FANDOM


Project Characters
This is a project discussion page, where a group of dedicated editors may come together and work towards their common goal.
For more information on projects, please see the community portal.
News
A reminder: please give proper credit where it is due when writing articles and nominating them! If someone else has worked on an article that you are nominating, please mention them by name in the section you post.

If you're new to the project, you may want to read the FAQ and Guidelines for an introduction.
Votes

Cite removals/changes vote
Downgrade articles vote
Gold Nomination ~ Scourge
Gold Nomination ~ Blade
Gold Nomination ~ Snipe
Gold Nomination ~ Flickerkit
Gold Nomination ~ Tyr

Archives

Discussion Archives

[1-50] [51-100]

[101] - [102] - [103] - [104] - [105]

[106] - [107] - [108] - [109] - [110]

[111] - [112] - [113] - [114] - [115]

[116]

Character categories

I really think we should start giving characters the categories based on the books they appear in, not by name. I never understood why we did this, but it seems kinda stupid that we do. For example, Firestar doesn't have categories for Into the Wild to A Dangerous Path because he was Firepaw and Fireheart, but he's the same character that appeared in those five books, just different names and ranks. Doesn't make much sense to me having it the way we do now.β€”Danny GVivaLaVida 02:38, August 10, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, this should definitely be a thing. The characters are the same, those categories should belong to them. --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 02:46, August 10, 2019 (UTC)

I also second this, and it's something that's always bothered me, too. A good example would be like we did for the early settlers; such as Dust Muzzle. This also includes kit and warrior categories, too. Overall, it's the same character and we should treat it as such. Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 03:13, August 10, 2019 (UTC)

Not sure of why we originally decided to have it the way it is, but it doesn't make sense to keep it that way, so sure. Might be hard to make sure we don't leave any behind on accident, so we should probably try and make a checklist system and assign people alphabetical batches.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 02:27, 8/11/2019

I disagree with this. It’s too much clutter as it is and to have categories that aren’t for the page itself is misleading. Firestar was not a character in ITW... Firepaw was. β€”Jayce  ( 21:11, 8/14/2019 )​​​​​​

I agree with putting all the books they appear in, not just by their current name. I think people see it as for example... Firestar doesn't have the ITW category so he must not appear at all in the book. Yes, it would be a lot of clutter, but it would make sense.– Cinna dear evan hansen, 21:23, August 14, 2019 (UTC)

I know this was mentioned in discord, but I'll put it here, too, but we can always condense the book categories to the arcs for those characters who appear in all of them, or nearly all of them. Like how we do it for the info boxes. Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 12:52, August 16, 2019 (UTC)

I would be fine with condensing the categories, but I really don't think we need to have, say, Firestar's page...list basically every book category from Into the Wild to The Last Hope (along with his other appearances). That, to me, is just way too much and overdoing it. However, I'd be willing to at least try and see what adding an arc category instead might do. This bears the question though, what if someone only wants to search by book appearance, and not by arc? What if someone wants to see if Firestar appears in Bramblestar's Storm, but only has the "Super edition characters" listing? The way we have it is so we can organize things by book, and I don't see this panning out all too well in some cases. It's not that it's a bad idea, but I do want to see how it would work for individual characters, how things would be searched/listed, ect.

tldr; I'm not too sold on it yet and I think there's still a few more things I'd like before this idea is implemented. β€”Jayce  ( 05:51, 8/29/2019 )​​​​​​

We could always keep the Super Editions, novellas, field guides, etc fully listed instead of condensing them, and only condense the main arcs. Any other comments? Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 18:01, September 7, 2019 (UTC)

Anything happening?β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 00:54, 9/12/2019

Yup, I still got another question. Would we only condense the main arcs, ect, if a character is seen in all six books? Because there are "character-of-the-day" type cats who are only in maybe one or two books. Would we still be keeping the individual book categories for that purpose? β€”Jayce  ( 04:26, 9/12/2019 )​​​​​

For characters that appear in all six or most of the six books in an arc, I'd say condense it and give them the whole arc category. However, for cats that only appear in one or two books I'd say give them the individual book categories, since they don't appear for the full arc and are important/appear only in that book. ❄Star❄ show yourself, i'm ready to learn<20:16, 10/01/2019>

i still say in all six books of an arc should be the means for condensing. if they appear in 5 out of the 6, i think it should be non-condensed Snowdapple ❄ 21:40, 10/11/2019

All of Erin Hunter's books are the best books. My fav character is HollyLeaf.

Any more comments? ❄Star❄ show yourself, i'm ready to learn<04:15, 11/02/2019>

It's been two months and it seems that we haven't reached a consensus. Any more comments?❄Star❄ show yourself, i'm ready to learn<17:40, 1/04/2020>

I would be fine with condensing them into a single arc category if a character appears in the entire arc. With Super Editions/Novellas, given their smaller number, I feel could just be used by the book name itself, seeing as how we have a lot of super edition only characters (guardian cats, sisters, jessy, etc). With characters that only appear in a handful of books, they can get the specific book category.β€”Danny GVivaLaVida 18:03, January 4, 2020 (UTC)

Oh I'm all for that. Does anyone else want to add to this? ❄Star❄ show yourself, i'm ready to learn<19:14, 1/10/2020>

I’m all for what Thunder said too. --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 19:15, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

Does anyone want to add to this? ❄Star❄ show yourself, i'm ready to learn<17:48, 2/19/2020>

Really late to the party, but I definitely agree with Thunder on this one. β€”JayI hope they remember you....ϟ 05:20, 2/24/2020

Wow I'm really late to this. I agree and think they should just be listed for what books they've appeared in, not just by their name. It's never made much sense to me why we've done that. β€”patchfeather . You're poison running through my veins 14:41, February 28, 2020 (UTC)

Last call for comments. Wow, six month discussion.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 17:53, 3/02/2020

I still think that if they appear in 5 out of 6 books, they should be every book, not just arc listed Snowdapple ❄ 01:48, 3/22/2020

Listing the entire arc when they haven't appeared in the entire arc is blatantly misleading and we should not be doing it. Unless they appear in all six books, they should be getting the individual book categories. β€”Jayce  ( 02:38, 3/22/2020 )

Pinefur - Gold Nomination

New history format, changes to ULE: Firestar section, and fixed the Finnish interwiki link. --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 01:23, March 5, 2020 (UTC)

Just a quick note; we haven't forgotten about you but we're going to wait until the discussion on PO concludes since it relates to this article. ^^ Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 22:09, March 11, 2020 (UTC)

With the passing of PO, this article will now need a continuity section. Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 03:22, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

Updated Should her only quote go as well? --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 03:40, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

As AU non canon material; it all needs to go.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 03:41, 3/22/2020

Updated Nuked her quote and category. --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 03:46, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

Holding on this again until the PC discussion below closes.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 16:14, 3/27/2020

Piper - Gold Nomination

Since I'm nominating Magpie, we'll go for the rest of the litter too. The history section is too long to go to the current format, and I think I'm missing the appearances section; will go add rn. β€”Jayce  ( 17:03, 3/12/2020 )

  • I think the "What's moss-ball?" dialogue can be moved to the top of the Crookedstar's Promise section.
  • I think the bottom three paragraphs/sentences of CP can be merged into one. Mainly because they're all very short; especially the last one, as a single sentence paragraph.
    • For the second bit, it would add a bit more context to say 'Moons later, when Crookedpaw is on his way..." to address the time skip.
    • Also for the second bit "When Crookedpaw is on his way to the Moonstone, he sees Soot, and she tells him that Piper, Fleck, Mitzi, and herself are fine, and are still living at the cornfield, but that Mist and Magpie were brought to a different farm to catch mice for the Twolegs." - read all the way through; it's kinda a run-on sentence; probably split it in two?
    • Last sentence: Is he Crookedstar when he thinks about them often? It seems to contrast with the statement on Magpie's page, of his vow to not forget, when he was an apprentice.
  • There are three instances of 'seen' in the history; which as OOU language, could be pretty easily tweaked out for flow. 'she is seen scooping' -> 'she scoops' or 'Crookedkit watches her scoop'; Mitzi tucks her away, etc. stuff like that.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 20:15, 3/12/2020

Mist (Lo) - Gold Nomination

I love these barn cats. Adding appearances section now. β€”Jayce  ( 17:03, 3/12/2020 )

Leaving a small note that it could use a similar history cleanup as done on Magpie.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 17:38, 3/16/2020

Characters' rank listing

Okay, so I know I haven't been active a whole lot, but I recently came across an issue while looking through the charcat template. On Tigerstar's page, how it lists him as a rogue all the way at the bottom of his rank list, I think for new readers or people looking up information, it can be a little confusing. I drafted this up to kind of combat that problem. I know it goes back to the old way, but I just think this way, the ranks appear in the list that the cat became that rank, and it's less confusing. For cats whose ranks don't go against the norm of the charcat template wouldn't get this. Thoughts? Snowdapple ❄ 23:30, 3/17/2020

any comments? Snowdapple ❄ 20:56, 3/22/2020

From my limited amount of understanding, Fandom themselves implemented the new infobox coding change and made us change it. So the rankings not being in order is something we've had to sacrifice. Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 21:16, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

For super important ones, like Leafpool, Spooky's been able to custom code them... but Vec is correct, Fandom did come in and do this, so I'm not sure backtracking and going against what they did for us would be a good idea. β€”Jayce  ( 02:47, 3/25/2020 )

Is there any way to contact one of the coders for Fandom and have them try and figure out this problem? Or have we already tried that Snowdapple ❄ 12:59, 3/26/2020

I don't think we should really go that far. If FANDOM edited it themselves, and if we can't edit it, then we should just leave it as it is. --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 21:47, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

honestly if we have the ability to change the ranks, then we should do so. the way it is now is inaccurate and dont always occur in a specific way and we should be depicting that, because its order is how it happened in the series. just because fandom forced us to do it this way doesnt mean we cant work our way around it, lol. david 🌈 21:56, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

Mudthorn - Gold Nomination

--Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 03:28, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

Ivytail (RC) - Gold Nomination

--Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 03:28, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

Alleg-only rank nominations

This is probably going to get me shot, but tbh, it's something that needs to be discussed. Is there any particular reason why articles of this quality should be allowed to get a silver or gold nomination? It requires very little work besides some template set-ups, and doesn't even have a history besides a cat's rank. While normally I'm not one to say someone shouldn't nominate something, I feel like we should be reconsidering allowing alleg-only cats to be ranked anything above bronze. Silver, and by extension gold, ranked articles are meant to be examples of our work, with gold rank being our best. What does that show if we have allegiance-only characters included in this category?

tldr for those who don't want to read my rambling: we should not allow allegiance-only characters to obtain a gold or silver ranking and keep them at maximum, bronze, since they do not have any content whatsoever and are not a representation of our work. β€”Jayce  ( 16:05, 3/22/2020 )

I do concur in concept of not making these silver nor gold. But, bronze represents something that these articles aren't either, which doesn't abide by the current ranking chart, and also might clog the bronze category permanently with articles that have no issues, which people browse for re-nominating. I would suggest making a new tag, something to mark these as 'complete' or 'comprehensive' for the information they do have that is completely filled out. To avoid the clogging and keep these articles entirely out of the bronze/silver/gold promotion system we use for articles that have quality - quality that a contentless article cannot possess.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 16:10, 3/22/2020

What Spooky said. --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 16:18, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

Spooky, your idea would be fine with me. My main goal was to express my concern with these nominations and point out the lack of content in the articles, in hopes that we could change things around to more accurately represent them instead of being misleading. β€”Jayce  ( 16:20, 3/22/2020 )

Agreeing with everything above; allegiance-only characters have practically nothing in them. ❄Star❄ show yourself, i'm ready to learn<16:21, 3/22/2020>

Agreed, I support the idea for a "completed" status for these types of characters. Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 18:18, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

agreed with above β€”Danny GVivaLaVida 00:02, March 24, 2020 (UTC)

Concurring with above^^ β€”patchfeather . You're poison running through my veins 00:06, March 24, 2020 (UTC)

Also agreeing with above; an alternative tag for these characters sounds like the best way to approach them until/if they become more involved. β€” max ゴジラ (02:52, 24/3/2020)

May I ask for any further comments? I've seen most all active users comment, and I'd like to get this rolling. β€”Jayce  ( 03:10, 3/25/2020 )

Agreed Snowdapple ❄ 13:00, 3/26/2020

Stumpytail - rogue or no?

So there's the case of Stumpytail, a kinda obscure ShadowClan cat. He stays in SC after Brokenstar gets kicked out, but also appears as one of Brokenstar's rogues in Tigerclaw's Fury. Normally, we take whatever's first, so arc 1. However. TF is also a book heavily focusing on ShadowClan, while the others he's in (FAI and FoS) are not. These two things aren't compatible - he's either a rogue or not - but in this specific case, I would argue that we should consider his staying in ShadowClan as retconned. Perhaps once true, but out of the few cats in TF, he's a prominent part of the group and appears a lot, in a book and so it's not just a one off. I bring this up because it'd need the PC override to continue to list one or the other, and the retconned material to be treated as a mistake, whereas currently it's all lumped on there. Thoughts?β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 02:59, 3/23/2020

I think it's probably worth pointing out that Stumpytail is not the only cat whose appearances in Tigerclaw's Fury contradict what was shown in the original series. For example, Boulder is kind of the reverse case of Stumpytail -- he is shown as having stayed with ShadowClan in Tigerclaw's Fury but listed in the allegiances of Fire and Ice, Forest of Secrets, and Rising Storm as not being part of the Clan. And Clawface, despite the fact that he was supposed to have died in battle during Fire and Ice, appears throughout TF, as much as Stumpytail does. – Ivy β˜† 22:56, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

Maybe put in a continuity section with these things? Snowdapple ❄ 21:21, 3/24/2020

Winter, I think the discussion is to decide which to keep in the main history and which to stick in the continuity section. =P I feel like we should go with whatever is mentioned more frequently and recently. In Boulder's case, it would be the rogue listing as a mistake, and with Stumpytail, it's him staying in ShadowClan being the mistake. Clawface's death is a bit of an iffy thing, because that was a big part of the original arc and Graystripe's character arc.. so I'm not sure exactly what would be done in that case. β€”Jayce  ( 21:47, 3/24/2020 )

oof my bad, im out of the loop with this site lol but yeah i agree with the most frequent standing Snowdapple ❄ 13:01, 3/26/2020

Tawnyspots, Thrushpelt, and Dappletail's ages

Ok so, in Bluestar's Prophecy the aforementioned three are radically different ages. Tawnyspots is an experienced warrior, Thrushpelt a new warrior, and Dappletail an apprentice. However, in Goosefeather's Curse, they're revealed to be littermates. This...really does not work out. If we're going to list their ages, we need to figure out what source to actually use, or even acknowledge if they pose an actual relation. It really boils down to either taking their first appearance in the series (Bluestar's Prophecy), or their actual birth (Goosefeather's Curse). It's like 3:30am so I hope this makes enough sense. β€”Danny GVivaLaVida 07:25, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

Id say the same with the above stumpytail problem just having the most recent first Snowdapple ❄ 12:30, 3/27/2020

Hm; I personally take BP, for these specific characters. Mainly because all of them have supporting roles in BP - given Tawny's deputy and Thrushpelt's whole thing with Blue, and Dapple's around a fair bit too, and their very minor thing in GC, which has a couple other timeline issues, too. I do support putting something or another in {{Continuity}}, to make it resolve itself; and we could just not list an age at all due to the conflict.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 15:52, 3/27/2020

Agreeing with Spooky, they were a very minor mention in GC, almost like a β€œoh we better throw some names in here” sort of thing. However, can I also add Speckletsil and One-eye to this, because they took have a similar case to these three. I’d agree with the continuity addition, and maybe adding a note in the age cite too perhaps? β€” max ゴジラ (19:50, 27/3/2020)

I really don't think there's enough here for a continuity thing for any of the cats other than Tawnyspots. Littermates don't always become warriors at the same time. Especially since Thrushpelt had literally just been made a warrior a quarter moon before the start of BP, it's very much conceivable that Dappletail, his littermate, might still be an apprentice. Same with One-eye and Speckletail -- Speckletail was a young warrior and may have just been promoted a moon or two ahead of One-eye. With Tawnyspots, it does seem that he is older than he would be if he was actually Thrush and Dapple's littermate, but was his age even ever commented on in BP? – Ivy β˜† 19:57, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

I agree that Thrush/Dapple can plausibly be littermates, and isn't a issue that much. However, Tawnyspots' age is commented on. A patrol with both Thrushpelt and Tawnyspots comes up, Bluekit is like why is Thrushpelt so small, and Moonflower says he's the youngest warrior. If he's younger than Thrushpelt, when they are littermates, that doesn't add up. I personally don't think they were referring to order of birth - Moonflower's wording is 'he's smaller bc he's the youngest of them'. The continuity is to take the age out of the infobox, imo, because it can be disputed with evidence from either way, and maybe be like 'according to GC his age is approx. [this], but would not align totally with BP because of [this]' instead of listing it flat out when we recalculate it. As of now, the ages on their pages look kinda wacky and not really matching the timeline.β€”spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 20:33, 3/27/2020

All right, I see. Thanks, Spooky. As far as the Tawnyspots thing, I just don't have access to BP right now and was going off memory, so I was just asking if there was any evidence. As I said, I definitely support taking Tawnyspots's age out of the infobox and him getting the note, but I don't think there's really any contradiction as far as Dappletail and Thrushpelt. – Ivy β˜† 21:39, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

I'd take the BP cite over the GC one, and adding a Continuity section with the note and all. --Blossomflower Cherry Blossom 21:46, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Ivy that it's still plausible for Thrush/Dapple to be littermates, since we have recent evidence that littermates don't have to have their ceremonies as the same time, such as Bristle/Flip/Thrift. Tawnyspots is a questionable case, and I agree with a Continuity section for him. Vec I am Iron Man! πŸ‘Ύ 22:31, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

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