Talk:Redwall/Archive 1

Archive 1

Old Discussions

This should be Redwall, not Rewall. The current Redwall page is listed for copyvio deletion so this one can't be moved.Ark30inf 22:15, 9 Sep 2003 (EDT)

I have added a note to Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/copyvio so this one can be moved there after the 7 days expire. Angela 02:41, 10 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Done. Angela 21:39, Sep 18, 2003 (UTC)

cartoon adaptiom

Some mention should be made of the cartoon adaptation. m410

There is a mention, it's right there in the first paragraph. Of course, if you want something more substantial, then by all means, go ahead and put it in (or make another page, if appropriate). Just don't ask ME to do it - I wasn't even aware a TV version *existed* until I read the page...

Oh, and by the way, I noticed that your current two contributions have only been to talk pages, including this one, not to mention that it seemed like you could've made the change yourself with the other article. It's almost always perfectly acceptable to edit the article yourself, instead of mentioning it on the talk page. - Bulbaboy 19:03, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

language?

I changed the sentence to say that the animals' speech is rendered into English rather than actually being English. Tolkein explains in The Lord of the Rings how the characters in his books don't actually speak English, but the narrator renders the Westron (and some other languages) into various modes of English to suit the characters. Perhaps this is plausible for Redwall as well, and Jacques doesn't explicitly say that the creatures of his forests speak English itself. Jeeves 11:48, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Excuse me, but when it comes down to it, that theory is not widely accepted and has never been varified by Jacques or Scholastic. I believe somone needs to varify that before we all asume that they do not, in fact, have the ability to speak English--Dan 16:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

We don't know so just omit what language people think they speak as we don't know. Dappled Sage 18:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Species

I was thinking of making a list of the species which have occured in the series, but ran into a snag with Gloomer.

Gloomer was identified as a water rat. But he was significantly larger than the weasels and fox that handled him, and was a monster rather than a sentient being.

In the same vein, the Dirgecallers from The Bellmaker were similar to Gloomer, being much larger and non-sentient. I haven't read any of the books past Pearls, but I think I read somewhere that later sentient ermine appeared - if someone could clear that up for me that would be great.

Ermine appear in "Rakkety Tam".- 12hernn

And lastly, I could have sworn that Squire Julian Gingivere was identified as a barn cat rather than a wildcat in Redwall, although all the Wikipedia pages list him as a wildcat. McJeff 21:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, Squire Julian is a crossbreed between a marmalade cat, and a wildcat. At the end of Mossflower, he and a marmalade cat moved into the barn, thus becoming barn cats by where they live, but Gingiviere was still a wildcat by blood.

In response to the species problem, I have decided to place all of them in the same category of 'monsters' as they are unnatural compared to the others. I also added a place for bad birds and merged weasels, ferrets, and stoats, who have identical personalities. Hope this helped. (Anonynous User) May 12, 2006

Proposition

Considering how large the Species section of this page has grown, maybe a page for just that should be created to keep the two articles at more managable size? If this idea is met with approval I'll take responsibility for creating the new page. McJeff 19:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Languages in Redwall

But some of the speech used in the books seems a lot like various British dialects of English; for instance the moles' speech sounds like the West Country accent of England.

Of course, this could just be a way of distinguishing them.

Whole issue is somewhoat irrevelant. Without any statement from Jacques the question becomes rediculous and there is no point discussing it.12.17.189.77 15:42, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, at the end of each episode of the animation series is a short Q&A section in which the author answers questions - he DID say that the Molespeech is a variation of a West Country accent.

I don't see how the languages are really that important to Redwall. They all speak english, don't they? Instead of sniffing and chittering or speaking mole, as long as anyone can understand it I don't thing its really relevant to the discussion. Oyo321 18:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Monsters

Someone said that the book Salamandastron contained a giant cow. I'm sorry, but I've read the book and have no memory of any kind of bovine. You were doubtlessly referring to the Deepcoiler, which is NOT a cow, but rather a sea serpent. Scorpionman 13:00, 9 October 2005 (UTC) Someone said the Deepcoiler was a cow? ROTF! Davidizer13 18:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I own that book, and have read it at least 3 times. No cows. --Tjstrf 18:12, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

)

False

This is getting ridiculous. First someone said that there was a cow in the book Salamandastron. Now, someone puts the book Yossi the Warrior in the list of Redwall books. There is no Redwall book by the name of Yossi the Warrior. Scorpionman 15:13, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I guess some people who don't like Redwall want to make the series seem ridiculous. Dappled Sage 18:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

External Links

Someone removed this phrase "Whether it's truly about Redwall has been debated" from the description of Terrouge under external links. I'd like to know why this has been removed, and why I shouldn't put it back. --147.124.49.89 05:23, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Because that's point of view and speculation. Not that this really matters, since the link is gone now, but I don't like leaving questions on talk pages unanswered. --tjstrf 23:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Film

Are there any plans for a live-action film based on the first novel? Scorpionman 14:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

To my knowledge, not at this time, no. There have been animated films, but nothing live-action. However, given the success of Narnia at the box office, it could open up the door. --66.190.72.175 00:14, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

If a Redwall movie is ever made,it'd be described as Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings by way of Stuart Little. R.G.12:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Heh heh, sounds like a pretty good description. With the success of the fantasy films that have been coming out over the past few years, I'd say that it's quite likely that a company such as Disney, which did Narnia, would do a Redwall live-action film. Just hoping! Scorpionman 18:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The problem with a Redwall movie would be how to keep it kid-friendly, since that would be the target demographic, while still being true to the books. The animated series suffered from this quite a bit. --Tjstrf 23:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Narnia faced the same problem, seeing as how it's supposed to be a rather kid-friendly story yet remain appealing to adults, but it succeeded at the problem. Redwall could do the same. One thing I would hope to see in a live-action film would be an extension upon Cluny's history. That would be neat. Scorpionman 02:42, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Narnia has been around long enough that a lot of adults would be willing to go see it "for old time's sake" and because they remember the books. I actually thought that movie was a bit more violent than it should have been, given the target audience. Granted, the battle was done excellently by any standard, and having giant Yak-minotaur thingies fighting against centaurs makes for an exciting battle, but was it a wise decision for maintaining the integrity of the series? I'm not so sure there. --Tjstrf 09:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Funny that you mention Narnia in this Redwall discussion....I always thought that Reepicheep (in particular) and other talking animals from the Narnia books were a big influence on Jacques. I've never seen anything that would back that up, but then again I haven't read any interviews with him. Is there some source anywhere that would attribute this? It seems like a natural influence to me. vaginsh

SCREW kid-friendly!- 12hernn

You do realize that if portrayed in the full graphic detail described in the books, it would be earning a pg-13 rating, minimum, right? Decapitations, crushing people to death, to say nothing of "cruelty to animals" which a lot of parents would gripe about... it would be more like Stuart Little meets Battle Royale than Lord of the Rings. --Tjstrf 09:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Who cares? Final Fantasy was pg13... - 12hernn

Making a film out of Redwall is impossible to keep it PG!!!! Disney will not be able to make such a film. Heck, I woukldn't watch it unless it was R. I mean, Tjstrf is right, there is nothing really "kiddy friendly" in the books and it shouldn't be that different either. No way Redwall is going to be a hit if it doesn't have violence in it, because to me, thats pretty much the fun and whole of the stories. People, don't hope for the best.

Also, I think Narnia was a pretty bad movie. It didn't have the fight scenes I expected, and they botched the whole thing up. The movie went well until the climax (the battle) and Disney screwed it up. I'm not confident that Disney would make a good movie out of Redwall, although I like Disney and I'm disappointed and ashamed at their progress now.

To 12hernn, Final Fantasy didn't have any violence in it. Nobody exactly "she blood" in it, and there weren't gruesome stabs and uppercuts. Oyo321 18:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

DISNEY IS EVIL. disney will tottally screw up redwall if they make the movie. i think they should tone down the violence a little bit (but not as badly as the cartoon) and rate it pg13. and they should make it kinda like narnia with the realistic-cgi thing with the wolves

I wouldnt watch it unless it were PG-13. It is animated and very few of those are "R" rated. And even those are japanese. try to make a rated "R" american anime and it will go down toilet. 12hernn 04:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I for one would accept a PG rated Redwall film . - R.G. 04:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't approve of a redwall movie either, it would be all messed up, but narnia started as a miniseries too, like Redwall was. User:Copernicus II 4:27, 29 March 2007

HUGE UPDATE!!!!!!!!! There is a movie for Redwall!!! It was made in 2000. It is rated G and the animation sucks. 12hernn 00:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not exactly the "live-action" we had in mind. To tell you the truth, I think Disney would do a pretty good job on Redwall. Narnia wasn't half as bad as some users made it out to be, I like the fight sequences and think that it was well-acted and directed. Sure, Redwall would probably be PG-13, that's not something I'd complain about! It wouldn't have to be a slasher film in order to be a hit, for crying out loud! The Lord of the Rings weren't slasher films, although they are pretty violent, Redwall would probably have the same amount of violence (minus the decapitations and cannibalism present in Lord of the Rings). I'm sure they'd work it out all right. This animated Redwall film that 12hernn mentioned probably is just the series, not any feature film. Ratso 19:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

It is a feature length film, I've seen it. Animine 12:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

After I read this descussion I went to my Public Librarys site and looked for a movie on Redwall. I found a few and I checked them out. They were all animated it was just the T.V. series and the feature length one didn't even have all of the scenes in it so I was very disapointed. (Grath Longfletch 01:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC))

Orphaned pages on this topic

Recently a new user with an obvious interest in this topic has posted several new pages about what appear to be characters in the Redwall series. I don't know anything about this, so could someone go through the user contributions of User:Sandry25 and link in the 5 or so pages that she has created? Currently they are just bald text without wikilinks. Thanks,

Witty lama 01:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I've read through it and all of it seems correct. I've read all of the books and I don't easily forget things that I've read. Everything on that page looked correct. (Grath Longfletch 02:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC))

Criticisms

I am one of the older fans of Redwall (25). I had a hard time figuring out one of the criticisms of the series.

• Stormtrooper effect- The hordes that attack Redwall (and Salamandastron) don't seem well trained. They more or less rely on numbers and intimidation, sometimes on a good military mind. Redwallers , while not trained in a military sense, do have naturally developed abilities (such as squirell archers) and are usually aided by a good stratigist. The Long Patrol and hares of Salamandastron are trained, plus led by badgers. Battles are usually well planned by abbey dwellers. Plus they normally have the advantage of being inside the abbey walls, able to use the ramparts and trees to their advantage.

The Stormtrooper criticism is valid. Although in some cases the Redwallers used guerilla warfare and terrain based advantage, often - and more frequently in the latter books - good guys just slaughter their way through bad guys effortlessly, such as Martin II killing hundreds of moniter lizards single handedly in Pearls of Lutra. Also, the 'bloodwrath' that the badgers experience is itself inaccurate. In Mariel of Redwall, it specifically said that Rawnblade Widestripe was the first badger lord to experience the bloodwrath since Boar the Fighter. It wasn't until Outcast of Redwall that the bloodwrath became something that all badgers came under every time they fought. McJeff 22:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, hundreds? Methinks someone needs to read through Pearls of Lutra again. Also, Outcast was published after Mariel; I'm sure you know there is some discontinuity within the series? --Anonymous 03:08 30 April 2006 (CST)

I call it "Brian Jacques forsaking continuity to give his good guys an excuse to be invincible, even though it damages the other books" McJeff 20:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Lol. I don't know. The book was meant for little kids, and Jacques probably wrote the book assuming that none of the would be smart enough to figure anything like that out at all. Oyo321 18:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you kidding? These books aren't just for kids... adults read them all the time, and no little kid would read a 400-page book with minimum pictures. 71.241.161.24 20:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

One user said that Martin the II killed hundreds of Moniters. Completely wrong! There were only 60 moniters, Martin had help, and only 40 moniters were killed.

Unacceptable language under "Criticisms"

I have not read any of these books, and don't plan to. I've only visited this page due to curiosity. But one thing strikes me: the use of the word "insane" in this sentence is completely unacceptable. It must be replaced with something less charged. "Also, many have found it insane that the 'peaceful Abbeybeasts' can take down hundreds of trained killers, as seen above" (my emphasis).--Peter Knutsen 10:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that whole section needs a heavy edit. I just don't have time right now, Anyone else up for it? --Jackyd101 02:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Seeing the stated use of the word 'insane' in "Criticisms", I wanted to know if it was an acceptably describing word for Gabool the Wild. I can't think of anything more descriptive. (He talks to a bell, rats that aren't there, and goes into a frenzied fight maddened by the Bell and the Spirit of Martin.) As it is descriptive and not an intended insult I figured it was fine to add it. I just wanted to let you know just in case. (Anonymous User) May 12, 2006

If it is describing a character's mental stse, there is no problem with "insane". PrometheusX303 22:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Its just that its "insane" that the fact that Redwall grandaddies or kicking rat butt like in the hundreds. Not that the mice "are" actually insane... Oyo321 18:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Vulpiz?

In one of the books, one of the seers called upon Vulpiz, Ruler of the Hellgates to reveal the future. It is a vague character so I placed it under 'Monsters'. Seeing the editing of "Criticisms", I don't want to make a similar mistake. I wanted to make sure that I did not make a similar mistake with this obscure character. Please edit or remove the article if it doesn't belong there. (Anonymous User) May 12, 2006

Im not sure which book he is mentioned in, but I remember reading that anme as well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dappled Sage (talk • contribs) 18:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

Blaggut

Clarified a few things in the article about Blaggut. Alvin6226 20:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Wildcats

In High Rhulain, the villain is a wolverine, but is listed as a wildcat. Unless I have gone wrong somewhere, I am sure he is referred to several times as "Riggu Felis, vicious wolverine." i thought that that was a kind of dog, not cat? --Fuzzibloke 11:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's a dog...It's related to the weasel, I believe. But you are certainly right, it is no cat. Scorpionman 02:10, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

This missunderstanding is probably due to a typo in an editorials, which are common. Riggu Fellis is the wildcat leader of the feral cats in High Rhulain. The wolverine you are alluding to is probably Gulo the Savage, a wolverine from the frozen North. He was the villain in the preceding book, Rakkety Tam, who threatened Redwall in an effort to retrieve the walking stone from his dead brother. (Anonymous Editor) May 12, 2006

Did you notice that all the wildcats are related?- 12hernn

Scale

One thing I wondered about since reading the books; is the world of the stories "normal-sized" to a human or to a mouse or squirrel? That is, are all the otters and cats huge, or are the various animals about the size of a human, with some exceptions? Obviously Asmodeus the snake was depicted as large, and the swan that ate some of the rat villains in Redwall was large enough to swallow them whole.

Myself, I assume a squirrel is approximately human size, and that all other creatures are in a reduced scale from there. So a badger might be the size of a giant human, (8-10 ft.) but wouldn't be the size of a giant elephant. "Monster" creatures, birds, etc. seem to have their normal or even an exaggerated scale compared to the woodlanders. But I don't think there are any Redwall size charts, so we don't know for sure. --Tjstrf 22:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

In the novel Redwall, it was described, although not plainly stated, that some animals such as the badger and beaver were far bigger than the mice, rats, etc. As the books moved on, the animals seem to have grown closer in size, with badgers and wildcats being, maybe, the size of NFL linebackers as opposed to normal people, down to mice being smaller than average.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by McJeff (talk • contribs) 20:05, May 5, 2006 (UTC)

Brian Jacques has said on Redwall.org is that they're as big or small as you want them to be. It's solely on your imagination. --Anonymous, 03:06, 30 April 2006 (CST)

I seem to recall that in I believe Redwall, one of the vermin gets "two yards" up a tree before panicking; I was never quite sure whether that meant human-sized animals, or that the walls are absolutely enormous at animal-scale... —Zero Gravitas 23:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Major edit

I've made a major edit to this page which mostly involves shortening and cleaning up the criticism section. I still think it might be too long, so feel free to prune it a bit. Here's a summary of what I did:

• I didn't see how the militarism section was a criticism, and it didn't explain it. However, there was some decent information in here, so I used this to start a new "Characters" section to describe each of the species and categorize them as good/bad. These are kind of rudimentary right now, but I'll try to expand them a bit, and PLEASE help me out in doing so
• I've never heard the "Abbey" term used as a criticism, so I moved that section to a new "Locations" section where hopefully descriptions of Redwall and Salamandastron will develop. However, this paragraph may eventually go into another section about miscellaneous topics in Redwall, where this paragraph will fit nicely under a "Religion" heading
• I cut out some of the details in the criticism section, as hopefully the characters section will describe some of these phenomena. There's still some detail that may need to be cut out later.
• It would be nice to find some sources for these criticisms. If you know of any sources, please provide them.
• Remember, there are new sections that I've created that I think can be great. Please help me in expanding these

That's all for now. Let me know if you have any questions! EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 03:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi EW, you seem quite knowledgeable on the Redwall series, and I'd like to invite you to participate on the actual Redwall wiki resource, http://redwall.wikia.com --LordTBT 09:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

"Said"

I've just found these pages and, having not read any Redwall books in six years, don't feel at all qualified to answer it. Does Jacques have a serious issued against the word "said"? I could never find a single ccurrence in any of the books; either he uses words like shouted, asked etc. (descriptive versions) or had speech by associations - "Of course not, don't be so stupid!" Martin turned to face them. (not an actual quote) - where the speaker is implied by dialect and context but not explicitly stated. Tyrhinis 20:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I also noticed that after reading a tad more thurougly. - 12hernn

He does vastly prefer to use descriptive verbs over standard ones throughout his novels, but is that actually a noteworthy thing to include in the article? --tjstrf 15:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels

Within the next week, I'd like to start revising the individual Redwall novel pages so that they conform to the guidelines set out in the Wikipedia Novel Project. At the very least, I would like to add a novel info box to each page, with the book cover, publication information, etc. I realize that this information is already available at the Redwall Wiki, but in accordance with Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels it should be available directly on Wikipedia.

My only concern is that people will disagree as to which version should be featured in the info box - the US hardcover edition, or the UK hardcover edition. Being an American, I would naturally use the US hardcover editions in creating the info boxes, but seeing as this is a potentially controversial subject, I wanted to post my intentions here first. Any support or objections, with valid arguments, should be posted in response here, although you can also leave me a message on my talk page. Cheers! - Runch 04:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The plan sounds good, and I support it. As far as the cover art goes, generally British subjects use British spelling and cover art. However, being an American myself, I tend to favor American covers as well. Perhaps it could be done on a case-by-case basis, and decide which is more aesthetically pleasing. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 07:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. Jacques is British and his books are British. We should give British cover artists credit, as those are the originals. I happen to agree, that, the British covers are a bit cheesy, compared to the American ones, but British book covers should be used. Oyo321 17:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I had planned on getting started on this project today, but now there seems to be some dissent. Unfortunately, I have a feeling that there is no 'right' answer to this problem. The way I plan to deal with it is as follows: I will use the american hardback cover in the infobox and I will also prominently display the british hardback cover with credit to the cover artist. I will do the same for every novel, to retain consistency. Hopefully, this won't cause too much controversy, as I feel it gives proper credit to both versions of the cover. - Runch 14:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

British books should have the British cover. This is the english language Wikipedia, not the american one. :) --Conti|✉ 14:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, I consent. But unfortunately, I don't know where to obtain all the publication details for the British versions of the novels (this was actually the main reason I proposed using the American covers in the infoboxes). Can someone point me in the right direction? - Runch 14:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Check out the Redwall main site. There could be some stuff there. Oyo321 13:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Sparrows

It seems to me that the sparrows of Redwall are getting the short end of the stick. Their only mention is as incidental villians in Redwall, and their larger heroic role later on in that book or in Mattimeo have been overlooked. 24.59.66.226 01:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, birds have never really played a significant role in Redwall-they were secondary animals, and don't have a significant influence in the books as a whole, although they do appear in Mattimeo. Oyo321 17:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Birds

A question to anybody who knows it. What is the size ratio of birds to the rodent animals? In one of his book (can't remember) a badger named Sunflash has a falcon friend that is small, like a human compared with a falcon. But in another one of the Redwall books (can't remember again) a bird called red kite or something like that is apparently huge and towering above the rodents, an accurate ratio. So wouldn't Sunflash then be really, really big? or the other way around? Which is right??? There also seems to be a problem with cats and mice. In the book Mossflower, a cat accidently swallows Martin the Warrior, implying that the cat is an accurate size compared to a small mouse. Later, when Martin fights Tsarmina, they're both the same size. ???????????????? Oyo321 17:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and another thing- in the book Redwall, Cluny the Scourge is riding a horse thats actually not that much bigger than him, and rides it like a human would ride a horse. This is really disturbing me. ??????? ?? Oyo321 17:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

• Actually, the size ratio between Cluny and the horse was real-life accurate. Cluny fit his entire army (a couple hundred rats) on a cart the horse was pulling. Remember, Redwall portrayed both the animals and the world in a more realistic way, especially in relation to size. Constance the Badger was repeatedly described as being far, far bigger than the mice and rats. McJeff 19:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Cluny was normal mouse size compared to the horse in that scene, I think. And he was riding the cart behind the horse, not the horse itself if I remember correctly --Snake712 01:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

just to make a few comments on the first comment if i remember correctly martin the warrior wasn't even near a cat until he fought tsarmina. it was matthis who was accedently swallowed. also the badgers are depicted as big animals and the mice small i've always imagenied the mice about waist height to a badger maybe alittle taller but never my much. So I can see where the red kite is bigger than the mice because if i remember correctly that bird was from up north and the abbey dwellers didn't have much information on those birds and i think it said somewhere in that book that the birds up north were typically big correct me if i'm worng. Also the comparison with sunflash and the hawk. i can't really help there but if i remember correctly when the hawk was caught by the vermin and sunflash was already held prisoner sunflash wasn't very old. and he just grew up in the book. i can't really make the comparrison there sry. Grath Longfletch 02:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Fixed Bits

I made the following edits:

• 1. Removed "on PBS" from the mention of the TV series. The series was not first released on PBS, in fact it did not even reach PBS until 2001.
• 2. Reworded the bit on Skipper of Otters and the Rhulain. I think it reads better now.
• 3. Removed the link to The World of Redwall from the Redwall Abbey section. If you can make the link relevant to the article, by all means include it, but don't try to sneak the link in as a link to Redwall Abbey.

- Runch 23:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

False

I fixed this but Slothunung (whatever you call it) was a dragon.

Wikiproject Redwall

Would anyone else be interested in forming a Redwall wikiproject to consolidate, organize, and maintain information on Redwall in Wikipedia? In part this idea grows out of a discussion on AFD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russa Nodrey. The way the Redwall series is currently handled on Wikipedia is a little... disorganized and haphazard. Currently every character from Redwall has their own article. Most of them are stubs, most aren't very good. There are more than 120 articles on various aspects of Redwall on Wikipedia.

I'd like to form a wikiproject to handle the articles on Redwall. One of the first things I'd like it to tackle would be the character articles. I'd like to create a List of Redwall characters organized by which book the character first appeared in, with the books in the order in which they were published, turing the individual character articles into re-directs.

If anyone is interested in improving the treatment of Redwall articles on Wikipedia, please join me in creating Wikipedia:WikiProject Redwall. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 14:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as my name is Tristan J. S. the Redwall Fan, I'm probably morally obligated to join you on this one. Just don't expect too much of me for the next week or so, since I'm in SAT studies overdrive right now. --tjstrf 15:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Feminist

Has anyone noticed how feminist these books are becoming? Mariel of Redwall, Cregga Rose Eyes, and High Rhulain are just a few examples. Great warriors, some of whom are also rulers. I don't think Wikipedia is discussing this in this article, but it should, because it's an important point see. What happened to the good old fierce, ferocious males? Why, these female "leaders" have no respect even for their male companions! Ratso 13:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

No those are 3 characters from 3 different books well mariel is in like 3 books, but thats not the point. they're intermittenly(if thats a word) male and female. Dappled Sage 18:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)