13, June 14, 2012 (UTC)

Is this still being worked on? 16:51, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Rosepetal - Silver Nomination
I expanded her history and added some quotes. =) Comments? ☛Duc  kspl  ash☚  05:20, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Expand Sign of the Moon. I'm pretty sure there's more about her in that book. Like the dog incident? 05:27, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Done. ☛Duc kspl  ash☚  16:12, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Looks pretty good, overall. Could you expand The Forgotten Warrior and The Last Hope? I know she appeared more in TFW, and TLH could be detailed a bit. 20:53, June 7, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, and finished. ☛Duc kspl  ash☚  05:36, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

Can Night Whispers be expanded more? 17:43, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

Finished. -- 21:34, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Can you expand Sunrise? --Starry Hawk My Talk!  22:29, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

I can't because I don't have the book. Sorry. 23:03, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

I can expand it if you would like, Ducksplash. 16:51, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, thanks! 50.44.225.248 17:23, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry that was me! 17:24, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Woops, sorry it took so long but Sunrise has been expanded. CBV? 21:31, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Dawn River - Silver Nomination
Because I was being a derp, I accidentally archived my own nomination without having it go to a vote (lol, facepalm); so, I'm renominating my work from March. xD 22:30, June 7, 2012 (UTC)

Does she have any quotes that you can add? --Starry Hawk My Talk!  22:26, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

Only quotes that ar irrelevant to her personality. 23:36, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

She doesn't say anything of any importance? I always thought she said a few things... If you can't add anything else, that's fine. Nice work.

Cedarpelt ~ Silver Nomination
Re-wrote and added more description to Bluestar's Prophecy. But other than that, there wasn't much more I could do. Comments? 07:14, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

Can you cite the trivia and add, maybe, one more quote? =) «Duc  kspl  ash»  22:08, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

Added =3 02:33, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

Is it possible to expand the end of the Crookedstar's Promise section a bit? --Starry Hawk My Talk!  22:25, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

I could only detail it. He doesn't actually appear after he congradulates Crookedstar. 06:23, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Bone ~ Silver Nomination
Just added a few bits and pieces in~ I'll be adding in a couple more quotes in a second, but anyways, comments? 08:08, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Could you expand RoS a bit?-- 11:22, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Done what I could without the book. I'll grab it from my library tomorrow =3 13:02, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Detail The Darkest Hour and Cats of the Clans. 18:06, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

Done what I could to TDH without the book...I'll see when I can get it to detail it some more. Also expanded CoTC a fair bit. 05:47, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Tallpoppy - Silver Nomination
I added quotes and expanded her history. :) Comments? 19:39, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Could you possibly rephrase Battles of the Clans? Having something like this ("It is suggested that they are sneering at the reader.") makes it seems like some form of a theory or something along those lines. I haven't read it in a while, so I may be wrong.

I tried, but I don't own the book. 02:19, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

In the Midnight section, I suggest editing it to make it sound like she gave up her queen duties. Right now, it sounds like she had just become a warrior from apprentice rank. Jun 27, 2012; 15:57pm

Finished. 17:52, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Mossyfoot ~ Silver Nomination
Mostly an allegiance only character, but the places she does appear have been expanded. 22:49, June 15, 2012 (UTC)

Any quotes at all? 00:05, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

Is it possible to detail TFW? 18:08, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

TFW can't be detailed and I honestly couldn't find any quotes that describe her personality. 14:42, June 18, 2012 (UTC)

In this case, considering she isn't a major character, it might not matter that they won't describe her personality. There just needs to be quotes about/from her. 15:00, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

If you want me too, I can add her name being called at the Gathering. 17:42, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

What about the things Hollowpaw says about her in SotM, when Ivypool is training him in the Dark Forest? 17:56, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I can add that in. 00:10, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Two quotes have been added. 00:17, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

If possible, expand The Last Hope. I think that Mossyfoot was mentioned somewhere in the book. Jun 27, 2012; 16:02pm

I couldn't find anything. Sorry. 15:40, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Brokenstar being blind?
Shouldn't his description of being blind be removed as he has had his blindness restored in the Dark Forest?

 Starry  Hawk Meow... 03:27, June 19, 2012 (UTC)

No. He died blind ouo 09:30, June 19, 2012 (UTC)

So? Not like death means anything anymore. 01:33, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

Good point^^. If his sight's been restored, I don't think it's considered part of the description anymore...

But isn't that his afterlife? Shouldn't his description include his description /at death/? Not after, not way before. 21:55, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

Longtail's sight was restored after he died; wasn't it? Shouldn't it be the same for Brokenstar? -- Starry  Hawk Meow... 03:36, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Did we remove blindness from Longtail's description? I see no reason to do so with Brokenstar. 23:56, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Longtail's blindness was removed, it looks like. Should we remove it from Brokenstar, too? Jun 27, 2012; 16:04pm

I personally think we should add the blindness part back into Longtail's article, and keep it in Brokenstar's article. -- 17:54, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Oh wait, I thought Longtail's was removed for lack of spoilers.... but in that case, I don't know why Brokenstar's is there..... *shrugs* No clue. 23:27, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Rowanfur - Silver Nomination
I added a quote and I had reworded parts of it a while ago. Comments? 21:42, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

Any more quotes? 14:57, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't find any more besides those three that are already on his page. 18:01, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Can you detail his history? Jun 26, 2012; 21:51pm

Nope, he only appears for about five sentences throughout the prologue of SkyClan's Destiny. -- 22:12, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Jacques- Silver Nomination
I've wanted to nominate him for a while (As in 5 whole minutes) and I could find nothing wrong with his page. Comments? 21:57, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

Anymore quotes? 21:59, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

I added the one quote mentioning him in The Forgotten Warrior, but I don't own any of the other books.-- 21:22, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Can you detail The Forgotten Warrior and Secrets of the Clans? <span style="">Jun 27, 2012; 16:05pm

The Forgotten Warrior is as detailed as it can be (He was mentioned in two paragraphs) and I'll try to get Secrets of the Clans from the library.-- 12:09, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Whitetail ~ Silver Nomination
I feel that her page is ready for Silver Status. =) <font color="#FF0000;"> Starry <font color="#FF0000;"> Hawk <font color="#780000;">Meow... 16:43, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Any more quotes? 17:07, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and The Fourth Apprentice and Sunrise could use some expanding. Sorry, forgot to mention that the first time. o3o 17:24, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

I can add quotes and expand The Fourth Apprentice, but I don't have Sunrise. --<font color="#FF0000;"> Starry <font color="#FF0000;"> Hawk <font color="#780000;">Meow... 17:25, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Can you expand The Forgotten Warrior any? -- 18:14, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Can The Sight and the entire Omen of the Stars series be expanded a little bit? 15:40, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

I will begin expanding them all (except for Sunrise, as I don't have it) right now. -- Starry Hawk  23:09, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Guidelines about descriptions vs. trivia
Alright, I started this conversation about a year ago in PCA, but I never got anywhere. However, since this is something PC needs to decide anyway, I figured I'd restart it here.

The conversation being about what counts as a mistake in a character's description in the books and what does not.

See, I've been confused about how we decide this for quite some time. Until I edited it just now, we had Leopardfoot listed as a sleek black she-cat, with the description of being mottled sitting in the trivia as a mistake. But, since she's never been described as solid, I moved mottled to her main description. For her, we had no description beyond her allegiances description and her first appearance, even though mottled was mentioned in the same book she first appeared in, only later.

However, to contrast that, we have cats like Spottedleaf who hardly ever gets anything excluded from her description. If she's called something, anything, we add it to her description, save for her comic appearances when we have no choice.

So this is my confusion. What gets added to descriptions and what gets added to trivia? I think we ought to have guidelines about this....

But, for an example of what we might do, here's how I typically look at it.


 * If a cat is never described as solid and suddenly (after their initial appearance) they're called mottled or tabby, I would just add mottled or tabby to their decription (like Leopardfoot or Mudfur).


 * If they're called mottled from the start and later they're mentioned as tabby or vice-versa, I'd just add it to the description since mottled tabbies are common.


 * If they're called solid and later they're called mottled or tabby, then I'd add it to the trivia, since that would contradict the solid description.


 * If they're called gray and later they're called a specific shade of gray, I'd just add it to the description (like Willowshine).


 * If they're called gray and later they're called brown (like Longtail), I'd add that to the trivia.

But that's just how I look at it. Thoughts? 19:08, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, also... if they're seen in the comics with the wrong description, I just assume it's just wrong, since the comic artist doesn't seem to bother with descriptions much. -- 19:10, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

I think that whatever makes sense should be added to the description. However, for solids, unless it says they are a pure solid color (like Graystripe), I think tabby or mottled should be added to the description. --<font color="#FF0000;"> Starry <font color="#FF0000;"> Hawk <font color="#780000;">Meow... 19:14, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

I don't know.... I think if it's only mentioned once, it may very well be a mistake... I think it should only be added if the "mistake" is repeated more than once. If they're just randomly called mottled or something like that once, like Leopardfoot or Mudfur, then it may very well be a mistake. I don't think we should just assume it's part of their normal description if it's mentioned once and only once, and in Mudfur's case, very late in the series, multiple book appearances later. It seems like we're assuming character descriptions by adding mottled/tabby/ect to their description...

But whether the author intended it to be mentioned or not is unknown, Skye. We aren't making any assumptions about adding stuff to character descriptions; we are adding what we believe the author had in mind for the cat. Despite having made many description errors, the authors probably know how they "view" each cat. In addition to that, we've already made it this far in Character Arts and Character Descriptions for the Charcats; is it really wise to backtrack now? --<font color="#FF0000;"> Starry <font color="#FF0000;"> Hawk <font color="#780000;">Meow... 20:36, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, yes we are making assumptions about the descriptions. Leopardfoot's, I can understand, and that I'm fine with. However, Mudfur's, I don't agree with. When he was described as mottled, it was such a minor appearance, and multiple books after his first mention. How do we know it was an accurate description? We don't. If Mudfur was described as mottled in, say Fire and Ice, or some very early book like that, where he was still new, I would understand adding it to the description. But not a book like The Sight, where his character is already developed and description mentioned multiple times, without a single mottled mention in sight. I still say it was a mistake for Mudfur. That's my opinion, and I don't want it thrown in my face later.

I agree with Cloudy on the Mudfur case, but what about other markings(besides tabby and mottled), like if a cat is shown without a white or pale marking on his chest in the mangas, but the cat is described with them everywhere else in the books, would that go into their trivia or not? :3 21:36, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

I think Shelly's right. Squirrelflight's white paw was mentioned once (I think?) and it's still in her description. Same with torn ears, most scars, Redtail as a dark tortie; the list goes on and on. Just because a character is mentioned with something new late in the series doesn't mean they haven't always had it. The authors can't make the allegiances as long as we have for articles, they pretty much just copy and paste it anyway. We should add anything to their descriptions that need to be added. 23:03, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

I do not support this at all. Adding descriptions that appeared very late in the series after multiple times being described just seems wrong. For example, adding Mousefur as a tabby, or Mudfur as mottled. It was mentioned once. Very late in the series. I'm agreeing with Cloudy on the whole mentioned more than once thing, and mentioned early one. The mentioned early on part would cover Squirrelflight Loonie. And as for scars and torn ears, those are things cats get at different points. Therefore, many times they may not have even been there to describe from the beginning. But unlike scars and torn ears, descriptions don't change. If they're not described with say, tabby stripes, for like 15 books, and then suddenly described with them once then never again, there's absolutely no point in assuming that was always there. It was mentioned once and never again, after plenty of opportunities to mention it were there before. 00:57, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Also, don't add things to the description while we're still discussing them. Just because it's your opinion they should be there, it doesn't mean everyone agrees. And until we finish discussing, nothing should be changed. 01:04, June 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Paleclaw, I don't need community consensus to do it, so please don't act like I'm jumping the gun. I didn't need to start this conversation at all and I don't need to refer to PC every time I make an edit to a page. 02:05, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

You guys really need to get of this tangent of thinking that I need the permission of this project to edit an article. Anyway, I stick by what I said above. However, I agree with you, Cloudy, that perhaps if a description comes very late after a character's initial appearance we can count it as trivia no matter what it is. But besides that, I stick by everything I said. We do need some kind of guidelines for what does and doesn't get put in a description vs. the trivia. 02:12, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

How about this? A character description like mottles or stripes has... three?... books to happen before we consider it trivia. Or how about up to six, max? After that, it's considered trivia unless it's something like a more specific colour, scars, or eye colour or something like that. 02:15, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

If you're going to change a character's description, then yes, you should ask the project's permission. Setting guidelines for what does and does not count as trivia is something that falls to the project as a whole, not one member. As this would change multiple character articles, there needs to be a decision made with the project as a whole, so we know when and when not to do this in the future. The actions of one (or two, or three) do not represent the project as a whole.


 * Those seem pretty fair. I agree on the nicked ears, scars, etc. that we add once mentioned. Having six books for mottled, tabby, etc. from when they're originally described sounds good. As far as needing project's consensus, if it's as blunt as what constitutes as trivia and what doesn't and doesn't have any notes on it, then you can't exactly say whether it belongs or not. When it's at that point it's basically personal preference, but since it has been brought up to the project, we should leave things how they are so there's no need correcting them later. 03:44, June 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * The project does not need, nor have any reason to, be a gateway for approvals on information that can be proven via a citation. It's one thing when we have directly conflicting descriptions (like some of the crazy eye color situations) to involve the project, but for something like a citable clarification provided in a later book... Those should be added, with their citations. If there's a conflict of opinion on the veracity of it, then the project should get involved if the users in question can't settle it on the talk page. The wiki runs on consensus, yes, but every member has equal authority. This means that the project has the right to settle disputes users have concerning what goes into an article, but the users are the source of article contents, not projects. Any user who can cite the information should feel free and welcome to change a character description. If other users disagree, they should discuss it. If they can't settle it themselves and figure it out, then the project should be called on to decide. We don't need to add red tape for adding information the books support. 14:19, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

I do not need the projects permission to add cited information to a cat's article. I never have and I never will unless this wiki goes really far south. In any case, what would that say for Spottedleaf? A good chunk of her page-long description comes several books after her introduction. Why is it different for Mudfur? 14:15, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Because Mudfur was only mentioned with it once, and many many books after his first appearance. We don't know if it was actually part of his description or not, so why add it in?

And you do if you're going to start setting/suggesting guidelines as to what counts as trivia and what doesn't. You're not above the project.

The project isn't above me either. It's my right to edit character articles without the consent of the project, and I edited Leopardfoot's article before I even suggested this. Changing her article does not determine the fate of any other article, only hers. And most of Spottedleaf's decriptions are only used once and come up in the Power of Three series, more than 12 books after her first appearance. I still don't see how Mudfur's any different. He hardly appeared at all when he was alive anyway, save for in Crookedstar's Promise. 18:00, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

So? What does it matter how minor he is? Just because he's a minor character, does not mean it's automatically correct. There are over 700 characters, so mistakes are going to happen. Just because something is said, doesn't automatically make it true. As for Spottedidiot... I don't know, nor do I care. I know nothing about cat genetics, anatomy, ect, to be able to make that call, and torties confuse me. e.e


 * Cloudy: If you can't discuss this with maturity, take a break and try again later.
 * Shelly has a legitimate citation from the book that you have no evidence to support as incorrect or a mistake (Character has not been mentioned as a self/solid cat anywhere). You are trying to made judgements about what parts of the source material to consider an error or not. It would be one thing if she had actually been described as both self and mottled, but we're talking about descriptions that indicate a color and a pattern. While separate, there is no reason both parts can't be correct, and no reason that we should even assume this is an error. We don't decide things are errors until we have evidence that they're errors, otherwise we have to assume the books are correct because they're our primary source of information.
 * 18:11, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any proof that is isn't a mistake? The mottled thing was mentioned once and never addressed again after that. How do we know it's actually part of her description? We do not. There is no proof that it's a legitimate part of her description aside from that one mention. It's questionable, and therefore, I'm questioning it. As a member of the wiki, I have that right. If you dislike my opinion, fine. There's no need to call me immature because I don't agree with you. If anything, that's being immature.


 * I called you immature for the "spottedidiot" comment, not for disagreeing with me. We can't stop trusting the source material, Cloudy. We assume the source is correct unless there is evidence to the contrary. I think everyone will agree with me on this point... Because what you're proposing is that we stop trusting the primary material wholesale... The primary material is practically our only source! 18:34, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, that. I just hate Spottedleaf, so that's why I called her that. Anyways, no, I'm not. I wish people would stop misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not saying we should stop trusting the books. I'm saying that for things that could easily be called into question, they should be given a second citation or something along those lines, in order to prove their legitimacy.

Considering that we have so many cites relating to this topic, I believe that we should continue the way we've been doing it all this time. The sources can or can't be a mistake; we don't know that. What we do know is until proven wrong, they should be put into the description as usual. It would be pure chaos if we had to re-read all of the books and single out certain parts of the description. Project Character Art would have to re-do or maybe even re-make some of the images that they have made. I know I'm still rather new to this; may not have as much of a say as the rest of you who are debating this topic, but I personally believe that we should keep going the way we have been. --<font color="#FF0000;"> Starry <font color="#FF0000;"> Hawk <font color="#780000;">Meow... 18:43, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Precisely. But we've been excluding random pieces of descriptions for absolutely no reason. Unless a description directly conflicts with the existing description, like a cat that's been called solid suddenly being called a tabby, I choose to trust the source material. Yeah, it's ripe with errors all the time, but I'm not going to assume everything I'm reading is incorrect simply because it might be. 16:17, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you, Shelly. If it makes things easier, I have kept all cites (reverted and not reverted from the Wiki) in a notebook; I can maybe add those to the descriptions and trivia. I choose to also trust the source material; if we don't have it, what do we have? However, we should be careful about what we do with the error stuff; we don't know what the authors originally intended for the cat to look like. I suppose there isn't another option, though. <span style="">Jun 26, 2012; 21:50pm

I still disagree with this and don't support it, but I don't really have much to say that I haven't said before. I'd be happy having it where they have 3-6 books to get their general appearance down. Then that's it. Unless it's more than one mention. 23:25, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Oh and by the way, even if a character is described as solid, such as graystripe, there's still errors sometimes. He was said to be solid, then said to have a stripe. They can make a mistake with anything and often do. 23:26, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

We need to trust the sources we have; right now, you seem to be doubting them. If there is a mistake, then it's surely worth mentioning, even if it's a minor one that doesn't appear often. And as for Graystripe's name, doesn't it make sense if he has a stripe? Back in the original series, many of the names described the characters. <span style="">Jun 27, 2012; 23:33pm

Okay, you know what? This is something I need to say, because it seems people are misunderstanding what I meant. I did not say that we need to stop trusting any and all source material. Get that out of your heads. That is not what I meant, so do not twist my words, please. There have been errors made before with the series, and there will be more in the future. Now, though, we just need to be able to tell what is an error and what is not.

Brackenfur and Thornclaw
I've been meaning to bring this up for a while, but I believe Brackenfur and Thornclaw's descriptions should change by our current standards. Both were first described as ginger, and outside of allegiances descriptions, are almost always described as ginger. Only in the allegiances and a select few times in the book are they actually called golden brown, and since ginger came first, I believe their main descriptions should be changed to that and the golden brown be moved to the trivia. 00:59, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

I've thought the same. But to be thorough we'd have to look through every book they're in and count the number of times each description is used. And, as for Thornclaw, isn't golden just a shade of ginger? I think he'd be fine as is. 14:56, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Thornclaw is golden brown. - 17:53, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Ah, you're right then. He leans more towards brown. 17:57, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

So what are we gonna do? And that way of figuring it out would work for Bracken and Thorn, yes, but then that would have to be how we decided these decisions in all cases similar, and that simply won't work. Say the series was still going with these characters. We'd count the past descriptions of them and decide which is mentioned most. But if it's near equal, which I'm pretty sure it is, then every book or two it would tip the scale to the other description. We'd constantly be switching back and forth from golden-brown to ginger, and that wouldn't work. So we can't use that method in deciding these kind of cases, cause we'll have to work out one for all occasions. I'm not sure what to do, but personally, I though in these kind of cases where there's close to equal descriptions you simply used the first, which would be ginger. *shrugs* Not sure, just what I thought. 06:04, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

An Idea for Unreleased Characters
Yeah yeah, you know me. I'm full of ideas.

Anyway, this idea came up because of Yellowfang's Secret and the chapters that have already been released from it.

We all know there are a few new characters revealed: Yellowfang's two siblings, Raggedstar's brother, a couple of StarClan cats, and a medicine cat. Specifically in the cases of Yellowfang's siblings, we've had people come through that have attempted to make pages for them which we... well, Atelda, has had to delete every time.

So what I'm proposing is that we do make pages for characters revealed in unreleased book excerpts and that we just leave a blank charcat filled with nothing but the words "coming soon" (or nothing at all) and a banner saying that the character exists in an unreleased book and that information about them will be published when the book is released.

It'd be simple to do, the banner can be made very simply, and it'd deter those that don't know that we don't reveal information from unreleased books. The articles could be semi-protected from newbies and anons just in case.

Sound good? 16:59, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I personally think it's a good idea. It'll stop others from continuously creating pages for it and having 'Teldy to keep deleting them. 17:02, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Perfect! Saves us the work when the book actually comes out. 17:06, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea. It'll save us the trouble of having to delete pages and having to make a page when the book actually comes out.-- 17:25, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I agree^^ This will save us the trouble and time. 17:27, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

This sounds like a great idea. 19:08, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I agree as well. It'll spare us all that trouble. 19:10, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

I think it sounds like a great idea, also. 19:28, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Seems we have an agreement, then. I see no need to put this up to vote unless someone wants to voice a reason as to why we shouldn't do this. For now, we just need someone to make a template and a banner for the unreleased character pages. 05:06, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Well, couldn't we just take the existing Unreleased template and slightly tweak it? It's a simple coding thing that I could probably do in a few minutes, if you'd like me to.

Okay, so I got kinda bored and simply tweaked the one we already have... seen here. I'm not sure if we should stick with the color on the already existing unreleased template, or go with another one, so I picked a few different colors. Feel free to change it around, as this is only my idea...  Playing with coding at 1:30 am...not the best idea in the world.

Cloudy's look good in my opinion. I like it in the pink or blue Pink and blue are some of my favorite colors though. But red works too because of the fact that red usually means stop. 11:46, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

I think we should just stick it out with the original colour, but that's just me. So, refresh my memory, what are the names of the articles we'd have to make at this point? The only name I remember is Nutkit, for obvious reasons. I know that Brambleberry suddenly has a new mentor and Yellowkit had another sibling and Raggedkit has a brother. 12:57, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Nutkit, Troutfin, and Scorchkit are the ones I can remember off the top of my head. I can try and ask someone who already has Enter the Clans if they can get a list of names for us. As for the colors, that's fine with me. I know Atelda expressed an interest in the blue one, and blue is part of the wiki's colors, however..

I have it. The cats whom appeared it in are:

Troutfin (Brambleberry's mentor)

Mallowfur (StarClan warrior)

Nutkit (Yellowfang's brother)

Rowankit (Yellowfang's sister)

Silverflame (elder, mother of Brightflower)

Mistfang (elder)

Scorchkit (Raggedstar's brother)

That's the cats who haven't appeared in any other book - if you want the ones who had and also appeared in Yellowfang's Secret, I can give those too. 17:31, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Should we start creating the articles? And for the unrelased template, I like the blue one/red one. 12:04, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

We should wait until the template is finalized before making the articles, lest some unknowing members of the wiki or anons think that we're just writing the articles up ahead of time and try to publish spoilers on them. And really, all we can do with the pages is put that template on them and nothing else, not even descriptions. Maybe a blank charcat, what do you guys think? 19:09, July 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, Littlebird and Hollowbelly already have pages. 19:13, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Well, the template's pretty much done. I just need to ask 'Teldy which color we should use (others have voiced opinions on multiple colors), and all of that fun stuff, then we're pretty much set. Well, that, and actually //making// the template, which'll take a matter of seconds.

I think (if possible), we should lock the pages to new and anon. members, since they're the ones most likely to add the descriptions, family, ect. As for a blank charcat...hmm... I think the only thing that should be put is a name, and the rank we know they have in the preview (like Scorchkit would be a kit, ect), or we could have that "given name" thing that we have on Brightspirit's article.

I think we can list the rank, honestly. A rank isn't much of a spoiler. But if others disagree, I respect that. 19:19, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

I think that the rank can be listed. If not, the Known/Given would work. As for having it locked off, that'd make sense, considering they are the ones most likely to add descriptions and such. 19:26, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking, actually^^^. Since we pretty much have a list as what character is what rank, I think it would be safe to place the rank we know on the article....and if we don't know them, then we can use the "given name" thing...but I think the preview gives us the information we need, does it not?

Right, deleted Littlebird and Hollowbelly. Anyways, I agree that it should be locked, and I also believe that a rank should be listed. 15:13, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Reference Check
So, Paleh and I created this in order to help keep track of references on each character's page due to falsified references. How it's planned to work is when you check an article's references, you will add the current date under the "Last Checked" column next to the correct character you checked. Paleh and I also thought about having users separately join this "sub-project" because some users are unaware of how to do references, or just don't concern themselves about it, so it might be a bit iffy on how they went about it. It's pretty simple, so what does everyone think about it? 17:23, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

I think it's a great idea, it'll keep everything organized, and help the wiki as a whole. -- 17:31, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

So we just check every single reference on the entire page? I still think that creating a "verified ref" template would be easiest. That way those looking at the page can see that they're verified without having to look at your subpage. 17:40, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea. -- 21:34, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

References are constantly changing such as to an earlier mention or removed due to a false cite or changed to a falsified cite due to a misunderstanding or something. A template wouldn't keep up with those changes. With the subpage, users can look at what references haven't been checked in a while. Also, with a "verified ref" template, what kind of impression would that give off to those users who are looking at this wiki for information, or to Kate? 23:49, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

It would give the impression that we care about the references and want them to be as accurate as possible. 19:57, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

It would also give the impression that despite citing things, we can't always be reliable with our information. Though that's true, we're trying to fix that, and it's not a good rep to have about the site. 00:27, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

I support this idea. <span style="">Jun 26, 2012; 01:17am

I love this idea, actually...well done. 14:54, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

I like this idea too. 03:17, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

What about for those of us that don't own every single book? Because some pages do cite references from every book in the main story (OS, NP, PO3, OOTS), and most people don't own or have access to all of them at once. But if they want to use this table, then what are they to do? They can't say the cites are verified if they can't verify every one. It should be fair, and every cite should be checked, not every one on a page all at once. 03:55, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Then perhaps we can have another row in the table where people can mark the books that have been checked, in case they don't have access to them all. I don't know, just an idea. 04:30, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Pinefur - Silver Nomination
Her article looks good for a minor character. Comments? 21:33, June 24, 2012 (UTC)

Is that all she appears in The Clans Decide? If it is, I see nothing wrong. Other than that appearance she's an allegiance only character, so there's not much to fix. 06:29, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

She actually says something (expresses her caring personality?), so I added that in as a quote, but overall no, she doesn't appear anymore. 15:21, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Strong Pounce ~ Silver Nomination
Comments?

Their main quote says something about blood. Whose blood? Maybe add that into the article. "S/He tries to sniff [character] but changes his/her mind when s/he smells blood." 20:17, June 25, 2012 (UTC)

Done. I also expanded, and fixed up the rest of the article.

The Long Shadows title is mentioned twice. Can you also expand Long Shadows a bit more? -- 00:56, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

No, I can't expand it. They're not even mentioned by name.

Sunpelt (LC) ~ Silver Nomination
Looks good to me. Comments?

Any more quotes? 18:47, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Done.

Is it possible to detail the history slightly? <span style="">Jun 26, 2012; 21:41pm

Not really. It's like....maybe two pages, if that. o.o

Splash (KP) ~ Silver Nomination
Splash~<3 I expanded/detailed his history to the best of my abilities. I'll go and add a quote now, however, I'd rather not add a main quote because he doesn't say much; especially anything that hasn't got much to do with his personality. Comments? 01:00, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Added a quote. 01:08, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Can you add any more quotes? <span style="">Jun 26, 2012; 21:39pm

Fallowpaw ~ Silver Nomination
There's not much to do really (I think?); his/her article looks pretty good. Comments? 01:13, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Detail the entire history a little more? 18:45, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Could you find another quote for him/her?-- 20:32, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

I tried detailing her history as much as possible, as she appears/is mentioned only three times. And I could not find another quote for her. He main quote is the only thing that she says. 06:55, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Little Mew ~ Silver Nomination
Aww, Little Mew. <3 I finished off his history; Comments? 01:29, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Is there a quote about him or does he say anything? if there aren't then ignore this. o3o

From what I remember, there really isn't much about him; nor does he say much. 23:03, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Cloud - Silver Nomination
I expanded history a little bit and found some quotes. Comments? 17:41, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Can Outcast be detailed a little bit? 18:43, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Can you expand Sign of the Moon a bit more? <span style="">Jun 26, 2012; 20:29pm

Done. 15:26, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Ratscar-Silver Nomination
I like him for some reason, so I'm going to nominate him for silver. Things I need to do? 22:12, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Can you expand all of the Omen of The Stars sections? -- 22:15, June 26, 2012 (UTC)

Can you add anymore quotes? 15:24, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Thunder, Wind, River, Shadow, and Sky
I've been wondering this for a while, but why are Thunder, Sky, Wind, River, and Shadow are listed as loners? In Secrets of the Clans it says,

''"And they fought constantly." ''Page 3

''"A terrible battle followed, and soon the ground was wet with spilled blood." ''Also, Page 3

Also, in Code of The Clans it says,

''"Battles broke out, just a few cats at first, but more and more, until hunting ground took on hunting ground, fighting for survival." ''Page 2

Now for a few quotes from the rogue article;

"Rogues are usually depicted and thought of as being selfish and aggressive."

"Rogues are hostile, stray cats who do not belong to any Clan."

"They are very violent."

I think that we should classify Thunder, Wind, River, Sky, and Shadow as rogues. They were described as fighting constantly, fighting for survival, and violent (A terrible battle followed, and soon the ground was wet with spilled blood.). If this has been discussed in the past, then I'm sorry. But like I said up there, I think they should be classified as rogues. 04:47, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Actually...that's not half bad of a question, Duck. You bring up some good points... I'm going to ponder on this one for a bit, because you're right. They were hostile cats, which should instantly classify them as rogues. o.o

Cloud took the words right out of my mouth. Seeing the points you have brought up; I'd refer to them as rogues rather than loners. Some did live in groups too, right? o.o 04:52, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

That is a very good point Ducksplash, and I don't know how I never even thought about that before. They should definitely be classified as rogues unless DoTC contradicts it somehow or they were loners before they became violent. 05:18, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. You do raise good points, and I've thought of this before, but I also thought of a counter-point: Rogues aren't just violent cats. They're violent cats that go against the Clans and the warrior code or else have been banished from the Clans or pose a threat to the Clans. Since neither the Clans nor the code existed at the time, rogues, by proxy, also cannot have existed. Loners can be just as violent. 12:54, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Good point Shelly, but in Firestar's Quest they called quite a few cats rogues, and those cats didn't know anything about the warrior code. Examples, Firestar's Quest pages 159(Cora and Stick are called rogues), 168(They mention Shorty as a rogue), 282(They call Scratch a rogue), 304(Scratch says "Then you'd better convince the rogues who live here already."). Those are just some of the examples and like I said up there, Cora, Stick, Scratch, and Shorty were all called rogues, just in my examples, and Cora, Scratch, Stick, and Shorty knew nothing about the warrior code. 06:31, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

I think they should be considered rogues. Ducksplash made some excellent points. 15:23, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Little Mew, Birdy, Pad, and Raindrop
Me and a couple other users in chat were talking about this. The cites from these pages are removed because they weren't mentioned specifically (only Little Mew was), however, Husker introduces them in the order they stand in on page 34 of Warrior's Refuge. (Birdy, Pad, Raindrop, Little Mew) I know it's them from their description. Should we go ahead and cite it, or should we not, since it hasn't been mentioned specifically? 18:28, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Acorntail and Pricklekit
Considering that an apprentice ceremony was never shown for Pricklekit, shouldn't we remove him as Acorntail's apprentice? It feels like we made an assumption that he became a full apprentice; who knows if Pricklekit had died or not afterward? I believe that Pricklekit should not be listed as Acorntail's apprentice. <span style="">Jul 1, 2012; 15:46pm

Rejoin and Purdy
Hi! I was wondering if I could rejoin? I have a lot of free time now, so I can focus more on projects. ^^ Also, I was wondering about something with Purdy. He has a scar on his charart, but no cite for it... 00:16, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Reedtail ~ Silver Nomination
Ah, Reedtail the description-less main-ish character that I always imagine as a black cat =3 I expanded CP some...other than that, there's nothing much more I could do x3 <span style="border: 2px solid violet; border-top-left-radius:2ex; border-bottom-left-radius:2ex; border-top-right-radius:2ex; border-bottom-right-radius:2ex;"> 12:16, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Add some more quotes. 00:00, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Can you detail CP a bit? 05:36, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Added the only good quote I could find and expanded and detailed CP a fair bit ouo 07:38, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Hazeltail - Silver Nomination
Been working on this one for a while. Main issue was the history needed expansion. Suggestions? 13:14, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

lol deceased daughter of Brackenfur and Sorreltail. Can Night Whispers and can you detail the last sentence of ''Fading Echoes? 00:02, July 3, 2012 (UTC)''

I know, right? Taken care of. 00:54, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Talk page separation
This was an old idea used by PCA and while I dislike taking ideas from PCA as it's a whole other project designed for a different purpose, I believe it would fair well for PC as currently we have many discussions and nominations that start to lack attention after a while. For those who don't remember or joined after PCA moved to subpages, the PCA talk page was divided into two sections: Discussion and For Approval. For Project Characters, all it would be is: Discussion and Nominations. 22:47, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. It'd be a bit more orderly that way, and it's worked great for PCA thus far. 22:50, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Ooooh, I'd be up for this. The PC talk page can get cluttered at times...and archiving can be a pain in the tush with multiple other topics and things like that on the page as well. I say yes to this. 8D This could prove useful once DotC comes out as well, because there's bound to be tons of discussion.

I like this idea. I wouldn't have to look through the nominations to find discussion. I support this 100%. 23:27, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

I'm up for this idea. Honestly, it's been kinda hard for me to find topics so far on this talk page for PC...and having the talk page separated would be easier. =P 23:56, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

It seems like a good idea to me. PC's talk page is getting more and more cluttered with all the new nominations and discussions, dividing seems like an good idea. 23:58, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. It'll be a lot more organized this way. 00:37, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

I think it sounds great! 01:10, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

This sounds perfect. I had to dig through nominations to find it 01:11, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Foxwhisker ~ Silver Nomination
His history is good and he has four quotes. Comments? 23:34, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

Clovertail - Silver Nomination
Fixed it up. ^.^ I can't expand any of the SkyClan and the Stranger sections, before someone asks me to, and I'll expand Battles of the Clans tomorrow. So, comments? 00:58, July 3, 2012 (UTC)

Patch (KP) ~ Silver Nomination
I'll see if I can expand/detail Escape From the Forest. He also has four quotes. Comments? 00:02, July 4, 2012 (UTC)