Warriors Wiki talk:Charart

=For Approval= Take it to the approval page

=Tweaked= Take it to the tweak page

=Discussion=

Hunters
aight so I'm well aware it's early but with Thunderstar's Echo comes the listing of hunters. new blank or no? I think we could use the already exisitng early settler blanks tbh, since they were made in the absence of warriors not yet existing, and they fufill pretty much the same exact roles as each other. (hunting obviously, patrolling, etc) what's your guys opinions? 21:40, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

I say use the early settler blanks, as many of the characters are the same anyway. This book seems to take place before the manga of MFV, and characters like Honey Pelt were given ES blanks because they were seen in that as adults. So I think that they get the Hunter rank, but get the ES blank

Seems to be a good idea to me; There isn't anything different that would warrant a blank change, so I agree with continuing to use the ES blanks.

New blanks for only one book don't seem like that wise of an idea, so we should just use the Early Settlers ^^Broken_Foot

They don't really seem much different from regular early settlers. I agree with everyone above, a new blank is unnecessary.

I agree. It seems like they just gave a name to a rank that's been around for a while, and they haven't really named until now.Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  02:00, April 13, 2017 (UTC)

Blue Whisker was called a ThunderClan warrior in Thunderstar's Echo, though. This poses a question: are they warriors now?

maybe...the structure of a clan and what a warrior is is basically set up now: they have leaders, deputies, medicine cats, those listed as hunters mentor cats, they hunt for the clan, fight if necessary, even have the rank of apprentice. I wouldn't be entirely opposed to a warrior blank, (and I know this is pc but) with a hunter and warrior listing. 19:59, April 14, 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I think we should use the warrior blanks. Yes, they don't have warrior names yet, but as said above the structure of the Clans is basically all formed now. 20:25, April 14, 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, we should use the warrior blanks for them. It seems fine to use them now

I vote for using the warrior blanks for the hunter rank 19:03, 4/18/2017

I looked at the allegiances and they were even listed as warriors (just with a bracket and "hunters" on them). I agree with using a warrior blank.

It seems like everyone agrees. Do we implement this now?

Cherrypaw (SHA)
I hate to be that guy. But if we do go by age and not by rank, Cherrypaw's StarClan image needs to be the kit one, since she was 5 moons old when she died. The reasons behind my calculating of their ages is that each season is 3 moons long, hence why there are 12 months. Spring/Fall/Summer/Winter are all 3 months long, examples for that being Spring begins March 21st and ends on the summer equinox in June on the 21st, which is 3 months later. Chestnutkit and Cherrypaw were said to be born in the middle of autumn, and at the beginning of winter, chestnutkit dies, which places him at 2 moons at death. Cherrypaw dies in the beginning of spring, which is a whole 3 moons later, which places her at 5 moons at death, which means A) she was apprenticed early, B) she would get the StarClan kit blank. 19:01, 4/18/2017

Honestly, I think it could have been a mistake on Su's side, I saw the post with the calculations and for me it was a little confusing, I consider it's a lot easier to just ask how old was she when she died before changing the image. 23:02, April 19, 2017 (UTC)

honestly should just ask su about it. besides, do we know the cats evenly divide the seasons into 3 months? or just when the leaves start to fall or when the trees start to bud? and do we know that it's divided how americans do it late into the month, or how (at least here in nz) is done? aka at the first of the month? 23:52, April 22, 2017 (UTC)

quick question
There's a wiki, "warrior cats fanclan wiki", that's using the pixel blank from here, is that okay? They have permission for that, right? 21:20, April 21, 2017 (UTC)

No, but no one respects us enough to ask.

Is someone getting onto that?Stealth f🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤  03:32, April 22, 2017 (UTC)

Could you link it please? I tried finding it and looking at their images but found no stolen blanks so I might have found a different one. -- 21:00, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I litterally looked at all 38 pages or something and found nothing. 21:02, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Just noticed that it hasn't been used since Feb. Well, here 's the link anyways. 21:05, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

I just commented on one page telling it to remove it. Is that OK? 21:11, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

yeah, and i think they removed most of it.

"It's fine"
Ok, so I feel like this needs to be brought up - and no I'm not acting as leader. I'm acting as one of your superiors (since that's technically what a SW is..). You all need to stop with the "it's fine" crap. It's getting way out of hand. Of course it will look fine to you if it's your image. If someone else says that they can't see something, or something looks wrong that makes it look like it doesn't match the other images, fix it. Don't say "Can I have a second opinion?" or "I think it looks fine to me, thoughts?" (which the latter is just another fancy way to ask for a second opinion). While you are the artist of your image, of course everything is going to look fine to you. No one likes to be told that something on their image looks wrong (me included, don't get me wrong), but it seriously needs to stop. Constructive criticism on an image is supposed to be criticism, not just a voice that gets brushed off, because that's really seriously rude. :/ 12:36, 4/22/2017

yeah, I agree. there's nothing wrong with using it sparingly, in the case you really think it's fine. but using it for everything gets really really tiring. 23:55, April 22, 2017 (UTC)

This has been a PCA issue ever since I can remember- it always has been. I agree with you, but I doubt this will make much of a difference unless some rule is enforced for it.. --PyroNacht (talk) 00:20, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Yup definitely an issue. I definitely think there's a time and place for asking second opinions, but it should only be used sparingly, as Skt said. People should do the comments given to them, and not try to brush them off, unless they're super positive that it's perfect the way it is. And even then, not so much imo, because one is not likely to see faults clearly in their own work.

Yes, and personally I don't feel like my chararts are great. Just saying. But obviously when someone just disregards your criticism, then you feel like you aren't respected. That's not ok. I think people want to believe they have done somrthing perfectly, especially with something minor.

Duly noted :) 01:10, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

@starry I know it's always been a problem, probably always will be, people may just need a reminder from time to time. especially those who haven't been here for years. 01:13, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

I agree. My comments on some images have been brushed off a few times, and I've felt like I've been too picky (which, at times, I admit I am a little picky), but then I noticed it happening a lot more with other people. Like... what's the point in having an approval page if no one listens to others criticism? I'm fine with people asking for a second opinion every now and then but this is constant. 02:05, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

I'm very proud with the one I'm working, but I make sure to listen to all the comments even if I think that it's fine myself. The "it's fine" thing is really annoying and basically the approval page is to make chararts better, as Patchfeather said. I haven't been on the wiki for even a year yet, and I honestly thought that Warriors Wiki had always been picky when it comes to chararts, but then I looked back at older archives and it was better even then. 02:25, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Alright, so thoughts on how to deal with this? I've been trying to incorporate a way, but really all I can think of is people being given a warning. Maybe like a 3 strikes you're out, kinda thing, but idk how that would work? Maybe if you do it 3 times your image gets declined? But idk if that's too harsh or not so don't take this to heart. Also prior to this, I've just been telling people to stop, but it kinda gets brushed off in itself, as you can see in some previous archives - like I tell people to stop, and they do it again 2 days later. So idk *shrugs* 19:56, 4/23/2017

OK, so, I read half of what you wrote before I got up and I liked the three strikes thing. While I got up, I thought "how about three strikes and your image gets declined?" Then I read the rest of it and it said that same thing! :) So I totally agree with that. 20:02, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

I think it depends. I've done it more than three times myself, and it's not always a bad thing, because often I can keep whatever it was I thought was fine. Especially for some with sharper shading styles, I've noticed in older archives that they often ask for second opinions if someone tells them to smooth it, because it's fine. Setting a strict three-time limit then having your image declined is a mite harsh, I'd say. I would, however, be in favor of declining if a user uses it three times on three separate issues. Then, that'd draw the line between an artist just trying to prove their point on one thing three times then getting declined, vs. a user who tries to refute every comment thrown their way. There's a difference between the two.

Yeah, that's kind of a better explanation than what I said earlier, but I digress. Like if a user uses it 3 times in kind of a harsh way then it could work. For example, if you Spooky were to ask someone to smooth their shading and they say "I'd really rather not, I think it's fine", then maybe that'd call for a warning? 20:14, 4/23/2017

That would work^^ Especially if someone used a tone that seemed like they were brushing someone off. But if someone just explains that that's their shading style, then I don't think it would be a warning, as they show that they value the other person's opinion but just don't think it's correct. If the artist gives a legit explanation for why they don't wish to change it, but offer to change it if someone else thinks it's not okay, then they shouldn't get any type of reprimandation for that. Especially if it's just on one issue, and they don't use "it's fine" very often in general.

What if it's not the artist that says it's fine, but a commenter? Like you know, when commenter 1 goes: Define the blah, and commenter 2 goes: its fine!! Does commenter 2 get a strike? 21:01, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that would especially get a strike in this case. 21:53, 4/23/2017

Whoops, my bad I read the question wrong. I'm not sure actually how we'd implement this for the commentors, but I do believe they should get some kind of warning, because just because one guy can see it, doesn't mean the others can. 21:54, 4/23/2017

.....when did we decide to impliment a strike system? Because I know that's nothing I agreed to. =\

Ivydapple - Join Request
Hi, I'd like to join! Ivydapple (talk) 17:06, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Sure, I'll add you in! Make sure to read the guidelines :D 21:51, 4/23/2017