Warriors Wiki talk:Characters

Spoiler Tag
I am glad that the spoiler tag has been moved up for Brightheart and Briarlight at least. I'm just noticing that a lot of main quotes, not just the these two cats, give big spoilers. Most of the time, even the name of the character is a very good spoiler. I think the spoiler tag needs to be moved up to above the main quote. 08:12, March 13, 2015 (UTC)

Mmhmm, I say move it. I'm totally up for it and would gladly help with that. Some of these quotes are really iffy and there's no point in changing the quotes tbh- they're main ones for a reason.

Schmeh, radical idea here, not really, but do we still need the spoiler tags? 17:26, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Definitely! Spoiler tags warn that this will contain spoilers. At least the history points out which spoilers it has. 21:02, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

I'd say go for it, do you want me to start now? 07:38, April 16, 2015 (UTC)

Maybe let's wait a bit longer for other people to comment. 23:49, April 17, 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure anyone else is going to comment, so I would think going ahead and moving things would be a good idea.

Alright let's do it. 06:02, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

(wow, late sorry) This entire wiki is basically spoils. Does it really warn against anything our readers don't already know? 04:59, May 15, 2015 (UTC)

I say so. Like I have a family member reading the series for the first time, and I basically banned them from Warriors wiki, although I am okay with them looking at a few pages... as long as I'm there. I think others can relate, like when a new book comes out, I see a few spoilers around before I actually read the book. I think it's better to keep with the spoiler tags, it's more polite to new people anyway. I think if anyone knows warriors, they can expect to see spoilers in the name of the article, I think we can help make it easier for them. 00:27, May 16, 2015 (UTC)

tbh, Atelda's right. The entire wiki is a spoiler. While it may be polite, having chararts with injuries, descriptions that aren't in the allegiances, and even plot summaries are spoilers in their own right. The only thing that isn't a spoiler is reading the book. Having one spoiler warning on the front page, or even doing what other wikis do and stick the entire article under a "read more spoiler warning" would be good as well. The Dragon Age Wiki, does this, I believe. Or, we could implement what the Mass Effect Wiki does, and have spoilers for individual arcs. Doesn't matter if we even do anything— we'll always be a spoiler-filled website.

I honestly think putting spoiler tags at the tops of articles should be enough. If we took off all the spoiler content we wouldn't have a wiki at all. We've warned the people; if they want to read on anyway it's on them. Besides, as Atelda said, they should know already that there are spoilers 14:20, May 16, 2015 (UTC)

I don't think anyone said anything about removing the content. I said under a read-more spoiler thing- all you'd need to do is click to view it.

I think we both misunderstood each other. That wasn't what I meant; I was just saying that basically the whole wiki is a spoiler. I think I could have been more clear. 20:19, May 16, 2015 (UTC)

I understand the courtesy aspect of the spoiler warning, yet you really can't deny the nature of being a wiki intent on being the best encyclopedia on the Warriors series that we can be. Plus, is simple courtesy a strong reason to keep battling all the difficulty we have had maintaining that naive mindset that people come here not looking or expecting spoilers? Stealthfire, if you have to be there to prevent them from looking at a few pages on the wiki, then it's clear that the spoiler warnings really aren't doing much. 04:11, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

I think more for new people just putting it at the top is better. I'm not sure what the fuss is about. 04:55, May 28, 2015 (UTC)

It's not so much fuss as it is the necessity of it that is being discussed. It seems like the spoiler alert is becoming an antiquated practice that is becoming unnecessary in my opinion. 00:36, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

I actually have an idea, and I don't know if this has been brought up or not. I took a peek at what I believe to be the German Warriors wiki, and they have like drop down menus like most users have in their profiles to reduce the clutter. Maybe we could use those for each of the books they're in, their descriptions, etc.? Storm &#9835;  01:31, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

-nudges conversation- Storm  &#9835;  17:09, June 5, 2015 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean Storm? This is sounds interesting. 01:41, June 17, 2015 (UTC)

She means exactly what I suggested above. It's a show/hide thing that reduces clutter.

Yeah like how some people have on their profiles 'cats i like' and there's a hide/show thing. Maybe we could edit that and bumble it around a little bit to fit on every page. Like I know how Firestar's page is ridiculously long, and I mean really long. It would help reduce the size of the page if we put those kinds of drop down menus for every book/novella/whatever that they've been in. But in books that they're only in the allegiances and not seen in the book, we can keep those there, but still have them in the show/hide thing. I think we should make the spoiler tag thing more visible as well. Storm &#9835;  02:00, June 17, 2015 (UTC)

That's a good idea. I use the same thing for my profile, but I find that it takes longer for my computer to load so we want to be careful. 08:43, June 18, 2015 (UTC)

I still don't understand the rational of still having the spoiler tag let alone making it larger. Similarly, drop down boxes should probably only be used on the major characters and they should definitely not be for every single book. The extra coding is also hard to handle on loading and especially mobile. Honestly, I think it's fine as it is. 20:58, June 18, 2015 (UTC)

I think the spoiler tag is big enough, I don't get why we need to make it larger. The dropboxes are great, especially with characters that are the narrators, since that has lots of detail. Who knows? If we use dropboxes, maybe we candetail those sections a bit more too. 22:32, July 1, 2015 (UTC)

We could do like this wiki. When ever u click on a page it pops up with a warning. Emberstar  Floating in the stars of ember 05:54, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

FYI itll take like 10 seconds to load up Emberstar   Floating in the stars of ember 05:56, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

On those wikis with the spoiler warnings that pop up, it takes forever to load and sometimes don't even fully do. Putting that coding will make it hard for people to view the wiki. It's not like we don't have a spoiler warning at all. If people choose to ignore it, it's their fault. Plus, the very nature of a wiki is that it has spoilers - people should know that when they come here. Sorry, but I do not support implementing that coding but I could see maybe using dropboxes 14:44, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Agreeing here. It will take a while to load, and I look at a lot of pages sometimes in a day, it will become terribly irritating. 01:00, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

Maybe we can just use tabbers for the books the cats appear in? Then instead of 'show' in the corner of it, we can put 'reveal spoiler' or something like that, but maybe for cats like briarlight and brightheart put their charart and description in a tabber as well?? 14:19, July 13, 2015 (UTC)

While I still believe the spoiler tag is a moot point, it should be enough. Like Icebreeze said, we gave them a heads up, they can do what they want with it. 01:04, July 14, 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, I still think the spoiler tag is enough. I still think that with some long pages we can use tabbers on the histories. 00:00, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

Anymore comments? 01:40, August 6, 2015 (UTC)

I say go ahead for it, for the main characters/narrators, use a tabber, but for most other pages, it's best to stick with a spoiler tag as they usually aren't as important. 15:56, August 10, 2015 (UTC)

I've made a test page for the changes we would make if we went ahead (this also includes from other discussions). I got a major character and minor-ish character. I'm finding the history is much shorter, but the contents links are working weird. 02:30, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Page Numbers Idea-ish
Because of the difficulty of the translation with the page numbers between the ebooks and the prints, I was wondering if anyone thinks it would be a good effort to find the rate of change between the ebooks and the prints. It would be, for the most part, simple enough to find the equation, but I would need a lot of volunteers and it would take a bit of time, especially with the books that I don't have. It would be yield extremely accurate results (although trials would have to ensure that) and might be a good tool for everyone to use across all the projects with the potential exception of PCA. It's just a whim that I thought of and thought it might be useful, so what do you guys think? 02:11, May 27, 2015 (UTC)

I completely agree. I have been thinking about how ebooks are getting more and more popular, and the three novellas hardcopies are clashing with the ebooks. I think something does need to change, like a double cite: "Revealed on page 12 of Dovewing's Silence/page 127 of Tales from the Clans". I sometimes wonder if it also needs to display the chapter in the same way, because I don't think many ebooks display the page number. 04:24, May 27, 2015 (UTC)

Yah... ebooks dont have page numbers... Emberstar  Floating in the stars of ember 05:20, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Or you could count the page numbers, or even just tweak the ref template so it says something like [Tales from the Clans, page number, Dovewing's Silence] or something like that.

Something like that, my ebook shows page numbers. Do we need to go three way??? Dovewing's Silence page ?, Dovewing's Silence Chapter ?, Tales From the Clans Page ?. I think there needs to be a better system for this. 09:05, June 18, 2015 (UTC)

Comments? 22:32, July 1, 2015 (UTC)

How would we do this? I does seem like complicated coding a little. 01:22, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

I think we somewhat strayed from the original idea behind this, but it's actually much simpler than if/ifeq tags and template coding. 01:07, July 14, 2015 (UTC)

I think you took what I said the wrong way, Stealth. With what I said, you wouldn't need to add the chapter number for the novella- we can use references from Tales from the Clans, The Untold Stories, and now even Shadows of the Clans instead of using the novellas. If anyone questions it, then we can provide a chapter number.

Also if statements need to burn with unholy fire and lightning. I hate how annoying they are and they're too complicated...and also break quite frequently. ._.

I still think we need to do a double cite, cause I still have some novellas as e-books and it will be hard searching for a cite on there. 00:04, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

Anymore comments? 01:40, August 6, 2015 (UTC)

Ebooks have no page at all, screens have different sizes, shapes and all that. You can read them horizontally or vertically and so on. It would be near to impossible to find the ratio between the number of ebook pages and the number of pages in a regular paperback book. I'd say we should just put the cite in and warn the reader that it is a cite from an ebook. 05:34, August 7, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a rare few do. (I have a kindle reader which is made to read ebooks off, and it displays page numbers) I still think we need to consider ebook anyway, especially since Mapleshade's Vengeance is not on hardcover yet. 01:34, August 17, 2015 (UTC)

Yo, speaking of FAs...
So, the featured article hasn't been changed since January, although a planned FA was suppose to go up March-April. It's still the beginning of June, and if not, there's always July. =) Similarly though, Skye or I could write one up. 05:05, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

I think that Daisy, Scourge, and Patchkit (MV) should go in the ready to be featured list. Emberstar  Floating in the stars of ember 05:11, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Even if we don't get one right away, I'm always willing to write one- It's been a long time since I've done one for PC. I wouldn't mind doing a newer article either, so Patchkit looks nice to me.

I would like to see Patchkit as main cat... i also think that Scourge should be main. I mean its been a while since an un clan born rogue was featured. I want Daisy because well i like Daisy and shes been in the series for a while but has never been featured. Emberstar  Floating in the stars of ember 06:01, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

They should be changed 1 a month. Emberstar  Floating in the stars of ember 06:02, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

I'm quite happy with Patchkit. After all, I wrote a lot of it and am very proud of how it turned out. It's amazing what happens when we edit and work together. 06:04, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Patchkit sounds perfect! His page is very well-written ^^ 22:45, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

It looks like everyone likes Patchkit. Any other comments? 21:51, June 22, 2015 (UTC)

What's going on with this?? Are we changing the FA, having a vote, ect?

I'm trying to sort it with Beebs but I think we are having a vote. 00:05, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

If activity improves, then honestly, it'll be a vote, but if it doesn't, we'll have a vote, but on the page. Just my two cents. 00:36, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

Vote now? 23:17, August 14, 2015 (UTC)

Alternate Descriptions
Why is the descriptions trivia being deleted? I'm just noticing and I really see no reason why. 21:57, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Because the stuff from Cats of the Clans and The Ultimate Guide is just an excuse for more art. Littlecloud does not look orange, Sharpclaw doesn't look brown-and-white, and in some cases, we cannot tell which cat is which, especially with Littlecloud. And those who don't have access to the app probably wouldn't know which one Sharpclaw is. I'm deleting it because it can come into major questioning- every other time I've said this, I've gotten told to be quiet as it deletes good images. With those pages, sometimes there is more than one cat shown in the photos, and just like the cover art on the books, if it's not explicitly stated which is which, to add them is an assumption. Heathertail doesn't look ginger, and with Stonefur, there are three cats in the picture, which is him, Mistystar (Mistyfoot at the time), and Graypool.

I agree with you on images with Littlecloud and Runningnose and Stonefur and that, but Heathertail definitely looks orange in my opinion. this is colour-picked off the image. I'm pretty sure it is not light brown. 22:22, June 5, 2015 (UTC)

But do we know what rank she was in that photo? Just because she was mentioned as something in the paragraph doesn't mean that's what the picture represents. Given that the same art was also used in Cats of the Clans... she was called Heatherpaw then, not Heathertail. There are also many different shades of light brown, and honestly, all of that is thrown out the window by not knowing her rank. That shade used on her image looks slightly like what Beebs used for Clovertail's chararts, actually. Colorpicking on those images won't do much justice at all, imho- given that those are painted, with probably watercolors or something along those lines (idk what Wayne used to paint them with, but I love his artwork nevertheless), you're never going to get the exact shades he used because of shadows and highlights and other various things on an image.

Below the picture lists their name. With cats of the Clans, Hethertail is listed as Heatherpaw and Willowshine is listed as Willowpaw. I think that gives a good hint. 09:05, June 18, 2015 (UTC)

While yeah, colors can look different in different lightings, there's no way a brown cat is going to look bright ginger unless everything else in the picture is orange. Which in Heatherpaw's picture, it definitely wasn't. Lighting isn't just a go-to argument whenever you want to argue about art. Also, we had this argument ages ago. We could either make art for every rank with the description or go with the rank that they held in the books at the time the book was published. But either way its an alternate description and should be added. 15:19 Sun Jun 28 2015

I think we do it by the name that is below the picture, and the time of rank the character was in when the book was released. 01:22, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

nah im still disagreeing because yeah sure it has the name at the time, but that by no means says its them as said rank. its assumung lmao 09:45, July 18, 2015 (UTC)

We never decided to make art for every rank mentioned- that was people whining about art. Regardless, it's still an assumption and shouldn't warrant an image. Mention, sure, I guess..but in general, a name does not distinguish a rank and we shouldn't be assuming as such. We don't for cats without a rank mentioned, so how is this any different?

It gives enough evidence of what rank they are, so I don't see why we don't go with that evidence. 00:06, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but what evidence? A name is not proof of a rank, nor is a mention. it's different in the books themselves, but just a simple piece of artwork is not clear and concise proof of anything, imho.

While we should add the mistakes to the trivia, as they're obviously color errors, we have no proof of their ranks, regardless. You can't just use a name to prove their ranks. For example, Palefoot doesn't have a rank, despite having a confirmed name. Even if it was something like "-paw", it would still be an assumption to say that they were an apprentice. I agree with Cloudy here. 14:41, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

Agreeing with Skye and Fox. We can't just assume that the current rank of the cat is the one the image, it could be in any, and making an alt for every rank seems really unnecessary - so I don't believe we should make any. As for the trivia, sure we could list it, but I don't think for pictures with more than one cat in them. Do we literally have any proof of which cat is which, if we knew nothing about Warriors and the cats' descriptions? 00:26, July 29, 2015 (UTC)

Nope. There's no way to find out which cat is which just by the pictures alone. I know when I first read Cats of the Clans, I thought Runningnose was the tabby, not Littlecloud, and I kept that belief for the longest time... So right there is proof that you can't assume anything based on pictures and names.

We use what evidence that's been given to us. The names are there, why not use it? It's evidence and it matches everything we have. Why is it we don't seem to like assuming? Even the littlest things? It says Flametail is ginger, so we assume his ginger. It says in the picture that cat is named Heatherpaw, so match it to publishing dates and data, it's Heathertail as an apprentice. Simple as that. 03:31, July 29, 2015 (UTC)

The names are there, yes, but it does not represent a rank. And Icebreeze was talking about pictures with multiple cats in them- we can't assume that one cat is one and one is another. Also, for the names, so what? It's one static picture, and we don't know what time frame they're being show in. There is no evidence as to what rank they are in that specific picture. It's not like they're dynamic and change as a different rank is mentioned. If anything, this seems like an excuse for art- given that it fluctuates and shows a cat's entire history sometimes, imho, that is not evidence enough for me to give a cat alts based on the appearance in the picture.

I should also point out that this is never how we've done things when it comes to alts. If there is no concrete proof as to their rank in the picture, then they don't get an alt. A simple name under the picture is not proof. If someone finds proof that says "this picture shows Heathertail as a warrior", then fine. The summaries are not captions of the images.

Is there anymore comments before this is decided and archived? It seems the majority have voted against charart, even though this is PC. 05:33, August 9, 2015 (UTC)

No more comments. Go ahead. 01:50, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

Kinfolk
I was looking for an accurate cite for Morning Whisker, (it's kinda invalid now since the link no longer shows the proper comment) when I came across this lovely gem of information from Kate:
 * As far as I’m concerned, nieces, nephews and cousins aren’t a Warriors concept. Vicky and I have always gone to great pains to make sure that kits refer to their kin by name not familial connection. Occasionally we’ll use the words mother, father, brother or sister for emphasis or because no other word will do, but I have certainly never intentionally used the words niece, nephew or cousin because warriors simply don’t think in those terms. “Kin” is as close as they get to recognising family ties.

So... umm... what exactly do we do with this? Do we revamp the family sections with this information? Given that we are an encyclopedia, we're kinda bound by the information we're given.... I have no idea what we'll do, but it's obvious we'll need to do something.

Hmm, It is good to list all the family members we know, but we can try to change it a little. Maybe, we can just have the immediate family listed, then leave the rest as a tabber listed as 'Rest of Kin', like the see more section on Cloudstar's page. That sorta lists them as kin, but lets us know how they are kin because I think that's important. 00:30, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

I honestly don't think we should remove anything/add any sections. Sure, the cats don't think abut it, but we are a full encyclopedia and a niece/nephew is a proper part of a family. 08:48, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

I like Stealthfire's idea. While we do need to adapt it to match what Kate said, labeling non-immediate family as "kin", I believe we should keep their exact relationship so we can be as accurate as possible, and I think it would be useful to those using the wiki as a reference. It's important information, and there's no need to get rid of it 16:06, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

yeah theres no point just making it more complicated to tell, maybe put a disclaimer or something saying that while we organise them into cousins and whatever, the cats do not go beyond immediate family, basically. 19:39, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that's a good idea. While the cats don't see each other beyond immediate family, we kind of do, so it's needed to have the relations listed and all. 00:39, June 15, 2015 (UTC)

Along with Stealthfire's suggestion concerning possibly using a tabber or collapsible box, I think we should also rename the section from "Family" to "Kin". 02:06, June 16, 2015 (UTC)

Renaming "Family" to "Kin" seems like a good idea. And I don't think we need to get rid of the nieces and nephews and such as it organizes them for us, but the disclaimer would work. 20:34 Wed Jun 17 2015

I like that idea, renaming Family to kin. Makes it more warriors like. 21:51, June 22, 2015 (UTC)

Anymore comments? 01:22, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

I don't think anyone else is going to say anything- so we'd be renaming family to kin, and perhaps making a note somewhere...? We could always add I mean, I think it would work if it's put at the direct top of the section when we change it from "family" to "kin"?

I think we use the tabber like on Cloudstar's page, (just the other family members the Clans have no name for other than kin) and that warning is good too. Renaming Family to kin too, because the books use kin a lot more than family. (do they ever say the word 'family'?) 00:12, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

They rarely ever use the word family- I'm currently rereading the series, and I'm on Rising Storm...and I've only really ever seen the word "kin" used, even with references to Fireheart and Cloudkit/Cloudpaw- he's called "his sister's firstborn", "his sister's son", or "Fireheart's kin".

I fully agree with renaming family to 'kin', and I wouldn't object to using a tabber for really long family lines. However, cats with say, only a few named relatives [see; the DotC cats sans Wind's line] don't really need it, imo. Any more opinions, or is it best to get started with this? 00:44, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

I've made a test page for the changes we would make if we went ahead (this also includes from other discussions). I got a major character and minor-ish character. The side template of the page needs a little tweak, but other than that it's actually looking pretty good. Also if you look at the coding, I also tried Snowed's idea and it fits. 02:30, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Mistlekit (TPB)
Is this really a 100% confirmation on her name and description? I'm starting to not agree with that... I mean, it says:
 * Then let's call her Mistlekit, since she was unnamed, and your description of her sounds perfect. :)

I don't see how that's different from some of the other cites we've had to consider invalid. Given that the description was decided by a fan, and she didn't confirm it as canon- she just said that it sounded perfect. It kinda reminds me of the "I like it- yes" thing that Kate did for Breezepelt and Nightcloud being on the run (which we know did not happen).

Description wise, if we're not going with the fan description, then the in-book description of dark tabby works. Not sure on the name, though. 13:20, July 11, 2015 (UTC)

Maybe we need to ask Kate what she means by 'sounds perfect'. Is that an approval that it is true or in her opinion it's a good description? 01:05, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

Good idea, Stealth! Just saying but that means Flamenose's description would also be invalid as well. 02:46, July 13, 2015 (UTC)

It would be invalid to begin with, as that is not a direct confirmation of his description.

Okay I'll go and ask Kate, hopefully she will answer soon. 00:06, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

She answered but I'll quote it:

''I cannot confirm any description that does not appear in the books because I am just one of many imaginations that go into making Warriors. What I think may not be what another Erin thinks and, not matter how much I’d like to give you a definitive answer, the moment I do, I may be contradicting another Erin’s opinion.''

That doesn't really answer the question... 21:57, August 10, 2015 (UTC)

Comments? 22:05, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

If she can't give an answer, then I think we need to remove it. Both Mistlekit and Flamenose's things can be called into question, and to keep it wouldn't be right.

I'm gonna have to disagree on Flamenose. Vicky was the one who wrote GC and she's the one who told us their names and that he was Larksong's mate. So I think what she says goes for this one. 22:29, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

I was talking about the description for Flamenose. What she said is not confirmation of his description.

Jacob is pretty much spot on! Pretty much in my definition means almost definitely, so I would think we could at least change the description so he's a ginger cat. The darker face, legs, and tail part could be what Vicky wasn't definitive on. 22:40, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

No. We cannot take bits and pieces of a description to what we think she was talking about. It's either all or nothing. To do anything else would be an assumption.

Based on what Kate said and the wording of the cites for Mistlekit and Flamenose's descriptions, I don't think there was ever a definite confirmation of what they looked like, or in Mistlekit's case, even her name. So I think they should be removed. 23:25, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

Her name was confirmed, and the fact she is a female. That's all. 01:37, August 20, 2015 (UTC)

imo only mistlekit's name and gender should be counted; her description was already in the book, technically... 02:03, August 20, 2015 (UTC)

Character Trivia
So...while going over my userpages, I found little something I must've come up with a while ago for characters with longer trivia sections must've been during some sort of conversation about the matter, idk. Anyways, I thought perhaps I could bring that back to the surface for everyone to have a look at, just in case we ever wanted a more discreet way of taking care of long trivia sections not necessarily for just character pages, but for any pages with trivia. It obviously needs a lot of tinkering and messing with before it becomes anything official; I just thought I'd share the idea and see what everyone thought of it. hhh i sound so awkward im sorry im really not used to bringing up these sorts of things 14:50 Sun Jul 12

I think this is a great idea berry! this would make the trivia sections much neater :) 14:58, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a good way to trim pages! There is a way to put cites in these boxes, correct? 16:33, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

Yes, cites can be placed in these boxes. haha ignore what i used for the example i used what came to mind first shh 17:16 Sun Jul 12

Hmm, we have been talking about using tabs for descriptions and history. I support this, but we don't want too many tabs. I think we can keep this non-collapsible and yeah sort it like you have. I've thought of another section to add: Related to other Cats or something along those lines. 21:46, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

Oh and I'd also thought about the order of the trivia themselves. I think it's best to put them in order of the timeline. Yeah so called Firepaw when already a warrior first, then The Darkest Hour one. If we cannot go in timeline order (like an author mention) then we put it based on when it was released. I also suggest an author information section too, so information from the author. 22:08, July 12, 2015 (UTC)

Woah woah, let's stick to the topic at hand. I think it's a good formatting tool, I'm just concerned that it might look odd with the number of trivia statements we have in correlation to the collapsible boxes. 01:14, July 14, 2015 (UTC)

Is it okay for me to give this a bit of a bump? I'd like some more suggestions for how to improve this idea and want to see how many are actually in favour. 12:11 Fri Jul 24

I really like that idea, Berry. I think it'd be great to go ahead and implement that. I don'tknow if it'd be odd for the trivia statements - I think we should put it on an article, one with a lot of trivia, and one with not a lot, and see what it'd look like. We can work from there. 17:01, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

I like Icy's idea. We should try testing it out on those two kinds of trivia, and see how it'll go from there. 11:38, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

Agreeing here too. I'd prefer to try it on characters that are not too major but fit the criteria, since this is just a test. I'd recommend Goldenflower as the bigger trivia test, and Whitetail as the smaller. 01:23, August 2, 2015 (UTC)

Never mind that, I've made a test page for the changes we would make if we went ahead (this also includes from other discussions). I got a major character and minor-ish character. Firestar's one looks pretty good (full credit to Berry here) but Adderfang I cannot get the line in between the two trivia points >< help Berry! 02:30, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Fixed; all that was wrong was that you didn't have the correct code. The whole thing needs to be there; removing the 'mv-collapsible wikitable' thing removes a lot of what makes the table the table. It turned out well; thanks for setting out these examples, Stealth. im so proud of myself ;-; 06:33 Tue Aug 11

It looks good! However, I really can't get past the idea that it just looks excessive on minor characters. 21:12, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah that's why I tweaked the minor character page a little. It seems better to just have box lines without a heading to match the other trivias. 21:48, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

StarClan Residence
Basically, it's the same thing that I said about moor runner and tunnelers - shouldn't cats who lie in StarClan get a rank name, like the Dark Forest cats do? For example, since we have

Leader: Tigerstar

Dark Forest Residence: Tigerstar

shouldn't we have

Warrior: Iciloo

StarClan: Iciloo

or basically,

StarClan warrior, StarClan resident, idk, whichever. Thoughts? 03:44, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

We talked about the Dark Forest resident, (why does it have resident that's such a long name) no we are not considering Tigerstar a leader. They are formed into an unofficial Clan, but don't get leader ranks. StarClan basically has two ranks, normal StarClan resident and StarClan kit. That's already been sorted. 05:01, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

What? That's not what I meant. I mean as in listing ranks...like,

Kit: Tigerpaw

Warrior: Tigerclaw

Leader: Tigerstar

Dark Forest cat: Tigerstar

There's no ranking in there. I'm talking about "StarClan cat", just like Dark Forest. 05:09, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

I think we should do that. All the cats are the same rank there - a StarClan cat- not a leader/warrior/apprentice whatever they were alive. 22:36, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Ice. We should give them a rank, since they have StarClan blanks in PCA, why can't we do 'StarClan Resident'? I think it's a good idea. 22:42, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

I see what you mean sorry for the confusion :) I'm neutral on this. I don't totally agree with giving a name to the Dark Forest residents, and changing their affiliations, since it already lists where they have gone after death. If it's happened with Dark Forest though, I see no reason for it to happen with StarClan cats. 01:05, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

Why would we do it for one, and not for the other? It doesn't seem fair.

They drop their titles and no longer consider themselves 'true members' of their Clans after death; StarClan/Dark Forest is their Clan now. The affiliation should be changed and add the name. 07:22 Sun Aug 9

Any other comments on this? 03:20, August 16, 2015 (UTC)

I think we can start now, tbh. It's only fair to give them the rank if the DF cats got the rank, and nobody is really against it... (I support it btw.) 03:28, August 16, 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough, to be honest. If the DF cats get them, then so should they. Feel free to start going ahead with this. 04:06, August 16, 2015 (UTC)

I'm starting to feel the post-death tab is becoming useless. :/ Should we just remove it from all pages? 04:18, August 16, 2015 (UTC)

Minor characters
Since the topic was brought up again, I'd like to propose that we make a page for extremely minor characters. Here's an idea for a template, and here's an idea for a layout for the page. Opinions? 12:09 Thu Jul 30

That's not a bad idea at all. :) I like this, but what about if the character has more than one art? It's probably unlikely but what does everyone think? 20:37, July 30, 2015 (UTC)

If the character has more than one image, the character pixels gallery would work just fine. 08:03 Wed Aug 5

Is this for every single character that is mentioned in the books? 12:25, August 6, 2015 (UTC)

No, it's extremely minor characters that have some significance, or just extremely minor characters. Like some unnamed BloodClan warriors in the BloodClan battle. Some cats there appeared in more than one sentence, like the indentical gray toms recognised Barley as a former BloodClan cat. We could also look at the Dark Forest battle. I'd say unnamed characters that are mentioned in more than on sentence. 22:00, August 6, 2015 (UTC)

I've started a list of minor characters with the series. Just to say, but there is an error to the coding in the Charart template, since it goes after the main page name rather than the title. 08:05, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

Err, it's way too short and doesn't list allegiances and book appereances. I think Berry's one is pretty good. 10:40, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

What??!!! I wasn't trying to take over Berry's version. That page is a page for potential minor characters and it just contains information about them. Not the actual page. Why the heck would I even try to take over Berry's page? It's rude, condescending and stupid .-. 11:26, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

???? It's just a list of unnamed characters by book and the info we have about them...? Rather than an actual template/page layout like Berry's...? Anyway, I'm not too sure we should make a page for all of them - I don't think the 'Orange WindClan warrior' who was part of a patrol or something gets a page - pages should be reserved for unnamed characters with somewhat of a significance (Dappletail's Kit, Lowbranch's Mother, etc.) Maybe for the most minor characters, we could have a page like 'minor unnamed characters' and categorize it by book, the info about the characters put in using Berry's template. Idk. 13:45, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

That...was the idea we started on. That's why I made the template. One big page for every extremely minor character too minor even for a page. That's why the page layout's there. That's what I image the page would end up looking like; lists of cats with info and the history. Also, I think Burnt's list is only there as that; a list. Not an attempt at replacing my template idea, so could we calm down a little? 13:49 Sat Aug 15

All right, my apologies. I think I missed something in the discussion, oops. 13:55, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I came across that way Brunt. It wasn't my intention. 00:55, August 16, 2015 (UTC)

Smoky and Coriander
In Smoky's and Coriander's articles, it said that they're both mates, which wasn't confirmed. On Smoky's family tree, it shows that Coriander is his mate. Without any proof they are mates, it shouldn't be up there. Songheart (talk) 21:59, July 30, 2015 (UTC)

It looks like it's clearly said in Bramblestar's Storm, given that not only did Smoky say that Coriander replaced Floss, he was brushing his fur up against her, and even Daisy is shocked, saying that he thought Smoky loved Floss. It's clearly obvious they're mates. Just because there's not a page number does not make a cite invalid.

I know. That's why I removed them, because I thought there wasn't anything saying they were mates. Songheart (talk) 22:12, July 30, 2015 (UTC)Songheart

It was added before I could obtain a hardbound copy of Bramblestar's Storm, and I just forgot to change it, is all. Next time, just ask instead of removing the information claiming it isn't valid. =P We allow the chapter numbers, because otherwise, most the stuff would be considered null and void... since not everyone gets a hardbound copy right when the books are released. I know I need to wait a few days, and then I go through and fix most of the cites I've added... I just happened to forget about those, is all. The cite is very clearly stated in the book and chapter specified. We do the same thing for novellas, as they do not have page numbers.

Clearly obvious =/= confirmed, though. We need an actual confirmation on that. And for 'replaced', it could also mean 'replaced Floss as a mouser' which is what the barn cats are. I'm pretty sure we've had similar cases in the past, but ones that we couldn't consider valid because it wasn't directly said. 01:24, July 31, 2015 (UTC)

Well, the "I thought Smoky loved Floss" comment doesn't exactly say nothing, y'know.

That's the only comment that gives up any backing; otherwise there's nothing else, and even then it doesn't outright state it. I'm pretty we can't use assumptions as cite, can we? 21:45, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

I mean, that almost outright says that Smoky and Floss are no longer mates as he's taken in another one. You would never say something like that to anyone unless you were certain they were with someone else. <span style="">07:18 Sun Aug 9

Even if that may be the case, they could be not mates, perhaps she is just assuming. Either way, unless we get a direct confirmation, like how so many other pairings have needed to be in the past [Lionheart and Frostfur, for example], that's just an assumption, even with sufficient backing. 12:53, August 9, 2015 (UTC)

I sorta get what you mean Bbun but I kinda disagree, but since it's how we do it around here... do we even know if they are fully mates? They could be on their way to becoming mates but aren't yet. 01:50, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

Character Descriptions
Alright, this is becoming too major and confusing to not discuss about. Many many pages with character descriptions are being removed. Like Sharpclaw (SC) and his sharp eyes, and Clear Sky and his icy eyes. Why? We already sorted out the synonym thing and suddenly we are removing everything that describes the eyes' colours. I do not understand at all.

I think we also need a new system for this stuff, as I keep getting put in the dark with this and it is just leading to much confusion. 01:48, August 3, 2015 (UTC)

Basically everything that's not a physical description, like soft paws, powerful claws, etc. You can't see those, you'd have to feel them. Physical descriptions are like something you see at first glance. 02:00, August 3, 2015 (UTC)

Whoever added the Clear Sky thing didn't even check the context. It said his eyes looked like chips of ice because they were narrowed. Context is everything, and whoever wants to add things needs to read before they do. Also, powerful claws, soft paws, ect... that stuff makes no sense to have in a description.

And I saw on Pips description, the dog, that he liked to run around and sometimes chase cats. That does not need to be in a description. 02:25, August 3, 2015 (UTC)

If anything, it's best to establish what's in a description, and what's not in one. You know, to make it easier for once? Perhaps explaining certain contexts and what they mean for desc. , maybe? 00:29, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me, Beebs. A description should be what you see at first glace- ie; pelt color, eye color, gender (keep in mind these are cats and scents also give away a cat's gender), size, condition of fur (ragged, sleek, fluffy, ect), and things along those lines. Claw size for cats like Bramblestar and Tigerstar too, since it's a signifigant part of their character. You can't tell if a cat's claws are sharp, if their muscles are hard or soft, or anything like that just by looking.

We should add this this little bit to the guidelines; just to clarify that descriptions are purely physical and can be seen at first glance, unless it's a major part of their character or what they were named for, and to remind users to check the context before editing. <span style="">07:16 Sun Aug 9

Actually just to add you can see if a cat's claws are sharp. just adding that in. 00:24, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Stoneteller Ceremony
It's been made official (enough) for PW. Are we going to add a ceremony section for Half Moon and Crag? 05:37, August 9, 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I don't see why not. If we have leader ceremonies, then Stoneteller ceremonies should be added as well.

Yep, we should add it. It's pretty important info after all. <span style="">07:13 Sun Aug 9

Alright I'll add them. 01:50, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

Squirrelflight-mates?
Squirrelflight and Ashfur were kind of mates. Like, for instance, they loved eachother in a way. In the Ultimate Guide, it says that Ashfur had loved Squirrelflight, and he was bitter when she dumped him and took Brambleclaw as a mate. To me, they look like they're closer than friends, and probably unofficial mates. So, like Crowfeather and Feathertail, should we put them as unofficial mates? Because, I know that in the section Mates that they weren't in a official relationship... Comments, please? 18:03, August 9, 2015 (UTC)

Squirrelflight and Ashfur were never mates. Loads of information and dialogue in the main arcs even state as such. Unoffical mates really shouldn't be listed. Crowfeather and Feathertail are listed as mates because of a cite in Leafpool's Wish...which I disagree with that being mentioned, but that's neither here nor there. Anyways, they shouldn't be listed as mates because they never were.

If we do it for Ashfur and Squirrelfight than we do it for everyone else on the list. I think like described, they were on their way before something happened and they didn't become mates. 22:42, August 9, 2015 (UTC)

its just a case of ashfur reading into it more than he should have. squirrelflight never intended for them to become mates, ever. like she literally rejects him, and its actually kinda gross to assume they were 'more' (i actually hate that term) when they weren't. its not worthy of adding and like jayce said, unofficial wouldnt even be on crow and feathers pages if it hadnt been said (weirdly) in lw. 06:33, August 10, 2015 (UTC)

They weren't mates, Squirrelflight didn't mean that and both Feathertail and Crowpaw did. 22:05, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

Character Descriptions for Path of Stars
I just want to say this: last time when A Forest Divided was released, people added descriptions for the new characters. But they didn't add all of the descriptions and went straight to making chararts. I had to add some in, and who knows if I've got it all.

I'm just saying it's better to wait before you make a charart because it's supposed to be based off the description, the full description. Adding the description is supposed to come first, so you have a clear picture of what you're working with. Songheart (talk) 19:05, August 14, 2015 (UTC)Songheart

This is kinda rude... some of the people who make the chararts don't have the full book, you know. If someone else has to go through and look for the rest of it, then oh well tbh. There's no need to hinder the other projects because someone isn't able to fully cite a description.

This is leaning more towards a PCA discussion, but I'm agreeing with Snowed. I get the new books as soon as I can, but because of where I live I have to wait some time. It's pretty unfair to deny me able to make a charart because of where I live. :/ and your saying we search for the descriptions only for making a charart. 23:17, August 14, 2015 (UTC)

Early Settler rank listing
I'm bringing this up because it's been established in the last couple of books or so that the cats who lives in the camps are not rogues. They should be listed as Early Settlers or whichever names, because currently, rogues are incorrect. Since the PCA page has it's own discussion about the Ealy Settler images, there should also be one here about the actual ranks. They even have their own categories, seperate from rogues. What do you guys think? Yes or no? (I hope this hasn't been brought up before.) Nubface (talk) 15:19, August 18, 2015 (UTC)

It hasn't and I was planning to but forgot >< thanks for bringing it up!

Yes I agree, they are different from rogues and unique enough to have a different rank. 21:55, August 18, 2015 (UTC)

Agreeing with what's been said above, they definitely need their own rank. 22:14, August 18, 2015 (UTC)

Only makes sense too - they're not rogues, but not warriors, either. 02:05, August 20, 2015 (UTC)

Dead Cat Talk
Firstly, I think we need to remove the post-death thing since it's not really needed anymore.

Secondly, are we giving cats of the Tribe of Endless Hunting a rank? It seems they are similar enough to StarClan, Vicky seems to think they are very similar. All other information we have on the Tribe of Endless Hunting is from the books so... 02:27, August 19, 2015 (UTC)

Well, only an admin can remove it from the template, and I'm only going to do that if we can come to a clear decision. Also, one word from Vicky doesn't automatically mean much in my eyes, imho. Regardless, if we'd do that, then we'd probably need to also shift the discussion to PCA and give them blanks. Although, I was under the impression that they kept some form of organization... I can't remember who said it, but it might have been Kate? I still don't think we know enough about the Tribe of Endless Hunting to make this decision, but that's just me.