Warriors Wiki talk:Characters

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

Archives Discussion Archives [1-50] [51-100] [101-117] [118] [119] [120] [121]

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.

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 02:38, August 10, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, this should definitely be a thing. The characters are the same, those categories should belong to them. --Av ^{Out of sight and out of mind} () 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! 👾} 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.—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. —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! 👾} 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. —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! 👾} 18:01, September 7, 2019 (UTC)

Anything happening?—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? —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 _{red and black ♥}<20:16, 10/01/2019>_{way down hadestown} 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 ✧Winter✧ 21:40, 10/11/2019

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

Any more comments? ♥ Star _{red and black ♥}<04:15, 11/02/2019>_{way down hadestown} 04:15, 11/02/2019​

It's been two months and it seems that we haven't reached a consensus. Any more comments? ♥ Star _{red and black ♥}<17:40, 1/04/2020>_{way down hadestown} 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.

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 18:03, January 4, 2020 (UTC)

Oh I'm all for that. Does anyone else want to add to this? ♥ Star _{red and black ♥}<19:14, 1/10/2020>_{way down hadestown} 19:14, 1/10/2020​

I’m all for what Thunder said too. --Av ^{Out of sight and out of mind} () 19:15, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

Does anyone want to add to this? ♥ Star _{red and black ♥}<17:48, 2/19/2020>_{way down hadestown} 17:48, 2/19/2020​

Really late to the party, but I definitely agree with Thunder on this one. —Jay^{I 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. —Patchfeather^{Hangar 18, I know too much} 14:41, February 28, 2020 (UTC)

Revaluating the official site's tree

Normally I'd place this over in Project Operations, but I feel the content affects the characters more so I'm placing it here.

To resolve the continuing debate over regarding the canonical validity of the official website's family tree, I'm just bringing it up here to see if we can reach a verdict. Putting bluntly, are we really taking the tree as a valid source of information? The tree appears to be a cobbled-together structure of old Su Susann cites. While I know some users here consider the tree canon, and a Twitter poll we did some time ago showed that the majority of people took it as a canon as well. However, as stated, the tree looks like it was just taken from old cites that were rebuked by Vicky and likely taken from the wiki itself when they were considered canon. Some statements contradict book works (Willow/Tawny), and some don't (Mosspelt/Frogleap). Some of the icons there also describe characters unlike their descriptions in the books (eg. Leafshade as a tortie and white).

Personally, my main issue here is that the website is official, and I know for a fact that people will complain if we don't take it as information in some form, contrasting from those who believe it to be, more or less, constructed fanfiction presented as valid information. If we don't take the tree as valid, then are we not just disregarding something from the official website itself? At this point, I'd rather just remove the information and list it as something else.

My proposal is that we move the website specific information to something called "Continuity" or something similar to that, where the website info is neglected from the main article pages and family pages if they apply there. I've made two options for us on this, we can have it at the bottom of the page with a header as "continuity" which is just a few sentences detailing what the tree says, an example being this. Alternatively, in a separate tabber for whatever character, an example being Firestar here. At the bottom of the page, it's less crowding up top with the other tabbers, but to me the main article is much too information-heavy. If we do a separate tabber, we can easily divide and distribute the information to whatever subpage it goes to, but the tabbers up top might look a bit crowded. Thoughts?

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 21:12, December 9, 2019 (UTC)

I agree PC is a much better place, so that this doesn't die out. Thunder's thoughts echo my own, and I think finding a compromise such as this is much better than either keeping it all as Biblical truth, or just scrapping it. I do like the idea of a section better (a lot of the articles even mentioned on the website already have tabs, and tabs crowding, and also it can be so easily made into a section anyways.

The main reason I support this is because of the nature of the website. I respect it's what WP has deigned to put out, but there's significant errors within... it, and it's pretty obvious a lot of it was copied from us, of which was also not accurate at the time... and it's now just cobbled together fanfiction. Albeit, fanfiction of the creators, but in a series with more than one, what's even true? Of course, it's much more reasonable to take proofs and cites from authors when their name is attached, to say "Kate said...xxx" or whatnot, which is fine, but the stuff from the website is largely unattributed or just from "the editor". Who?

It's still important to list somewhere, because it does still exist. That's why a continuity listing, a sector of some sort for it, but also separate from the main article, is the best solution. It's still definitely presented, but it's not indistinguishably entwined with book/named-author canon.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 21:30, 12/09/2019

I personally see nothing wrong with taking the website as canon information, especially in regards to the old one. The fact that it is updated both in articles published and initial extreme errors in the official tree (Hazeltail and Mousewhisker as Spiderleg's kits, blue Dustpelt, etc) and those facts, along with the amount of care that does go into the website's desire to connect with the fandom, leads me to believe of its canon validity. Of course it has its blatant errors, though whether that's due to staff size limitations or other issues, I do not know. The website chooses to list FrogXMoss and white tortoiseshell Leafshade for a reason, and that's what I think. But that's just me.

However, I acknowledge and agree to the concerns about the validity of the website. I don't like the separate tab option for the continuity. It makes it...subconsciously demonstrates that it's separate when I think it should be the opposite. I do like the continuity section on the page somewhere. I also really like the official tree separate reference thing, similar with blogs. I don't recall if that was ever officially introduced in a discussion yet (it's finals week and my brain is dead so I apologize if it was), but I like how it does show the reader that "okay so this is from the tree, take it as you will" that we do for the blog cites. I think that, in combination with the continuity section, will work really well. Vec ^{I am Iron Man! 👾} 22:05, December 9, 2019 (UTC)

I definitely agree that we should list the tree. As for taking it as canon, well, it is mostly canon. Listing it as separate to show the continuity seems weird, like we're just disregarding the whole thing, when mainly it seems like it's mostly alright, minus the couple mistakes. Listing the tree separately seems pointless if most of it matches up. If there are any mistakes, we can list them as such. Any information that is from the tree and nothing else should be noted as such though. If it contradicts nothing, then it can be added, but if it contradicts something, then the book takes precedence. That's just what I think. ♥ Star _{red and black ♥}<21:22, 2/01/2020>_{way down hadestown} 21:22, 2/01/2020​

Hmm... yeah, I'm gonna agree with Star. I feel as if the family tree is very canon, considering it is very accurate and does fix mistakes with occasional updates. --Av ^{Out of sight and out of mind} () 21:26, February 1, 2020 (UTC)

I concur with Thunder- we shouldn't take it as Word of God anymore. —Jay^{I hope they remember you....ϟ} 05:21, 2/24/2020

hi hello yes, just popping on to give my two cents before this is over and done.

so basically the website is canon yes. we can all see that; however, what we can all see as well is there are 100% of the Su Susann missing kits on this tree. they were all confirmed to be fan characters and not real, not valid. Now I don't hate Su, I loved her and I loved the information that she put out. She even gave me a link to her personal info wiki at one point, and I loved the info she was putting onto it. But the fact that Vicky was being bashed for Su's opinions, thus making her say Su's ideas weren't real, and that there were simply too many cats, and thus causing Su's everything (account, wiki, etc)'s downfall.

tldr; i really think we should reconsider seeing this tree as valid canon information when it holds non-canon information on it. thank you for coming to my ted talk ✧Winter✧ 22:22, 2/27/2020

assuming things

I noticed this earlier and discussed it with David earlier, but I personally think that if there's something in the books that is either blatantly obvious, or has a lot of supporting evidence, we should take it as canon. Things that come to mind are Owlfur being the father of Sunfish's kits. The two of them are mates and while Owlfur himself is never said to be Mallowtail's or Dawnbright's father, literally what other cat could it be? Same goes for Snowbush being the father of Larksong, Leafshade, and Honeyfur. To my knowledge, he is never called their father in the books, but we know he's referred to as Lilyheart's mate in the books, and to me that is very clearly signifying that he is indeed their father, because honestly, Lilyheart is never mentioned to have another mate, and what other cat would it possibly be? Other things like Cedarstar succeeding Houndstar. We know Cedarstar was Houndstar's deputy and the timeframe fits for him to become leader shortly thereafter. Same goes for Volestar and Hailstar. We don't list it because nothing outright says "Cedarpelt succeeded Houndstar", but this (and the above mentioned) are rather obscure details that likely won't be touched upon again.

We do this for other things like Owl Eyes and Owlstar. The two are very obviously the same cat and we consider it canon due to the amount of evidence, or Rabbitleap being the father of Wrenpaw. However, things like the mates of Curlfeather or Sorrelstripe, or assuming a cat's afterlife in of itself is far too broad of a spectrum to assume anything, so we don't put anything there. Thoughts?

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 23:06, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

I feel like assuming a cat's afterlife (and therefore another blank) isn't a good idea, since it's pretty subjective and (depending on your views of said character) possibly biased. I'm not cool with comparing the two since it's not the same thing. If a cat is mates with someone, like Snowbush and Lilyheart, I feel it's safe to list them both as the parents of the kits. I also feel like Snowbush was called the father of Lilyheart's kits in the TAQ preview we got from Kate, so that counts.

We could possibly add that Cedarstar succeeded Houndstar, and Volestar and Hailstar, and whatnot... but my question is this: where is the proof of all of that? At least with the mates thing, we do have something stating that these cats are mates.

If it's obvious without question, then we might be able to list it with a note.. but if there's anything that could be questioned (such as a cat's afterlife), then I don't think we should be listing it as canon. We're a database on canonical information only, not to be listing our guesses. Something being obvious is not proof and never will be. A hunch or a guess isn't factual evidence that can be used to say "this is what happened for sure", but instead a "this is what we think happened". —Jayce(05:39, 1/07/2020)​

I feel like listing two known mates as parents of one's litter is fair to safely assume. Maybe not so much when the books were first published where fathers weren't open about siring a litter than the current books (Whitestorm comes to mind, how he didn't originally outright say "I'm the dad" just that Fireheart caught him looking proudly on when Willowpelt made the announcement she's expecting, but was later confirmed as the kits' father iirc). The cats today tend to stay monogamous with little parentage drama, and it seems like one of those things that changed as time passed. As long as we have confirmation they are mates, I'm fine with listing them as parents.

As for the others, I'm agreeing with Jayce on those. There's no proof Hailstar and Cedarstar succeeded Volestar and Houndstar. While I agree it's highly likely they did, we don't have confirmation. We could put a note in the trivia section saying "It's possible Hailstar succeeded Volestar but this is unconfirmed". Same thing with the afterlife; it's not infallible. Vec ^{I am Iron Man! 👾} 23:42, January 14, 2020 (UTC)

I concur with the parentages. However, I also think we can't safely assume the successions of ranks.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 19:48, 1/18/2020

For parentages, if there's no other possible cat, and cat in question is mates with the mom/dad, then list it, but for afterlives and successions, it can't always be safely assumed. A couple of cats were stuck in limbo, and the succession also has room for plenty of deputies sometimes. ♥ Star _{red and black ♥}<17:48, 2/19/2020>_{way down hadestown} 17:48, 2/19/2020​

Everyone seems to agree on adding everything but the successions; and we could probably cite these instances that aren't outright stated with lil explanatory reference notes. Any other comments? —spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 01:23, 2/23/2020

I agree with Thunder and David here, honestly. —Jay^{I hope they remember you....ϟ} 05:23, 2/24/2020

Bramblestar's impostor ~ Silver nomination

shame it didn't retain the new history appearance but consensus is consensus —Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 01:53, February 23, 2020 (UTC)

Fuzzball ~ Gold Nomination

—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 02:06, 2/23/2020

So, I'm a little confused here. Our normal histories are saying to list the Super Editions last, but this article has it first? What layout exactly are we going by, and did I miss something that exempts this from it? —Jayce(21:53, 2/27/2020)

Updated Paradoxical, but moved to per precedent.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 22:11, 2/27/2020

Velvet (AVoS) ~ Gold Nomination

—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 02:06, 2/23/2020

A friendly poke to finish the P&R section, since you have that listed as coming soon. And maybe add the ==In the ''[[A Vision of Shadows]]'' arc== header to keep it consistent? Vec ^{I am Iron Man! 👾} 21:23, February 27, 2020 (UTC)

Petalfur ~ Gold Nomination

How cheery.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 03:55, 2/23/2020

I'm still mulling about this format (so poke me later), but a few things come to mind as of now:

-I know the whole point of the appearances list was to remove the "so and so appeared in the allegiances..." but I think maybe just adding a section for Outcast in Petalfur's history with something along the lines "...she is the daughter of Mintfur and Icewing along with Grasskit, Beetlekit, and Pricklekit" or "she is born to Mintfur and Icewing...". I know that would kinda repeat with the brief summary, but I think her first appearance, allegiances or not, is worth noting in the detailed history section.

-Again, still unsure about throwing all the quotes within the history section w/o a "Quotes" section, especially since some of them aren't that relevant like her Sign of the Moon one and Bramblestar's Storm kinda.

-Think it should be "In the Super Editions" to match the rest.

-Double check the cite for her quote for Petalfur's relationship with Rippletail; think you have the wrong book.

-Thoughts on {{mclist|2}} the "Appearances" section? Just so it's not one long column when it could be condensed.

-Again, still unsure about having the "Character pixels" at the very bottom of the page, but that's probably because I'm used to having it in the middle in the current character pages. Maybe before the "Personality" section?

I know like half of these are just thoughts and not concrete prompts to fix anything, and I apologize for that, but you know that sometimes I just need to word vomit in order to further my thought process to make a decision lol. Vec ^{I am Iron Man! 👾} 04:17, February 23, 2020 (UTC)

Updated fixed the various formatting stuff and quote attribution - I should mention that a cat with a ton of real quotes would totally still get a "Quotes" section - so it's just for cats that really don't that won't. It happened so that I took each of the quotes from her sections and were able to work them all in without deleting any, so I just didn't end up needing a Quotes section for her specifically. I did remove the more irrelevant ones, though.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 13:38, 2/23/2020

Mistfeather's mate

So, in TAQ Mistfeather mentions that his mate was killed in the battle. In Hawkwing's Journey, Stormheart is killed at the beginning of the attack. Can't we just list her as Mistfeather's mate? —Jay^{I hope they remember you....ϟ} 07:38, 2/28/2020

While it's certainly plausible for them to be mates, there's nothing, to my knowledge anyway, blatantly stating these two are mates. In all honesty, the editorial team probably forgot Mistfeather's mate since he was a rather minor character. I'm curious as to what others think though. —Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 07:49, February 28, 2020 (UTC)

I think adding it makes sense. Stormheart was the only she-cat killed in the battle, so we can use process of elimination here to determine that, and perhaps put a note explaining our reasoning that she's his mate? --Av ^{Out of sight and out of mind} () 13:57, February 28, 2020 (UTC)

The reasoning makes sense, she was the only she-cat killed in the battle, unless there was another she-cat in the Clan we didn't know about who wasn't mentioned. I figure she was probably forgotten, like Thunder said. Despite that, I'm not sure if we should list it if it hasn't actually been confirmed. Even if it may be obvious, it's still an assumption until officially confirmed. —Patchfeather^{Hangar 18, I know too much} 14:38, February 28, 2020 (UTC)

While I mentally concur that it’s probable, and more than likely, Stormheart - we never do list assumptions that have little backing other than circumstantial evidence. So I would agree with Patch.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 15:14, 2/28/2020

It's all circumstantial, as we said during the last discussion. Given the track record for this series and how often they like to forget plot points and characters, it's too much of an assumption to list it in good faith. Process of elimination is good, only when we have events to back it up. Mistfeather having a mate is never mentioned or even hinted at in Hawkwing's Journey, and it's like they forgot about it in general. If we had something from said Super Edition that said he had a mate, I'd be for at least mentioning Stomheart... but nothing is there. He's not even really seen after the Darktail battle, only mentioned once by Rabbitleap. —Jayce(15:49, 2/28/2020)

Concurring with above, sorry Jay. Vec ^{I am Iron Man! 👾} 03:28, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

Parenthesis detailing former allegiances

On Squirrelflight's page in her infobox, I've added that because she got exiled from ThunderClan and is now taking shelter in ShadowClan, the little parenthesis detailing the circumstances, this is what I mean. Eg. Squirrelflight is now formerly in ThunderClan because she was exiled. She was temporarily a ghost and in StarClan, and now, she's taking sanctuary in ShadowClan. I use refugees in her case because she isn't a full-fledged member of ShadowClan. Basically, I think cats who were exiled or banished from somewhere should just get that little notice detailing it. And then, any other cats that also are in a similar situation, this would apply to. I would also suggest cats like Brokenstar receive it but it appears some user has gone and put them in ahead of time, though it can be reverted if this post fails.

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 03:01, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

Given, these are floating around already; despite not being sanctioned. But I like them, especially given it's like, no Squirrelflight really isn't just affiliated with ShadowClan, it's worth noting she's a refugee. And it's just confusing to not note the temporarily for StarClan, given she's not dead, and was definitely there, but not for long. So yeah, I agree.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 03:10, 2/29/2020

I agree. --Av ^{Out of sight and out of mind} () 03:20, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

I like this idea a lot. Just to clarify, would these be italicized and in smaller font, correct? Vec ^{I am Iron Man! 👾} 03:21, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, like how Squirrelflight's is. It'd be utilizing the templates she has there and worded to however it suits the character.

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 03:31, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

This is a fantastic idea. —Jay^{I hope they remember you....ϟ} 06:50, 2/29/2020

Refugee status

I also want to argue that since Squirrelflight, as an example here, is not a member of ShadowClan, instead, she's seeking refuge, she shouldn't be considered a warrior, loner, or rogue. I think this also applies to Rowanclaw, Tawnypelt, and Tigerheart who were forced out of ShadowClan in Thunder and Shadow and Bramblestar took them in, but they were not ThunderClan members. In fact, I think the allegiances said those three were refugees in ThunderClan. This should also apply to those who got shelter in ThunderClan in Shattered Sky, which encompasses the three aforementioned ones, as well as the Kin cats who escaped the Kin and got refuge in ThunderClan for the time.

I've compiled a list of cats who should receive said listing. Feel free to add anyone I might have missed.

Below is meant more as a blanket rule for what requires a cat to be a refugee.

• The individual must have been exiled, banished, or forced out of their former residence.
• Does not plan on staying permanently.
• Must have resided in their sanctuary for a quarter moon or more (can be discussed case by case).

ThunderClan

• Squirrelstar - ShadowClan (The Silent Thaw)

ShadowClan

• Rowanclaw - ThunderClan (Thunder and Shadow)
• Tawnypelt - ThunderClan (Long Shadows & Thunder and Shadow)
• Tigerstar II - ThunderClan (Long Shadows & Thunder and Shadow)
• Dawnpelt - ThunderClan (Long Shadows)
• Flametail - ThunderClan (Long Shadows)

The Kin

• Snowbird - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)
• Gullswoop - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)
• Conefoot - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)
• Frondwhisker - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)
• Strikestone - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)
• Juniperclaw - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)
• Oakfur - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)
• Ratscar - ThunderClan (Shattered Sky)

RiverClan

• Mistystar - ThunderClan (The Darkest Hour)
• Feathertail - ThunderClan (The Darkest Hour)
• Stormfur - ThunderClan (The Darkest Hour & Sunset)
• Brook Where Small Fish Swim - ThunderClan (Sunset)

SkyClan

• Quick Water - ThunderClan (Shadowstar's Life)

Kittypets

• Jessy - ThunderClan (Bramblestar's Storm)
• Minty - ThunderClan (Bramblestar's Storm)
• Stormcloud - ThunderClan (Bramblestar's Storm)
• Velvet - ThunderClan (River of Fire)
• Fuzzball - ThunderClan (River of Fire)

Loners

• Ravenpaw - ThunderClan (Ravenpaw's Path)
• Barley - ThunderClan (Ravenpaw's Path)

Spoilers for VoS below, read at your own risk

Below contains spoilers for VOS, click at your own risk

Last warning, below contains spoilers for Veil of Shadows

• Lionblaze - ShadowClan (Veil of Shadows)
• Jayfeather - ShadowClan (Veil of Shadows)
• Twigbranch - ShadowClan (Veil of Shadows)

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 03:01, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

Ooh, I like this. Much neater and clearer. ooh Thunder ye got me excited now Av ^{Out of sight and out of mind} () 03:20, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

I concur. A cat gets yeeted out of a group; doesn't make them a warrior of that Clan; doesn't make them a loner or rogue either. And, especially when it's done for a lengthy period of time (Tawny/Tiger/Rowanclaw) or otherwise even listed in the allegiances; calls for refugee rank. And I agree with using the term refugee too, because I think it's been canonically said at some point. if PC were to pass this, that warrants art per new rank; irrelevant to rationale for passing this, but saying—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 03:36, 2/29/2020

Another great idea. ^^ —Jay^{I hope they remember you....ϟ} 06:50, 2/29/2020

Images in the history section

Using Shrewtooth here as an example, I'd like to see if we can incorporate official art into the history pages of characters since I've seen so many other wikis do this. Heck, even relationships sections if it's documented and appears in the books. Images that would be used would be the graphic novels and the mangas at the ends of Super Editions. I also know there's official art depicted in the Field Guides, but as far as I know, their timeline placement is a bit tricky to do. If we can determine where a certain image takes place, then it can go there in my opinion. If we really wanted, we could use images them in the detailed description bit on articles. Thoughts?

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 03:01, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

I do also like this. The TUG images and such might fit within the Personality sections (for characters in those field guides, those sections would be big enough to carry an image without breaking the header of the section below, and personality sections are time-irrelevant. Oh, there's also the BP manga that is totally showing the exact scene in ITW with the exact dialogue, so I wouldn't be opposed to that being in there too. When formatted right, looks nice.—spooky ^{is that... a furry cat?!?} 03:15, 2/29/2020

Yeah, this looks neat. --Av ^{Out of sight and out of mind} () 03:18, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

I like this idea too, and would also like to point users to the one we collaborated on with Harrybrook for grins as another example. Do you have set guidelines in mind for how many images per history section, or per book? Vec ^{I am Iron Man! 👾} 03:27, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

Harrybrook is also another example. While I think some guidelines can certainly be discussed here, I think 3-5 images per character can work, and depending on how major they were in said book, 1-2 images per book header. Graystripe and Millie would arguably receive a fair amount since they were the main characters in Graystripe's Adventure. Leafstar and Sol would get more than others because of the roles they played in SkyClan and the Stranger, the list goes on.

I also think we should categorize the images by characters as well as by book. Using this image as an example, the categories would be Images of Harrybrook, Images of Firefern, and Images of Stormheart, and finally Images from After the Flood. I think it'd help categorization more if there's going to be a fair amount of images used.

—Hrafnsmál ^{The raven's call} 03:43, February 29, 2020 (UTC)

This is a swell idea too. ^^ —Jay^{I hope they remember you....ϟ} 06:52, 2/29/2020