Warriors Wiki talk:Charart

=For Approval= Take it to the approval page

=Tweaked= Take it to the tweak page

=Discussion=

A proposition concerning project vernacular
This is a rather simple proposition concerning one name used in PCA.

I'd like it if Senior Warriors could no longer be called leads.

You see, it may seem like a silly thing to want to change, but here's the reasoning: words are powerful. When a senior warrior is called a lead, it sends the message to new or prospective users that we are in charge, which we are not. We merely have been recognized by the project to have a decent amount of experience, which is reflected in the title of Senior Warrior, and are given the responsibility of approving or declining images. To call us leads is to put us too far above the rest of the project, and as a senior warrior I'm uncomfortable with that.

Comments? 19:30, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

So, do you want there to be no senior warriors at all? I think we just help out the leader and deputy. They can't approve every image or add in every new user all on their own. No, we aren't in charge, but we could shake off the status of being a lead. We'll still be senior warriors and uphold all the responsibilites of being one, but we don't lead the project. I see your point, and I'm open to see what other users have to say. 19:50, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

What gave you the idea that that is what I wanted? No, I just want us to cease being called leads, that's all. 20:01, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I don't care either way. But the keystrokes to type "lead" are a whole lot easier than typing "Senior Warrior," which is probably how the term came about. I think it's up to the individual person as to what they prefer to type, but if you mean official guidelines and things like that, I agree that the official term should probably be used to make it sound more...official. Breeze whisker  20:05, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Why? Senior warriors ARE in charge., Not as much as leader or deputy, but they still are high ranks. At first I had a lot more to say but now I'm dead. XP 20:07, December 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * This point of view is both incorrect and outright harmful to the project. The leveled listing of the project was always intended to show experience with the tasks of the project, and to assign extra responsibilities to users. It does not indicate that anyone is in the charge of the project. This is because the Project Members should be leading the project via consensus. Leader, Deputy and Senior Warriors only have extra responsibilities. That's all that sets them apart from the rest of the project. Perhaps it was a mistake on my part to borrow from the books for cutesy names for project membership, as people have an unhealthy tendency to take it too seriously. 16:24, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

You hate me, don't you Shell? Jk. I honestly don't care what SW's are called. Just as long as we have them. 20:10, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

Nah, don't hate anyone. XD But yeah. Senior warrior's aren't in charge, it's arrogant of us to think we are. We're just here to help guide people along and keep the project moving while contributing to it, and that's the extent of it. 20:13, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I kinda agree with Icy, and at the same time, I don't really care all that much. XD I think we do kinda have a right to be called leads, but I really don't care all that much if that changes. ♔ⓅⓐⓁⓔⒸⓛⒶⓦ♕  ☆StarClan be with you★  00:19, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

I disagree, since it's a whole lot easier just to type leads. Keeping in mind that "lead" technically means "senior warriors, deputy, and leader", it's a whole lot easier to type. You're right Shelly, we're not in charge, but we do possess a higher rank (for lack of a better word) than warriors and apprentices. We have the power to approve or decline images, to decide on CBA, and accept new users into the project. Disclaimer: Remember that in no way are senior warriors better than other users just because we have privileges. 00:35, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

I really don't care either way I never call you guys leads anyway I usually just say SW, so really I don't care. But they are 'leader's' of the project so it makes sense to call them leads. 02:16, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, SW is a lot easier to type then lead(s). It's just 2 letters! I agree with you Shelly, and I can see why it annoys you. You're not in charge and don't exactly have the right to lead this project. What you do have the rights too and warriors and apprentices can't access, is declining, approving images, CBAing, creating voting forums, etc. Those are the things a leader/deputy would do though, but the only other things leaders/deputies can do that you can't is annoucing new deputies/leaders, and making the final decision for the project. (i probally missed a lot more though.) 23:44, Thu, Dec, 29, 2011

Just a random bit of input from me, concerning another reason the word "lead" shouldn't be used. It's misleading in more ways than just what it implies. It also creates "insider" language that makes the project seem more exclusive and special. It's completely non-intuitive (SW=Senior Warrior is not only intuitive, but a common bit of Warriors Fanon Vernacular). I personally hate the use of the word "lead" by this project.L/D/SW is more descriptive and would at least be intuitive to new members mores than the "Lead". And honestly, why not just type out Leader, Deputy and Senior Warriors. It's not like we pay for bandwidth by the character or anything. Say what you mean, don't use lingo to say what you mean. You could also.. You know... Add the Leader and Deputy to Senior Warrior list (which they technically should be eligible for, anyways, and just use the word SW... It would also save time when a person leaders the Leader or Deputy position in the project, too. 16:20, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

I honestly don't see what the fuss is about, as it's only a word that isn't supposed to be an easier way to type out Senior Warrior/Deputy/Leader, but I'll run with it. How about we call them "Senior Members"? SMs for short? That doesn't seem like it would be difficult to type out, and it doesn't seem completely unintuitive. I dunno. Just a compromise, maybe? 21:58 Sun Jan 1

I'd rather not combine everyone into one category. We're all really not that different, but there should still be a distinguishable line between senior warrior, deputy, and leader. I feel like if we call everyone senior warrior, we're losing what we have as a project. That sounds really stupid, now that I'm reading it again, but I'll stand by it. 00:59, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting that we change the rank title. I just suggest that we no longer be called leads, that's all. 01:13, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

I know, Shelly, I was referring to other suggestions. 01:29, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Wildheart. Senior Members seems like a reasonably good name. 00:36, Tue, Jan, 3, 2012

I don't see how a euthanism will solve the problem. Senior members doesnt really change anything. 02:54, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Referring to Senior Warriors, the Leader, and the Deupty collectively does make a difference. It's much better than calling us "leads". 01:23, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

Furled Bracken?
This has probably been brought up before, but I do want to know the answer, so I'll ask it now. Should Furled Bracken get a Leader image, a Healer one, or should a new blank be made for him? It seems wrong to leave him as just a Sharpclaw, even if he is the only leader of the ancients that we've seen. We had a healer blank for Stoneteller back when he was the only Healer we'd seen, so why not Furled Bracken? Just wondering. ♔ⓅⓐⓁⓔⒸⓛⒶⓦ♕  ☆StarClan be with you★  09:29, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

We had this debate a few years ago.....the leader then, Bramble, decided for him to not get a healer blank. -- 10:01, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

He was a leader, but not in the literal sense. There was no deputy, no medicine cat, and barely the same apprentices we know now. He may have led a group of cats, but they weren't a true Clan. I don't think he should. 21:59, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Oblivion on this. It's kind of like Scourge. he led a group of cats, but didn't get a leader charart. 22:01, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

If he got one it should be a healer, but I don't think he should, also didn't he give the position to Stone Song? 23:11, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, making an Ancient Leader blank would be fine with me, really. Could be fun. 23:40, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

Are the Ancients like BloodClan? If they are and Furled Bracken gets one, would that qualify Scourge too, if they're not a true Clan? Sky- Lather. Rinse. Obey. 23:44, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

What about an outside-the-Clan-leader blank? Probably not that name... ♫Purplemoon♪   2012! The end of the world?  23:46, January 4, 2012 (UTC)

No, no, I didn't mean like Scourge. Scourge's "Clan" are just a bunch of rogues kept together by fear of Scourge. However, if we do make a blank for the Ancient leaders, then how many would we have? Off the top of my head, I can think of two. 01:04, January 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * is dumb* I is a good idea though, but I spose it wpuld have to wait like the prisoner blank. (if it's agreed to be done.) Sky- Lather. Rinse. Obey. 01:06, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Why not make a Ancients leader blank? Like I said, we had a Healer blank when there was only one healer. The ancients are an organized group, unlike Bloodclan, so he should get some kind of blank. And why would it have to wait? It'd only be like 2 chararts to make.... ♔ⓅⓐⓁⓔⒸⓛⒶⓦ♕  ☆StarClan be with you★  03:13, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Furled Bracken and Stone Song were a different rank than just a sharpclaw, they should get either a Healer or another separate blank. Breeze whisker  03:16, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Didn't they know about herbs, though? I don't see why we shouldn't use the healer blank for them. 03:31, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Would they really count as healers though? Cause Half Moon was the first Stoneteller. Are Stonetellers and healers kinda different things? ♔ⓅⓐⓁⓔⒸⓛⒶⓦ♕  ☆StarClan be with you★  09:54, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

The Ancients and the Tribe are basically the same thing, but if they have separate pages, I guess it wouldn't mean that. I agree with Breezewhisker, they were more than sharpclaws. If they have separate pages, then I think they should get different blanks. 02:55, Wed, Jan, 11, 2012

Ive always thought we needed another leader blank for the cats that arent clans. One that could work for Scrouge and Furled Bracken and Jingo. I was thinking we could just take the current leader blank and tweak it a bit, to something like having the tail wrapped around the paws rather than just sticking out like it currently is, and maybe tweak the facial expression. It would match the leader and healer while still matching, and would keep with the theme. But if we decide to do it, we should wait until the loners are finished. 03:03, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

I like that idea. 8D ♔ⓅⓐⓁⓔⒸⓛⒶⓦ♕   ☆StarClan be with you★  09:24, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

I like that idea too, maybe they could have something in their mouth of something? I always wanted Scourge to have something 01:55, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

I too like the idea of that. If that's the case though, would Bone need a "tweaked" deputy charart? 05:50, Thu, Jan, 12, 2012

Too many senior warriors? Try not enough.
Well, the proposal train must continue rolling. You guys may notice a theme in my proposals recently: I want to even out the project and make the senior warrior rank less exclusive than is has been. I feel the rank is held too highly above the rest of the project. In reality, we're just members of the project that have been recognized for our experience and handling of the tasks the project presents, and we are trusted with extra tasks because of it.

I feel there are many warriors that are more than competent and experienced enough to handle this job. However, they are denied spots as senior warriors because again and again people declare that there are too many senior warriors.

However, in a recent discussion I had with Kitsufox, she actually opined that the project should be at least 1/4 senior warriors, if not 1/2. Frankly, I agree with her. I think that, at minimum, this project needs to be 25% senior warriors. And, at current count, we have 70 members. That would mean that, instead of the current 9 senior warriors, we need about 17 or 18.

This would not mean lowering the standards of becoming an SW, of course. This would just mean that those that already live up to the standards (and there are many of you) will be given their chance to be elected to the rank.

Honestly, how could we have too many senior warriors anyway? The SWs help keep the project moving by approving images. And if someone is elected that isn't ready for the job, the vote will likely fail anyway. I trust the project to know who to and not to promote. 03:27, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

I thought the only reason that we kept the number low was because we might step on each other's toes with edit conflicts and stuff. Otherwise I've never seen any good reason to keep the number low. 03:30, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

That's not much of a reason to deny excellent warriors this promotion, in my opinion. :\ 03:37, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not saying that's my pinion, I just thought that was the reason. 03:39, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

I know. ^^ 03:45, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea of more SWs. With all the new apprentice images, it can be very tasking to maintain all those chararts for archiving and such. 03:52, January 5, 2012 (UTC) Shadewing

I agree. There really isn't a reason there shouldn't be more senior warriors. And it seems silly to say "no more senior warriors" when CBAing and archiving images is an essential part of the project and you might as well have as many people doing that as you can and still increase your efficiency. Breeze whisker  04:12, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

As an addendum to my opinion (which Shelly quoted correctly), it might be something to consider to limit what part of the membership is counted for deciding what the percent numbers mean. That is to say, so many apprentices (at least used to) fall off the boat, it might be wise not to count apprentice or lower ranks in the figuring for what the "target" numbers. But theirin you also need to consider that it's now easier to move out of the apprentice rank (I still think two approved is too many, and one should be enough, but that's another discussion for another time. One that might become necessary if auto-decline becomes a possibility) so things should buff out pretty well given a little time... 14:16, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

I can see why we need more senior warriors. Too much would be like, 40 senior warriors. We need them to get the project to run smoothly. But this would eliminate the number of warriors we have in the project, so to stop that we could lower the requirements slightly for an apprentice to become a warrior. We have 24 warriors right now. If 9 of them were to become a SW, that would leave 15 (I know this sounds stupid), and we have a whopping 35 apprentices, compared to them, the warriors are tiny. Only about 1/2 or 3/4 of the apprentices are active though, so if some were to be removed we'd have around 27 apprentices left. 05:30, Fri, Jan, 6, 2012

Yeah, DJ, but becoming a warrior is pretty simple now anyway, and all members of the project should be contributing evenly regardless. Having more people in a higher rank wouldn't change how much gets contributed each day. And if my screening process proposal goes through, the introduction of a new rank will mean that the apprentice rank may be thinned even further. 15:46, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Yep, okay. That gets rid of my concerns now. 00:59, Sat, Jan, 7, 2012

So that's that. If anyone thinks that a warrior deserves a promotion and that person qualifies, I'd say go ahead and nominate them. 17:44, January 9, 2012 (UTC)

Wait a second. I agree with this proposal, but we haven't had feedback from either the deputy, leader, or any of the SWs. Before we go ahead with this, shouldn't we get some more input? 20:19 Mon Jan 9

Eh, alright. Shall I just post a vote? Sorry, just felt like everything had been said. 22:37, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with this, too. Although I'm only an apprentice, I still believe that we're shortstaffed -- 22:07, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that we can't have too many senior warriors in the project. Although, I just don't want to go around and nominate every good user for a senior warrior status. I know you'll probably think "thanks, captain obvious" or what ever, but that's just my only concern. 22:15, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Unrealistic Cats?
Alright, there has been some discussion about this, and sorry if someone has already tried this before, if so, completely ignore this. I have recently seen that we have been, well, changing the descriptions of the cats. Like with Leafstar, we decided not to give her cream patches to make her more "realistic". Or Birdsong, where her having ginger flecks only on her head would not be "realistic" so we had to add them all over her, thus changing her description a tad. In my opinion, I think this is wrong. We are here to provide information straight from the books, not bend it, even if it is just a slight change of things. I know it isn't such a big deal, but it bothers me, and possibly others, too. Now, I understand that sometimes we have to make these changes. Like with Firestar, he had an unrealistic tabby pattern, so we changed it. But it still matched his description. In my opinion, I think we should change these cats back to their original descriptions. Now, I know people will disagree with me on this, but I merely wanted to hear what other people thought about this, so please don't take this the wrong way. 03:14, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

I sorta agree with you on this. It's like we're assuming their descriptions now. I said something like what you did on Weaselfur's apprentice on the approval image 03:34, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Leafstar isn't described with cream patches, actually. She's a brown and cream tabby. Nowhere in her description does it mention patches. And Firestar's being changed for more than his tabby pattern. 03:50, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

On topic, though, I do see why it'd be a problem to make chararts that deviate from cat desctiption (though I have not seen a cat's description on their page changed thus far to suit a charart, so...). But on tabby stripes, I still prefer that we use realistic patterns as often as we can. We want to produce qualtiy art that looks as close to real cats as we can, and just making up some pattern that would never be seen in real life isn't accomplishing that. 03:57, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Unless something unrealistic is specifically described in the books, we should always error on the side of realism. It's safer to assume "normal cat" if it's not specifically described than anything else. 15:13, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

I hate how Billystorm and other ginger cats have stripes, I think the Erins would have said ginger tabby but he is called a ginger and white tom. 15:30, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

So you'd rather over half of the ginger cats look like goldfish? 15:48, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

It is genetically impossible for a ginger cat to not be a tabby. 15:50, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

First off, I want to say thank you, Misty. I've been seeing this as well and it has bothered me to no end. We're deviating too much from the cats' original description. And if you want to argue genetics, Shelly, it's also gentically impossible for cats like Blackstar to exist. So are we going to change his images to make them more "realistic"? Every time I've mentioned this before, I've been shot down with the whole "Then how come we have stripes on the gingers?" I am personally against the ginger stripe thing, and I really think we should get rid of those. 19:38, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

In Blackstar's case, his pattern is specifically described many times. With any other case, as Kit said, we should assume these cats look realistic. That means stripes on the ginger cats. 19:51, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Well in the series is fiction and in the manga's he has no stripes, and I read here 'all cats are genetically tabbies' so again we could redo all the charaters and make them tabbies if you like but I think it's a waste of time and there is no need for it. 22:09, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, all cats have the genes and have a tabby M on their heads. Ginger cats just always have obvious stripes. Ones you can see without putting a few hairs under a microscope. 22:47, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

And Mistypebble, I find it odd that you're protesting us making realistic chararts when, at this very moment, you're redoing Songbird's charart for realism. 22:57, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

I think we should try to make cats realistic if we can, without changing the description that was mentioned in the book. Warriors is a fantasy, so anything can happen really. I agree we should try to make all tabbies realistic, keep the stripes on the gingers, unless they were specifically described as a solid. 02:38, Mon, Jan, 9, 2012

o.O I'm sorry. I thought I deleted this. I read it over a few times, and I realized that its right that we make them more realistic. I don't know why it posted... So sorry for being bothersome, this didn't need to be brought up. 22:27, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it did. You are absolutely right to say that the cats should keep their descriptions. 22:31, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Final Proposal on Screening Process
The final proposal on the screening process is up for evaluation here. This is the last chance to get you input on the process before it goes to vote! 21:13, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

Loner Vote
Go vote. 09:20, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

When does it end? 19:14, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

Just a question, can we update our image while they're up for a vote? I made mine in like 10 minutes cause I was in a hurry, and was hoping to be able to work on it more, so... XD  Pale Legs   ♪Be prepared...♪  00:34, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

As long as its not a total redo and minor tweaks, it should be fine Paleclaw. And i forgot to write the date for the ending but I'll go add it now. 02:52, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to redo the blank but I would like to say that the tail down would be alot more accurate I don't have the example pictures with me now but I'll post them later, thanks. 21:48, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Cloudtail and Scourge
Hey everyone! I was looking at some of our pages and came across Scourge and Cloudtail. Cloudtail was a kit when he was a kittypet, so does that mean he would get a kit image like Scourge's? 19:10, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

I dont think so, we never saw any informations about collar or so... ,19:12,January 14,2012 (UTC)

Would we tweak his kittypet image then? That one has a collar. 19:18, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

Well, we have kittypet images for Nettlesplash, Birdpaw, and I think Honey paw where we didn't use a collar and we edited it out. 19:20, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, yes. Tweak it. ,19:20,January 14,2012 (UTC)

Loner Images
Since the vote for the new loner lineart is up, should the loner images come off the pages? Or do we wait until the vote is finished? 19:12, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

If I were a senior warrior, I wouldn't take them all down until we have the new lineart approved. 19:13, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

We should wait until the vote is finished. For all we know, we may keep the old blanks (as that is an option). 03:48, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but what is the exact problem with the current loner blanks? I can more or less understand and accept the change of the Apprentice blanks, as they were really bad, but the Loner change seems just an excuse to play around more with drawings instead of actually working on articles. If all work invested in redoing the pixels over and over again (and the associated drama) would rather go into editing the encyclopedia, we would have the most complete and comprehensive wikia in the world. 19:57, January 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * If you disagree with change, cast you vote to keep the old blank. It wasn't an option on the original vote, but it should have been and it is now. And no. Art shouldn't be removed, even if the blank is to be replaced. Why have nothing there when we have something? 00:04, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

For the record, we aren't just creating more work for ourselves. The old blanks look like dogs. We are drawing cats. It's as simple as that. 22:00, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

They look nothing like dogs, and no one had a problem with them for five years.

I maintain my opinion that the only goal here is to keep PCA artificially alive in a quest for fame and achievements. Instead of calling it a day once we've ran out of cats to make, leads make up hundreds of extra chararts: first, an endless number of alternates for one-time mistakes in the books, then redoing virtually all cats because of people's individual preferences and interpretations, then making images for fake ranks (e.g. queen rule), then finally the new blanks. I guess the list won't stop here.

Does all the time and energy invested into the pixels is worth it? Let me ask you: do you think that readers come to this wiki to view half dozen tiny pixels at the bottom of each page? I'd say they rather come here to seek summaries about books, descriptions of events and locations, information on characters. I wish the effort of the editors was divided accordingly.

Regards, 17:59, January 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * I see not problem in replacing a blank that their should have been so much opposition to that it never got approved for use. If you think the historical part of character sheets are more important, work on those parts of the wiki. Some people are artists rather than writers, and can impact the wiki better through doing things like eliminating sub-par blanks that should never have gone into production use anyways (Rogue is another one I'd love to see go away, and another case of what I suspect is something getting approved for use because no one had the backbone to just say no). I do agree that "one off" errors and book covers shouldn't be rounds for alternates isn't appropriate, but diffrent leaders of the project have arbitrated alternates diffrently. This project may not be one of the most essential the wiki has, you are correct, but it's still a part of the wiki that brings us something unique and adds a layer to our character articles. 14:13, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

I get exactly what you're saying Helix, but the fact is that many of us here just really love doing charart. I know it sounds bad, but I don't really care if anyone looks at my image. I just like making them. We're not trying to make ourselves famous artists or anything, we just love what we do and we don't want to let it go. Is that so bad? 02:26, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

We are not keeping PCA artificially alive. They do look more like dogs than cats. PCA has at least three years left in it of work considering the fact that the books are set to continue being printed for three years. And yes, I know plenty of people tht come to the wiki to see what their favorite characters look like. No, our project is in no way vital to the wiki, but it makes us unique. 03:37, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

Revising the Tweaking Process
So I'm bringing this to the collective attention of the project, as it seems there have been a couple issues with this lately.

Issue: There is no process for nominating images. This seems to lead to confusion over whether an image really needs to be tweaked/redone or not,sometimes arguments, and occasionally hurt feelings.

My proposal: we implement a tweak-nominating process. I say we have two sections in the tweak nominations forum: the Approved Tweaks section and the Nomination section. Under both headings there would be two subheadings, named Tweaks and Redos. Under the Nominations section, you can link an image, and list the reasons it should be redone/tweaked. To approve a tweak/redo nomination, a certain amount of Senior Members would have to sign and leave a vote under the filename and reasons, to make sure that no perfectly good images get tweaked or redone simply because a SM didn't check the list before an artist posted it. For a tweak, I say we should have to have two SMs sign and agree to it, and for a redo, perhaps three. Then, once the process is approved, we can have a subpage or whatever so we can archive the nominations and add the image filename to the other heading (Approved Tweaks). Then any artist would be able to strike out the filename and reserve it, like we do now.

Thoughts? 00:59 Sun Jan 15

Good idea. I agree with you. 01:04, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

A bit confusing, but sounds good. 01:08 Sun Jan 15

I love this idea, Wildy but wouldn't it take a long period of time to complete all of the tweaks/redos? 01:12, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I like this idea. Even though it would take a while, it still makes sense. 01:15, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

If the SM do our job like we're supposed to, it shouldn't take long. I think we should come to a decision soon but I think we should hold off on redos until we've come to a decision. I like this idea! 02:34, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

We wouldnt need to archive it. You don't archive stuff from a forum, and we could just split the current forum up so its set up like this. I think we don't need to change the process personally, if people could just recognize that images belong to the wiki and not individuals, and them being redone to be better is half the point of this project. My images have been redone, i got over it. I think the current process is fine, and doing what is suggest about would just set up needless hoops for artist to jump through and slow the project down. 02:50, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Iceheart, I know who that was directed at, and that was cold. Unlike you, some artists take more then five minutes to work on a piece of artwork, and to see it done for no reason is just plain stupid. Something like this is needed, whether you like it or not. Colleen's right. Also, as a wiki, we need to document everything, including stuff on a forum page, and something like ^^that^^ is a perfect example of what should be kept. 03:04, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

It wasnt directed at anyone, just so you know. We never archive stuff form the current forum, so i assumed it wasnt an issue. And im a little hurt that you think i put so little effort into my art, that was cold. Im not going on whether i like it or not, im going on whether we need it or not. Am i not allowed to state my opinion? 03:10, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

But Iceheart, what if someone puts an image on there as soon as they take it and there's nothing wrong with it? Let's just use Foxleap's apprentice as an example: newly approved, nothing wrong with it. Someone that had REALLY wanted that image, then reserves it and redoes it. With no good reason. This would prevent that. Ugh edit conflicts! 03:11, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Ivy on this one. And WIildy. Though I think that we'd only need this process for redoing, not tweaking. And Icy and Cloudy, no offence to either of you, but could you take this to your talk pages? I think we've all had enough drama in the PCA, and I think this will help get rid of some of that. So please, if you're gonna fight, take it to your talk pages. I don't mean to be rude or bossy, I'm just sick and tired of the drama. <span style="border:2px dotted; -moz-border-raiuds: 1em; color:#4b3b6a; font-family:Cursive; background:#bdcdff; text-shadow:gray 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;"> Pale Legs ♪Be prepared...♪  03:16, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Wow... the unbelievable politics of drawing cats.Cloudskye, how do you know that was directed at you? I honestly think you're being a bit too sensitive about this. She's right, when you submit an image it becomes the project's image and ceases to be yours. If it needs to get redone by someone else later, get the heck over it. If someone thinks that one of my images needs to be tweaked or redone, frankly I'd be fine with it. Accusing Iceheart of only taking five minutes to do an image is hateful and unnecessary. However, I do think that a revamp of the tweaking system is needed, so that there can be no doubt or argument on an image, only comments aimed at improvement. 03:16, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Ivy's idea: we should have a process for that. A nomination for revising whether what the did was nessacary, after they post it. It would be the more reasonable thing, and I can see it working out nicely. 03:17, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I really do think it'd cause less drama if we did it before though. <span style="border:2px dotted; -moz-border-raiuds: 1em; color:#4b3b6a; font-family:Cursive; background:#bdcdff; text-shadow:gray 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;"> Pale Legs ♪Be prepared...♪  03:27, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea. It increases communication, and it would be a whole lot more efficient to take this precaution than having a couple of members going at each other because they don't agree if something should be tweak/redone or not. Breeze whisker  03:31, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, two things: Paleh and Iceheart: I was not insulting the quality of Iceheart's work. What I meant was the time it takes to make an image. It takes some users longer then it takes others. I know I take forever and a day just to make a solid colored cat. Shelly, I'll be as sensitive as I want to be about this. I've been here far longer then the rest of you, so I'm a lot more attached to the wiki. If you wanna play the game of "once it's on here, it belongs to the wiki", then half of the images we currently have should be redone, because frankly, I think they could look better.

Sometimes, images are re-done for the wrong reasons. Not just my own. Iceheart's had some of hers redone, so has Icestorm (as we all know), and even myself. But, without proper reason, and without asking, well, that's where I get mad. If you've got a problem, then take it up with me personally.

As for the archiving... we should do it. A paper trail is a lot better then no trail at all. That way, if a user has an issue with an image in the future, they can look in the archive and see just why and how everything went down, inculding who gave permission and all that. 03:33, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

How long you've been here doesn't mean jack. Especially if you're going to point at Iceheart and try to say that she barely puts any work into her images or that she doesn't care about them. All images are subject to tweak or redo if they need to be. You are being over sensitive, and your seniority doesn't give you the right to insult people like that. 03:37, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Since no one seems to be listening to me... I did not say she does not care about them, nor did I sat that she doesn't put any work into her images. I was talking about the time it takes to make one. For all I know, five minutes could mean a lot when making a charart. Jeez. I'll say what I please, and I know what I meant. It's not my fault someone took it the wrong way. My seniority had nothing to do with it. I was just saying I'm more attached to the wiki then some of the newer members (like yourself and probably half of PCA. xD). All images are subject to being redone, you say? Fine. I'll remember that next time an image of someone else's gets done. 03:42, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, you guys are starting to scare me. Please just calm down about it, and stop fighting. I think some of you are over reacting, just a bit. Sorry if I sound rude, but your scaring me and it makes me uncomfortable over your fierceness in this "debate". (It seems like it has turned into one) <span style="">03:46 Sun Jan 15

No fighting. PCA is a wreck because of these fights. Enough. Look, I may not be a SM, but I want to stop this. Please... -- 03:50, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

^Agreeing with those two. If you're all gonna be grumpy, go be grumpy elsewhere. Just because you're all more senior members does not mean you should be allowed to go at each other out here. Take care of your issues in private like the rest of us. And do take care of them. Breeze  whisker  04:00, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I'm on Stoneclaw's side on this. But back to the point. I think that plenty our users are competent enough to tell blotchy shading when its there. Personally, I think that the nomination of tweaks and redoes, though a good idea, will just take too much time. Just one thing that I just feel I have to emphasize that the point of the project is to make high-quality images for the pages. Now, before anyone gets mad, these are just my opinions on the matter and are directed at nobody. (Thanks for the edit conflict, Breezy xP) 04:04, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I'm with Stoney. Quite the fighting. I meant it when I said go to your talk pages. This discussion is about discussing whether Wildy's idea would be good or not, and I'm on the verge of archiving it because all you guys are doing is fighting. If you wanna fight, by all means, go ahead. But do it away from the PCA. You guys are senior members and you should know better than to fight on the talk page. It's come to a point where people who are supposed to look up to you, and you're supposed to be an example for are having to tell you to take your fights away from here, and that's not right. I'm gonna be completely honest, if you guys are gonna cause an uproar everytime the smallest subject comes up, you shouldn't be a senior member. Now start acting your age and prove that you're worthy of the status that we all voted you to have and get on with the discussion, cause this is getting us nowhere. I mean it. (edit conflicts DX) <span style="border:2px dotted; -moz-border-raiuds: 1em; color:#4b3b6a; font-family:Cursive; background:#bdcdff; text-shadow:gray 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;"> Pale Legs ♪Be prepared...♪  04:13, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Okay... wow... didn't mean to start a riot, guys :P Okay, so let's start anew (any comments after this that are not to do with the topic at hand, and I'm gonna follow Paleh's lead and archive this): Anyway, that's just my two cents. Thoughts and comments for improvement? <span style="">01:17 Mon Jan 16
 * Issue - archiving vs. not archiving: I think we should archive simply so we can have a paper trail of why images were redone, so users can go back and check it out. I think it's better to document everything than to not (better safe than sorry?).
 * Issue - will this slow the tweaking process down?: Ivy is right, if us SMs do our jobs right, then we're going to be able to keep this running smoothly and quickly. Plus, with the influx of new SWs, we're definitely going to be able to keep on top of this. Besides, this will help keep issues on the tweak page to a minimum, as we hopefully won't be arguing about whether or not the image should have been tweaked/redone.
 * Issue - the images don't belong to us once they're approved, so why does it matter what's redone/tweaked or not?: To put it simply, some images just don't need to be touched once they're approved. They look fine to everybody... except that one user who thinks the markings are ugly or the shading is slightly off, and puts the image on the tweaking list. Now, with the tweaking process the way it is now, we can't help that. Maybe a SM will catch it, and take the filename off the list, but maybe they don't have time to go through the list extensively, and maybe they miss it. What if that first user ends up redoing the image just because they thought that the shading was off? What if they end up making the image worse than it was before? What if they start a fight with the OA of the image because the OA thinks the image looked fine as it was? We can avoid all of that with a simple tweaking process: a "fair trial", if you will.


 * You actually bring up my personal reason for thinking there should be a formal process that leads to an image being tweaked: consensus. This establishes the consensus that an image should be tweaked, instead of just specific people thinking an image should be tweaked. It creates a forum for discussion in which people can please cases both for and against the need for a tweak. And if it slows tweaks down, well... Why do they need to be fast in the first place? We don't rush our artwork. Why should we rush the decision to replace our artwork? I support a formal means by which tweaks are proposed, and by which they are approved. Even if it's as simple as a discussion period, followed by examining the opinions by a senior warrior or higher that acts on the consensus (or calls for a vote, if the consensus isn't clearly established by the discussion). Frankly, though, any image without a clear "in favor" consensus probably shouldn't be on the tweaks/re-dos lists. This is a step in the right direction, as the tweaks page's staying (*cough* something I suggested, since art is never done, only abandoned) seems to have evolved into a series of conflicts concerning why certain images are getting redone. The paper-trail and the process are needed, or the Tweaks aspect needs to go back away. When it was just tweak weeks you guys basically created a forum and collectively decided what needs tweaking and what doesn't. That discourse needs to be a part of the permeant tweaks system. 18:27, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

This is just my opinion, but I think there needs to be a forum on this discussion.

Issue 1: I'm agreeing on archiving the forum. I agree with the reason Wildheart said above.

Issue 2: Yes, if the discussion on having more SW's succeeds, this should work. I agree with Kitsufox, we don't rush artwork, nor should we rush the discussion in our artwork.

Issue 3: PCA is one big family. We may fight, but at the end of the day, we work together to create chararts for the wiki. If one of your images needs tweaking/redoing, it's not the end of the world. Be happy you got it approved. I wouldn't care the slightest bit. If one user thinks the image needs tweaking, thats what the forum page is for. If more SM's disagree with that user, they can put it down.

So this obviously means I agree with this suggestion. That's my 2 cents, if you want to argue with me or anyone else, go ahead and do so on your talk pages. But I came to this project in peace, and I want to keep it like that. <span style="">01:23, Tue, Jan, 17, 2012

Enough
Okay, guys. Let me level with you.

This has got to stop.

Ever since I joined this project, and probably before, it's been one drama after another. We are here to draw cats. That's our mission, our motto, our job. The end.

I'll be the first to admit that I've played my part in this drama, but it needs to stop. We just need to sit here, stop acting childishly, and draw the best cats we can so those that frequent our website can look at the pretty pictures and know what their favorite characters probably look like.

And that's all I have to say. 03:54, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Wow. I was about to put up the same topic (It's as if you can read my mind Shelly! XD) Anyway, true. We are acting like 5 year olds making tantrums. As a community, we need to work together not fight. 03:58, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Also, the ranking system seems to make things worse. Some of the higher ranks try to act more superior, and take advantage of so-called "n00bs or apprentices." I gotta say, we don't need the apprentice rank. 04:01, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Amen to that, Shelly. And Stoney. All I will say, is, I agree. I've never played part in the drama, but, I watch it, and we need to work together. Is this project going anywhere if all we do  we cause drama sometimes? 04:02, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I want PCA to be a calm, peaceful place. That would honestly make me really happy. 23:08, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, this is one of the major decisions in making me want to take a hiatus from here. We don't need to fight to get stuff done, in fact it is the opposite. 23:10, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Aww... but I loved the fighting! It was fun to watch. People are fighting over things so inferior and tiny that it could be considered as nothing. But who knows, there's always gonna be fighting in some way, but I agree. 17:29, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I think we all want this to be a user friendly place, not a bickering bunch of people. 18:17, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

To everyone: ''PCA is a peaceful place at heart. ''More like sharing your opinion then making unessecary fights. <span style="">01:31, Tue, Jan, 17, 2012

We are a family. A good community is one that is strong, but acts like a family, being nice to each other. Arguing over art is stupid. Everybody: ''Think about this. The disputes you start can affect PCA's future.'' Honestly, if you are truly devoted to this project, I don't think you should be starting disputes. Instead, of arguing, I think we should focus on our goal, that's what PCA is here for. Peace is a good thing. Instead of acting immature, focus on making art, be happy and make PCA proud. =) That's my suggestion. And if you're a SM, or even a Warrior, be good role-model for newer PCA users, and of course, help others when they don't know something. Just, of course you can start a calm, peaceful discussion, but not fight. For me, if you follow my tips, and there's less drama, I know I'll be happy. =) 02:06, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

Inquiry
An inquiry that may lead to a vote to demote Iceheart from leader to senior warrior is being held here. Please review and participate in this conversation, as it effects the entire project. 05:28, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Webfoot's Pelt Pattern
Okay, I'm working on webfoot's apprentice image, and i have a dilema. His elder and warrior chararts have different pelt patterns. Which one should I follow? <font face="Segeo Script"> ~Pouncey!  <font face="Segeo Script"><font color="#ee1289">"Aloha!" "You're  Hawaiian?" <font color="#ee1289">"No..." <font color="#ee1289"> x3 18:40, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion, go with the warrior. It was the most recent approved. 18:58, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I say Elder'ss. 19:03, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Confusion on the charat feild :/ <font face="Segeo Script"> ~Pouncey!  <font face="Segeo Script"><font color="#ee1289">"Aloha!" "You're  Hawaiian?" <font color="#ee1289">"No..." <font color="#ee1289"> x3 21:38, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

...they're totally the same, though... what? <span style="">00:52 Mon Jan 16

From Fallow: No... The warrior has just stripes, and the elder has less stripes and spots.... 16:48, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

Well yeah, they're not identical because they're different sides of the same cat... For the apprentice image, go with the warrior image. <span style="">02:49 Tue Jan 17

What about the spots though? It's not like he'd only have spots on his right side.... I'd say go with the spots, but that's just me. <span style="border:2px dotted; -moz-border-raiuds: 1em; color:#4b3b6a; font-family:Cursive; background:#bdcdff; text-shadow:gray 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;"> Pale Legs ♪Be prepared...♪  16:15, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

Point. I forgot that Misty made the new version instead of layering the lineart over the old version when we had to switch from longhaired to shorthaired. Although the current warrior version is lovely, it doesn't match completely: we could just have someone take the old warrior version and layer the lineart over the top. That would keep us from having to redo the elder image. <span style="">04:20 Wed Jan 18

I'll do it. 04:55, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

Shadows
All cats have shading, which means that a light source is coming from somewhere, so why don't chararts have shadows? Is it not necessary or did nobody think of it? Just curious since it has been on my mind for a while now.

I think people would like to make there own shadow. Also it would be hard for a lineart change. 17:33, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we need shadows. The light source is (basically) just so we can put highlights and shading in their corrisponding spots to the sun. <span style="">20:03 Mon Jan 16

DerP I read it wrong >.< Disregard what I said. 20:07, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, it was just a thought. Thanks for answering my question.

Good point Cheshire though. <span style="">01:57, Tue, Jan, 17, 2012

Leaving the Project
I have decided to leave the project. So far I have not made any images, and I just feel as though I am not contributing as much as I would like to. Sure, then the answer would be contribute more, but all I do is comment on images, which any person could do. I would like to come back to the project when I have had more experience in digital art and can make the contributions I want to. I may need more experience of PCA is just not for me, but either way I am leaving, so as soon as you can, please remove me from the apprentice list. Thank you.

Good luck on the practicing Cheshire! Can't wait to see you back in the project! <span style="">20:40 Mon Jan 16

Aww.. good bye Cheshie, and hope you can come back soon! <span style="">08:04, Tue, Jan, 17, 2012

Join?
Can I Join? User: Fallenstars 21:40, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

Join Request - Hazeleye
Can I join? 22:09, January 16, 2012 (UTC)Hazeleye

Made a seperate heading. <span style="">22:37 Mon Jan 16

Cat From Dawn
So, the following cats from Dawn; Leafpool, Brightheart, Cloudtail, Mistyfoot, and Gorsetail were all captured by the two-legs when they were destroying the forest. Do you think they should get kittypet chararts? I honestly think they should because they were being taken care of by two-legs. 21:17, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

I believe the same, though, I'm pretty sure we decided before that they wouldn't get one... 21:20, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

We've had this discussion before, and it was decided that they would not get kittypet images. Plus, Cloudtail already has a kittypet image, so he would be excluded from that. 21:20, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

These cat were not treated as kittypets except for the fact that they were given food (which most of them refused to eat, so that echnicality is out the window). They were kept in cages in a trailer and one of them was even injured badly by a twoleg, and they were not given kittypet names unlike Leafstar and Birdpaw. 21:23, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

Rejoin?
Hey, I was in PCA but I was inactive for a while so I probably got removed. Can I join again? I promise to contribute but I don't know how really. Thanks 01:42, January 18, 2012 (UTC)Moonshine

Mentor Blanks
This idea may be kind of out there, but.... Should we have Mentor blanks? It's kinda a rank, and I've thought for a while that we should have one. So yeah, just an idea. Feel free to disagree. <span style="border:2px dotted; -moz-border-raiuds: 1em; color:#4b3b6a; font-family:Cursive; background:#bdcdff; text-shadow:gray 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;"> Pale Legs   ♪Be prepared...♪  16:33, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe, but for now, with everything going on, I think it can wait for later. 17:28, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

I had the same suggestion before, but it was rejected because it was not a real rank, anyways, I'm not sure. 18:04, January 18, 2012 (UTC)