Warriors Wiki talk:Charart

=For Approval= Take it to the approval page

=Tweaked= Take it to the tweak page

=Discussion=

Unknown Residence Blank
Are we changing the meaning of this blank to apply to everyone, then? Because when we made these blanks, they were originally only meant for the ghost cats/purgatory cats from A Vision of Shadows (including more recently: Pebbleshine and Ashfoot). We need to have that discussion before anything is posted on the approval page, because the blanks as we currently have them don't apply to anything other than the ghost cats (which we'll need to change the file names for those ANYWAYS, depending on the outcome here), so if we start making them for characters like Jake, Ravenpaw, ect, we'll need to officially change the intent behind these blanks. ​​​​

I honestly didn't originally know that they were solely for the AVoS ghosts, I saw Riin reserve one and figured they were meant for other characters as well. I don't see why they couldn't have the intent for other characters. They are named Unknown Residence and since Jake, Scourge, etc. have the affiliation of that it would make sense to give them that as well. Minkclaw Winter is coming. 04:09, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

That's my bad for reserving early, whoops. But I do agree they should be considered "unknown residence" as well. 04:11, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I'm personally of the mindset that the unknown residence blanks should be reserved for any unknown afterlife. The blanks were created because the "rank" holds significance like StarClan and the Dark Forest. It's a destination. Cat purgatory. A place for good kittypets. All afterlives. Neither StarClan or Dark Forest, but somewhere present and mingling around. As for the actual "unknown residence" cats...I don't think they should have this blank. For the infobox, I'm all for it. But as a rank, I disagree. The thing with an "unknown residence" is just that. It's unknown. We don't know where the cat ended up. They died, but they didn't end up in StarClan, the Dark Forest, or some form of alternative afterlife. No one knows, hence why it's "unknown".

However, some of them, such as Tom, Jake and maybe Ravenpaw (might have to look at the cite closely), could have this blank imo. They've been confirmed with the cites (again, might have to double check) to be present in some sort of afterlife. I think for the sanity of creating blanks with one or two cats in it, those three aforementioned should get the "unknown residence blank". Cats like Tigerstar, Spottedleaf, and Scourge should not have one since they just died (again) and went nowhere...somewhere unknown even to the authors. That's just my interpretation.

tl;dr cats who have been confirmed to be in some sort of afterlife that's not StarClan or the Dark Forest, should get it, but cats who died and the authors have confirmed they have no died and don't know where they went, should not get it. 04:23, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

use the blanks for both, just rename purgatory cats to ghost.png. 04:25, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I don't think Jake and Ravenpaw and them should have these blanks... I think they were meant solely for the cats who were stuck between the real world and the afterlife. Not knowing a cat's residence vs. a cat actually being described with no true residence are completely different things. So I think they should just be for the ghost cats.  JOLLY  FIRE  06:00, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

Scourge is the only cat to be confirmed not in any official residence I think, (though Vicky's comment was incredibly vague) while, Ravenpaw and Tom have been confirmed to be in an else where residency. To expand on my comment from before, I believe cats with unknown residencies should get the blank since StarClan, the DF and soon Endless Hunting will have afterlife blanks, I think it'd be fair to give cats with a confirmed sort of afterlife blanks as well. I agree with David's idea of just renaming the files/titles but using the blanks for both, since they're all described to be in some form of afterlife. 06:19, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I agree with them getting the blank, we can rename the files like was suggested above. 16:08, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I also agree with them using this blank. 16:26 Sun Nov 25

Just to be clear (since this is something I was confused with at first reading some of the comments), this would not be for typical deceased Clan cats who which we don't have a confirmation of a post-death residence, correct? (such as Briarlight) The general idea here seems to be for those who have some kind of afterlife confirmed- I want to make sure everyone's on the same page here, so we don't get more arguments in the future. ​​

I agree, I think it'd only be okay with cats to have a confirmed unknown residence much like Ravenpaw, Scourge, Jake, etc. With a cite that is. Minkclaw Winter is coming. 20:20, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

Yes this is purely for cats who have been confirmed on their afterlives, so Jake, Scourge, Tom and Ravenpaw. Cats like Briarlight and others who have not been confirmed to have an afterlife should not get a blank since we don't know where they are and their is no confirmation of where they are in general. Cats who have a confirmed and specified afterlife should get a blank and cats who have died but have not been seen/confirmed in an afterlife should not. Not knowing where they are and them being in different afterlives are two different things, in my opinion. 20:41, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

What about Tigerstar, Spottedleaf, Brokenstar, and Hawkfrost? 20:47, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

They're just gone. The cats that died twice will never make another appearance and have no residence.  JOLLY  FIRE  20:48, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

That comes in question, should there be a no residence blank? 20:48, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I think that cats that die 2 times should get a blank, and cats with unknown residence should get one, and Scourge... he... uh... is gone. IDK what to do about him. ~RAR =^.,.^= Im spoopy kittan! 02:19, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

Well all Vicky said about Scourge is that because he doesn't believe in StarClan, then he's not in the Dark Forest or any Clan-affiliated afterlife. I think Scourge can be up to interpretation. ​​​​

I don't think there should be a "no residence" blank, since how can we give a blank to a cat that doesn't exist anymore? It's like Hawkey and others said; they're poof, gone. They don't exist anymore. It is different from an afterlife because some cats still exist after they died. Cats such as Tigerstar and Spottedleaf don't. On the topic of Scourge, I don't think he qualifies for this blank in the definition we're going by. Looking at the Erin Hunter Chat 3 (where the cite says it is), Scourge has no concept of afterlife, and he didn't go to the Dark Forest or StarClan...so my interpretation is that Scourge is just like Tigerstar and Spottedleaf: gone. He doesn't exist anymore. He didn't believe in any afterlife, so he didn't go to any after he died. 02:40, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

The cats that died twice like Spottedleaf among others wouldn't get a blank, I think it was said that they'd keep their last image blanks? Minkclaw Winter is coming. 02:51, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure. I do agree with that, since they have no affiliation whereas cats with an afterlife technically do. I think only Jake, Tom and Ravenpaw should get an unknown blank since they at least have been confirmed to be in an afterlife, just an unspecified one. ​​​​

I disagree with using the blank for cats like Jake, Tom, and Ravenpaw. Cats like Jake and Ravenpaw are actually in the afterlife, in the skies, and can and have visited StarClan even though they themselves live in different skies, as opposed to the ghost cats, who are trapped on earth until whatever unsettled business they have is taken care of and then they join StarClan. I really don't think we should equate these two situations, which to me seem rather different, by using the same blank. 21:27, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

If Jake has visited StarClan, shouldn't there be a reference/citation that he has thus giving him the StarClan cat rank? I don't see why they can't have both as well. Minkclaw Winter is coming. 00:02, December 3, 2018 (UTC)

I think the cite was only that Tallstar travels outside of StarClan to visit Jake iirc. ​​​​

^ Cite here. It only mentions Tallstar visiting Jake outside of StarClan, rather than Jake going into StarClan. ​​​​

Any more comments? 01:24, December 14, 2018 (UTC)

So what about Jake, Tom, and Ravenpaw? Do we think they should get an unknown blank or not? 05:44, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

I think those three should since they are confirmed to reside somewhere, but not any other character with no confirmed residence. 17:43, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

I'm agreeing with Ivy here - those three aren't ghost cats, and our unknown blank was created for ghost cats. Imo, that ghost-state of being half-stuck is an actual rank in and of itself. Raven and the others should have a different blank depicting that they have a confirmed afterlife that isn't ghost, StarClan, ToEH, or any of the others like DF. 17:54, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

Should we rename our existing blank to be "ghost" to avoid confusion and then make a new blank for actual unknown residences? —​​​​

I think we should, because it's not strictly an unknown residence--we know where they reside, just not the name of said residence. Plus, they don't exactly walk the same skies as Jake and the others.

Let's rename it then. I read the comments ^^ and I think Scourge should have an Unknown Blank. Since he's dead, and he doesn't have anywhere to reside to, he should be unknown. -- Silverfur   skz  [ 05:20, 12/25/2018 ]

i dont agree with scourge because the way it was worded "Nope, because he doesn't believe in StarClan, and therefore has no concept of any sort of after life." is basically saying he didn't go anywhere, somewhat along the line of currently faded cats. 22:17, December 25, 2018 (UTC)

Any other comments? I also support the renaming ~

Oh look i did forget to comment. I support renaming and giving them their own blank. 03:52, January 13, 2019 (UTC)

Late, but I support the same. Scourge shouldn't get a blank though, it should just be Jake, Tom and anyone else I might be missing. I also wanna clarify - this is only going towards the Jake cats where they are in an afterlife but not in one that we know of/thats been revealed correct? I remember some talk of whether this would apply to dead cats who aren't yet confirmed in an afterlife (like Reedshine, Briarlight, Appledusk) Cats who are dead but have not been given a direct afterlife. I personally disagree with the idea of giving them an "unknown res" blank since some aren't even shown dead, but I'm curious on others' opinion on that. —

Comments, anyone? 03:57, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

Kits and warriors
So there have been some comments flying around on how we should approach the kit/warrior redo. I have a few questions I want to ask.

Question 1: How should we proceed with whoever wins to put up their blanks? Should we:

A.) Wait until the kittypet / leader rush is over and have someone tell the winner to put the blanks up, and after the blanks are approved, start doing the art

B.) Same as above, but wait for both kit and warrior to be approved and then start art

C.) After the votes ends, instantly have whoever wins put their blanks for approval, but once they are approved, neither are in use yet until announced

Thoughts on that?

Question 2: How do we proceed with making the art when they get approved? The kits + warriors have over 1300 images. Do we:

A.) Go alphabetical with just one group (such as kit/warrior). Possibly split this up into sections such as A-D, E-J, K-N, O-R, S-U, V-Z, and when that is finished, do the other group and split it up in the same way.

B.) Go by Clan with one group (kit or warrior) splitting up by ThunderClan/RiverClan/WindClan/ShadowClan/SkyClan/Unknown, and when that is finished, do the other group and split it up in the same way.

C.) Same as A, but having both kit and warrior at the same time. This would need to be in place after both blanks are approved.

D.) Same as B, but once again, both kit and warrior.

Question 3:

How many images should one have?

A.) Two images, both free for game for everyone.

B.) Extend image limit to 3 for just warriors (or apprentices). If this route is chosen, it would have to be discussed on what images you can have, whether two OA, one OA, all free game, etc.

C.) Two images, but one of them must be an original OA if you have one (see here and here) and the other can be what you wish as long as someone else has not reserved it.

D.) Two images, but both must be the ones you are an OA of.

Question 4:

When should we do it? I brought it up in an earlier point, but when exactly?

A.) After kittypet and leader

B.) After minor characters

C.) After Lost Stars

D.) Before Lost Stars

F.) Some distant time in the future, can be decided in a separate discussion later

Please feel free to voice other opinions as well, these are not the only answers. These are just several questions that need to be addressed before anything starts. 17:17, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

I would just like to add my own thoughts - personally, for Question 1 I would like to go with C, 2 I would like A, 3 I also prefer C, and 4 I think F, so we can have a discussion when we all want to start. 17:36, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, one more addition. If the discussion page gets too messy, we could always put it up to a vote too. 17:38, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

Mine would be C, D, B, A.

Mine is C, B, D, A Malina457 (talk) 19:49, January 20, 2019 (UTC)malina

Mine would be C for the first one. A or B for the second one; I don't think it's a good idea to have both blank redo art at the same time. I can see that getting very chaotic with people scrambling to get the ones they want done. One at a time would make things a bit calmer imo. C for the third one; I think making the OAs reserve at least one of their artwork would prevent anyone from claiming too many. For the fourth one, I'll go with F, but definitely after the kittypet and leader redos. 19:51, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

A, and then for the second, I would actually rather do it in order of books. Lost Stars and the novellas are coming soon, and we should start doing warriors/kits for those books first, then implement them by series/books. Maybe whenever they get/first appear with their warrior name. Then B and C for the last two questions. I have no idea if this makes sense, but we should get the new book chararts out of the way first. —​

1) C

2) C

3) D And I'd like to say that I don't think it's fair if people can take original images AND new ones at the same time, because that would give them an unfair advantage in terms of the number of images they can take (if that makes sense?) What I'm saying is some people have a lot of these images pre-reserved and thus would have claim to more images in general. I'd say people should finish the images that they are the OA of before they can claim new ones.

4) A

1) A.

2) C.

3) D.

4) A

01:26, January 22, 2019 (UTC) A, D, B, A.

01:55, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

B, A, C, A -- Silverfur's     starry     paws      ~    10:15, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

A, D, B, A. I feel if we hold off and discuss it, though, it'll just keep getting put off, since discussions here often die due to lack of interest. ​

C, C, C, F 14:21, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

My personal take on this:

1. C - yes the lulls can last for a while, but approving blanks takes a lot longer than approving chararts, so if we get them up we'll have less work to do come lulls.

2. A or B - split it up by Clan or alphabetical order, I don't care. I feel like if we do both at once the approval page is gonna get a bit hectic. Organizing it by rank feels a bit more controllable imo.

3. B - Not everyone has a warrior, and it would be unfair for others to get tons of warriors to work on while some (myself included) get only a couple or even none at all. However the OAs obviously get their images, because it would be unfair for someone else to take it.

4. No opinion.

c, a, d, a, i think. I always get lost trying to read all this. 01:12, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Just wanted to let people know that when answering the splitting it up, the list is already there all in alphabetical order, and it would take hours to split it up into Clans. So I change my mind to doing it in alphabetical order, unless everyone wants to pitch in and make a list of warriors and kits in Clan order. 01:36, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

With question 1 having a consensus in answer C, that will proceed. 08:27, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Star brings up a really good point - I don't think it'd be fair that people can only reserve images they are the OA of. I know for myself speaking, I have one claim in total for both kits and warriors, and if we put this extension up for only OA images, some people are going to get nothing or very little whereas some people with get dozens of images. —

Yeat, that wouldn't be fair to only reserve images they have claim to. Unless something is already pre-reserved in the lists that Icy has, everything else is fair game and should never be otherwise. I think it's basically saying that those who have others reserved are only allowed to reserve what they have, which is equally unfair, imo. You can't tell someone they can't have an image if it's free game. =/ I get not being an image hog, but if someone only wants one or two that aren't theirs, then there honestly is not an issue. ​

Yeah, I'm a bit confused on the wording of that option. I think it'd be okay to also reserve images that are fair game even with the limit increase. People who have their OA claims will get to their OA claims and if not, then their image just becomes fair game eventually as well. I don't really see a reason to restrict it to "you can only reserve images you're the OA of" because that shafts a lot of newer people and adds more complication to how we'll complete all the images. —

Mhm, exactly. What is claimed and isn't done will eventually just become free game anyways. Plus, there really isn't any point in restricting anyone when we have a lot of work to get done. ​

Sorry I might not have been clear. What I meant for that question is you first have to get all of the ones you pre reserves finished then you can reserve free game ones. 22:13, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

yeah I kinda agree with icy here because it's certainly not fair to reserve free images if you have a huge list of your own, while also keeping those. one or two images? sure reserve another, but I do think people should be doing their own if they intend to keep them before moving onto free ones. 22:17, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Aaah, okay. That I can 100% agree on. I assumed that for the first lil bit you could only reserve OA images. —

Yeah that was what I was trying to say. I think if the OA really wants their images they should take those first before they can move onto a new image.

Sounds fair to me^^

Hm so wait - when kits and warrior are up, do we want to have claims to our pre reserved images first, and then only be able to reserve free game images after they are finished? Or did we want one original, one free? 01:27, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

I would say you have to complete all your pre reserved onesfirst. i mean, if you didn’t want them, you shouldn’t have reserved them.

01:33, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

Hmm. If we do two then yeah I agree with Ari^^ However, if we do the warriors get three I think it would be okay if they had to do two of their originals before taking a new one.

Gonna be redoing my answers here: (Omitting question one since warrior blanks are already up for approval and such) A, D, D

I still prefer my idea of doing it by book and starting with Lost Stars, but I do know that may not be very practical and since we already (for the most part) have an alphabetical list of the chararts that will need to be done (Thanks Icy <3) I think that'd be the best course of action since separating the blanks by Clan or book or what may be would be a ton of extra work. —

I am somewhat begging for us to do this in alphabetical order simply because I do not know if I can find the strength to organize these guys by Clan. 11:16, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

I don't really care for how we organize them. Sorting them alphabetically seems more practical over sorting them by clan because the images are already sorted in alphabetical order.

It has been 15 days since I posted this, and here is the consensus so far (most votes):

Question 1.) Already fulfilled, put both blanks up, get them approved, but wait to use them until the time is announced.

Question 2.) Go in Clan order with kit and warrior. This, I beg of people to reconsider because it is going to be terrible to organize everything into Clans when it is alphabetical.

Question 3, which is also being discussed below.) Extend images to 3 for warriors and possibly apprentices if they can handle it. Two must be images you are the OA of, third can be free game (and if preferable, can be another you're the OA of and have crossed out.)

Question 4.) Do the art after every kittypet image and every leader blank is approved.

This is the consensus so far. I want this discussion up longer, but if anyone has changed their mind / wants to add more / ask another question, here is your chance. 15:56, February 3, 2019 (UTC)

Ugh. Sorry, question 2 is a tie between A and D. Alphabetical with one group is A, Clan with two groups is D. Anyone mind breaking that tie? We have 4 votes for A, 1 for B, 3 for C, and 4 for D, and two for other. Question 3 is tied in every single answer, but we also have the discussion going on below which most people think 4b, so that is why I went with that. 15:58, February 3, 2019 (UTC)

For question 2? I think I'll change my vote to alphabetical order, tbh makes most sense Malina457 (talk) 16:08, February 3, 2019 (UTC)malina

Did you want both kit/warrior at the same time or one group separately? 16:10, February 3, 2019 (UTC)

I still think 2b, 3b, 4a. I think we should do warriors first, since they're the titular role in the series. 22:03, 02/5/2019

Reservations for warrior and kit redos
I wanted to make a separate section for this so it did not clog up the other one.

So we were discussing on how the reservations would work and I presented a few options.

1.) Two images, both you have to be the OA of (that you crossed out here.

2.) Two images, one you have to be the OA of and one you do not have to be (which is free game, seen here.

3.) Two images, both can be free game (either OA of or not.)

4.) Three images, which can have several ways to go about it.

4a.) One you have to be the OA of, rest are free game

4b.) Two you have to be the OA of, other is free game

4c.) All three you have to be the OA of.

And finally, the last one:

Should only warriors and above get three images? Or should apprentices and kits get them as well?

Please share your thoughts below. I am really sorry if this was complicated, I did not know how to simplify it more. Oh, and I am not saying that you can only reserve images you are the OA of throughout this entire rush, the OA options I presented is that you have to finish those images first, then once you finished everything you crossed off, you can have free game ones. 11:01, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

I'll go with option four on this one, and I think at least one should be something you've reserved... but I feel most of us are just going to do our own work first anyways. I think anyone ranked warrior and above should be allowed three, and if someone ranked lower wants to give more than one image at a time a shot, we shouldn't be trying to deter them from that. If they personally feel they can handle it, I say let them have a try and see what comes of it. ​​​

If you guys go with option 4 can you comment on which one you prefer, a, b, or c? Just so it is easier for me to collect data. Cloudy, are you going with a? 11:07, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Oh, whoops, sorry about that. Yeah, option a. I completely forgot to mention that above, my apologies. ​​​

Either 4c or 1

4c

12:28, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

4b, and only warriors and above should get 3, sonce it takes kits and apprentices more time to get images approved. Where we have an image limit on the approval page, warriors and up get images approved quicker but if we have kids and apps posting 3 images the page will get clogged 12:47, 01/30/2019

4b, for me warriors or above for three

4b, warriors and above are allowed three images. Maybe let apprentices try two if they want but keeping three to warriors and higher. SquidwardPlays 16:09, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

4b, and I think apprentices can get to try, but only if they have dinner like... 2 or 3 approved, probably 3. ❈ Love is Love, forever! ❈ =^.,.^= 16:25, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

4B as well for me, and warriors and above for three images. 17:27, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

4c. —

4b, warriors and above three images.

18:28, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

4b -- Silverfur's     starry   <span style="" title="It’s alright to go slowly">  paws    <span style="" title="Go on your own path, my lane">  ~    07:23, January 31, 2019 (UTC)

4c. i support c cuz they're your images so it makes sense to expand the limit even further and get them done 14:14, January 31, 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I did want to add - for 4b, which is two OA images one free game one, the "free game one" can be one of the images you still reserved. It can be any image as long as it is not someone else's. 14:07, February 1, 2019 (UTC)

Not sure if this belongs to this section but are we allowed to pre-reserve images that we tweaked previously and that the OA is inactive?

Well, that was not part of my plan because regardless if one tweaked it, they are not the original OA (unless they are) so therefore they are unable to prereserve it. Others might think otherwise, though, so what does everyone think? 14:48, February 1, 2019 (UTC)

Tweaks shouldn't count towards OA claims. Some of yall already have 50, 100 claims on images, and some of us have 1 or 2. I don't think it's fair to add tweaks to claims since that just limits the pool thats fair game and its unfair to those who don't have any claims to begin with. —

Hmm yeah that, near everything would be claimed if we did that rip, and we'd have a lot of conflicting claims too

I guess 4a? I don't have any images to my name for this catagory though, so I'd be a bit happier with fairgame. But 4a makes sense Malina457 (talk) 16:04, February 3, 2019 (UTC)malina

So just to clarify, with option 4b, if you either don't have any (or very little) images your the OA of, or you run out of them, you would essentially just be able to reserve one image at a time, correct?

My understanding was that when you run out of OA claims it reverts to three free game for warriors; it’s just that you have to do yours first with the two/one thing

Yeah, that is what I meant. 01:31, February 8, 2019 (UTC)

Reminder
Just a reminder to people who can archive tweak nominations - please wait 24 hours until the last vote if it has a consensus. 15:52, February 3, 2019 (UTC)

why is this on the talk page? is it a question? <font face="Tempus Sans ITC">❈ Love is Love, forever! ❈ =^.,.^= 20:47, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

There is nowhere else I can put it. This is just a reminder since people do read the talk page. 20:50, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

I do once a week, could this be put in the announcments? <font color="#ffffff"> <font face="Tempus Sans ITC">❈ Love is Love, forever! ❈ =^.,.^= 21:03, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

Idea for charart pages
The heading is simple, but mainly wanted to discuss how we do the redos again.

So, as you can see, the kittypets were approved yesterday and edit conflicts have already happened repeatedly and there is so much activity going on. There are 159 images for the kittypets. Over 1200 for kits and warriors.

I want to propose we split the approval page to subsections, such as Warriors Wiki talk:Charart/Approval Page/A-F, which would be where characters listed in alphabetical order (such as all warriors starting with A-F) would go when the warriors are redone. This pattern would be repeated with other increments of the alphabet. Only two would be active at the same time.

Also, since edit conflicts are such an issue, Xd1358 suggested that we use a preloaded edit, seen here. Basically, what you would do is type something in the box he has, click "enter", and what would automatically load is already an entered template for how to put up a charart which would all you have to do is replace a few things. This, in turn, would be on the approval page as subpages (or templates, is what they look like) and stop edit conflicts and make the pages easier to load, especially on laptops/phones that cannot handle so many sections. There is also an edit intro that would explain this. You are welcome to test this if you wish.

So, we could use that on subpages, or we could use that on PCA's approval page, or we could not use it and just go by how we normally do and use subpages, or go by we normally do in increments on PCA's approval page only. Thoughts? 00:44, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

Also, if people were in approval of doing it by Clans, we can still do subpages but split it up such as /ThunderClan, /RiverClan, etc. Or, if anyone else has any other ideas on how to do the workload without crashing PCA's approval page / getting into so many edit conflicts, please share them. 00:47, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

I really like Ecks' idea of making a generator, specifically for subpages. —

I think the subpages and the generator would really help with the edit conflict problem! I noticed it happening a lot today, and people were getting frustrated. It will only get worse and worse with these insane redos we have to do. I support this idea for its efficiency. 00:55, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

I'm for the generator but not the subpages. Just the generator alone would solve the edit conflict issue with how it works, and having not all the images on one page will get confusing because of how we've done it for so long, and people might forget to comment as much. It's also a bit more cumbersome for leads, imo, so just the generator would be best

This is indeed a system we have been using for years now over at Wookieepedia and it works really well. I've added a list of pros and cons, as well as instructions for the new system, over at my subpage User:Xd1358/test. To clarify, the "generator" is merely a way of making subpage creation as streamlined as possible; it does not solve edit conflict issues unless you actually use subpages. With this approach, the images would still be visible on one page, as all subpages are transcluded (like any template) rather than linked to. The difference is how you nominate new things (and eventual achiving); the commenting phase is essentially unaffected. 1358 <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  01:07, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

In theory the subpages sound like great idea, but considering there's something like 1500 images being redone with the new blank redoes (possibly more, I have no idea the counts on the kittypet and leader images, just the kit and warrior), that seems like an awful lot of subpages. Will they be deleted after copy/pasting their contents into the standard archives?

I really wish there was an extension or something to improve wikia's edit conflict handling. I don't know enough about how mediawiki actually handles edits on the back end, but it doesn't seem like there's any reason edits to different sections of the same page can't be resolved automatically.

There would be many subpages, yes, but all things considered, there's already over 85,000 pages on the wiki. You could, of course, choose to copypaste (or just use subst:) to gather them on one big archive page but you'll lost the associated edit history. As for MediaWiki and edit conflicts, I'm not entirely sure how it works but this seems like a problem Wikimedia would've solved long ago if it was feasible. 1358 <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  19:42, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

Minor, but I do not think that if this system were to be put in place, it would be in use for kittypets. However, if it were to be, I would like to try a test run with the leaders. 23:55, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

Just tested it out on PCA's approval page with Ruby. What showed up was. When I tried to edit the section, it brought me to a separate subpage that edited that section only, therefore would not edit conflict PCA's talk page. The only issue that needs to be addressed this moment is possibly adding a date to the preloader and changing it to be more title friendly as well. Thoughts on this? 02:35, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

I think this is actually a really good idea for the project in general since we seem to be doing art quite a bit especially with the recent blank redos. 03:01, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

It's gotten bad with KPs, we definitely need an organized system for kits/warriors. I think this idea works beautifully. —

Agreed, there's been so many ECs since the kittypets... don't want to imagine what it would be like with warriors and kits. This will help greatly and i'm in support for adding it.

03:17, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

To be more specific, Spooky and I used a former roleplaying wiki to sandbox things: Here is what happened. So, on the page, there are two transcluded subpages: and. When you edit the approval page, only those will show. But when you edit certain sections, such as if you wanted to critique Iceshine, you can click 'edit' and it would take you to a separate subpage to edit. This, in turn, would stop edit conflicts because most of them are on the approval page, and it would be much harder for people to consistently be edit conflicting when there are separate subpages for each character. Yes, this would be a lot of subpages, but it is much easier than what we have so far, not to mention easier for the lead team. If anyone wants to test this out on said wiki, they are more than welcome to.

As linked before, ecks also created preload, seen here, an editintro seen here (which would explain what to do), and the test page in general would generate what you have to put. Basically, all you would put in the "generator" is (Character) (Rank), so Firestar (Warrior). Then it will take you to the subpage to create it and fill things in and it is there. And then what would be next is to put the template given to you on that subpage, so if I were doing Firestar's warrior, the edit intro would tell me to put on PCA's approval page. Does this make any sense?

And generally I would like to revoke my idea of doing 6 separate subpages of the approval page alphabetically. Thinking this over, we may benefit from doing increments of the alphabet, not all at the same time. 05:22, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Hmm just out of curiosity, what happens then when an image is posted twice on the approval page (such as if it's declined/withdrawn and reposted, or if at some point in the future we redo even more blanks once this system is already in place)? Does the contents of the subpage just get cleared and replaced, only existing in the history then?

Ahhh, now that makes more sense. Honestly, I'm all for anything that'll help with edit conflicts. 19:21, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

The only con to this is that there will be a lot more subpages on the Wiki. However, if this is the only thing that will stop edit conflicts, I still think this is a good idea. 21:12, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Edit: As said before, we could subst the pages on an archive, but we would lose the edit history. Thoughts on this? 21:13, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

As I said to you earlier this morning, what really turns me away from this is the ungodly amount of subpages that we're going to have. I really can't justify that much clutter on the wiki, especially if we're going to continue to use this past the warrior and kit redo. While this will probably help with edit conflicts, I honestly cannot get past the clutter that we're going to have and unless we have a solution for that, I cannot support this idea. These subpages will just sit when they're done and it makes zero sense to me to continue to have that many useless subpages after they've completed their run.

Why not just transfer the content of the subpages to the archives and delete the individual pages after? Not all leads are admins/CMs obvi but it could help rather than just let them "sit" there. We would lose the editing history but we'd still have a record of what was said at what time with sig timestamps and everything. —

I agree with Echo here^. I love this idea, but I'm with Jayce on the clutter part of it. Edit history wouldn't really matter when we can just copy/paste to see what everyone said after the CBA is completed and the image is archived. We're really going to need this system, and I honestly think that's the best way to go about preventing the clutter aftermath <span style="">22:09, 02/5/2019

You could indeed transfer the subpages onto one big archive page (you don't even need to copypaste, just do ), but you do lose the edit history of said subpage. However, I'm also not sure what kind of problem having many subpages is -- storage space is virtually infinite and it's not like the subpages are inflating the article count. There are currently pages on the wiki already and another thousand certainly won't break it. 1358 <sup style="color:#336600;">(Talk)  23:20, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not totally sure that bringing up what we already have eases me any more; it actually just makes me even more concerned for the amount of pages we have. It kinda feels like you're brushing my concern aside by bringing up the page count, and I'm definitely not a fan of that. We don't need that much clutter on here.

I feel like the clutter issue is much less important than the issue of redoing images and possibly getting edit conflicted at every turn (as we have seen with the kittypets) and as said, pages are not going to hurt anybody. There is no max page count, so I have to disagree that there will be a major clutter issue because it will not affect the Wiki in a negative way. 23:28, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

I think you've jumped to conclusions by saying me and Ecks were trying to brush your concerns aside. We're not - we're trying to find a solution or explain the process. It will be a clutter, but we can find a way to manage it. —

I haven't jumped anywhere. I fail to see how the massive amount of clutter is not an issue. We already have enough as it is. I am entitled to my own opinion and the fact that you don't seem to consider this a valid enough problem is a bit off-putting. You might not think it would affect the wiki in a negative way, but that doesn't mean I don't. You told me to bring up a concern I had, and I did. =/

We'll still have image limits; I'm thinking they'll be no more than 60 extra pages at a time if we stick with the image limit we have now. And, if we go rank by rank, clan by clan, it won't be so overloaded. Once and image is approved, the subpage's contents is moved to the archives and the subpage is deleted. I see no reason why we should keep the subpages any longer than needed. An archive isn't edited - the subpages will no longer be necessary to prevent conflicts and will be deleted, with contents moved just like we do now with individual sections, is my understanding. <span style="">23:35, 02/5/2019

The subpage will have to exist in order for the contents to be displayed. If the subpages are deleted, so is the content. No one is brushing aside your concerns, we are commenting on it. May I ask how the extra clutter affects the Wiki? 23:37, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Of course you're entitled to your own opinion, Jayce. You said your opinion and we explained a way to work around this. It's not an argument, and I genuinely think you're taking this a bit personally as you're accusing of as not considering your opinion as valid and saying we're brushing it aside when we're not. We're trying to find a solution and figure out a work around to make it manageable. It is a concern, but you have neglected and ignored our solution and anything we say to try and counteract your concern. No solution we find to this will be perfect, there will always be a con, and we're discussing this to figure out what will work best. We are not against you, but we're trying to work with you to find a solution. —

Icy, the subpage can't just be copy pasted for comments and we just... type a header on an archive page?? An then delete subpages? More work... but we don't need all these subpages that no longer serve their purpose of preventing ECs. <span style="">23:40, 02/5/2019

Can you try and reword that? I do not understand what you said. 23:42, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

If this section about this topic were on a subpage, and we came to a conclusion on the topic and it needed to be archived (like a CBA being finished on the approval page), we edit that subpage, copy the contents of the section, and paste it to the archive page with the heading ==Idea for charart pages==. Then the subpage gets deleted. Literally the same as we currently archive things, just with an extra two steps. The only thing lost is edit history which we don't need. Once an image is approved, it's approved. Done, archived, the section is never edited again. <span style="">23:53, 02/5/2019

The only issue is, not everyone has the delete tool and that puts twice as much work on people who do have the tool. So, unfortunately, not all leads would be able to do it. That is just my thoughts on that. 23:55, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

We have the deletion category for a reason, if that's your argument, that we don't have the tools. You, Jayce, Spooky, and the other CMs are on often enough to keep up with it. <span style="">23:58, 02/5/2019

That is not the argument I am trying to make. Yes, we do have the tools. However, if we were to go the subpage route, these would be over 1300 images to create, and unfortunately we may not be able to keep up on it. It is not a matter of our activity but it may prove to be a hassle in the end. In my personal opinion, I do not see why we need to delete the pages (other than the clutter issue, which, generally, would not have any negative effect on the Wiki, it would not collapse it / break it / prevent users from editing). But, however, that is just how I see it. I am also not quite sure how other staff would react to wanting to delete those many images. 00:03, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

the edit conflicts dont even seem to be that bad of a problem.....this just seems less user friendly, an unecessary extra couple of steps, and this is what the limit is for?? also just because we do have the tools to delete it doesn't mean we're on the wiki all the time to keep up with deletions. we are doing other things. 00:06, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

http://prntscr.com/mh6cm0 edit conflicts really aren't that big of an issue to create all this clutter. we don't need it. <span style="">00:09, 02/6/2019

So... you wanted the idea but now you're against it? You've flip flopped a bit and it's a bit confusing. I was edit conflicted 5 times in a row when trying to fix the spacing issue left by VE, and it's just the redoes. We have incredibly active newer users and PCA's moving so fast. In the end, you don't have to agree but you kinda grilled Icy on the process for a second before going "nevermind," so its left it a bit confusing. —

Ok so here's an idea (i don't think it was brought up before but i haven't read all the replies), what about using the forums instead of subpages? That's what the other projects do for their nominations, so it would make sense. And we can still include them all on the approval page for easier viewing, I double checked and forums can be used as templates. I believe we can get around the standard forum template and breadcrumb links being included by just wrapping them in noinclude tags in the generator, so it would look exactly the same on the approval page as the subpages. I'm still not sure how it's handled when the same image goes up for approval multiple times (do the other projects have a way of handling that with nominations?), but at least this would avoid having a bunch of subpage clutter without requiring page deletion or history loss. Not sure if it would be an issue of crowding out the votes and discussions that are normally in the PCA forum, but if so perhaps we could have a separate forum just for art. (note: yes i realize that the forums are still pages/subpages, but the mentality behind it is different since there's meant to be lots of forum topics, so it probably won't feel like clutter)

WHile that's another solution, it still doesn't truly combat the main issue which is the massive amount of subpages. Ultimately, we can always just put all the subpages under the same category and that'd have almost the same effect, so I don't know if that much extra work to store it in forums would be beneficial... —

It wouldn't really be any extra work compared to the normal subpages. And I believe PC has well over a thousand nomination forums, and (afaik) nobody's had a problem with there being so many of those so far. The amount PCA would have would be very similar, especially if we didn't start using this until the kits/warriors.

But what is the difference, really? It is still the same clutter - there would still be several hundreds of forums left over, there really is no difference between the forums and the subpages, at least from what I can see. 03:57, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

Honestly there's not a big difference, it's mostly just the mentality of it. The forums were meant for that, and there's already a precedent for having hundreds of separate threads in there, and that method is used by all the other projects. Afaik the only reason PCA never did that originally was because it was easier to be able to view all the images on one page, which is now resolved, so it seems logical to just follow their lead. It's still a lot of pages, the only difference is that these are pages that the other projects already have lots of, and have no issue with.

Hm, so are you saying the difference is that people mainly will not have an issue with it because they are forums instead of subpages? I just do not really see the difference other than that, and forums usually are just for silver nominations/discussions/what not. Sorry if I am misunderstanding what you are saying. 04:06, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying. That is basically the only difference. And posting images for approval is basically PCA's versions of nominations, we just call it by a different name.

Got it. Thanks for clearing it up. But still, the same issue stands, the amount of pages. 04:10, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

Addition: You brought up an excellent point with the other projects, the amount of pages are not an issue there... not really sure why they would be considered one here as well. Still, my opinion is that the forum namespace is also probably incorrect. I do not know, what does everyone think? 04:13, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

My main issue with using forums is PCA forums are used for blanks as well as the family tree votes and official art votes. Unlike PC, PB and PA, PCA uses forums primarily for business related things. I think adding the chararts and "nominations" to that may genuinely make things cluttered. I think they should stay as subpages where we can contain them easier. —

Just a question
Hi, I saw Littlecloud's alt mc got declined to the one month limit, and I don't get the point of that. Someone work really hard on an image - they work on it for a month! - and then it got declined? Why? What is the point of that? I'm asking because Feathertail's alt apprentice is nearing a month and I really don't want that declined. Something else I noticed - in real life, tabby she-cats have some ginger in their pelt. So if I'm making a tabby she-cat, am I allowed to add some ginger since this is how it works in real life? -- 07:32, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

In PCA the current default ruling is to make tabbies without a specified pelt color brown, so it’d be just that without any ginger. They’d only get that color if it’s cited. I personally wasn’t around for when the one month limit started, but I’ve always understood it to be a prevention method for someone holding a reservation for too long (which doesn’t let others try it) and also because it encourages people to upload promptly so that the page doesn’t stall, knowing they have a lose limit. Which, one month is more than enough time to complete a project in almost any case, if you keep on top of updating it

First thing: I'm reuping almost every day, and it got CBAed three times if I'm right, it's not like I'm barely uploading it. Second, sorry that it wasn't clear what I meant about tabby she cats. I meant that brown tabby she-cat aren't just brown, they're brown with some ginger and their pelt. I'll link a pic if I'll find one, the she-cat I wanted to take a picture of won't let me do it.-- 14:52, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

We already have more than enough "realistic" standards for our art, despite the series itself being highly unrealistic. While it's good that people are paying attention to genetics, it really isn't necessary to force even more realism upon PCA; it takes away from the creativity when some of us are unable to make hyper-realistic patterns as it is.

As for the one month ruling... while I would be okay with making exceptions, generally the rule itself is fine. Otherwise, we'd have people intentionally hoarding images for months at a time while others don't get a chance to work on it. ​​

I tryed to re-up mine, whenever I could, and altho I think it was fair for it to be diclined, I think that kits (and possibly apprentices) could like a week more, because they are newer. Or maby it could be if you re-up often. but I think for newer people, who upload often, could get a week or so more. <font face="Tempus Sans ITC">❈ Love is Love, forever! ❈ =^.,.^= 20:47, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, I actually kind of agree. Newer users seem to get shafted by this one month limit, even though they have the commitment. As long as they upload consistently, I think it'd be okay to extend the one month limit. The "they can't reserve for another week" after they're declined for one month kinda shafts them more. For newer artists, this limit does feel against them. —

I would be more than happy to see the one month rule extended for users who work hard on their chararts and reupload consistently. Their hard work should not go to waste because they could not get it finished and approved by the deadline. The one month rule should be absolutely be implemented for warriors and up, and I think we can be more lenient for kits and apprentices. PCA shouldn't be about meeting deadlines, it should be about improvement and development. People who strive to improve should be rewarded. 02:59, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

I'm bringing back the subject of the tabby she-cats. I'm not stating we should tweak any tabby she-cat to have some ginger - definitely not - I'm just asking if I upload a tabby she-cat with ginger in her pelt, am I allowed to do that. And also, another thing in cat genetics. Again, I'm not stating we should do every cat like that, I'm just pointing this out. When she-cats are ginger, they're usually very pale ginger, looks something like Sandstorm. Of course if a ginger she-cat was mentioned to be dark, we should keep it like that, but if an allegiances only character was only mentioned to be "ginger she-cat" can we do her pale? -- 07:36, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Shade is always artist's choice. If the cat is only called ginger you're free to make the cat dark or pale ginger. Though for tabbies I'm not sure. Some ginger could be considered as a pale part but idk

I’ve seen many female tabby cats in my life and not once have I noticed any ginger unless she was a tortoiseshell tabby. My neighbors cat, for example, is a fluffbum of a black (brown with dark stripes) mackrel tabby and she has absolutely no trace of ginger on her. So ginger on tabby cats should be exclusively on tortoiseshell tabbies; if a character is described as a tabby, there should be no ginger (unless its a ginger tabby lmao). Tabby =/= tortoiseshell tabby. If you’re going for realism, a bit of gingerish colour on the nose is fine, and I’ll link examples when I get on my computer... I’m at work and its 4:26am rn lmao. <span style="">09:26, 02/5/2019

Honestly, gotta agree with above. I have a torbie myself and she's the first case I've seen of pure ginger on a brown tabby. (Torbies are so pretty qwq) However, I have a feeling you're referring to gradients such as this, where it appears ginger with light or as highlights. Or possibly the markings on a brown tabby's face. As far as I know, it is okay to add features like that to a brown tabby charart, since all tabbies generally have a lighter muzzle and lighter eyes. David's art comes to mind, as I know they will add lighter markings on cats cited as just tabbies. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's not considered ginger, just tabby markings, but that may not be what you're referring to. —

Echo that's precisely what I was getting at, thank for providing those examples <span style="">22:11, 02/5/2019

Tabby Rulings
So Spooky brought this up on the discord and me as well as some of the others talked about it, and I decided it'd be good to bring this up. Nuking some of our tabby rulings, that being that cream and ginger have to have stripes, and making that optional, as well as the default tabby coloring nuked as well, and tabbies of unmentioned color getting to be any color. That's the basis of this, and to sum it up, tabbies with unspecified colors getting to be any color rather than exclusively brown, and the option to have solid cream/ginger cats. <font color="#302B54" face="Segoe Script" >Squidward <font color="#483D8B" face="Segoe Script" >Plays <font color="#6A5ACD" face="Segoe Script" >All  <font color="#836FFF" face="Segoe Script" >Star. <font color="#302B54" face="Segoe Script" >I <font color="#483D8B" face="Segoe Script" >Am <font color="#6A5ACD" face="Segoe Script" >Ranko <font color="#836FFF" face="Segoe Script" >Kanzaki. 02:51, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

I agree with this 100%, as long as its a tabby it should count. Well in my opinion but with this when it just says pale tabby/tabby would a calico tabbies be able to be used? 03:00, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

That'd be great. --<span style="" title="No need to rush, my pace"> Silverfur's   <span style="" title="Don’t compare">  starry   <span style="" title="It’s alright to go slowly">  paws    <span style="" title="Go on your own path, my lane">  ~    04:11, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

kill the “brown tabby” bull. that makes means we have so many of the SAME type of image. Minor characters is a big example of why we should get rid of the tabby ruling. So many described as jut “tabby” that if this ruling stands, we might as well just use one image for all unspecified tabbies lol <span style="">16:17, 02/6/2019

I am 100% in favor of nuking the brown tabby rule. It forces people to make the same image over and over again, while there is a lot of room for creativity with vague descriptions. I also think we shouldn't be so strict on tabby styles. That also depletes an artist's potential for creativity. The tabby rogue I put up received several critiques for "triangle tabby" stripes (I hadn't even heard of this before), when it is a very common and fun style that I like to use. Not everyone wants to/can make super realistic tabby styles and there is really no need to with chararts, which is just fan art in reality. 16:27, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

To me, tabby color can be whatever van artist picks. For ginger cats, stripes optional because genetics, but i really think cream cats shouldn’t have them unless specified because it’s a huge assumption. I still personally support the original ruling against triangle tabbies, and would like that not to change, though. The project decided that for still valid reasons imo, and there’s a lot of ways to be creative and work around it

we should stay consistent with ginger, either all or none. and I for one am not going back to tweak all those, as it's a waste of time. if you really don't want to add stripes, just add like two stripes on the tail and face markings and make them really faint lmao (don't know about cream since that was only extended since cream is dilute ginger I guess)

triangle tabbies should still not be allowed, mostly because those don't look like actual stripes. (not a realism thing here. just that they don't look like a tabby.) and one of two triangleish looking ones on a tabby are fine, it's normally an issue when it's like this. 20:08, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

I'm all for artist's choice for unspecified tabbies, especially with all the minor characters tabbies so many tabbies. Especially since the authors have different takes on what color a simple "tabby" is. I'm with David about the ginger cats. I see no harm in adding stripes to gingers, and I really, really don't want to tweak all of them. Not really sure about cream either. 20:31, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

Well we wouldn't have to tweak any of the ginger tabbies. In fact we wouldn't need to touch any. What I'm trying to say is that if it's agreed on then after that were to happen onward, ginger cats can be solid OR striped. <font color="#302B54" face="Segoe Script" >Squidward <font color="#483D8B" face="Segoe Script" >Plays <font color="#6A5ACD" face="Segoe Script" >All  <font color="#836FFF" face="Segoe Script" >Star. <font color="#302B54" face="Segoe Script" >I <font color="#483D8B" face="Segoe Script" >Am <font color="#6A5ACD" face="Segoe Script" >Ranko <font color="#836FFF" face="Segoe Script" >Kanzaki. 21:08, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot to say that I am okay with the ginger cats and cream cats being optional tabbies unless cited otherwise. Also yeah I see what you mean about the triangle tabbies, David. But I also don’t think the stripes on my image look like that at all. 21:12, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

I'm all for this as it'll create diversity between some very minor characters enough to make them individuals. But, would it still be acceptable for a person to make them brown tabbies if thats what they think, as the artist, the charart should be? Sounds a little stupid when I type it up, but, for clarification purposes it might be handy to have a response. 21:51 Wed Feb 6 2019

I agree with making the color artist's choice when the description just says "Tabby." Obviously the artist should feel free to make a tabby brown if they'd like to. Personally I like making most of my tabbies brown, but should artists want to make them gray or golden or something they should be able do that.

Please nuke the tabby rule, it annoys me greatly. There's zero reason why we need to make them brown. I'm also perfectly fine with making stripes optional on cream and ginger cats, but would also not object to removing the stripes on cream cats we've already done, since that's the only reason most of them were tweaked to begin with.

I agree that people should be able to make their tabby any color they want. I am also in favor of making tabbies on ginger cats optional - we do not have to go and remove stripes from every single tabby, but perhaps if the OA wants to nominate it to get rid of it, that should be allowed as well. 03:23, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

I agree about making unspecified tabbies whatever colour. I also agree with not having stripes for cream cats. I’m still mulling over the ginger thing, though. 03:56, February 7, 2019 (UTC)

I am and always have been a big supporter of realism, and this is no different. I'm still in support of requiring stripes (of some sort at least, if only on the head since "solid" and ticked gingers still have those), however PCA draws some really odd lines for when realism is required and when it's not. Some examples being tortie colors being allowed to be basically anything two-tone even those there's a very small set of color combos torties realistically come in (with all of them including either ginger or cream), and all sorts of unrealistic stripe patterns being perfectly fine, or highly unrealistic white markings/markings on top of white, or overall unrealistic color/patterns on cats that have otherwise realistic description, along with many other things. So despite the fact that I highly support realism whenever possible, if PCA doesn't care about realism in all other cases, it is questionable why ginger stripes are an exception to that.