Talk:Warriors (book series)/Jun 2007

Two things

Can we protect this page from unidentified people and new users like on the Lost page? (Fan of Lost) and not just this page but all the warrior pages? It is real tiresome trying to figure out what is real and what's speculation. And can someone please archive this discussion again? It's getting long. Both suggestions apply especally to the character list. Griffenflash 19:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why? I am a new user and I would be upset if you locked me off. Just because I am new doesn't mean I don't have good input or ideas. Badgerstripe 19:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

im not even a user.i like to help the site -Sandstorm May 4 07

You know Sandstorm, it is easy to become a user even though you might not get the name you want. Badgerstripe 21:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Info: User:Sandstorm. Exists but a good name could be created for you. Now go here -> select "games" -> select "Find your Warrior name and clan" -> input your info (or any info for that matter) -> BAM! -> you've got your name. NOW go to login/create an account -> select "create an account" input your name password and other necessary info -> Then you're in! Regards, ï¿½razorclawï¿½ 22:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was messing around just now and make your name Have "Y" at the beginning and your town start with an "N". You should be on the floor at their mistake. Also another funny name: Start your name with "N" your hometown with "T". The DOB is your clan. Regards, ï¿½razorclawï¿½ 23:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that and my name would be something like Scarface. I'm just using my name that I have in my club-Mousefur May 9 07

That didn't work Razorclaw, it got something like Swiftfoot or something. Badgerstripe 21:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Making Seperate Articles

Who was it that went ahead and made individual articles for each warriors book? No offense to the person who did it, he or she probably had a good idea in mind, but it doesn't really make much sense. I mean, each article is barely two pages long (In MicroSoft Word, that is). It is really just a waste of bandwidth to create several different pages for topics that could fit into one article with no problem. And this may be an obstacle for those with slow computers.....

Redfur 01:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Redfur, if you are going to make seperate pages for each book they should at least make each summary longer so they can put in more details to each. Badgerstripe 1 May 2007

Beforehand it was about 100KB long. It was a good choice to separate the articles. Also if you haven't noticed most vandalism has been mostly deposited here instead of on the articles. Think of the advantages and the disadvantages, I think the advantages far out weigh the disadvantages. Also if you want more info, add it!. ï¿½razorclawï¿½ 21:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well Razorclaw I have never been good at summaries so if i added stuff it would be a load of crap that no one would understand. Badgerstripe 1 May 2007

Well don't, shut up and stop complaining about it. I can understand the thing about slow computers, but razorclaw did the right thing. The page looks much better, so slow computers will just have to deal with it. Spottedstripe 00:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did i say that it was a bad idea? What I said was that I think that if we have seperate pages we could at least put more information in them. I think it is a good idea and easy to follow. So don't be so guick to judge people Spottedstripe.Badgerstripe 20:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never said you thought it was a bad idea. It's just that if you think your summaries are crap, you don't have to put in on Wikipedia. Spottedstripe 21:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also you (any of you) could just drop the info and changes you want here or on my talk page and I or someone else will change it. ï¿½razorclawï¿½ 22:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spottedstripe - No need to tell anyone to shut up, the discussion page is made for discussions and questions, in case you hadn't noticed. And I did try to word my question in the politest way possible. And the part about how the page looks so much better is your own opinion. Mine is that it looks slightly messy, with large headings, and then three, if even, lines of text underneath them. And then there's the fact that there are headings for books not even out yet, like the last several books of "The Power of Three" and the "Fourth Series". I think it looked a lot better under one page, but that is just my own opinion. And, of course, I can complain about anything seeing as how I live in a free country. :) Over and out, Redfur 22:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also if you are going to have most of the pages as seperate articles the you should do it for the entore series, even the ones with short articles. Badgerstripe 00:31, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to all the topics?

There used to be more that 40 topics nokw there is only like 19. What happened to all the topics? Badgerstripe 13:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, not sure! I was kinda wonderin' that myself! :P Maybe they cleaned out the forums as well, or maybe they posted it somewhere else. Unfortunately, I have no link to it (IF there's a link), so if it's been moved, all you people out there, I would really like to know! I have a few things I wanna post! :) Spottedstar 23:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They've been archived by a bot:

All the archives can be found up top. In the archive box.

ï¿½razorclawï¿½ 16:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you didn't send the "Sandstorm or Spottedleaf" discussion into an archive because it is harder to find and add to. Badgerstripe 23:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duh?

No need to put things like "duh" in book summaries. I'm removing the one in "The Forest of Secrets". Spottedstripe 23:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, who put THAT? Duh them. Crowstar 14:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change in Main Warriors Article, and a Suggestion?

I took off the numbers 1-6 under the "4th Series" heading, since absolutely nothing is known about them, except they are part of the Fourth Series.

Signed by~ Redfur not logged in

Also, Maybe each series should have it's own page, instead of each book getting its own page. I mean, after E.H. finishes the Fourth series, that'll be 24 books! (4 series x 6 books, for those who don't know). And that means 24 seperate pages for each book, which would be a little tiresome, as they would be so hard to edit all the time since they are scattered. And that doesn't even include the Warriors Manga and the other two Special books. I believe that Warriors could be organized by:

1.) Main warriors article, pretty much the whole story in a nutshell
2.) An article that contains detailed summaries about each book in the Original Warriors series
3.) An article that contains detailed summaries about each book in the New Prophecy series
4.) An article that contains detailed summaries about each book in the Power of Three series
5.) An article that contains detailed summaries about Warriors spinoffs, like the manga, Firestar's Quest, and Secrets of the Clans

And then you could have the character list and herb list and all of that stuff. I would be willing to help with changes if anyone else thinks this is a good idea. Redfur 18:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a great idea. -Mapleleaf, May 7, 2007, 3:47 P.M.

I agree. We should get a few people together and get that undergoing once the 4th series starts coming out! Spottedstar 20:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree too, I think it's really stupid to have over twenty-five pages. I also think that having a character list and a herb list would be a good idea too I can do the herb list. I can do one overall- Mousefur 7 May, 2007

I agree also. Name me as one of the "few people". It really would be smart to have less articles. Also maybe we could come up with a newsletter for the people who edit these articles. To alert them of changes going on amid this Wikiproject. It would have things like "merge in process please help..." "NEW BOOK COMING OUT THIS WEEK (Outcast)!!!!!!!!" and the like. It is quite hard to keep track of all the changes going on when its spread out. Regards, ï¿½razorclawï¿½ 22:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redfur, there is a list of characters and a list of everything about the clans. The two links are: Clan (Warriors) & List of Warriors characters these articles need to be split also. (L.o.W.c. - 163 KB) & (C (W) - 41 KB) respectively. ï¿½razorclawï¿½ 22:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can help with the herb list my friend keeps a bunch of sticky notes that have the herb and their use,i can also help with the book pages i have read almost every book twice- Sandcloud May 8 07

I agree also, tell me what to do and I will. Badgerstripe 21:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to The Traitor and Hidden Secrets? Why does the names of books 4 and 5 always change? User:Razorclaw game me certain proof that book 4 is called the Traitor, and book 5 was called Hidden SecreTs for a few days, but now it is all deleted. Anyone know anything about this? Elfin341 01:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, anyone else realize that some added a ThunderClan allegiances part to the Fire and Ice page?- Mousefur May 9 07

I deleted the Thunderclan allegiances part. It didn't add anything you couldn't learn from another page. Crowstar 15:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firestar's Quest page

Someone keeps messing up the Firestar's Quest page and I absolutely hate it! They are always changing it, they make it so the births, deaths, etc. are always just ThunderClan, not even the cats who went to sun-drown-place (The ocean) are mentioned in them. I would appreciate it if someone could watch that page and make sure no one messed it up. Badgerstripe 12:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get on it. You press "Watch this Page", right? Crowstar 14:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Making Seperate Articles

Who was it that went ahead and made individual articles for each warriors book? No offense to the person who did it, he or she probably had a good idea in mind, but it doesn't really make much sense. I mean, each article is barely two pages long (In MicroSoft Word, that is). It is really just a waste of bandwidth to create several different pages for topics that could fit into one article with no problem. And this may be an obstacle for those with slow computers.....

Redfur 01:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Redfur, if you are going to make seperate pages for each book they should at least make each summary longer so they can put in more details to each. Badgerstripe 1 May 2007

Beforehand it was about 100KB long. It was a good choice to separate the articles. Also if you haven't noticed most vandalism has been mostly deposited here instead of on the articles. Think of the advantages and the disadvantages, I think the advantages far out weigh the disadvantages. Also if you want more info, add it!. Â«razorclawÂ» 21:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well Razorclaw I have never been good at summaries so if i added stuff it would be a load of crap that no one would understand. Badgerstripe 1 May 2007

Well don't, shut up and stop complaining about it. I can understand the thing about slow computers, but razorclaw did the right thing. The page looks much better, so slow computers will just have to deal with it. Spottedstripe 00:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did i say that it was a bad idea? What I said was that I think that if we have seperate pages we could at least put more information in them. I think it is a good idea and easy to follow. So don't be so guick to judge people Spottedstripe.Badgerstripe 20:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never said you thought it was a bad idea. It's just that if you think your summaries are crap, you don't have to put in on Wikipedia. Spottedstripe 21:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also you (any of you) could just drop the info and changes you want here or on my talk page and I or someone else will change it. Â«razorclawÂ» 22:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spottedstripe - No need to tell anyone to shut up, the discussion page is made for discussions and questions, in case you hadn't noticed. And I did try to word my question in the politest way possible. And the part about how the page looks so much better is your own opinion. Mine is that it looks slightly messy, with large headings, and then three, if even, lines of text underneath them. And then there's the fact that there are headings for books not even out yet, like the last several books of "The Power of Three" and the "Fourth Series". I think it looked a lot better under one page, but that is just my own opinion. And, of course, I can complain about anything seeing as how I live in a free country. :) Over and out, Redfur 22:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also if you are going to have most of the pages as seperate articles the you should do it for the entore series, even the ones with short articles. Badgerstripe 00:31, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOCKING

Sometimes it gets very annoying when people edit, like in the Firestar's quest page, I can't add that there was probably the birth of Crowkit (Crowpaw) Badgerstripe 1 May 2007

I would like to add that the Firestar's Quest page has been unlocked. Badgerstripe 23:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firestar's quest page was locked again, I need to change the cover article because we dont know what cats are in the non-center cover. Badgerstripe 23:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it keep locking? Seems odd to me. Crowstar 00:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October

I saw Vicky on her tour and she said Dark River is coming out in October. I posted this so please DON'T CHANGE IT-Sandstorm May 3 07

You'd need to give proof, however. Crowstar 12:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We'll have proof when the transcript of the May 12 chat is out (and we can add it to the article then, I suppose). Vicky confirmed that it's coming in October, as well as another tour from her. TakaraLioness 00:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Automated archival

I set up the page so that Werdnabot will archive this page every 25 days. Regards, Â«razorclawÂ» 23:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That helps in some ways, but then it is harder to find a lot of the topics, and your topics might disappear and no one can add to it because they cant find it. Badgerstripe 16:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to all the topics?

There used to be more that 40 topics nokw there is only like 19. What happened to all the topics? Badgerstripe 13:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, not sure! I was kinda wonderin' that myself! :P Maybe they cleaned out the forums as well, or maybe they posted it somewhere else. Unfortunately, I have no link to it (IF there's a link), so if it's been moved, all you people out there, I would really like to know! I have a few things I wanna post! :) Spottedstar 23:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They've been archived by a bot:

All the archives can be found up top. In the archive box.

Â«razorclawÂ» 16:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you didn't send the "Sandstorm or Spottedleaf" discussion into an archive because it is harder to find and add to. Badgerstripe 23:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duh?

No need to put things like "duh" in book summaries. I'm removing the one in "The Forest of Secrets". Spottedstripe 23:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, who put THAT? Duh them. Crowstar 14:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change in Main Warriors Article, and a Suggestion?

I took off the numbers 1-6 under the "4th Series" heading, since absolutely nothing is known about them, except they are part of the Fourth Series.

Signed by~ Redfur not logged in

Also, Maybe each series should have it's own page, instead of each book getting its own page. I mean, after E.H. finishes the Fourth series, that'll be 24 books! (4 series x 6 books, for those who don't know). And that means 24 seperate pages for each book, which would be a little tiresome, as they would be so hard to edit all the time since they are scattered. And that doesn't even include the Warriors Manga and the other two Special books. I believe that Warriors could be organized by:

1.) Main warriors article, pretty much the whole story in a nutshell
2.) An article that contains detailed summaries about each book in the Original Warriors series
3.) An article that contains detailed summaries about each book in the New Prophecy series
4.) An article that contains detailed summaries about each book in the Power of Three series
5.) An article that contains detailed summaries about Warriors spinoffs, like the manga, Firestar's Quest, and Secrets of the Clans

And then you could have the character list and herb list and all of that stuff. I would be willing to help with changes if anyone else thinks this is a good idea. Redfur 18:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a great idea. -Mapleleaf, May 7, 2007, 3:47 P.M.

I agree. We should get a few people together and get that undergoing once the 4th series starts coming out! Spottedstar 20:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree too, I think it's really stupid to have over twenty-five pages. I also think that having a character list and a herb list would be a good idea too I can do the herb list. I can do one overall- Mousefur 7 May, 2007

I agree also. Name me as one of the "few people". It really would be smart to have less articles. Also maybe we could come up with a newsletter for the people who edit these articles. To alert them of changes going on amid this Wikiproject. It would have things like "merge in process please help..." "NEW BOOK COMING OUT THIS WEEK (Outcast)!!!!!!!!" and the like. It is quite hard to keep track of all the changes going on when its spread out. Regards, Â«razorclawÂ» 22:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redfur, there is a list of characters and a list of everything about the clans. The two links are: Clan (Warriors) & List of Warriors characters these articles need to be split also. (L.o.W.c. - 163 KB) & (C (W) - 41 KB) respectively. Â«razorclawÂ» 22:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can help with the herb list my friend keeps a bunch of sticky notes that have the herb and their use,i can also help with the book pages i have read almost every book twice- Sandcloud May 8 07

I agree also, tell me what to do and I will. Badgerstripe 21:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to The Traitor and Hidden Secrets? Why does the names of books 4 and 5 always change? User:Razorclaw game me certain proof that book 4 is called the Traitor, and book 5 was called Hidden SecreTs for a few days, but now it is all deleted. Anyone know anything about this? Elfin341 01:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, anyone else realize that some added a ThunderClan allegiances part to the Fire and Ice page?- Mousefur May 9 07

I deleted the Thunderclan allegiances part. It didn't add anything you couldn't learn from another page. Crowstar 15:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What?

What happened to The Traitor and Hidden Secrets? Why does the names of books 4 and 5 always change? User:Razorclaw game me certain proof that book 4 is called the Traitor, and book 5 was called Hidden SecreTs for a few days, but now it is all deleted. Anyone know anything about this? Elfin341 01:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need definite proof of the titles. For example, if one of the authors confirmed it, then that's fine. But if it's just coming from SF Bookcase, which was where that little reference was leading, then it's not really official. That site's had fake books listed before. Here's an idea though: Why don't we just wait until the chat on Saturday and ask Vicky the titles. Then we'll have hard proof (because there will be a transcript to refer to later) that they're correct or whatever, and then we can re-edit the article to read whatever the titles are instead of like Book 4, etc.TakaraLioness 14:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Alright. Elfin341 03:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. And now that we've gotten the info from the chat, we now know that those titles aren't official. Vicky said that they hadn't even decided on the last three titles yet. TakaraLioness 00:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have another thing to say now. Someone had just put up that the 4th book is called "Mist" and that Hollypaw, Jaypaw, and Lionpaw have gotten their warrior names from it. If what Takara says is true, then that should be wrong. The person's email address is posted there, so you can check for yourselves. Should I get rid of it? Spottedstar 20:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CLAN Article

I feel that the article Clan (Warriors) should be moved to List of Warriors terms, as the article is not just about clans, it has other information such as the warrior code, et cetera, too. Comment on this?

Elfin341 01:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The title "List of Warriors terms" makes it sound like it's just got terms though... I don't mind renaming the article, we just need the right kind of name... I don't know what that is at this point though. TakaraLioness 17:31, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firestar's Quest page

Someone keeps messing up the Firestar's Quest page and I absolutely hate it! They are always changing it, they make it so the births, deaths, etc. are always just ThunderClan, not even the cats who went to sun-drown-place (The ocean) are mentioned in them. I would appreciate it if someone could watch that page and make sure no one messed it up. Badgerstripe 12:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get on it. You press "Watch this Page", right? Crowstar 14:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BE AWARE! FOLLOW THIS LINK!!

Hey people of this wikiproject! Vote now or forever lose the articles! Hurry before its too late! -Razorclaw

Actually, an AFD discussion is not a vote, but an expression of ideas. As such, it's not numbers that matter, so much as the substance of the discussion. As it stands, I don't think there's any real consensus towards deletion anyway. FrozenPurpleCube 23:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Voted keep all.--Elfin341 19:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:NOT

Plot summaries. Wikipedia articles on works of fiction should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, not solely a summary of that work's plot. A plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic.

So with a little fixup, it will meet article criteria. Elfin341 19:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I agree with you, Elfin341. Crowstar 21:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixup

Help add Infoboxes and References to every page about the books, to

1. Make it look better

~~2. Counter the AfD.~~

3. Becuase we're going to have to do it anyways. --Elfin341 02:30, 19 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

No titles?!

On the Outcast summary, the way the last sentence is worded make it sound like there will be no more titles, period. I'm just going to change it to say "According the the Wands and Worlds chat, there are no titles after Outcast yet. Spottedstripe 15:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

6th Book

I think we should add the 6th book under The Power of Three articles, because it looks sloppy without have it there but I don't know how to create a seperate article. I would appreciate it if someone would explain how to make a seperate articles under my talk page. Badgerstripe 17:03, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you put a link to your talk page somewhere? Thanx. Spottedstripe 21:45, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]