Warriors Wiki talk:Characters/Archive 74

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)

Ducksplash, these are excellent points. I agree that they should be rogues. 16:16, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Does this mean they get rogue chararts? 16:27, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Depends on how the discussion is concluded, Moonshine. I agree that they should be classified as rogue. 16:30, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

I agree that they should be called rogues. They fit the description almost perfectly, and certainly weren't behaving the way loners are generally thought to. 20:37, July 6, 2012 (UTC)

I agree as well. 03:06, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

May we get started on adding "rogues" to their charcats? 20:38, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

I think it's safe to say that yes, they were rogues, and not loners. There's pretty much a consensus with this, so I believe it's okay to go ahead and change their articles.

Archiving.

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. Jul 1, 2012; 15:46pm

I agree. The book doesn't say explicitly that Pricklekit becomes his apprentice. It implies it heavily, but the kit is still a kit when the story is over and there is no paragraph that explains what happens after Featherstar promises Pricklekit to him. For all we know, as Starry said, Pricklekit may have died after this point.

I agree also, the book never showed Pricklekit as an apprentice. -- 17:38, July 10, 2012 (UTC)

Archiving.

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)

I think it sounds like a great idea. Separating nominations and discussions will make it so much more organized. 14:19, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

This sounds like an awesome idea. It would save us space, and everything'll be look at. 14:24, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't you put up an edit button next to Discussion and Nominations because if you just click add a topic it goes to the bottom. Or are we supposed to just edit from the latest discussion? 00:00, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

Because we're using heading #1, it doesn't give it the option to edit the entire section so unless we switch everything down a heading number (which would be a pain in the butt) we'll have to make do. 21:15, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

I can edit the whole thing... Maybe try using Monobook o3o 17:33, July 8, 2012 (UTC)

Archiving.

Maplestar
I was wondering why is she named Maplestar? Her leader name was never revealed, they always just called her Maplewhisker. I think it should be changed to Maplewhisker. owo 03:07, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

Good point. I agree. 03:12, July 7, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. 17:35, July 8, 2012 (UTC)

I agree as well. We did it for Marshscar, so this is no different.

Actually, I disagree. Since it was stated in CotC on page 83, SkyClan would be safe under Maplestar's leadership.. So they did call her Maplestar. 01:50, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

They never directly called her Maplestar....she hadn't even gotten her lives from StarClan yet.

Bramblestar didn't have his lives and his pagename was changed. Though he was called Bramblestar... 02:36, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

He was called Bramblestar. Maplestar, however, was not. It was a future thing. That's like saying Mudclaw should be called Mudstar, because he was once called it by Tallstar, who was talking about what would have happened if Mudclaw became leader of WindClan.

Archiving.

Onestar
Hi guys. I'm here today with Onestar, and I'm going to ask if I can remove his kit and apprentice names. (Same would go with the art.) He's never shown as a kit/apprentice, nor is he mentioned. If I'm wrong, someone may correct me. Opinions? 18:52, July 14, 2012 (UTC)

I do believe they were mentioned in the Warriors App, Icy. I'm not sure off the top of my head.

Okay. I wasn't sure as I don't own the Warriors App and there's no cite. 19:11, July 14, 2012 (UTC)

Eh. This can be archived. I got my proof. Sorry for the inconvience, y'all. 19:15, July 14, 2012 (UTC)

Archiving.

Gorsestar
Same case as Redtail. I believe Gorsestar was only mentioned as a deputy, and never a warrior. I think it should be removed from his page unless anyone else has proof that he was called Gorsefur as a warrior. 17:25, July 10, 2012 (UTC)

I agree, he was never shown as a warrior. 17:41, July 10, 2012 (UTC)

I also agree, if we can't find it, take 'er down. 20:06 Thu Jul 12

Not sure if this should be taken to PCA. e.e Does that mean his charart would have to be taken down as well? 01:25, July 14, 2012 (UTC)

Yes. If there's no mention of his warrior name, why in StarClan's name would we give him a charart? o.o

Yeah, this is common sense.