Project Charart
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.
This is the Project Character Art Discussion Page
Put join requests, project concerns and announcements here. Any chararts put on this page will be declined.
New art should be routed to the approval page, while all Art tweaks should be routed to the tweak page, and all Tweak nominations should be routed to the nominations page.

Archives 1-94
[95] [96] [97]
[98] [99] [100]
[101] [102]
[Archive Clutter]

Archives 1-100
[101] [102]

For Approval

Take it to the approval page


Take it to the tweak page


TUG Alts

Forgive me if this counts as a duplicate section, but, I think it should be addressed.

Some of these TUG alts are seemingly only partials to a character's description, and or, depict cats with different fur lengths. I know the discussion for Cinderheart is still ongoing, but another recent one is Willowshine. Her new kit alt is for her appearance in the guide, but the only difference between that and her short description is for short fur (which isn't enough for an alt in the first place).

I haven't had time to look for other alts that also fall into this discussion, but, I think there should be a revote for these and or clarifications made to the guidelines to avoid these discussions popping up again. ᴀx ʙ ʙʏ (03:42, 09/5/2019)

I agree with max. Willowshine looks exactly similar with her description, and only the fur length was changed. I got to say Willowshine's vote was made before her description changed, but now that it did, I feel like the alt isn't needed.

You could argue that she looks different but I think the artist was just given a simple description for the cat. Silvこころ震わせた 思い出 10:22, May 9, 2019 (UTC)

The Willowshine issue was just a kerfuffle from the start, to be honest. She was listed as a dark gray tabby, which is why she got an alt for being light gray, as she appears on the tree (not for TUG, since that only showed the face). However, her description was overturned to be a pale tabby per that being what's canon, and thus making this useless and just never got removed as an oversight. For other cases we should make guidelines, but Willowshine's was never for TUG anyways, but for a prior version of the tree.spooky is that... a furry cat?!? 22:56, 5/27/2019


I'll just lay out what I know about the situation. Here's the link to the archive.

  1. Burnt got Jayce's permission to redo Berrynose's apprentice (and the alt). I'm not sure if there were any conditions (like keep the old pattern, etc.).
  2. There were no other images to match due to everything being unused, so she chose to add texture.
  3. This was before the discussion about matching unused images. - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 04:51,6/24/2019

tbh this alt is just for an injury, so shouldnt it be considered a part of his main set as its not a change in the coloring, but a change in his physical shape? example of sets with this sort of alt that match: briarlight and crookedstar. furthermore it just looks more consistent in the gallery if these sorts of alts match the main set. why would berrynose suddenly have a different kind of pelt just because he gained a tail? he wasnt mentioned to be otherwise different in terms of coloring etc Burntclaw 05:04, June 24, 2019 (UTC)

i take back what i said about the main set bc they are mistakes, but my other points still stand i believe Burntclaw 05:07, June 24, 2019 (UTC)

Stop using me giving permission to support your argument, Fox, when it's extremely clear that this is not what I intended to happen when I said you could nominate them. When I voted yes, I figured it was to actually redo and match what was already there, not completely rehaul the entire set, including the alt. I was under the impression that you were going to do what I did with Egg, just color-coordinate it a little better, but not completely change everything. Regardless, it's still highly unfair to myself to have to match newer images when mine did come first.

The 'master pattern' rule has always existed, this has nothing to do with unused images. The images should have rightfully matched what was there, since the reverted images did not belong to whoever was nominating them. Regardless, why should I be the one forced to essentially give up one of my images (because lbr here what you wanted to do was exactly that by copying the already done warrior) because it was redone. The nomination says nothing about the alt images in the set. I checked that multiple times. shepard ( 20:17, 6/24/2019 )

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