Re: SkyClan's Territory + Mistakes?

I am trying to write a fanfiction about SkyClan, but in the article about current SkyClan's territory in the gorge, there are a few things I am a little confused about:

1. It says that both the Skyrock and the Rockpile is where the leader holds ceremonies and meetings. So which one is truly where Leafstar has her ceremonies and meetings? Or at least most of them? I would think the Skyrock would be the place, but that Rockpile would be a better place, since it is low enough down (although SkyClan has excellent jumping skills) for elders and queens to come to, as they usually bring their kits, even though they aren't technically "old enough to catch their own prey" for a Clan meeting.

2. In addition, the Skyrock is supposedly where the medicine cats go every half-moon, and this is where Leafstar went to receive her 9 lives instead of the Whispering/Shining Cave, but this cave is also said to be where medicine cats share tongues with StarClan. Only the med cats can go to the cave alone, and each place is said to be like the Moonstone/Moonpool, but is the Skyrock the main place where they go to be with StarClan? I would think that the cave would be the place, since it shines like the Moonstone...Mistystar31 (talk) 19:09, May 23, 2014 (UTC)


To be listed as a dead book I believe the cat actually needs to be appear, (like their spirit appears, such as in StarClan or the Dark Forest) which Stonepelt doesn't. Bluestar just mentions his death in passing. Ferncloud's spirit appeared at the end of the book, however. That's why it's listed as a dead book for her. Shimmer 17:21, 07/16/2013

Yup, that's why. Since she dies in A Dangerous Path but doesn't appear as a spirit until The Darkest Hour only The Darkest Hour is listed as a dead book. Shimmer 21:14, 07/17/2013


It's not a reliable source of info, unless you get a confirmation from Vicky, or any of the other Erins o3o Queen Beebs 03:51, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

It seems reliable, especially with the references I placed. How did you redo my "edit", or rather my help of understanding which cats were on the front cover, right after I put it there?

Mistystar31 (talk) 03:57, August 19, 2013 (UTC)


The link you showed me would go on Thistlepaw's page, actually, but basically you put a < ref> and </ ref>, without the spacing, to do a cite that's on Facebook or Kate's facebook.

Then, you put in the link of the cite in these brackets, [ and ]. I hope this helped you! Queen Beebs 19:44, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, wrong link, but there is one for Tawnypelt's trivia page. I'll try what you said and hope it works. Thanks.

Mistystar31 (talk) 19:57, August 21, 2013 (UTC)


Could you please stop changing how the cite is on Tawnypelt's trivia? It's fine how it is, honestly, and that's how we format all cites. o.O If you're not sure of how to do something, you're more than welcome to look at the code and ask (which you did, and Beebs explained it.) ouo Jayce (21:08, 8/21/2013)

Well, I have a direct link, and that's the link I used. It's the whole link, and goes directly to Vicky's comment. As for the "revealed on", since the references go straight to the reflist at the bottom of the page, we should also use proper grammar there, and only having "Vicky's facebook" makes no sense. Adding the revealed on part gives it a little more of a sentence-feel. Jayce (21:15, 8/21/2013)

What is your direct link? When I tried to put my direct link on, I noticed that Cloudskye had cut the end part off and replaced it with the Vicky's facebook part. Why is that?

Uh, I am Cloudskye. o.o And the direct link is this one. It's what is currently on the article, and I had to add the other part because that's required when adding a cite. The direct link that I added is fine, and I'm not quite sure why you changed it? Jayce (21:31, 8/21/2013)

I didn't mean to be annoying when changing the cite on Tawnypelt's trivia; I was just trying to do as Beebs instructed, but it kept not working, so I was "experimenting". Anyway, the link I used was a direct link for me, but it had more at the end than the comment=12 part because I had commented on the page, and so it had a little more on the link that I used. That would explain why my link didn't really work. Anyway, I'm sorry for any trouble with the trivia link's source. I'm also grateful for you explaining that after the "< ref>" (without the space, as Beebs said), you add "Revealed on" before the [ and add whoever's facebook] before the other < /ref>. Thank you for more info.

Are you angry at me for all of this? Please tell me the truth, and if so, please accept my apology. I really am sorry for the trivia and talk page trouble. If so, please give me another chance.

Mistystar31 (talk) 21:47, August 21, 2013 (UTC)


Temporary is when a cat is assigned a different mentor, while their current one is out of commission, or something along those lines. Jayfeather was Brightheart's official apprentice. He just happened to decide to take another path in his Clan. That doesn't make Brightheart any less of an official mentor to him. Jayce (04:49, 10/1/2013)

Re: Help on Blue "Table" and Cites/Sources

Hi, Mistystar31. Basically, anything inside the double braces, {{ and }} , is apart of the table and will display any information in it on the table. Then there are parameters, which is the vertical bar, | , and the label of that parameter which is anything to the right of that vertical bar as well as the equal sign =. The parameter label is pretty specific, so if the parameter asks for the publication date, for example, you would put the information to the right of the equal sign.

So for example, if you had a table such as this:

|author = N/A
|publish date = }}

And say, you want to put in the author's name, you would delete the "N/A" and put the author so it would look like this:

|author = Kate Cary
|publish date = }}

and it would display Kate Cary's name in the author spot. If you are unsure of what a parameter label is asking for, you can always use the search bar in the upper right of the screen and search for the title of the template. The title of the template is what comes directly after the double braces at the beginning of the table. So in this case, the title would be Book. However, you want to ensure that when you search for this template, you add the beginning label of Template: to specify what type of page you are searching for. So to search for a template, you would put in the search bar Template:Book

To make two cites have the same label, the only way you can do that is to have the reference the exact same as another reference. By that I mean, it must be the same format, link, and everything. Otherwise, every reference will have it's own number to refer to.

Also, thank you for asking about everything that you're unsure of. It's great that you come for help. =) Atelda insert vague subtext here 03:47, October 3, 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes it will have extra coding due to the type of mode you are editing in. There are two tabs at the top right of this editing window that say "Source" and "Visual". You always want to edit in source mode as it will show the coding underneath the appearance of the page. Sometimes, when you edit in visual mode, the coding window will automatically try to transfer whatever appearance you try to put into visual mode into coding which doesn't always translate correctly, nor is the coding really needed.

The reason why the two citations won't translate into one is because there is not the same link, or in other words, the two links to the facebook pages are not the same url therefore the wiki will not direct the two citations into one. Atelda insert vague subtext here 05:18, October 3, 2013 (UTC)

Then it's probably just due to the external source inside an internal source that the coding doesn't decide to match up. Just don't sweat it. Atelda insert vague subtext here 04:01, October 5, 2013 (UTC)


While it is about facts, it still belongs on Thistlepaw's trivia section, not the one for Bramblestar's Storm. It does not matter if she's a minor character, a mentioned character, or even a main one. It doesn't have to do with the book itself (like say a release date mention or something like that), and it's already mentioned on her page, so there's no need to place it elsewhere too. Jayce (05:53, 10/26/2013)

When I said "doesn't belong here", I was referring to the page for Bramblestar's Storm. Which, it doesn't. It belongs on Thistlepaw's page. Jayce (05:56, 10/26/2013)

I've already explained why I don't want it there. It doesn't pertain to the book itself, but for a character, that being Thistlepaw. While it's nice to have, it honestly should just stay on the character page, otherwise we'll have to place dozens more bits of information on countless articles, and it would quadruple some of the page sizes. I mean, have you seen the mistakes page? If we add things like that trivia to the page for Bramblestar's Storm, that means we'd need to add a lot of what's on this page to book articles as well. Jayce (06:19, 10/26/2013)

We've had the updated cover for a while now, as seen here. Sometimes, the cache just sometimes won't let the image show up properly. Usually, clearing your cache will help solve this problem. The OF's thread is a few days late, as this cover's been out for at least ten days now. Beebs had uploaded it when she checked one of HC's websites for us. Jayce (17:24, 2/25/2014)


We don't have to mention which EH chat it was, and I think it's fine how I had it. We don't need to mention it, because it's already stated which chat it is in the references, which any person can check if they doubt it. I tried to make it slightly more professional, and I seriously don't see what the problem with my edit is. Jayce (18:42, 4/22/2014)

I seriously don't see what the problem with my edit is, either.  Yours might be more professional, but mine was still fine, and I thought it was professional, with adding the names/numbers of the EHCs.  Before you edited my edit, there was the phrase "Erin Hunter Chat 7", so I thought it would be fine to add "Erin Hunter Chat 3".  And I at least helped by correcting and adding a few facts, such as Kate, instead of Vicky, saying the two cats aren't the same in EHC 7, and that Vicky at first said in EHC 3 that it was a mistake, implying they were the same cats.  Technically, there is something wrong with your edit: Vicky didn't actually apologize; she just said that it was her fault for keeping Smokepaw alive and making him Smokefoot (until Kate changed them into 2 separate cats).  Admitting you're guilty for the mistake and apologizing for it are different.Mistystar31 (talk) 19:00, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

I still disagree, but I think your newest edit appears to be a little better than mine, so I think I'd like to keep it how it is (I think going halfway on that would be just fine). I misread it, and thought she did apologize. I'm also going through and changing quite a bit to remove things like that, since I don't think some of it was needed. I never once said you didn't help- I'm actually glad you pointed out the information in the third EH chat- I didn't notice that and I wasn't the one who initially added the trivia to begin with. Jayce (19:05, 4/22/2014)

Just curious--what do you disagree on?  What "things" do you want to remove?  I know you didn't say I didn't help, but I get annoyed when I just put out all the facts I can find and some (the origins, like the EHCs) are "deleted", even if you can see the origins in the references.  And I'm not blaming you (or anyone) for not adding every fact to trivia; there's most-most-most likely other stuff I haven't added.Mistystar31 (talk) 19:22, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Like, things that say "in EH chat (number)" and things like that. It seems to me like it's a double mention, and it just doesn't feel needed. I didn't delete anything you added- just rephrased it and gave it a more "professional" look, since we are an encyclopedia-based wiki. The more professional you can be, the better. That part you added actually was helpful, since I'm pretty sure someone overlooked it. That's part of the reason why the references are there- so people can check where what fact is stated. Jayce (19:32, 4/22/2014)

Yeah, I understand, and I know that's why the references are there--I like to check where some facts were found and use the references, too.  I know you didn't "delete" anything, just rephrased or let it only be in refs.  I just sometimes think, even with the refs being a double mention, that when you add in the EH chat #, it looks more professional.  But I understand, and if you're fine with the trivia edit, so am I.  Are we still going halfway, or are we totally agreeing with this edit?  I like to compeletely agree most of the time.Mistystar31 (talk) 19:47, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Nooo, what I meant by halfway was although I liked my version of the edit, yours is just as good so we'll go with that instead of fighting over whose version is better. You're entitled to edit, and so am I. Sometimes disagreements happen, and that's what talk pages are for- to settle any disagreements. Jayce (19:51, 4/22/2014)

Okay.  I know that's the purpose of talk pages; that's what we've been doing.  Thank you for liking my last version and the other facts I put in.  I really appreciate it.Mistystar31 (talk) 20:00, April 22, 2014 (UTC)


Okay, but our wiki requires everything to be cited. So if you claim that info to be true then find the page, or it goes off of the article. That evidence needs to be backed up with actual page numbers. -- Burntclaw 漫长的 平安夜 00:40, July 28, 2015 (UTC)


The {{cite}} template is there there for a reason, it's prompting for a page number, and if the template is there long enough, then Mudfur will be deleted.

Also, sure, go ahead then. You can tell me the page numbers and I will re-add your information- Otherwise, they will be deleted from the page.

Also, calm down a bit with your use of bolds, italics and caps please- It seems like you are yelling, which I do not like that content on my talk page. User:Burntclaw/Sig 03:05, July 28, 2015 (UTC)


I know why the cite/template is there, because it needs a page number of the specific novel for reference. However, the cite/template for Mudfur on that sentence has been there, on the Medicine Cat article, for quite a long time, yet it has not ever been deleted. If I seem like I am yelling, I don't mean to, but I am quite annoyed as well about the content on my talk page about, even with truth, needing a citing. Also, some of the bold was just to have the "Specific Cases" first sentence shown without my continuation about Mudfur not thought of as part of the sentence. Not only do I no longer have the books needed, besides "Bramblestar's Storm", and have to get them from my library, but it will be quite irritating to read them again to find the exact page(s) and prove my edits, even if I skim through the books to find the specific scenes, since the proof will start with the 2nd series with Midnight, and go all the way to the current last series, The Last Hope, and also Bramblestar's Storm. For the "Specific Cases" page, there is already one cite I can give: the allegiances of Bramblestar's Storm, for how Leafpool returned to her medicine cat lifestyle, since she is on the allegiances with Jayfeather in the ThunderClan Medicine Cat section.Mistystar31 (talk) 04:08, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

If the cite template has really been there for that long, then delete it- Simple as that. If nobody can find proof for Mudfur, then he needs to be removed, not worth arguing over- he can be added again once somebody actually finds the page. To add to that, these articles are coming from a time where citing wasn't mandatory- so a lot of info is questioned to be cited, or deleted. How we do things now is we cite things immediately as they are added, we don't add the {{cite}} template behind every single piece of new info we add to articles.

Also, even if you know its a fact, our wiki is an site for info about Warriors for everyone, if someone has never read the Warriors series but say, they are doing research about the book. How will they know the information you provided is correct without backup evidence for your information? Also, just because finding a page number is irritating does not mean that it isn't needed. You do not need to re-read the book, if you know approximately where the scene is, then flip to the approximate page and then look for the particular scene- it isn't hard, it is what i do all the time. There is absolutely no need to reread the entire book.

Sure, the content is the truth, but if you don't provide evidence for it, will everyone know it is the truth? No, that is why we have cites. We do not need to add the cite template for every single bit of info we add to it, it's simply easier to just find the page then add it along with adding the info. User:Burntclaw/Sig 04:23, July 28, 2015 (UTC)


I'll reply to your points, one by one:

Unlike you, able to simply flip through the correct book and easily find the page(s), not everyone remembers approximently where the scene is as quickly and perfectly, even if they know it happened.

I didn't say you had to remember it perfectly and clearly, if you know approximately (yes, approximately) where the scene is, you should be able to, on that basis, find where the pages are. Also, I don't do it perfectly. It takes me a little while to find the page, but I don't have to read the whole book just to find it. I really should not need to be saying this.

And not everyone, including myself, doesn't remember every page around which every specific scene happened, even if they know which novel, meaning rereading or skimming the book for that page.

You don't have to know the specific page, I definitely don't know the specific pages- I really shouldn't be saying how to find a page, tbh. Like I said before, if you want, I can go find the page number and cite it for you.

You said I was "yelling" at you before with too many bold/italic/capitalized words, when some of the bold and italic words were just to not mess up the "Specific Cases" sentence and my continuation of the sentence? Now I am truly angry, as if you are mocking me of not finding everything so much easier, like you, yet none of my words, besides your sentences, are bold or italic. Just because someone may italicize, bolden, or capitalize their words doesn't mean they are yelling; they can be emphacizing a point.

There is the clear different between yelling and emphasizing. Seriously, I do not need something like this on my talk page:

"If I HAVE to have citing and of the RIGHT PAGE NUMBERS..."

To me, that seemed like screaming- especially when capitals are bolded and fronted with italic. It's true- Not all bolding is screaming, and I was not screaming at you- what you just did you there on your first message to me seemed like screaming to me.

Also, is this really worth getting "truly angry" over? I undid your edit because this wiki cites things, it's simply the rules here- everything on a page, except for the history needs to be cited, there is totally no need for all of these essays you and I are writing on each other's talk page just because i undid one edit of yours, seriously, if you don't like the rules and are writing essays on users' talk pages just to get around them, you might want to consider if this wiki is really for you.

Also, how the heck was I mocking you? I was not mocking you- There is a clear difference between mocking and explaining things. When I was a noob here, I didn't find things easier either, nor did I know what citing was or why was it needed, I had senior members here explaining things to me like i just said to you- just because they knew things I didn't did not mean I found their tone condescending. User:Burntclaw/Sig 05:36, July 28, 2015 (UTC)


I said that on the basis of that you said "reread" which gives me the immediate impression that you have read the Warriors series, I was not mocking, I was explaining. Also, I never called you a noob- I was talking about myself, not you.

Now, can we both stop writing essays on each others talk pages just because an edit is undone? This is getting very much exhausting and I'd rather much have a rest for the rest of the afternoon rather than writing angry replies to people over such a meaningless argument.

Also, to add, you are not allowed to delete Talk Page messages. User:Burntclaw/Sig 06:36, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

I didn't say you called me a newbie, I just meant when I used to be one when you said I should consider not being on this wiki. Very well. It is exhausting, and pretty much meaningless.Mistystar31 (talk) 06:41, July 28, 2015 (UTC)


Please stop adding trivia to Bluestar's page. As I told you before, you need to add a citation to the article as well. It doesn't matter if Bluestar was described looking similar to Mistystar (then Mistyfoot)- they could have meant body type as well. Your edits are being undone due to lack of a citation, and to me, it doesn't actually make sense. I don't see any backing to it. As I told you, a shade is artist's choice and the only one described as pale is Bluestar. For Mistystar, we have a cite that she's neither pale or dark, and for Stonefur, we don't have anything. Jayce (07:29, 10/31/2015)

It was talking in the book about their fur, not body type, but fine. I will find a citation.Mistystar31 (talk) 07:38, October 31, 2015 (UTC)

Re: Your message on Trollsky's page

Hi, Misty. You just stop this? You're causing quite a commotion and it's not doing good for you, or anyone. What you're doing to Mistystar's page is vandalism. You're adding unnecessary information and it doesn't benefit the article at all. Please stop, and calm down with all of this. Thank you, Berry Midnight Monster's Parade! 07:54 Sat Oct 31

Also, please respond to messages on the other person's talk. It makes it easier for us to see. Berry Midnight Monster's Parade! 07:54 Sat Oct 31

i dont care. get the hell off my talkpage. david 🌈 08:36, October 31, 2015 (UTC)


Hey Mistystar. Can you kindly knock it off? Getting whiny about an undone edit isn't the way to go. And besides, Trollsky's talk page is littered with messages because that's where you're supposed to leave those. You aren't supposed to edit character's pages without citations, and that's why you had your edits undone all the time, which caused your 'edit war'. I suggest you stop right where you are so you don't get into any more trouble. User:Winterflurry/Sig 20:07, October 31, 2015 (UTC)


js im not obligated to clean my talkpage if i dont want to ;) shouldnt talk about people when you know they can see every message you leave. david 🌈 19:47, November 1, 2015 (UTC)


Mistystar31, please refrain from leaving hostile messages on user's talk pages. You edit was undone because we need a citation for every description. If you don't like it, keep in mind that it's a rule here. Unfriendly behavior is also unwelcome here. User:Burntclaw/Sig 00:16, November 2, 2015 (UTC)

Although David was being rather hostile, that doesn't give you an excuse to leave rude messages calling people who enforce rules "whiny". (As per your message on Winter's talk page) You're overreacting, and I suggest you to calm down. Again, if you don't like the rules, trying to suppress them will not help you to change them- we cannot, unfortunately, change the rules for one person. Again, perhaps this wiki isn't for you. User:Burntclaw/Sig 02:33, November 2, 2015 (UTC)

"I already am, as I continually keep writing, trying to calm down. I've been done with the editing-without-citation issue for a while, yet people keep talking to me about it, so I will respond, especially if they are being rude themselves. Not all my replies are "hostile", and I'm not the one who called Snowdapple "whiny"--they called me "whiny", and I merely said I am not. This wiki is for me, as I love the Warriors series. I merely forgot about the rules, as I have said multiple times now, and of course they shouldn't be changed or suppressed for one person. As I already said, I will either find a citation to put in my "edit", or not edit if I cannot find a citation."

This is clearly attempting to spark off argument. This is why users continuously tell you off. They advice you to calm, you give them a hostile reply. And yes, you are being hostile. Your behavior is bordering rude and as a rollback of this wiki, I'm asking you to stop being hostile. And btw, you did call all of our comments whiny:

"Maybe if people stopped whining about me, I would stop responding back, just as told I should do."


User:Burntclaw/Sig 05:42, November 2, 2015 (UTC)

lol if you are gonna find that ^^ insulting. User:Burntclaw/Sig 06:31, November 2, 2015 (UTC)

Ok then. You clearly come on my talk page and annoy about one little citation, then spark off arguments on various users' talk pages with hostile language and calling them "mouse-brains", fine, I'd rather you not reply to this. User:Burntclaw/Sig 07:35, November 2, 2015 (UTC)


Mistystar, please refrain from undoing several edits. Your edits are being undone for a rightful reason, as you do not have a citation. If you have a citation (or proof) that backs up your edit, please feel free to add it with the proof. If you do not, refrain from adding it. Regards, Appledash the light of honor 06:32, December 26, 2015 (UTC)

I do have proof that the cat sitting to the left on the cover of Sunset is Leafpool. In the novel, she receives a starry vision of Squirrelflight and Brambleclaw walking next to each other in a starry form, their tails entwined. Therefore, unlike Hawkfrost in the center, the cat to the left looking at the starry paw prints is Leafpool.Mistystar31 (talk) 06:40, December 26, 2015 (UTC)

Yes but it could be anymore. Unless you find me a valid source that specifically states it is Leafpool, then you need to leave it alone. Regards, Appledash the light of honor 06:42, December 26, 2015 (UTC)

Re: Series Amount + How Many More?

How many more series of Warriors (not even including the Super Editions, novellas, manga, or field guides) do you think the Erin Hunters will create?

As much as I love the Warriors books to continue reading them, and I really do like them, I would think 6 arcs are definitely enough. For example, not including the "companion books" or the play, the Harry Potter series had only 1 arc of 7 books. This series, on the other paw, has 6 novels in each arc, so when the Vision of Shadows arc is done, that will be 36 books alone, with many more from the other types: 10 Super Editions (including the upcoming Tigerheart's Shadow), 13 graphic novels, soon 12 novellas, and 7 field guides; altogether, that will be 78 books, or at least 71 without the guides! Isn't that enough?

And here's the extra question: How many more, especially arcs, would you be willing to read?Mistystar31 (talk) 20:12, April 3, 2017 (UTC)

Bonus Scene/Poster + Only on Hardcover?

Does the bonus scene in the hardcover forms of the books only appear there? Or does it also come on the paperback and kindle/nook books, even though these covers do not have the little sticker?Mistystar31 (talk) 21:44, September 9, 2017 (UTC)


hey misty, i saw your edit on the trivia page on Dawn of the Clans. all you need to add is a reference, and then it'll be all good. if you don't know how to add references, ask spooky or thunder. —Ripplewater (uʍop ǝpᴉsdn ǝɥʇ)  01:24, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

My "references" are the front covers of each book, which are shown in the "picture box". But does that count?Mistystar31 (talk) 01:49, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

i don't think so? —Ripplewater (uʍop ǝpᴉsdn ǝɥʇ)  01:51, May 16, 2020 (UTC)


umm.. i don't think that's a reference, a reference is showing the proof of the fact. just by showing me the book cover, doesn't prove that it's the first book with a bonus scene. also, please answer on my talk page. —Ripplewater (uʍop ǝpᴉsdn ǝɥʇ)  01:58, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

for example [2] that's a reference. —Ripplewater (uʍop ǝpᴉsdn ǝɥʇ)  02:00, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

i removed what you've added because there are no references. if you find one, just undo my edit and add it. —Ripplewater (uʍop ǝpᴉsdn ǝɥʇ)  02:27, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.