Hallo, may I join le project?
I already made a few chararts of my OCs for practice! Here's a couple:
Yes you may! I'll add you in as a kit. Make sure to read the guidelines before participating. And, just for reference, you're only allowed to have one personal image on this wiki. ^^ Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 15:05, May 13, 2019 (UTC)
Absolutely, Hawkey. It's wonderful to see you rejoin. =)))) —( 17:17, 5/16/2019 )
Hello! I'm interested in joining the project if I can! Thank you if you do make me a member, otherwise no sweat.
(I don't know if you require samples of your art but if you do I can give one!)
Course! I'll add you in as a kit, and please be sure to check out the guidelines before participating. Thanks for your interest and welcome to PCA! —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 23:40, May 20, 2019 (UTC)
The computer software does not matter. What matters is the type of art program you use, such as SAI, GIMP, Photoshop, Firealpaca, Pixlr, etc. Sometimes those only work for one software, but nowadays that shouldn't be a problem. Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 03:56, May 21, 2019 (UTC)
I was SO close to making Frostfur's warrior image, on SumoPaint, when they told I have to pay monthly just to use more than two layers. And Vec, do you know of any apps that can be downloaded on a Chromebook? —MilkRipple (THIS IS THE HEIGHT OF LUXURY!!!) 00:38, May 22, 2019 (UTC)
Minor character Images
This is more of an announcement than a discussion.
Please check first a minor characters rank before making an image!
So many good images are going to waste because images are being made for cats who have no cited rank. No images will be given to cats if they do not have a cited rank (as seen next to the Rank(s)) Do not just assume a character is a warrior.
For example, this cat could be a warrior, but there is nothing to say they actually are. They could be a queen, an elder, heck medicine cat. But we don't know, so we cannot give them a blank right now.
I know this is confusing, so I've added characters that can have images right now in the characters needing art list. It lists all minor characters needing art except from the mangas, which I'll get to. Please check this as it also will help you with how to name your image too.
Date for redoing the warriors/kits
^ List of conflicts so far, from the discussions:
Saturdays - Jayce
Last week of March - Silver
Any weekday is questionable as a lot of us have school
Honestly, there are so many warriors and kits I don't think conflicts will do any harm. People might not get their no. 1 choice, but there are plenty to do and plenty of OA images.
Unpopular opinion incoming.. I don't think we can realistically account for everyone in terms of dates. Looking at this, week days are technically unavailable, and also weekends, the entirety of May, and April. The redo date will extend far beyond the initial date anyway and will open many opportunities for those who didn't get their first choice. And, as Breezey said, we have many images to do so conflicts aren't that huge. Personally I think April/May are good months to start these, or as per Breezey, nominate and promote more people and begin these. - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 14:27,3/21/2019
I second all of this, and actually have been mulling about it for a while. We can try our best, but we can’t possibly account for everyone and we need to pick a date and start the warriors/kits. I think sometime in April would be great. Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 17:37, March 21, 2019 (UTC)
I am probably going to get shot for this suggestion... but perhaps wait until after everyone is done with their school things..so end of May/June? We have Lost Stars and Path of a Warrior to also work on, along with the elder blanks. That's more than enough for now, and it gives people a chance to rest from being so burnt out from the kittypets and leaders. I'm afraid that if we push this too early, it's going to result in some issues with people just being so tired. —( 19:56, 3/21/2019 )
Hm, I actually think that’s a good idea. We should finish the elders, and the two new books, take a two week break, and then start warriors/kits. by that time i would think it would be the end of may, which sounds fine to me.
i personally support that we start doing the warriors in may/june– ap exams in may ew. also, are we doing the elders first? Burntclaw 23:16, March 21, 2019 (UTC)
If anything it'd be June since that's when summer break begins. If we're doing the elders early though.. wouldn't that defeat the purpose of pushing back all the warriors/kits? - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 23:31,3/21/2019
I agree with late May/June, because school has taken over my life, and I'm not ready to dive into the massive pit that is the warriors/kits so soon. Plus breaks and weekends don't really work until then. star 👻square hammer👻02:15, 3/22/2019r ♥ 've always been" data-rte-attribs=" style title=will i ever be more than i've always been">waving through 'm tap, tap, tappin on the glass" data-rte-attribs=" style title=cuz i'm tap, tap, tappin on the glass">a window <02:15, 3/22/2019>
I mean June would be one of the worst months for me if anything....that’s our last month of school so it’ll be packed and busy with finals. May would be better. I’d prefer early May or early July, but June overall is busy for me. Ⓦⓘⓝⓣⓔⓡ ✣IWasn'tLookingForLove ✣ 03:16, March 22, 2019 (UTC)
May is probably the worst month for most of us still in school, but then again, we can't account for everyone. Perhaps it needs to come down to a vote on the month.. then possibly date. Also, what is happening with the elders? Do we do those immediately or after a batch of warriors/kits? - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 03:41,3/22/2019
I have no preference on the month as long as one is picked lol. I do agree with Ferk and David that we should do the lost stars bunch and minor characters when the book comes out, and hold off the rest for the summer. Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 15:46, March 22, 2019 (UTC)
(unpopular opinion warning) im fine with starting with the new lost star characters in april then once everyone done with that wave then do the rest in sections by arcs (ex. may- tpb june-tnp july-pot) Willowstep12 (talk) 16:10, March 22, 2019 (UTC)
Hm, I say right now we should finish up the rest of the mc that are available. Then we should take a 1 week break or so. Depending on what time that happens we can start working on the ls lot and maybe even elders. Then we can start the warriors and kits in late may or early june?
honestly i dont see a problem with starting with the elders once the vote is over– i dont rly see a point in pushing it back imo, it just piles the things we need to do on top of each other Burntclaw 14:06, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
have no preference for when we should begin kits and warriors, so long as we have a little break. If the beginning of summer works for most, thats cool. I have no problem with starting elders, anytime works for me. —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 16:17, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
just got a big schedule form. having tests on may and june, as im preparing for the most important examination i'd take in my life. we should just do em in april along with lost stars. --
I support doing the kits and warriors in the summer. Ⓦⓘⓝⓣⓔⓡ ✣IWasn'tLookingForLove ✣ 17:23, March 30, 2019 (UTC)
just a little request to join
ayyy can i join this request (and one fact, i accidentally named my personal file as
Snowstar.leader-0.png, i have renamed it yesterday, but it's ok now i guess), i was practicing charart for 2 years now (from learning and stuff)Casty AJ (talk) 13:46, May 28, 2019 (UTC)
nah it's alright. --
as the OA of the df, the eyes are blatantly yellow so yes they need to be fixed Burntclaw 01:14, April 13, 2019 (UTC)
Bluestar pale gray vs pale alts
So it was decided by PC that pale gray is considered distinct from blue-gray, and also that the "pale" (not "pale gray") cites for bluestar are considered mistakes since she's meant to be the same shade as mistystar. But since that's two separate reasons for considering each of those two descriptions mistakes, it's not really clear how it'll work with the alts. Is there gonna be an alt set for all "pale gray" descriptions, with no blue tinting, but then an additional pale blue-gray set for when she's only called "pale"? Since "pale" would usually be added on the the base coloring (blue gray) in cases like this for other characters.
It seems a bit excessive to have two alt sets for such similar descriptions, but I'm not really sure what would be a better solution. Making them all pale blue-gray would contradict the decision PC made to consider pale gray different from blue-gray, but making them all pale gray with no blue would be an assumption that the authors didn't intend "pale" to mean "pale blue-gray" in those cases.
Now that we're into the blank redoes, could we put a link to the OA claims on the main project page? I keep having to dig through the archives to find it ScarletwindGo Beyond Plus Ultra!! 18:04, June 1, 2019 (UTC)
My life has kicked into high gear and I just don't have time for the wiki anymore. The two images I had claim on are free game. Best of luck in the up coming rush. Malina457 (talk) 08:24, June 4, 2019 (UTC)malina
Crookedstar's Kit Alt.
Not that great at opening discussions but here we go. This concerns Crookedstar's kit alt for his broken jaw. The alt, of course, is significant enough for a tweak but the angle of the kit's pixel means that his broken jaw is largely obscured as his other chararts have his broken jaw on the right. It could be flipped to better show off his jaw, but I'm not sure if that would be allowed or if there's a better way to show his broken jaw barring flipping it. Any thoughts? — ☆ paper · finches ★ 15:57, June 5, 2019 (UTC)
I think in this case it should be alright, considering how vital the crooked jaw is to his description. Whilst I tried emulating what was done on the old warrior, it still doesn't bring the point across that his jaw is crooked. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ (23:22, 05/6/2019)
Flipping the blank would be fine, and actually what I’d intended on suggesting. This is a major injury that should be depicted. —( 03:06, 6/06/2019 )
Removal of Winterwhisper423's SW rights
I love Winter, he's always very kind and helpful, but he goes inactive for months at a time. Life gets in the way, of course, and, if I recall correctly, he is also avoiding spoilers. But this has been a long time concern. We need our leads to be active and preform their duties regularly. If a lead cannot fulfill their responsibilities than they should not have that responsibility in the first place. I believe it would be best if Winter was removed from his position. —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 03:58, June 7, 2019 (UTC)
I concur with above. As much as I appreciate and enjoy working with Winter, this project requires all of our leads working simultaneously especially at a time such as this. And Winter has not contributing to match the needs of the project. Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 04:07, June 7, 2019 (UTC)
I regrettably agree. Hasn't been just a one time occurrence, as we've seen some very lengthy gaps, and even so, there are ways to be active in all cases. School can get in the way, and obviously focus on that, but if you can't do both, you just can't, and no reason can be eternal for inactivity.—spooky a black scaredy cat! 04:11, 6/07/2019
As much as this pains me to say, I agree with everything Patch has said. Winter is really a cool guy, but his activity is.. not great for a SW. I haven't seen him helping Vec with the Charart Contest, and he's rarely posting or commenting on PCA's pages, or doing anything in terms of edits on the wiki these past months. He really hasn't been seen CBAing/archiving approved and declined images or participating in nominations and events. On a note, his last edit was on May 27th, and looking at his contributions, he has some decent gaps in editing. I really haven't seen him on BlogClan, Kate's blog, and he is usually pretty active on there.
I knew this would come. I’m not mad. You guys are being responsive by bringing this up :) I have been inactive, and I totally understand. I would like to clarify some things though:
1. I have been busy with school at times recently, but I haven’t been avoiding spoilers. And there were many windows for me to pop in and be active. I just kinda lost interest in Charart. That’s all there is to t; I stopped reading Warriors and I lost interest and motivation to make Charart. It happens.
2. Potato, I do not agree with your comment about the blog. I recently became a moderator there and I check it every single day. I comment a lot. I moderate comments every day, and write up BITS posts. I am very active there.
3. Furthermore, me and Vec email about the Charart contests, too. I have not edited them or created them recently, but I pitch in ideas and we work together. I’m willing to step down from that, too, if you guys would like.
It’s totally fair for you guys to question my inactivity. You can remove my rights as a Senior Warrior. I may return to the project one day—hopefully. But for now, I’m on hiatus. I’ll still be around the Discord though.
Ⓦⓘⓝⓣⓔⓡ ✣IWasn'tLookingForLove ✣ 04:54, June 7, 2019 (UTC)
- I haven't been around long enough to know the whole history but I see no reason for you to have to step down from the charart contests. It sounds like you and Vec came up with that together and, because it's not a central aspect of PCA, I see no reason for you to have to give that up if you don't want to. For me, personally, I love the themes you two have been coming up with and am looking forward to seeing more! :) ScarletwindGo Beyond Plus Ultra!! 04:58, June 7, 2019 (UTC)
shouldnt this be a forum, not a discussion? Burntclaw 05:09, June 7, 2019 (UTC)
As long as there's a paper trail, I'm perfectly fine with it being a discussion like this. Since Winter's already commented and acknowledged it, I feel we shouldn't beat the horse and just accept this as it is. Winter, thank you for being very mature and responsible about this. I, like Scarlet, don't see a need for you to step away from the charart contests, though, especially if you're still planning and communicating with Vec. There's nothing saying you really need to edit or create them, as long as you're still helping. Vec is more than able to speak up, however, if she feels something I'm saying isn't right. —( 05:19, 6/07/2019 )
Quick bit, I'd like to confirm that Winter and I have been communicating regularly via email about the charart contests. Winter comes up with a lot of the themes, including the most recent two contests. The only reason I didn't bring it up was because Winter's sw rights are exclusive of the charart contests. I'd prefer if Winter did continue to help run them with me, but that is always his choice :) Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 13:45, June 7, 2019 (UTC)
I would like to continue running them with you Vec. :) Ⓦⓘⓝⓣⓔⓡ ✣IWasn'tLookingForLove ✣ 13:50, June 7, 2019 (UTC)
That is perfectly acceptable with me, even moreso since Vec has said that you're helping as much as you are. She's correct, those rights have nothing to do with the contests, and you can continue to help. You two have done so well and the ideas have been amazing and creative. —( 17:37, 6/07/2019 )
Feathertail UG Alt
I looked through the charart list, and noticed Feathertail's warrior alt for Ultimate Guide was still listed. I actually did this image in December, File:Feathertail.warrior.alt2.png. Does this need renamed to alt3 or was this an oversight? I just don't want my image to be replaced, especially since it was the first in that set. Sun Man, that man is nonstop♣•22:06 Tue Apr 9
Tortoiseshell color ruling
Alright, so as per this I believe we should do the same as we did for the tabbies and nuke this "tortoiseshell cats have to be black and ginger" rule. It's really limiting all of our artwork possiblities, and really in general, just making most of the tortoiseshells that we have art for look the same. I'm not saying any of the art is bad, no, so don't take me wrong on it. It's just that I feel any tortoiseshell should be any color you want it to be.
And no, I'm not talking about nuking the no white rule (sorry jayce :P )
My point is that a lot of people think there is a rule, so we should make it official that people can have the freedom they want to do the color torts they please. Paleh was saying to add ginger onto that image, and I disagreed, thus starting this. Hauntdapple☠️ It's spooky time ☠️ 11:56, 3/30/2019
Tortoiseshell colored cats are by definition a form of black and a form of red. That can be black and red, brown and red, blue and cream, lilac and cream, and any amount of white or pointed. Coloring a tortie just a black base or just a black base is like coloring a blue tabby red. I'm not opposed to not caring if there is more than one shade of black or red in an image, but there should at least be those two present. -Rustle it takes a leap of faith14:17 Sat Mar 30 2019
theres never been a hard rule on it having to be ginger ans black unless said in the text? i have several smoke, a former chocolate and a couple dilute torties, theyre not banned. black and ginger just tends to be the ones people think of first i guess. david 🌈 15:05, March 30, 2019 (UTC)
I think unless it's said in the text, the coloring of a tortoiseshell should be up to the artist....given we just nerfed the stripe rule due to "realism", I don't see why we should continue to limit people. Let people be creative, it ain't going to kill anyone. And even then, not everyone is able to make hyper-realistic patterns and it's hardly fair to force that on people. —( 15:38, 3/30/2019 )
There was never any rule on tortoiseshell coloring. I specifically said in my comment that pca's rules on it are very unspecific, i.e. it doesn't actually say anywhere what's officially considered a tortie or have any specifications about what colors are allowed. Adding ginger or cream or something was just a suggestion, since real life torties don't come in gray and black, it was never meant to imply there was any rule about it. And given PCA's general stance on realism atm, I don't think there should be a rule. Though it might be good to officially clarify what pca does and does not consider a tortie (and maybe also tabbies for that matter, since there's been plenty of "that doesn't look like a tabby/is that considered a tabby/ect." situations), just to avoid any confusion in the future.
Like I said, brown is darker form of cream, which is also a filtered form of ginger. I think Finch's image looks chocolate to me. It doesn't look gray imo Hauntdapple☠️ It's spooky time ☠️ 16:13, 3/30/2019
Any other comments? Given there's no rule... nothing'll really change save for being able to reference this for rebuffing comments, really. Imo, as long as it looks tortie, we'll be okay. We can't run wild, though, either - so as long as it meets the written text then it'll work out.—spooky a black scaredy cat! 19:22, 4/24/2019
Minor Characters Images
I'm loving all these chararts we are adding for the minor characters pages, but I'm noticing a problem regarding characters we cannot give a blank to. If you check Omen of the Stars page, I've been filling in The Fourth Apprentice and I'm not even done yet, and there are so many characters we cannot give a blank to.
So I'm wondering if we can find alternatives to these characters, instead of cluttering the pages with Noimage.png. For example, perhaps with Clan cats we can give them their Clan's symbol?
Spooky also mentioned a new blank (yay more!) where it's a general adult cat blank for cats we have no idea of their rank, but still have a description. The Super editions page is a great example. There is so many on there we have no idea their rank (or even Clan) and so we cannot give them a blank, despite having a description.
I don't know how I think about a generic blank...I think it's not too far off to just give them a blank closest to what they might be. Not a rank, that's PC, but saying a Clan cat gets a warrior blank if unknown, Tribe gets a cave-guard, etc. would work. -Rustle it takes a leap of faith10:54 Mon Mar 11 2019
Could we just use the unknown residence blank when one gets approved? But in my opinion, as Breezey said just using a warrior blank, or cave-guard would work better. — ☆ paper · finches ★ 18:15, March 11, 2019 (UTC
I mean personally I don't think these characters have to get images, but if it's agreed that they should, I think whiskey's idea sounded good. I guess in case we would just vote on which blank would be considered "standard" in certain cases?
I don't think we should use pre-existing blanks for characters that don't have a cited rank. By using the warrior blank, it appears as if we're assuming that some Clan cat is a warrior when the character could just as well be an apprentice, queen, or elder for all the information that's in the book. Making one of these blanks "standard" distorts the actual meaning of the blank and would likely be misleading for readers who don't know all the reasoning behind the choice. I don't think it's necessary to give these characters images anyway because of how minor they are, but if we did I'd favor using an "unknown" blank instead. – Ivy ☆ 19:50, March 12, 2019 (UTC)
Mean to get to this sooner, but I agree with what's said above ^. I personally don't think it's necessary to give the unknown rank minor characters images, and we already have much to do regardless. Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 19:56, March 12, 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, let's not assume ranks. That's a problem we've had before... If we entertain the topic, it really should be after everything else is done... which that's going to take a while as it is. —( 03:14, 3/17/2019 )
If we plan on giving these characters images, they should be given their own blank rather than assuming ranks. Right now, I think we have enough on our plates, but perhaps we can bring it up again in the future when we're less swamped. —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 16:25, March 24, 2019 (UTC)
Yeah I agree we can't do a new blank right now. What about using clan images? There are so many cats we have no description of so cannot give a blank, would giving them their Clan's image be a good substitute?Stealthf🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤ 23:49, April 9, 2019 (UTC)
I don't think we should give them any blank. It's a huge assumption about their rank, so unless these characters are featured in the future, I say no for the moment.Boo!flower Human no more 00:51, April 14, 2019 (UTC)
It's still an assumption to give them Clan images, even if it's just a substitute. I think it would be better to wait until we have time to just make them their own. —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 16:46, April 16, 2019 (UTC)
Non-Clan Leader Blanks
I was talking with a few users in Discord and they suggested I bring this up here. The non-Clan leaders are pretty much the cats that lead their little rogue/loner groups, I suggest a blank for the Non-Clan leaders. Since they technically get a rank of being leader but aren't actually Clans I think it'd be a great idea to have a blank fit for them. The leaders that would more or less count for this would be like Darktail, Harley, Jingo, etc. I don't really think BloodClan would considering they were referred as a Clan in the books. Thoughts? Ellie life is an illusion 09:15, February 13, 2019 (UTC)
I don't think there's really a reason to give them a different blank. There really isn't much difference from a Clan leader besides the nine lives, and even then Nightstar and Mothpelt were leader with one life. Stoneteller has a blank because that role is a medcat and leader hybrid. -Rustle it takes a leap of faith9:43 Wed Feb 13 2019
i still think at the most it should be a somewhat minor tweak of the current ones if anything at all. another idea (that would be pc's jurisdiction) would be adding clan leader as the thing in the infobox, instead of just leader as it is now. david 🌈 09:58, February 13, 2019 (UTC)
I don't think they'd need a different blank. It's sort of like making blanks for clan queens and non-clan queens, which would be pretty unnecessary.
Agreeing with Fox and Breezey here. Another blank is not necessary. Those cats are still technically seen as leaders, even if they don't have nine lives. Hawkfire always daydreaming ( 18:18, 2/13/2019 ) 18:18, February 13, 2019 (UTC)
I think it's unnecessary for them to have separate blanks. In the end, they're all leaders, whether they have nine lives, or are in a Clan or not. —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 14:31, February 14, 2019 (UTC)
I think we should tweak the current one to show some difference; there is a notable difference between Clan leaders and other leaders. It isn't quite just the nine lives, it's the rules they live by, their duties, how they act - all of which makes them so much different from cats like Jumper and Fog.—spooky a black scaredy cat! 17:54, 2/15/2019
We could definitely tweak them.... but we also made a cotp blank for fewer cats than we have cited as non-clan leaders. So really I have no preference to how we go about this. — ferk was here ✦✦✦ 18:25, 02/15/2019
I agree there, that's why I brought this up. A blank was even made for the rank of mediator and CotP and I think non-clan leaders would count too. Ellie life is an illusion 18:52, February 15, 2019 (UTC)
I think we should have a non-clan leader blank, but I think it should just be slightly tweaked, maby a new blank in a simalar position? ❈ Love is Love, forever! ❈ =^.,.^= 22:18, February 15, 2019 (UTC)
I honestly think it'd be a waste seeing as a big defining difference between non-Clan leaders and Clan leaders, from what I remember, is their faith (the whole nine lives thing) - which isn't a physical thing. A leader is a leader honestly - seeing as they do the same things. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ () 21:33 Thu Feb 28 2019
I do feel there is a difference between Clan leaders and non-Clan leaders. For one, the nine lives. The other thing is the Clans are very rigid with their rules. They don't switch leaders like The Ancients did, and they have strict rules on who is next in line and the warrior code also demands loyalty to their leaders. Other leaders do not really have that.
Although I don't think a whole new blank is necessary. Perhaps just a tweaked version of the leader blank? Like we did with the old healer blank.Stealthf🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤ 22:00, March 10, 2019 (UTC)
I don't think tweaking or adding a new blank is necessary. To be honest, I don't think the non-Clan leaders should be given a leader blank at all since they're really just rogues, but they've already been given art so I can't really speak much about that. But, like previous statements are said, non-Clan leaders are just leaders of a different group of cats, but they aren't physically different or do any different tasks. How would the blank even be tweaked to represent non-Clan cats without changing it entirely? If it's only going to be tweaked slightly, then I think that it's more work to do that for a small number of cats than to just leave the art as it is now. Splook sweet creature 19:25 Sun Mar 24
I disagree with tweaking the blank. I do think non-Clan leaders should still be given the leader blank, they are still leaders of their groups, but I don't think they should have their own separate one. It just seems unnecessary to go through the whole tweaking/making a new blank process when in the end, they are all just leaders of their groups, guiding the cats around them. Any other comments? —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 16:38, April 16, 2019 (UTC)
Non-clan leaders should still be given a blank because they're still leaders. Even though they're a rogue, they still have a semblance of authority over the other cats, like how Fog represented her group in TS. As for creating a new blank/tweaking the leader/just give them the leader blank, I don't have any preference. star 👻square hammer👻23:20, 4/30/2019
Non-Clan leaders should still get the blank, as they are still leaders amongst their cats, but, I don't think we should tweak/make another blank for them. I'm sure the books even directly state that the only difference is spiritual or something, but still. Leader blanks are leader blanks nonetheless. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ (23:24, 30/4/2019)
Alt Image Cites
So lately I've noticed a lot of alt images going uncited because it's usually clear what they're for (mostly for the official art or family tree alts), so the cites don't get prioritized and end up either slipping through the cracks or taking a really long time to actually get on the page. Since PCA has always had a policy of requiring cites for images, I feel like these shouldn't be any different. In the past, cites were required before the image could even be reserved, but considering the family tree and official art alts are voted on beforehand, maybe it should just be the alt's artist that's ultimately responsible for adding the cite if it's not already there by the time they post the image.
And while we're on the topic of alts, I actually had a suggestion. So despite the incorrect description being listed in the trivia section, for a lot of character it's not always clear which alt is for which mistake/cite, especially for characters with a lot of alts like bluestar, tawnypelt, firestar, and so on. I feel like a nice solution to this would be to add the description of the mistake along with the cite to the image's description. You can see an example of this in my personal image's description. If the alt had more than one cite, as is the case for some common mistakes like brackenfur, all the relevant cites would be added, the same way they are in the trivia section. This should make it a lot easier to tell what the alts are for, not only for the readers of the wiki but also for us, especially when trying to figure out if an alt is still required/valid, and whether it's in the same set as another alt. Thoughts?
I agree with this. I've removed an alt once because it had no cite for it and it almost became an argument until I was told what it was for. Please add a cite before reserving/posting an image!Stealthf🔥re ❤Warriors Forever!❤ 21:20, March 12, 2019 (UTC)
I'd be fine with that, because even I lose track of what's what anymore. There are too many alts on the wiki anymore;;; —( 02:43, 3/16/2019 )
If I get what you're talking about.. Maybe it should say "Brackenfur was mistakenly called [pelt color] in [book name]'. I've seen a similar style to this on the Stacyplays wiki, where if there is a character mistake they list the episode the mistake was in.Boo!flower Human no more 16:26, April 6, 2019 (UTC)
Alternate Charart Section
Some characters, like Tawnypelt have so many alts that the gallery looks a little clunky and disorganized. Perhaps we should have a separate gallery for the alts? This way the chararts look more organized. It might also be helpful to have all the non-alts in one section for visual purposes. Thoughts? - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 03:40,2/20/2019
I like this idea! Half the time, I look at the art for a quick glance, and I think the wrong one is what the really look like! I 100% support this. Welcome, to a world of wonder, and beauty! Now follow me, into the light! 04:50, February 20, 2019 (UTC)
I think that might end up looking messy for characters with a lot of different mistakes throughout the series, and it might get trickier to organize if that is the case. - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 12:25,2/20/2019
for extreme cases like Tawnypelt and stuff, sure, but not if they only have an alt or two; just in the interest of section counts it'd be good to just do it for those that need it imo —spooky a black scaredy cat! 22:56, 2/20/2019
Is there any specific reports of what people are having trouble with? It might be something fixable. On another wiki I was on I had to custom make a new tab system cause of some kind of issues on different devices or something (I can't remember the specifics), and it ended up working fine after that.
Unsure if this is helpful but here is the attempt at integrating the tabs: https://warriors.fandom.com/index.php?title=Firestar%2FMain_article&diff=1351841&oldid=1351364
Unfortunately I don't have a screenshot of what I saw but basically the page wouldn't load and kept on refreshing itself. The gallery itself wouldn't show either. Maybe it has something to do with tabs being in a tab - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 02:58,3/31/2019
H-hello... Can I please join this project? Thanks!
Cinderheart's TUG Alt
i feel like we should discuss this, so i'll be posting it here. i posted the vote since it looked shorthair but others who voted pass on it also said the colors looked off. we discussed it on discord but i felt like putting it here to hear more opinions about this. Silvこころ震わせた 思い出 04:35, April 28, 2019 (UTC)
I'm gonna throw my opinion in here. Cinderheart was never confirmed as a longhair and since TC doesn't have requirements like RC and WC, it shouldn't happen. The coloring itself is gray tabby which is what her other images are for. The added coloring comes from the lighting and it seems kinda unfair to allow this one when other images were declined for lighting. Ellie life is an illusion 04:47, April 28, 2019 (UTC)
fur length alone unless its named for shouldnt be an alt thing. it is utterly pointless to have 50 dark grey tabbies where the only difference is fur length. that image depicts what she is, aside from bushy fur (which she may only be medium haired, not even long. dont remember seeing that.) david 🌈 04:50, April 28, 2019 (UTC)
if that alt stays for any reason, i feel like it would be because its not dappled when cinderheart actually is. the fur length stuff shouldnt be the justification Burntclaw 04:57, April 28, 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I'm agreeing with David here, the TUG art's only true difference is the fur length. The artist's style in the work is notable, but, it does appear to depict her with her current descriptions (dapples and all - very minute to my eye, looking at the way the markings are painted).
This should, in my opinion, be taken to a revote to decide whether or not it is a passable alternate image though, as its only fair to engage everyone's opinion again. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ (05:22, 28/4/2019)
I think she looks like a blueish-gray tabby with darker stripes and random brown blotches. Kind of like Silverstream's alts. Cinderheart is not bluish in color, she's smoky gray. I think this alt is okay to stay but I'm not exactly sure.Boo!flower Human no more 15:21, April 28, 2019 (UTC)
smoky if anything is likely referring to her colouring being similar to smoke, not the actual smoke genetics thing. since it doesnt specify, we cant really use that. and the brownish is very minor; ive had an irl grey one become sunbrowned. doesnt mean she wasnt still grey, and it very much does look to me like shes in the sun. david 🌈 21:45, April 28, 2019 (UTC)
I personally don't see enough of a difference between her normal description and The Ultimate GuideTemplate:'s artwork to really warrant the image. also, lighting can drastically change the color of a cat; I've seen many pictures of said cat David is talking about and she definitely looked brown in some and gray in others. (cause I'm pretty sure they're talking about Fluffy) Also, we're assuming 'smoke' refers to the pelt style and not a coloring, so that's definitely out the window with this, and I think that Wayne (who painted those) was only given a basic description and not some insanely in-depth one like what we have listed on the wiki. It makes sense that certain things like 'dappled' are missing, it's not necessarily a mistake. Those things were listed in the text, not the allegiances. Who are we to say it's an error when Wayne might not have even known about it? —( 22:46, 4/29/2019 )
As someone who's worked on projects from minimal descriptions, I can agree that it was possible that the artist, Wayne, might not have been given a complete description - like we have compiled on-site. I still don't think that the art itself requires an alt. image though, as it's only depicting her with short fur, which as mentioned, isn't enough to qualify an alt. to begin with. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ (23:30, 30/4/2019)
Part of what is confusing to me about this and continues to be is that we really don't have proper guidelines as to what "dappled" or "smoky" or whatnot means. Like, I'd agree that the TUG alt isn't dappled but like...when I did her warrior it doesn't necessarily look that much more dappled just more complicated. It might be in PCAs best interest to just...define all of these more common descriptors and then come back to this. -Rustle it takes a leap of faith18:09 Thu May 2 2019
Frecklewish Alt Warrior
Does Freckle need her alt with her clouded eyes? Since there's discrepancy on whether or not she got bitten or if venom was spit in her eyes, so I don't know if she has scars. If she doesn't, then her alt would literally be me blurring about ten pixels in her eyes. Thoughts? ScarletwindGo Beyond Plus Ultra!! 18:29, June 13, 2019 (UTC)
I think it's best to make them cloudy. I believe you can go blind from it being spat (at least spitting cobra venom) and while adders aren't cobras, I don't think they normally spit anyway? david 🌈 18:45, June 13, 2019 (UTC)
- So just tweak the warrior or make an alt? ScarletwindGo Beyond Plus Ultra!! 17:22, June 15, 2019 (UTC)
Alright, so this was mainly an administrative action between myself and Spooky. We also consulted Patch since she's the deputy of PCA. We've decided to proper Scarlet and Max as temporary senior warriors because of the massive amount of work we have to do. Scarlet, as most of the older users know, was PCA's leader before the PCA shut down, and the one I served under... so having her as a temp and back on the team is something that I personally am glad about. Max was also chosen due to their unbiased and friendly nature and their extremely helpful comments. We also got someone in a different timezone than most of the US, because otherwise we have leads staying awake until 4 or 5 am just to archive images. tldr, once the rush is over, these two users will go back to their regular warrior rankings, unless the project needs permanent leads, in which case they would be nominated the proper way and a formal vote had from there. —( 05:58, 6/09/2019 )
Non-OA Pattern Redoes
I've been observing this for pretty much all my years here at WWiki, and I believe now it is the time to stop disregarding the old pattern just because the blank is redone (only applies to non-OA claims in a blank redo). And I'm not just talking about images in a set (yes, like Shade Pelt, if you were following the drama), I'm also calling out stand alone images (too many examples, if one wants them, I'll gladly list them out, but picking out my example, Scarlet). Yes, I'm as guilty of this as most of you are, and I'm willing to redo my images to match the old pattern if a policy is set in stone.
I'm not convinced that being the only image in a set automatically disqualifies the OA's rights to the pattern. Here's an argument I frequently heard on Shade Pelt's image, "the only reason it is not in use is because the blank is being redone hence it should be matched," but then also "if an image is the only one in the set, it can be redone." But for what reason? The OA of a single image shouldn't have less claim to the pattern than the OA of a separate image does. What is the difference? Is it suddenly less, quote "disrespectful" if the image is the only one in the set? I'm genuinely confused by most of your comments on Shade Pelt implying that redoing the pattern is ok if it's a single image, but not if it's in a set. If we are to force people to match patterns, then force it for all instances, not just one. Call for the redo of all images that were unfairly redone, not just ones that have other to-be redone images in a set.
I agree that in both instances the pattern should be matched due to respect for the OA, and this shouldn't change regardless of whether it's a single image or not. Currently there is no policy for this, and I would very much like it if all unused images - regardless of being in a set or not - were matched. I'd be happy to comply, but don't force it on a single person. If this is agreed on, either from now on (after Shade Pelt, because whatever new policy wasn't reinforced back then), match the original pattern regardless of the image not being in use due to blank redoes, or redo everyone's images prior that did not match the original pattern. There can be no double standards for this. - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 12:02,4/30/2019
reinforce all, or reinforce none. redo everything from before, or keep everything. my two cents. morally speaking (yee tok), i think we all know whats the right option Burntclaw 12:04, April 30, 2019 (UTC)
Agreed, there's no valid reasoning behind "the image is old." The image should still be matched regardless. I think that either all of these images should be redone, or enforce the rule AFTER Shade Pelt is approved so images can be matched from here on out. Edit: Just realized I repeated what Fox said at the end because I didn't read all the way through, but I'll leave it because I agree.- JArtz11 Oblivious to EVERYTHING! 12:34, April 30, 2019 (UTC)
To be fair, I will be redoing my images if I had redone them in a different way or form. I apologise for the lack of respect I had given to you, burnt.
Just curious, did anyone even ask an inactive "original OA" how they would feel about their patterns being redone? Or are we just projecting random feelings to make arbitrary rules? Especially when images are redone or tweaked for silly reasons all the time in this project, like the fifth attempt at matching Firestar to Jake or whatever. I have watched, in the four years inactive or lurking, nearly two-third of my original images redone or tweaked anyway. It's something expected in this project and most of those inactive users redid or tweaked images at some point in their PCA career, unless they were around before tweak week and in that case their images are probably already redone years ago unless it was like a black cat lol
Honestly, I'd say try to make a reasonable effort to contact all the original OAs of all the old warrior or elders or kits and if they don't want the image/care about the pattern its free game to do whatever with the pattern. -Rustle it takes a leap of faith13:57 Tue Apr 30 2019
Sure, we may not know how the OA feels, but changing the design of a character that already has a valid one doesn't make sense to me. Why should designs be changed just because? If a design still matches with the character's description we should leave it be. Also images being redone/tweaked is different from what's going on here. Tweaking only fixes mistakes and redoing chararts is simply just pasting their pattern onto a different blank. The design may need to be changed in tweaking, but its for a reason and isn't because the new artist just felt like it. - JArtz11 Oblivious to EVERYTHING! 15:01, April 30, 2019 (UTC)
There’s a lot of different ways to look at said issue, honestly. I do agree that OA patterns should be kept where feasible, but there’s a lot of times in which it isn’t. If an OA is here and active they’ve always gotten claim over everything. But, as an encyclopedia, we also evolve. Many older patterns and color sets aren’t things that would pass today. I personally don’t count feelings into it - I’m a bit of a cold heart, I suppose - but I believe in doing what is best for the wiki even if that means one of my favorites gets sacrificed for it. Validity is another issue because images sometimes get redone several times, tweaked beyond recognition from its original, fur length switches, all the things. We’ve been telling people, for several months now - if it’s the only image in the set you’re free to redo the pattern. It’s rverywhere in the discord. An issue now crops up - how is it fair to make them scrap their design, which achieved validity through the approval process? If this extends to deputies and MC redos, in which this happened some - some people who aren’t here anymore are going to get their stuff retconned. OAs are important, but I don’t believe it provides invincibility when it comes to pattern; rather, a right of first refusal type of deal. We should be better about the asking, and also about keeping calm in stuff like this. I think we could make it a rule going forward, and for anyone wronged previously, if they are here, they can contest that case. But, the state of the wiki has been somewhat fragile due to recent events, and shooting ourselves in the foot by adding to our to-do list isn’t something I support. And, since I’m sure this will be divided as heck, it’ll eventually go to a vote; and in policy changes, precedent holds that it doesn’t apply to the past, but only the future.—spooky a black scaredy cat! 15:22, 4/30/2019
since ive never stated an actual opinion on this matter (ive literally just repeated "redo everything or nothing" over and over because i was, as some of you may tell, annoyed by the fact that i was being shouted down for doing something everyone did) ill just state it lol why not. practically, why go back and redo a bunch of also perfectly fine images (which contrary to popular belief it seems, the new artist did spend lots of time and energy into) for... what reason exactly? is redoing these images really the best use of our time right now, especially with the other blanks and stuff being redone? does redoing the images really add anything beneficial to the wiki itself? im against redoing every image before just to match the old OA pattern because imo its a big waste of time. i guess if the OA themselves comes back and is greatly offended or something, then sure let the poor guy keep their dignity and bring the pattern back lmao. in terms of whether or not the OA pattern should be kept, im not going to lie but im pretty neutral. both sides have pretty fair points that i buy. but really no matter what happens, the ONLY thing i am passionate about in this entire debate is to keep a goddamn consistent policy FROM NOW ONWARDS and dont just randomly shoot at random people to follow arbitrarily reinforced rules. also seriously lmao how is a single image suddenly redo worthy and a set not?? Burntclaw 15:48, April 30, 2019 (UTC)
That's what Im confused about. Why was the "if there is only in the set it can be replaced" rule put into affect in the first place? I don't see the logic in allowing this with singular images and not a set. I guess you could argue that if it was a set then you'd have to replace all, but it would have been a completely unnecessary change in the first place. - JArtz11 Oblivious to EVERYTHING! 16:19, April 30, 2019 (UTC)
Spooky is 100% correct; this will only apply to future images, as per the precedent that we already have set. To apply to past images could be seen as rigging, just like the issue we had with the voting a couple months ago. We cannot apply current policies to past instances.
While I personally don't have a lot of images that weren't mine, I myself would also go back and redo the ones that didn't match the original pattern if it's feasible and possible to do so. I would also be fine with contacting the OA to find out if they want the image or want to keep the pattern; if they don't answer within, say, 72 hours, then the image is fair game. That's pretty reasonable and acceptable and another alternative that I would willingly support.
Also, it was never a rule, perse, and my thought process with the sets was: if someone makes an advanced or complicated enough pattern, that almost guarantees them an additional image in the set due to people not being able to or unwilling to match the new pattern. I have seen this plenty of times in the past, and chances are it'll happen in the future. —( 17:22, 4/30/2019 )
I'm throwing my two cents in on this - like might as well.
A lot of the past month or so have gone so quickly and so many images have been done anything has seemed difficult to discuss let alone enforce. If this has always been an issue then it should've been brought up before these big redos were done so that it could be enforced from the get-go. Past images shouldn't be subjected to this new ruling as it isn't fair to do so.
I think it should be from the decision of this, onwards so that we properly enforce it and such with a paper trail, I don’t think it’s fair to those who have already redone images as it does take time away from them if they’re redoing images already approved recently- if they do so wish to redo them to match old patterns, I feel like they should be allowed to nom those images them themselves. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ (23:12, 30/4/2019)
I'm a firm believer in keeping the OA patterns, but redoing images and changing patterns has been going on for longer than just right now. My images have been redone and the pattern has been changed completely and it's discouraging tbh because you work on an image to get it approved and then your personal piece of creativity and artistry is covered up. On the contrary, I don't think it's possible to get every OA input when it comes to redoing an image, and some patterns are going to get covered up (especially from OAs that aren't around anymore to ask). I don't think the "let the poor guy come back and bring the pattern back" is a fair comment to make. It's not about that, it's about keeping the history of users who worked hard on their images alive even though they're not here to do it themselves. I don't think it's a waste of time. You're making an image anyways, and part of PCA is matching images to others, so I don't understand why it would be such a hassle to just... match another image. Summatively, I think the art of past users is to be considered because they did lend a hand into making the character come to life, no matter how long ago they left the site. Splook sweet creature 05:06 Wed May 1
Linear Art Matching
^ We need specific guidelines on whether someone should match the other's linear art.
In my opinion, they should match because different linear arts make two chararts look completely different. It's almost like scar placement in a way. But no matter what I'd be fine with making either clear on the guidelines so long as it's enforced consistently. - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 23:18,4/25/2019
its not the same. ragged or messy fur can easily change all the time and there is no reason to force someone to match it, especially at different parts of life. this is supposed to be about being creative, not limiting it. david 🌈 23:29, April 25, 2019 (UTC)
It depends on what the alt is for, as sometimes it does need to match in certain ways (eyes, scars, ear tears, lost limbs, Brightheart), but generally I agree with skt.—spooky a black scaredy cat! 23:36, 4/25/2019
Unless its major tweaks, like Spooky said, I don't think they should match and I'm agreeing with what David said, PCA should be encouraging creativity not limiting it. Also, by having people use the same base that someone already has had approved, no one would be learning lineart tweaking skills as much and I personally think that people should learn how to tweak lineart at some point. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ () 23:41 Thu Apr 25 2019
Agreeing with above. If it still matches the description, why does it matter? Doing your own line art tweaks is fun, why discourage it? Why does every fluffy/plumy tail have to look exactly the same? They wouldn't in real life 🤷 Sun Man, that man is nonstop♣•23:58 Thu Apr 25
Thought I should add, I do agree though that where ever this discussion ends up, the guidelines should reflect how lineart tweaks/matching goes to avoid further issues in the future. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ () 00:01 Fri Apr 26 2019
to be honest, imo the linear art should match just because it looks more consistent in the art gallery: especially for things like plumpy tails, it just looks inconsistent/weird when you have 1 tail that is much larger/a completely different style than the other. but regardless of what happens, enforce a single rule consistentl and dont bend them for other people .-. Burntclaw 01:31, April 26, 2019 (UTC)
So, many of you don't know me but I'd like to put my two cents in. I don't believe we should enforce a lineart to match, but suggest to keep the lines as similar as possible; of course, being artist's choice to comply or remain creative. Restrictions ruin the beauty of creativity and would destroy the drive for many to put in their effort for Project: Character Art. I personally joined this project to develop and better myself as an artist and personally would not be able to develop and enjoy the process if I just had to use someone else's work. Thank you Mother of Ferrets 02:19, April 26, 2019 (UTC)
I don't think there should be a "set" style for ragged or spikey fur. Every charartist knows what ragged fur is and is capable of doing it themselves when the need for a ragged cat charart arises. Altering lineart is fun, it gives artists a chance to make their image stand out via their own style. However, if it's the same character (like if the cat with ragged fur has an alt) then I could see the reasoning behind getting the lineart to match? I think that might be the initial point Fox is trying to make. Splook sweet creature 03:12 Fri Apr 26
Honestly, I think they should match. Every one I've done I've been told to match the person's before me lineart. I do understand ragged fur and such but when it comes to characters that have major body characteristics such as Thistleclaw and Mistcloud I think the style itself should match. Like I feel we should be able to do our own but make sure the stule itself matches the one before it. Ellie life is an illusion 04:37, April 26, 2019 (UTC)
im not saying that we should use the exact same linear art for all the cats across the board, im saying that within the same character, the linear art should be the same because it will look consistent within a gallery– this applied especially for flat muzzles/torn ears/tail tweaks. Burntclaw 05:41, April 26, 2019 (UTC)
torn ears and whatever are fine to have to match, as theyre permanent. whats not fair is being forced to match non permanent things like ragged fur. as long as it matches whst the text is saying theres no need and frankly will lead to a lot of uneeded redos. feel free to nominate images of yours that were made to match where they shouldnt because how are people going to learn if they cannot experiment with lineart in their own way? david 🌈 06:33, April 26, 2019 (UTC)
Honestly, I wasn't even talking about ragged fur. I was soeaking more of the permanent effects such as Cinderpelt, Mistcloud, etc. Like those should all match with tge same style so it doesn't look inconsistent because I have to agree that when we have different style on ine character it seems a bit off. Ellie life is an illusion 06:46, April 26, 2019 (UTC)
im agreeing with david on this, pca is about being creative. i dont think it'd be fun copying the same ragged fur design on a set as it limits creativity. cats like cinderpelt who have permanent injuries should be matched and mistcloud's spikey fur can be interpreted in many ways.
i dont think we should all have the same styles as it leaves the set boring and similar, and it will feel like a "code"
(my poor two cents) I feel like alts should match with the original image. Maybe not directly, but close enough so they don't look drastic. I agree with David that ragged fur in general should be artist's choice...let people learn and express their creativity, but I also agree with Ellie and Burnt that the major and/or permanent ones should generally match style. Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 17:57, April 27, 2019 (UTC)
for permanent things they ahould be being matched anyway if part of the true desc set, because those are permanent and consistently depicting the same true appearanve of that cat. though i feel with alts, if its a mistaken desc, is there really any harm in having different lineart? its a mistake and not their actual consistent appaearance, and i can onlythink of longtail and tigerstar even having their torn ears described in a very specific way. as long as it matches to the text its not going against anything and alts are often peoples only way to actually get lineart practice in because chararts often get taken quickly. david 🌈 21:30, April 27, 2019 (UTC)
why though is what im asking. its still an error and different lineart isnt erasing the description and the art isnt consistent to begin with anyway since its multiple users. david 🌈 21:35, April 27, 2019 (UTC)
Jesus, it seems I've missed a lot. Anyways, I'm pretty much in the same boat as David here. Main images should match, but I kind of feel that alts, unless they depict a major thing (Poppydawn's or Feathertail's tail, for example, or Raggedstar's raggedness, since he was named for it), they could be left up to whatever artist is doing the image. In the cases of major things where a cat is named for it or it's been explicitly described in a location (Tigerstar's ripped ear was very specific I believe), then they should match... that kind of thing isn't going to change. —( 22:43, 4/29/2019 )
Since a bunch of us are already uploading our claims (with permission), would anyone in the project object to allowing those of us who want to get our OA claims done first, to let us post them and disregard the alphabetized choice? This would only apply to OA claims and wouldn't make this a free-for-all. A lot of us have a bunch of OA claims and it would be easier for us to get those out of the way and leave the newer art for the rest of the project. I'm sorry if this makes very little sense- I've been sick the last few days. Basically in a tldr, a few of us want to focus SOLELY on our OA claims for now and I'd rather ask permission from everyone else first to see what the project thinks. —( 00:35, 6/01/2019 )
I agree with this, and Scarlet does bring up a good point. When would an OA lose their claim? star 👻square hammer👻21:19, 6/01/2019r ♥ 've always been" data-rte-attribs=" style title=will i ever be more than i've always been">waving through 'm tap, tap, tappin on the glass" data-rte-attribs=" style title=cuz i'm tap, tap, tappin on the glass">a window <21:19, 6/01/2019>
- I feel like if an OA just has a lot of old images that they're trying to get through, so long as they don't suddenly stop half way through, any amount of time is fine. But if an OA goes MIA in the middle of redoes, then I think it'd be fair to re-evaluate ScarletwindGo Beyond Plus Ultra!! 23:59, June 1, 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed. If a user is working through them, they should have the time they need. I think that if a person doesn't edit the wiki itself (overall) for a solid two-three months, they lose their rights to their images, unless there's a truly extenuating circumstance and they say as much. That's definitely enough time for someone to make an image or check in. As for the OA thing, it's so unanimous, we can probably start that now, no? —spooky a black scaredy cat! 17:44, 6/02/2019
- Agreed^ For the OA thing, I see no reason why we can't start now. Better sooner than later if you ask me, since I know a lot of us have premade quite a few. There's no point in leaving them sitting when they could be getting approved. —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 20:14, June 2, 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed with above. I think we should start it now, and have it finished quicker. We have loads to do Silvこころ震わせた 思い出 16:21, June 6, 2019 (UTC)
Any other comments on the topic of OAs losing their claims? If they haven't made any edits and 2-3 months do go by, me personally thinking 3, I think it would be safe to allow those to be free game. I think we could possibly nudge the OA, either on their talkpage or another form of contact, after a month has gone by. If there's no response by month 2, one more nudge, then by 3 and nothing still, they're free game. Or if 3 months is a bit long, could do the same as I said above, but in the time span of 2 months. —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 00:04, June 14, 2019 (UTC)
Could I please join the Charart project?
Welcome back! Make sure to re-read the guidelines real quick and I'll add you back in as a warrior. We are currently in the process of redoing the kits and warriors (A-K). If you are the OA of any, please cross them off the lists here and here. OAs can post their claims regardless of the alphabetical order that we're on. We are allowing 3 images to be posted to the approval page if you are a warrior. If you do have any OA claims A-K at the moment, those must make up at least 2 of your 3 claims. If not, check the list to see what's available! ^^ Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 02:25, July 2, 2019 (UTC)
I'll just lay out what I know about the situation. Here's the link to the archive.
- 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.).
- There were no other images to match due to everything being unused, so she chose to add texture.
- 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. —( 20:17, 6/24/2019 )
Hey, everyone! Just want to announce that PCA will be commencing a short break soon. We've all been working hard on the kit/warrior images, and the lead team is really impressed with everyone's accomplishments! Yay us. So, on July 12th wiki time, no new images can be posted to the approval page or any new reservations (besides tweaking). As of now, you are free to post your reserves, but please refrain from reserving any new ones until then. The break will end on July 20th wiki time. No new letters will be posted until after the break.
A few other things: if you have any reservations now and you cannot upload by the 12th for whatever reason, your reservations are still valid through the 20th; ignoring the week limit reservation rule. Imagine we're putting a giant pause button on the project; that's basically what we're doing. The leads will be dwindling down the page as we get closer to the 12th. From there, there is a high potential the approval page will be locked. The tweak page will also remain open throughout the break.
Just as a reminder, if anyone has any issues with this choice... the civility policy is still very much in effect and all problems should be discussed calmly and respectfully. We're all tired and burnt out, so hopefully this is a welcome thing for the project and might boost morale. —( 05:53, 7/09/2019 )
request to join I guess uwu
I'd like to join the project, please.
нιѕσиє тнє σтf, уσυ'яє fαιтнfυℓ мαgι¢αℓ gιяℓ αт уσυя ѕєяνι¢є! (talk) 12:49, July 21, 2019 (UTC)
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. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ (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.
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 a black scaredy cat! 22:56, 5/27/2019
So Willowshine's alt kit should be removed then since that isn't needed now that her description has been switched over. For the guidelines we can add what is and isn't appropriate for the official alts to be nominated (No to images that only show the face, differing fur lengths, eye colors etc, yes to different pelt colors and other major aspects that contradict the in book appearances of said character) Any other comments? —PatchfeatherHail Satan, welcome Year Zero 18:23, July 17, 2019 (UTC)
So my warrior blank for the minor character gray she-cat in SkyClan's Destiny got approved, but there is no way to include both the warrior and kittypet blank keeping it in the minor characters section. Does this mean that it should get its own article, or is there a way to include both images? Thanks! WindsongRun with the wind... ❀ 14:49, July 7, 2019 (UTC)
Ah, that just needs the template to be coded to accept both. It's just very finicky and no one's had time for it, so this and the other cases will be added when we do find time to fix it.—spooky a black scaredy cat! 21:28, 7/09/2019
This became a discussion on the tweak noms page. Should Sol really have a mane on his arts? I don't think it mentions once in the books he is named after it, so would it be a major character thing or no? Boo!flower Human no more 22:23, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
I think considering Hollyleaf believed he was lion kinda expresses how much his mane stands out. I think he is written to be a unique looking character so it makes sense to try to match that with his chararts.
I called for the discussion for Mapleshade more than anything due to the tweak nom, not really for Sol's because I think it due to that very clear distinction that he looked like a lion. Which the cite states, "Sol looked like a lion because the fur was standing up around his neck," which actually does raise the question of the context - assuming that if it was laying flat, does it still appear as a mane.
But yeah, this was more about Mapleshade's cite for a mane - which I'm not sure would be called for on her chararts, because I'm pretty sure its a one-off cite, unless, I'm mistaken. — max s̨hout́ ̨at ͠th̢e ҉devi͞l͢ (22:30, 08/7/2019)
I think Mapleshade's is a one-off and a mistake. It'll probably have some limelight with PC's one-off cite thing, but I think Sol should keep his as it's implied it's a feature- he was said by Hollyleaf to look like a lion as Stealh said above. ^^ Boo!flower Human no more 22:33, July 8, 2019 (UTC)
I wouldn't necessarily label it a mistake imo... physique cites are different than coloration ones. Given prior precedent, her chararts don't need it, but it can remain in her detailed description (not the top one) tbh, but that's a PC thing.—spooky a black scaredy cat! 21:27, 7/09/2019
Welcome! I'll add you in as a kit. Please consult the guidelines before participating, and note that only artwork listed here can be done at this time. Happy chararting! Vec I am Iron Man! 👾 18:42, August 26, 2019 (UTC)
Request to Join
Sure thing! I added you in as a kit. To answer your question, a good portion of users use GIMP because it's free and relatively powerful. Some prefer photoshop but that costs money. Lastly I know others who use Firealpaca and SAI. OA stands for original artist, and they usually have first claims to their images, especially now as we're redoing all warrior images. - Fox 僕たちはひとつの光 04:07,9/14/2019
Oh, ok! Thanks! I don’t have any of those, as I am on mobile (iPad). I have a similar app though, called Medibang Paint. Do I need to download GIMP, Firealpaca or SAI? Wavetail (talk) 06:36, September 15, 2019 (UTC)