Talk:Warriors (novel series)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Covers

WHO IS DELETING ALL THE COVER AND CENER COVERS?! THAT IS SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ANNOYING!!!! Tigerclaw14 21:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)Tigerclaw14

No need to shout. You might want to read about reliable sources, verifiability, and original research to see why they're being removed. Metros 21:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

What's that supposed to mean, Metros? Does that mean, perhaps, YOU deleted that info? If I'm not mistaken, I believe that you said yourself that you don't see why that information has to be there in the first place. Another clue...you said "no need to shout"? Who wants to be yelled at? Spottedstripe 16:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I never denied that I had deleted the information. I simply told Tigerclaw14 the pertinent information to read to see why the covers were being deleted. And the "no need to should" was in response to the all-caps locked, multiple exclamation point post of Tigerclaw14. Metros 16:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me you're making quite a big deal over citing some 300-page, fantasy book cover. It's not like the cover of the Bible or anything.

Well, maybe you should drop a hint to us, who have worked hard on organizing those pages, before you go and delete something we consider important. Sorry we can't be as perfect and mighty as you when it comes to citations and reliable sources, but, then again, most of us have lives and are not going to waste them looking up information for what is obvious. I mean, why would the artist just put some random cat on the cover? It's obviously a cat important to the plot of the book. So, please, at least ask the people who created these pages before deleting information.

Also, it's not like we're making a huge section on the article to describe the cover. It's just one little section that tells the central cover and the main cover. It's not the end of the world if one little section doesn't have sources. And what's the big deal with "most likely" or "probably"? When I edited the Twilight cover, I admitted it was an unknown cat, but most people, by discussing it through various means, have settled on the idea that it's either Crowfeather or Cinderpelt, seeing as how they both had major/semi-major roles in the book, and are of similar coloration. We aren't promising that the cat on the central cover is Crowfeather or Cinderpelt. It's just an educated guess based off information from the book.

-sighs- But what annoys me is how everyone is fine with the covers until one person decides to speak up about sources. It's not like it was a huge issue before this. And we were on the verge to resolve the issue about the cats' identity by saying "so-and-so and an unknown cat" or whatever, but then one person has to complain. And, also, there are hundreds of thousands of Wiki articles out there they don't have proper sources, and everyone, well, mostly everyone, is fine with them.

And, actually, I was offended with your use of the term "kids" in the previous discussion. Sure, I'm 14, but I'm also one of the top in my class. Us "kids" have edited these pages to make them as reliable as we possibly can, but no article is perfect. Every now and then, we have to throw in a speculation, be it about the plotline or whatever cat is featured on the cover.

Ha. It seems I've made a big deal out of the cover, too, huh? But I'm just trying to defend the hard work that's gone into preparing these articles.

Redfur 18:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

"We have to throw in a speculation" Uhh no, you don't. There is never a time to speculate in an article on Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, not a fan site for you all to speculate and add your own ideas about what's going on. Metros 19:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

-smiles and shakes head-

There is never a time to speculate on Wikipedia

Block quote

Well, let me tell you something- We do, okay? I'm sure someone like you whose probably been trained to sniff out every last mistake in an article already knows that. You don't seem like the stupid type to me. Just stubborn. How many articles do you think have proper sources? I think I've seen one, and I use Wikipedia all the time for everything from looking up Cross Country rules to my favourite book series.

Is there any point in trying to penetrate your thick, smug skull? See if this will: Please go away. And I'm sorry for 'attacking' you as you so reported. I don't remember saying I was going to bash your head in, I was merely merely expressing my frustrations, which you brought on yourself. Something I would expect from someone who sticks like glue to every rule in the book.Redfur 19:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't matter how crap half the rest of Wikipedia is. Certainly all the stuff I write is referenced to reliable sources and is not original research. Speculating about what cats these are or are not is just fine, so long as the fruits of that speculation do not find their way into the article, because we don't allow speculation, ever. You violate policy enough, you get kickbanned. Moreschi ^Talk 20:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

O.k. guys, let's keep a calm head here. I agree that the "kids" comment by Metros was innapropriate, but there's no need to start a fight. There's no point in fighting. Crowstar 20:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

did I cause that argument? Or was it just someone who thinks their so smart? 68.36.70.102 23:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)Tigerclaw14

Sorry, that was my fault. I apologize, Metros, and anyone else who was offended, for losing my short temper. I'm just stressed out from the final exams, and get frustrated easily anyways. But that's no excuse to lash out at another person...But if the whole cover ordeal is going against Wiki regulations, there's no real point in arguing, because someone'll just come along and ban us all. The only real solutions are to write to Erin Hunter or just let fans of the series use their imaginations... I just don't know why everyone started making a big deal of it now, after it has been up for about two months. Redfur 01:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Redfur, if I've ever done anything to make you angry, I'm sorry. Quite frankly, you are my hero! Spottedstripe 01:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Guys and girls, do you really expect these articles to be reliable? A two-year old on the computer can make it so that the most common type of kangaroo is the Bobby-Kangaroo or that the first president was James Bond. Yes, this is an encyclopedia on the internet, but it is more like an editable book. I really think you would be hardpressed to find information on here that is totally reliable. So don't go deleting what is speculation, you will be fighting an already lost battle. It would be like Cambodia thinking it can rule the world by using pitchforks as thier primary weapon with table forks as their secondary. Badgerstripe 20:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

If you disagree with these basic things, then you basically disagree with the key pilars and policies of Wikipedia. You might want to reconsider your involvement with the project if you disagree so greatly, Metros 20:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Metros, Metros, Metros. Did I say I disagreed with you? All I am mad about is how angry you guys get at speculation and that you delete the talk about is this speculation true things on the talk page. You are being an anoying person. Like I said, a 2 year old could change this information. Badgerstripe 20:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but when was the last time you saw a two-year-old on Wikipedia? When was the last time you saw a two-year-old on the web, PERIOD? I dunno about you, but if I saw a user name that was called "Timmy_Age_2", I would know I have gone insane. Badgerstripe, I guess what I'm trying to say is that we have to put a little bit of trust into our users. Wikipedia is generally aimed, in my opinion, toward an older audience. We have to trust our fellow users that they aren't just putting on garbage. I'm not telling this to just you, but to all the users. Just don't get angry at me. Regards, Spottedstripe 12:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

No, everything really needs to be encyclopedic and backed up by sources. If you can find any reliable sources then it's a good bet it shouldn't be in the article. /wangi 13:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Alligences

You know in the beginning of every book it has an alligences section. Would it be possible to create one article that has all the alligences from all the books. The one problem I have is that I think this is considered plagerism; is it? Also, I don't really know if we need it or not. ~ Bella 15:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

It's all pretty much covered in the List of Warriors characters page. ElectricTurahk 16:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...you're right. ~ Bella 15:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

What Happened?

What happended to alot of the topics? They are not in the "Archived Discusion" or anywhere else. If someone is deleting things they don't like, STOP it is annoying, rude, and disrespectful. Badgerstripe 02:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Its being archived by a Bot. If you have an issue bring it up with the Bots owner. DON'T TRY TO STOP THE BOT. IT WILL STILL ARCHIVE THE PAGE. Razorclaw 02:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Many threads were removed as not being appropriate for an article talk page. See the header at the top of the page which states "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Warriors (novel series) article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject." The threads that were removed did not meet these standards. Metros 02:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Razorclaw!!!!!!!! Listen to what I said. It is not in the archhived area!!! Read it through. Also, don't remove them. I like to talk about things, just because everything on here isn't about improving the page doesn't mean it is useless. If you are deleting the topics, STOP it is rude and disrespectful. Badgerstripe 20:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, yes it does mean it is useless. Go read the top of the page again: "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Warriors (novel series) article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject."

This is your a forum for you to discuss and "talk about things;" this is a place to discuss the improvement of the articles. Metros 20:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fine then Metros, have it your way. I am going to make a page for the "useless" things. If you find a "useles" topic kindly past it there. I will put a link here and on my talk page. Badgerstripe 20:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Here is the link. If you want to use it. Warriors (useless talk). Badgerstripe 20:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Which I have just deleted. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a forum, and not a webhost. Thanks/wangi 20:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Wangi you are a goody-two-shoes
2. I have created a page that you can't delete because it is breaking no rules I can find. Click on the following link to finnd the new headquarters of "Warriors (useless talk)" Here is the link: Warriors (useless talk) 21:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Please, don't waste my time or your own. There are plenty sites out there you can host your "useless chat" - this isn't one. User pages are meant to be used to help build the encyclopaedia (and see WP:SOCK too). Thanks/wangi 21:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

You've really done yourself no favours Badgerstripe, your two disruptive User:Warriors (useless talk) and User:Pain in the butt vandalizer sock accouts have now been blocked. And as a result you'll have an autoblock on your main one. Thanks/wangi 21:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

My god. You guys are getting REALLY annoying on this page. ~Rainpaw

Wait, who do you mean? ~Crowstar~ 20:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

All three of them. Metros and Wangi for being Wikipedia bloodhounds and Badgerstripe for not learning his lesson. ~Rainpaw

Um, they're just being moderators. They have to do stuff like that. ~Crowstar~ 20:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but it doesn't mean they have to act like know-it-alls. Also, I know someone who's user account got deleted because they had some funny stuff on it that had nothing to do with wikipedia. That's just rude. ~Rainpaw

He's not being a know it all. Badgerstripe wasn't following rules. Plus, this isn't the place to discuss this, it belongs on a talk page. ~Crowstar~ 20:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah I know. I shouldn't judge people like that. I just get pissed really easily. It's one of my faults. ~Rainpaw

ExCUSE me, Rainpaw?! There is NO reason for cussing on Wikipedia. Metros and wangi are the annoying ones, but I think Badgerstripe isn't annoying, he's just frustrated. We all get frustrated. Give him a break. And Metros is an admin, so that's why he acts like a know-it-all. Ignore him. Spottedstripe21:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

GOD! People! This has just turned into a personal-attack-the-admins fest! If attacking's all you're gonna do, just stop talking! 'K??? ~Crowstar~ 22:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm NOT attacking. Just saying Metros acts like a know-it-all. Spottedstripe 12:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I can't stand to see anyone being insulted in the slightest. It makes me angry, and when I'm angry I tend to make stupid outbursts. Sorry. ~Crowstar~ 16:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Um, excuse me, I didn't really CURSE at anyone. I just said I got pissed easily. It's not like I was saying: @##@$% you. In fact, I wasn't talking about anyone else. I was talking about myself. Besides, is pissed really a cuss? ~Rainpaw

It is in my book, Rainpaw. And, Crowstar, no offense taken. I can see how you can be concerned, and it's mostly my fault anyway. Forget about it. Spottedstripe 12:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Citation and tone templates

On many of the Warriors' individual book pages, there are templates saying that the tone of the article is not up to Wikipedian standards, and that the pages are not cited. I have been adding infoboxes to the articles and I think that takes care of the lack of citations, but whoever put up the templates about the tone of the articles did bot leave an explination of why that was done. If anyone thinks that the tone of the articles needs to be addessed, please explain. Thanks ~Bella 14:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

For more information on these issues cheack out Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles and particularly Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Information style and tone. Also on the citation issue the infobox is not really considered enough (although a good place to start). Try looing at Wikipedia:Verifiability for information to start you on that subject. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes and another issue common in these articles is an in-universe style which is not hugely encyclopedic trying looking at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) for discussion of this issue. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Novel series?

Who changed the Warriors article name? What's the difference between a book series and a novel series? Spottedstripe 12:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I know. I think it's kinda irrelevant, but whoever did it must have had a good reason. ~Crowstar~ 18:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

It all has to do with some of Wikipedia's ridiculous guidelines and stuff. Take, for example, no images without a rationale. Anywho. A (small) group of people decided - who knows when - that all book series should be labeled as novel series, so they changed them. Seldom is there consensus, like they claim. But because the small groups edit so many things, people just accept it, often because they don't bother looking into it. Either way, it is irrelevant. I told the person who made the change to fix the links. They said the would. There's no problem. ElectricTurahk 18:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I think we should keep changing it back if it's a "small" groupof people. ~squirrelstar~ June 27, 2007

Well, whatever the reason for the change, it hasn't affected anything really. All of the links work properly, etc, etc. I'm fine with it being this way. There's no need to waste time changing it back to "book." TakaraLioness 20:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I really don't remember discussion on this taking place... ~Crowstar~ 20:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

DO NOT change it back. It will start an edit war. And we'll lose because it's the admins who do most of this stuff (There's too many of them >_>). The exact same thing happened regarding spoiler tags on the BIONICLE pages. Of course, we (Myself and the other BIONICLE contributors) lost. But, really, no harm has been done, so it would be pointless. ElectricTurahk 21:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I mean, no one's gonna die because of this, we're probably maing a HUGE deal of this, though it is VERY annoying that this took place without a discussion. ~Crowstar~ 21:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh, sorry I brought it up. No damage done to the article, just have to remember to type "novel" now. Regards, Spottedstripe 23:20, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

To me, the title seems to make no sense. I would agree to the changing of the title to 'Warriors (series)'. But why 'novel series'? ~Bella 20:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe because they are novels? Just deal with it now. NO HARM WAS DONE. We don't need to argue this further. ElectricTurahk 01:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Citations

In the beginning of the article, (2nd par.) there were 2 uncited sources. I was able to cite the one source, but I didn't find any info to support the second source. Whoever wrote this please tell someone where you found the info or cite the article yourself. I'm going to delete this until someone tells me where they found this. ~ Bella 15:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Which source would that be? Everything at the start of the article seems fine to me. TakaraLioness 03:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Ummm....Actually I deleted the other source, but it said that there was a 3rd book in the new series. ~Bella 00:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

SKYCLAN???

Okay, just today, I logged on and checked my watchlist. Nothing new, except a giagantic addition to Firestar's Quest. I headed over there, took a look, and what do I see? Under "Cover"... SKYCLAN??? Is this from some new excerpt I never saw, or just a hoax? Crowstar 20:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Whoa...yeah, it just sounds like a hoax to me. There is no such clan as SkyClan; whoever put that up is just a fan adding a bunch of crap to the articles. We seriously need to lock these pages because lots of people who aren't users here are taking advantage of the articles. Anyways, yeah, just delete that. Spottedstar 21:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

DON'T LOCK!!!! Then some people just mess them up then lock them and it is stuck. Hey, maybe on his journey he will meet a SkyClan, there was a BloodClan so it makes sense that there are other Tribes, Clans, or other groups. Badgerstripe 14 May 2007 ~ not logged in

Its okay to lock it. Use a Semi-protect. That was registered users can edit it but not IPs and and accounts under 4 days old. If your account is under four days old then you will not be able to edit it. Regards, Razorclaw 22:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC) ~ not logged in either

Alright, thanks Razorclaw! Can someone get on that? I've got other things to do, but if someone else could do that, I'd be very grateful. Spottedstar 23:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

There could still be a SkyClan. Badgerstripe 19:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, maybe, but as for now, we don't know that. So we need to leave things the way they are till then. Spottedstar 20:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You have to ask an admin to do it. Just putting the template on the page doesn't lock it. Anyway, I will edit it to show you what I mean. diff. -Razorclaw

Alright, we'll have to do that then. Spottedstar 23:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to request that an admin semi-protect the Warriors main page, the Characters page, and the Clan Information page. However, there are separate articles in some of these as well (like in the Warriors main page; how they have different pages for all the books). But also, not ALL of those pages have been vandalized, but are at risk. In requesting for it, should I request all three articles plus the pages to all the books or should I just do it all under Category (as said here)? Or better yet, please just tell me what to request so I can get to it soon. Spottedstar 20:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

SPOILERS! There is such a clan as SkyClan. FirstLook members have said that Firestar goes on a quest to rebuild the lost clan that was driven out of the forest, they were called SkyClan, and a long time ago, their leader was Cloudstar, a white cat with gray patches. This information is one hundred percent true, as I have the book as well. There are also many new cats that Firestar meets, its a very interesting book.

No offense, but I doubt you have the book. Crowstar 15:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Either way... Any info on SkyClan (true or untrue) should be kept off of the articles until the release date, or if the authors/Author Tracker, etc give us some taste of it. TakaraLioness 14:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I swear by all that is good that I got the book from FirstLook, actually, a lot of people did, you can ask anyone who got the book for spoilers, and they'll tell you about SkyClan.

OK, first of all, sign your posts. Second, I'm not sure about his, so if FirstLook is a fansite, then it is probably wrong. If it isn't...well...like what TakaraLioness said, just keep all the info off until we know for sure. That way, no one will complain (once again, not saying any names.) Regards, Spottedstripe 01:39, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

No, FirstLook isn't a fansite. It's a program of HarperCollins. You apply to review a book early and if they choose you, they send out the book and you get it months ahead of the release. So, that's why some people have FQ already, not that they're supposed to be spoiling it. But yeah, all spoilers, no matter how minor, should be kept off of the articles until the official release date. Then once the release date is here you can go for it and put up a summary and everthing. It's fine then. TakaraLioness 11:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

This talk is where I got the name for my clan on my RPS :) At the time I didn't know there actually was one. ~Aurorastar

Holy cow...that's awesome! I'll have to check that one out...do you have to pay for it? Spottedstripe 21:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean the Firstlook thing? ~Aurorastar

Ya the Firstlook, is it expensive? free? is the shipping outrageously high? when does the book come out? when does it take place? where do i access it? Anna F C 03:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I don't have it but I'm pretty sure it's not COMPLETELY free. You have to still pay for the book and it probably costs shipping. ~Rainpaw

You have to pay for the book? I thought it was free...I signed up and the user account costs nothing. Can't wait for "Firestar's Quest" the be featured at a FirstLook book! ^^ Spottedstripe 21:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Wait a minute... I was just speculating. Do you really get the books for free? Or are you being sarcastic? ~Rainpaw

I'm not being sarcastic...do you get the books for free or not? Now you've confused me... Spottedstripe 12:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay... Me getting REALLY confused. I'm just going to shut up now. ~Rainpaw

OK, LOL. ^^ Spottedstripe 23:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge Outcast article with Warriors article

Hi, I was just checking out the articles, making sure nothing's messed up, when I went to the Oucast article and noticed that almost nothing was there! I think it would make more sense to just put what is there under the "Outcast" title in the Warriors article. Anyone agree? Spottedstripe 12:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

If no one responds, I'm just going to merge the two. Outcast doesn't have enough info released on it to make an article just yet. Spottedstripe 13:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

ATTENTION! I'm merging the two right now...speak up if you don't want it done! Spottedstripe 00:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Ummmmm...you don't seem to have merged anything, did someone just delete it or something? ~Bella 00:20, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Yup. Argh... Spottedstripe 23:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

References?

One question... How can you have references for book sumaries? Isn't all the information from that book? And another for Metros: Why can't you have a cover description for the Lost Warrior? It is a magna series. Every time you see a picture it says who the character is. It's common sense not original research. ~Rainpaw

Simple, this is an encyclopaedia, not a repository of cruft, we shouldn't have detailed book summaries. For more information please have a read of:

• Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: 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. See Wikipedia:Notability (fiction).
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)
• Wikipedia:Notability (fiction)

Thanks/wangi 21:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but what about The Lost Warrior Cover? ~Rainpaw

Alright, let's put it this way, unless you have written (on the internet or in a book) proof that the authors said that Firestar of Brambleclaw or whoever is on the cover of the book, you can't say that you know 100% who is on the cover. I know just as well as anyone that common sense tells you who is on the cover, but according to Wikipedia rules, that's the way it goes. ~Bella 00:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Just as a small side note, the websites must be OFFICIAL. Just becuase a fan site says that Whitestorm is gonna come back from the dead and rule the forest does NOT MEAN that it's true. Now, if Kate Cary or Cherith Baldry said it themselves, then that would be a different story. Regards, Spottedstripe 23:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Good point Spottedstripe, I completely agree. ~Bella 12:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Cats of the Clans?

Supposedly, there's something coming out called Cats of the Clans. Is this true? Crowstar 14:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Apparently it was mentioned in this chat. I don't know if it's worth putting up though until there are more concrete details instead of just one mention in a chat at least 6 months in advance. Metros 14:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Me neither, we have NO details about this, except that it exists. That's like putting an article for yourself on wikipedia because "You'll be famous one day." It could even be cancelled. Crowstar 15:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

We can add info about it later when, well, when we have more information... I doubt that it'll be cancelled, but I'm sure the authors will tell us more things later. TakaraLioness 18:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

You'd think something like that would just be a duplicate of SotC. Maybe not...I'm probably just dumb...Spottedstripe 21:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

No, you aren't. Anyway, I think thes'll have much larger color pictures, and backgrounds for characters. Crowstar 21:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. That sounds really neat. I'll have to get that right away (just as soon as I get Secret of the Clans and any other Warrior book...I'm broke!!) Regards, Spottedstripe 00:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

When does it come out, sorry, (I never pay attention to the chats)Anna F C 03:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You're not the only one. I've TRIED to read the posted scripts before, but they bore me.~Crowstar~ 15:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

They bore me too, but I've found a way to find on the page what I'm looking for real quick. For ex., let's say you need to find something about Dark River in a very long chat. All you have to do is press CTRL and F at the same time and a box will pop up. Type in 'Dark River' and press Find Next. It takes me right to the place where they're talking about the release of Dark River. ~Bella 12:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Help with a vandalist...

I need help with a vandalist who destroys Warriors articles by adding spam, links to fansites, and vandalism. I don't know where to report this, but if we all warn this guy... His IP is 71.82.119.242. If anyone can block him, please do. ~Crowstar~ 16:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

He even added something bad about Volume 3, which is the temporary title for the last volume in the Manga Trilogy. I really think this page needs to be Semi-Locked for a while. Guest 20:18, 14 June 2007

"Guest" you do realize that if it's semi-protected you won't be able to edit the page, right? Metros 01:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Um, actually, I believe 71 is blocked, so it can't be him. ~Crowstar~ 12:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind not being able to edit these pages for a while. I'm just worried about the vandalist, that's all. I want to do my best for these pages. It isn't just editing. I also want this page safe from vandalists like this guy we are trying to block right now. Guest 14:57, 18 June 2007.

Y'know, you could join, which would make editing a lot easier. ~Crowstar~ 20:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, i no this a dumb question, but can't you block the editing from one person? I no you already have an idea of who made thwe changes, but can't you like read the changes they made?For example I know my friend logged on my account, vandalised some site, and then when i logged on it wouldn't let me edit, but when I created a new account I COULD edit, just find the vandal so all the innocent editors could honestly make changes, If that is a shocking naive (which means "made by someone who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about") answer, sorry. Anna F C 03:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you can block 1 person. Only admins can though. If you need any more help, ask me. ~Crowstar~ 15:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Why don't we just protect the page 'till the next book cmes out. then, the vandal will give up --Melman the cat 13:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think 71 wouldn't still be blocked right now...I think that block was only 24 hrs. But I'm not an admin so I'm not sure. I don't really think we should semi-protect the pages now...if he/she vandalizes anymore, I think they have something near a permanent block anyway.... ~Bella 00:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It is 71. I know this because I checked this page's history, and I noticed that 71 made that change with Volume 3 (where I requested semi-protection, to protect this page from 71 and other vandals, even though I wouldn't be able to edit this page for a while). I'll try to fix any vandalisim he puts on Warriors pages. Oceanstream (formerly known as Guest), 12:25, 3 June 2007

I wasn't saying that it wasn't 71, I was just saying that he's probably not blocked right now and it probably out there vandalizing, or will be. ~Bella 22:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Introduction

Hi folks. Just a comment in passing. As someone totally unfamiliar with this series it took quite a bit of reading to figure out just what this series is about. Plenty about clans and character names and plotlines. Nowhere does it clearly state that this is a saga in which the main protagonists are cats living in wild cat society (a la Watership Down being about rabbits, for example). That would be a good place to start I think.MuJoCh 12:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Emphasis on "Totally unfamiliar with the series". If you want to know so much, read the books. I think we haven't really said that the books are about cats and Clans because mainly the people that read the articles have already read the first or second books. Regards, Spottedstripe 12:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but this is an encyclopedia article; by definition a resource for people unfamiliar with a topic. I don't think wanting to find the basic premise of these stories, quickly and clearly stated, is all that extraordinary. But hey, I'm just suggesting. MuJoCh 20:21, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, sorry, I was too mean. Spottedstripe 17:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Watch out!

Okay, I belong to an RPG about warriors. There was an IP who'd call himself HackerMysterio and seemed to have a vendetta against warriors. He will say very innapropriate things like "I RAPED MICHAEL JACKSON!". Worst of all, he WILL pose as other people, (which isn't such a problem here) and type nasty things like that. However, I'd like you to look out for him, as half the members there are Wikipedians, and after we got him to leave, he said, "Ill go pester you wikapedeans now." He's probably gonna make extremely innapropriate edits to Warriors... Look out! Crowstar 13:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow...I think we'll know if he poses as someone else, because we pretty much know everyone here. I'll check all the articles really wuick to make sure he hasn't done anything yet. Regards, Spottedstripe 18:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

You beat me too it Crowstar. I was just about to warn them about this guy. Honestly I think he's just some bored person who has nothing better to do. All I know is that it was freaking annoying. Now that most of us are registered he won't be able to impersonate us on our RPG. ~Aurorastar

I think the guy just struck again on our forum. I already deleted the post. This time he called himself the 'incredible shit seller'. ~Aurorastar

Yipe...I would find it more comforting if you didn't put what he calls himself, or what he says. Regards, Spottedstripe 13:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Uhhhh.... Sorry.~Aurorastar

No prob. Spottedstripe 20:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

He's not Guest posing as Oceanstream. I used to call myself Guest (who helped out a lot with these articles), until I came up with Oceanstream to seem more like a warrior. I am not HackerMysterio, and I try to be as appropriate as possible. Oceanstream, 12:37, 3 July 2007

No one said you were. So, were you the Guest that was putting posts in some of the earlier disscusions? Spottedstripe 23:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes I was Guest, but I changed Guest to Oceanstream makes me sound more like a warrior. I try to help out as much as possible. I'm not logged in yet. I just changed my Wikipedia name. For my first few posts as Oceanstream, I put Oceanstream (Formerly known as Guest) to avoid confusion. I'm sure some people know the change now. Oceanstream, 22:50, 5 July 2007.

Yes, it makes you sound like a very noble warrior. I like the name. Spottedstripe 17:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Dark River

The Dark River page redirects me back to warriors (novel series). I have no idea how to make a change like that so I just thought I should tell you. SquirrelFlyte 14:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I think that it was merged, I have no idea though. ~Crowstar~ 14:11, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, the book'll get its own page later, I guess. TakaraLioness 18:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Basically all we know is it's PROBABLY from Hollypaw's POV, and that Cinderpaw falls out of a tree. ~Crowstar~ 18:15, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Well, it's probably going to have all of the trio's POVs, but yeah, I'm sure that Hollypaw'll be the main focus. TakaraLioness 18:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

All I know is that the page was nominated for deletion, so it probably was deleted. ~Bella 20:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Probably. I doubt that it had much on it at all. We don't know a lot about Dark River. TakaraLioness 20:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

As of now, we have too little information on Dark River. What would be made in the article would be a horrible stub. Just wait until the book is released to recreate it.

And FYI. When something is made into a redirect, when you are redirected, it shows at the top of the page "Redirect from *insert page name here*". Click the portion I have marked in asterisks (*), and it will take you to the actual page. You can then check that page's history to see why it was so bad. I assumed this was common Wiki knowledge. ElectricTurahk 01:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

So, what do you mean by that? Implying we don't know anything about Wikipedia? Spottedstripe 12:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hardly. I was just pointing something out because it looked like the editor who started this section did not know that. It was not directed at you. Especially because you have not taken part in this discussion. ;) ElectricTurahk 12:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

People, where talking about Dark River, not wheter Spottedstripe can use wiki. Now,about Dark river. Why don't we just un-link the words and when the book comes out,re-liknk the words.We currently don't know anything important about the book --Melman the cat 13:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Now here's a different proposition. Look at Outcast. It's just fine, and we have even less information on it. Why can we not just fix Dark River up so it is acceptable? Still, removing the link was rather obvious... I had already assumed it had been done. ElectricTurahk 13:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm not against either idea, though it'd probably just be easier to wait until we got a lot more information on the book... TakaraLioness 16:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I knew Dark River might have been deleted because I did what you said. I found out all the info there was on Dark River and incorperated it into the article with citations and also made it an infobox (before it was deleted, obviously). Apparently they still voted to delete it. Another point a user made was that, it's going to be a big book in the series, and instead of going and creating the article all over again and possible starting something of an article deletion war, it might be easier to just lay back and wait for the book to come out like somebody previously mentioned. ~Bella 21:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, let's wait for more info. And, ElectricTurahk, I said WE in my previous post, so I KNOW it wasn't aimed towards me. And Melman, "Spottedstripe" is one word. Spottedstripe 13:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay,Fixed it --Melman the cat 18:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

CotC

Do we have any info yet for Cats of the Clans? If we do, we need to stick it in the article under the title. Spottedstripe 23:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

No need now, for I was bold and made the article for it. All information should relevant to the book should be added to its page. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 23:52, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Could we possibly add the births, deaths, ect. that appear in this book like we do with the others Warriors books? Just an idea. 209.30.147.52 15:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, the book isn't out yet so we can't add that sort of stuff yet. SquirrelFlyte 16:17, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I was just checking. Spottedstripe 17:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

well,er... we know that it lists the cats of the clans, and, we will probly ( not confurmed) see some new cats I don't think there will be B-days and stuff about every cat, but maby we'll find out that about major carecters also, maby ages anyone ? --Melman the cat 18:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that idea I posted I meant to put on Secrets of the Clans, but I got mixed up. Still, the idea might work on Cats of the Clans also. Shrewpelt 00:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Articles

Many of these articles for the books need rewrites, especially Darkest Hour. If anyone wants to help, feel free to. Crowstar 16:42, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd love to. However, it's kinda late, so I'll try and do it early tomorrow. I'll try to done some tonight, though. Regards, Spottedstripe 02:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how to rewrite. I'll try though. Crowstar 11:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I took a look at the "Darkest Hour", and MAN, is it ever bloated! I'm trying to figure out a way to trim it as we speak. Regards, Spottedstripe 12:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, Darkest Hour trimming was successful! I deleted those two, looooong paragraphs at the end and replaced it with a general overveiw of what happened in the book, without including much detail. That way, there are no spoilers. We should do it like that on ALL of the articles, so people will want to read the book instead of just brushing over the article. Regards, Spottedstripe 12:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Great job! ^.^ Crowstar 14:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess I'll start the rest of the books in sequence. Anyone wanna help with this project? We should name it "WikiProject: Warriors Books". Regards, Spottedstripe 00:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks like Mr. Razorclaw reverted everything back to normal. Gosh darnit, I spent a long time trying to come up with the right words to say! Guess that means I shouldn't edit anything anymore... Regards, Spottedstripe 12:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Why did he do that? Did he even say anything about why? I thought you did a good job.~Rainpaw

Ow man, he deleted that part with ALL The names and descriptions of the cats, you know, at the begining of every book, I did 3 hours of it! That is a lot for me! Anna F C 03:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Is there anyway to bring it back? I really don't think he had the right to just delete it! ~Rainpaw

I have one idea, type the edit first on Word or Word Perfect, then Copy and Paste it onto the site, then if it gets deleted you can add it back on the page from your saved document. I will try it and get back to you. Anna F C 14:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I can't find the edit this guy did.... if he deleted any part of the article, just ask him why, and if it isn't a good answer, you can get an admin to revert the edit. I looked on his talk page though and it said that he was gone from wikipedia for a while though. I also think Anna F C's idea is really good about using Word...I did that whenever I'm going to create an article. It helps with spelling and grammar too :) ~ Bella 14:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey Bella, I think you're confusing two people, but I may be wrong. Metros is on a Wiki-break, but Razorclaw was the one who deleted my edits. Although, I've been at another site for a couple of days, so maybe Razorclaw is on a break as well...I'll check his profile real quick. Regards, Spottedstripe 18:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, he has! Sorry. Spottedstripe 01:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Gotcha..you're right. Well....you still can get an admin to revert the changes if you think they should. ~Bella 00:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, as hard as this is to believe, I'm afraid of admins...too much know-how... Spottedstripe 20:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I guarentee that they won't bite! but I think I actually found a way to revert them myself...what pages were they on? ~Bella 22:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The pages I edited were The Darkest Hour and Into the Wild. I would really appreciate it if you reverted them because I'm still a bit new to Wikipedia and I DON'T KNOW HOW!! Spottedstripe 23:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I just checked all of your edits to The Darkest Hour. Why exactly are you upset, when you made just two edits to the page, both almost a month ago? One is now absolete because the book template was added, and the second edit was not exactly a good one. You shortened the plot summary so it covered next to nothing of the book. That's why it was reverted. How it was was fine. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 23:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe whether you think my edits were good or not is an opinion. I would like you to keep your opinions to yourself. And I'll have you know I spent a long time trying to come up with what to say because the articles needed trimming. I think that you could, maybe, appreciate the fact that I was the one who tried to trim the articles. No one ELSE wanted to, so I gave up my spare time to Wiki my heart out. I hope I made you feel guilty; being mean was not my intent at all. Spottedstripe 17:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Guilty? Not in the least. I said what I felt. And I understand you may be upset because you spent a long time writing something only for somebody to change it - it's happened to me plenty of times elsewhere - but that does not change the fact that what you did was anti-productive. The summaries did not need trimming. And if they did, not to the severe extent you did. However, the point is now moot, for your edits a month ago would have no impact on the article as it is now. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 17:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

According to "Wiki Clan", they DID need to be trimmed. Or did you not see the disscussion that we held on the very section?! I'll thank you for trying to understand how I felt, but I will NOT thank you for calling my edits "anti-productive". *sob* Spottedstripe 12:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Guys, why are we arguing about something that went on one month ago? And Turahk, that comment was uneeded. Little comments like that may not seem like much to you, but to the person they're aimed at... trust me. The solution here? ElectricTurhak, you don't talk to Spottedstripe, and Spottedstripe, you don't talk to him. ~Crowstar~ 12:59, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

...What the hell is Wiki Clan? --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 13:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and regardless of what it is, I wasn't around (Well, I was, but I didn't edit Warriors pages) back then to see any discussion regarding this, if there was any. But. Yeah. A month ago. Just let it go. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 13:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The book articles themselves

I was going over the book articles, and typing in what the cover is proven to be, in the box on the right with all the info, but somebody went back and deleted it. -.- It was good info, too! But they changed it back to stupid stuff like saying that the cover of The Darkest Hour is cats watching the sunset (it's the dawn), that the cat on the cover of Twilight is black and that cats are sitting on rocks there, that Leafpool on Starlight is light ginger, that Bramblepaw is rubbing against Fireheart on A Dangerous Path, that Feathertail is a gray tabby, that Brambleclaw is dark orange, etc. Look, what's the point of putting in a description if it's proven to be a certain cat (like how The Darkest Hour can't be anybody else but Firestar in the center) or confirmed by the authors? Can't we just put what it's proven to be?

66.157.111.88 13:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 66.157.111.88 13:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

As you have seen if you look at some of the earlier discussions, it does seem pretty obvious to people who've read the books who is on the cover of the books, but unless someone can find an exact quote from the book or from the authors that says exactly who those cats are, we can't assume they are Firestar or Graystripe or whatever. The reason this happens is because it is an encyclopedia, and no assumptions can be made without proof. ~Bella 19:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I did all those, Lakestorm. It was at the beginning of June when TakaraLioness, Metros and I got into kind of a disagreement, and Takara suggested that we just put the cat descriptions instead of which cat we thought it was. That would get rid of all arguements about center covers. If you want someone to blame, it was me, but don't change it back or else we'll start fighting again. Regards, Spottedstripe 23:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not going to blame you. I saw that argument, and (if I'm not going to get flamed) I believe that Metros was acting very stupid (who else could the cat in the center of The Darkest Hour be?) but here's an idea: post the actual, common-sense confirmed cats, and for Twilight, put Crowfeather or Cinderpelt, for Rising Storm, Sandstorm or Tigerclaw.

Aside from that, here's something else: it seems like everyone believes that the cat on Secrets of the Clans is Thunderstar. What about you? Because I do, but people keep deleting it. So I get kind of angry...when that's as good as proven, and people still say it's speculation. 66.157.111.88 23:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 66.157.111.88 23:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

OK...yet again....the rules on Wikipedia state that no matter how much you think this piece of info is true... you cannot put it on Wikipedia unless it is PROVEN! (said by the author or is written in the books) I apologize if this makes you angry, but unless you have solid proof (not common sense or your opinion) you cannot put it on Wikipedia. ~Bella 00:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, please do not put the 'common sense confirmed cats' on the pages because they will be deleted unless you have proof, and we don't want anymore arguments. ~Bella 00:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

• cough* Some of them are good as proven. For example, on Into the Wild, the center features a ginger cat with sunlight streaming down on him. On the back, the same picture shows him with a broken collar in front of him. This is an actual scene from the book, during Rusty/Firepaw's naming ceremony. On The Darkest Hour's center cover, it shows a ginger cat drinking from a pool with a lion's reflection. This is also an actual scen from the book featuring Firestar. On Midnight, the center features a brown tabby's head. The main Warriors website has Brambleclaw's picture being this image, and the image for Highstones being the rest of the book. The authors proved that the cat on Moonrise is Feathertail. The cat on Dawn is a ginger tabby with green eyes. The book is told from mostly Squirrelpaw's, a ginger she-cat with green eyes, point of view. The authors said somewhere that the cat on Starlight is Leafpaw/pool. There are badgers on Twilight, and it's in a rocky hollow. ThunderClan makes their camp in a rocky hollow, and this is the only instance of badgers in the book. The cat on Sunset is a dark brown tabby with blue eyes. The only dark tabby with blue eyes in the books is Hawkfrost, and most of the book is about him and Brambleclaw anyway. Also in Sunset, Leafpool has a dream in which all the stars come together to form a single glittering path on the lake, and Brambleclaw and Squirrelflight are seen on the end of this path. On The Sight the only three points of view used are Jaypaw, a gray tom with blue eyes, Hollypaw, a black she-cat with green eyes, and Lionpaw, a ginger tom with amber eyes. The prophecy refers to them (There will be three, kin of your kin, who hold the power of the stars in their paws.). The cover of The Sight (the actual one, anyway) features a gray cat with blue eyes, a black cat with green eyes, and a ginger cat with amber eyes. And also, suring most of the first series, books feature a ginger cat. The only two prominent ginger cats are Firestar and Sandstorm, and Sandstorm is light ginger. Plus, it's from his point of view anyway.

See? Sometimes common sense actually works.

66.157.111.88 01:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 66.157.111.88 01:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, fine. If you wanna start an arguement, go for it, but I'm gonna do nothing to help you out of it, and I'm sure Bella won't either. Just have everyone start yelling again, get everything out of whack, but you'll have to fix it yourself. By the way, don't reply to this, because there's nothing to say. Spottedstripe 12:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeaaaaah...I'm not trying to start an argument. Bella said unless I can prove it from the books or from what the authors said, not to put it, and I'm just showing that some of it IS proven from the books. Sorry.

66.20.174.191 13:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 66.20.174.191 13:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have made the whole 'proven in the books' statement more clear. I completely understand where your coming from and this the whole thing is ridiculous, when right in front of you, you can see who the charcters are. But it has to say in the book something to the effect of 'the cat on the cover of this book is Firestar' or something like that. There are other cats, I'm sure, that have a pelt that looks like fire and might have broken their collars, and therefore they could be depicted in this picture. This annoying rule is used to try to prevent someone thinking that the cat on the front is Firestar, when it is really another cat. ~Bella 17:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree, Bella. Sorry, Lakestorm, about what I said. Just lost my temper for a minute there. Regards, Spottedstripe 20:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, true. But Firestar's the only cat who's prominent in the book and is a kittypet in the forest with a flame-colored pelt. I'm not gonnan put anything back on first--let readers use their imagination (which, I'm sure, will almost definitely be Firestar for Into the Wild). 66.20.174.191 22:26, 1 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 66.20.174.191 22:26, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, and I'm positive the readers will think that the cat is Firestar too. :) ~Bella 12:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I'd like to know what readers would think it was if they DIDN't think is was Firestar. ("I'm REALLY positive that the cat on The Darkest Hour is Sandstorm!") Spottedstripe 23:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Not only readers of the books read the articles on Wikipedia, and really, if you want to continue this argument, please tell an admin or something about how much you don't like this rule. I really don't want to argue over this any further. ~Bella 15:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Tone and Style

Many of the aricles have the tone template saying that they are not in the proper tone for the article and they are completely right. I just redid Rising Storm's summary, and it was pretty bad. If someone wants to help me do this, it would be much appreciated. I just thought I'd make everyone more aware of this point.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 18:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I also just did Into The Wild as well.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 18:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, Bella! Nice font for your username! I've always wanted to figure out how to do those. Spottedstripe 12:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually I didn't change the font, just the color, which is pretty easy to do. And thanks. :)  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 13:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Warrior's Return

Is the warrior's return thing real? i'm starting to think every new thing is vandalism. Shrewpelt 17:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see anything about 'Warrior's Return".....  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 21:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Someone had it down as the title of the third manga, saying that it came from a Borders poster. Actually, the title is on a free Warriors poster made by HarperCollins (making it legit, I think), which can be found at Borders (I snagged one when I went to buy the deluxe edition of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows). It's got descriptions of the series, and some quizzes, and says that the second and third manga volumes will be out in "Winter 2008" and "Fall 2008," respectively. No, I don't know how that makes sense, but it's there, all on the poster. Go pick one up in the bookstore and see. But, I suppose, we could just wait until the dates surface on Tokyopop's site or whatever. TakaraLioness 22:44, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's odd. I can't find it anywhere on the internet and I don't think you can cite a Border's poster...guess we should just wait.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 22:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Okay then. TakaraLioness 22:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It's funny...I used to be really impatient all the time, but when I started the Warriors weries and had to wait for books, I became really patient. Hmm.  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 11:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Covers

ElectricTurahk: I know you have proof that the cats on Into the Wild and Midnight are Rusty and Brambleclaw. I also have proof that the cat on The Darkest Hour is Firestar but everybody says "it's not proven". Can we leave that out, considering that no other book has it?

72.154.53.67 12:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 72.154.53.67 12:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

But because there is proof, it's all right to be included (Show me The Darkest Hour proof - despite it being incredibly obvious - and I'll back you up there.). And if we have the info, why not include it? --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 14:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, but still. Yanno where I'm coming from?

...kay then. There is a scene in which Firestar drinks from a pool and sees his reflection as a lion.

If we can prove that, why not post the covers for every book, when almost every cover can be proved? :P

72.154.53.67 19:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 72.154.53.67 19:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Why not? I wasn't around during the last time this happened, but I do have a suggestion. Find the reasoning. Put it on the talk page. Add it in. If it's disputed, discuss it. And by discuss it, I mean each individual cover, not as a whole - that's what I think the problem was last time. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 20:19, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes. I can do that. But not now, maybe later...

72.154.53.67 23:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 72.154.53.67 23:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Alright, then, I'm ready. :P By the way, these are my opinions, but they're not stupid stuff like "omg da covr off into th wild is hollypaw and lionpaw!!!!!!"

Into the Wild: Cover: Spottedleaf telling Bluestar the prophecy. The area of the forest looks like a clearing, and Spottedleaf's den is in a clearing. Spottedleaf is a dappled tortoiseshell, while Bluestar is a blue-gray cat. Spottedleaf in the picture is black and ginger/brown, and the Bluestar is gray.

Fire and Ice: Cover: The battle at the gorge. The sky is rosy, like a tinge of dawn, and the cats have the battle in early morning. The battle is near a slight waterfall, like there is in the gorge. The land is pretty normal, like no trees, like WindClan or RiverClan territory around there. Center Cover: Fireheart and Graystripe holding vigil. The moon is nearly full, and there was a Gathering just a few nights after they became warriors. They are sitting side-by-side, as they are during their vigil. One is ginger and the other gray, just like Fireheart and Graystripe.

Forest of Secrets: Cover: Two cats going across the stepping-stones to RiverClan. It is unknown who these two cats are, but I personally think they're Fireheart and Graystripe. Center Cover: Fireheart. There is no other ginger cat in the series, and he is the point of view for the series, as well as the main character.

Rising Storm: Cover: Fireheart following Whitethroat and Littlecloud under the Thunderpath, and a cat following him (this could be debated as to whether it's Sandstorm or Tigerclaw, but I personally think it's Tigerclaw). The cats waiting have the same coloring, and the ginger cat looks like Fireheart. The other cat could be Tigerclaw since he stalks Fireheart, or Sandstorm as she's with Fireheart in this scene. Center Cover: Hardcover: Fireheart and Cloudpaw. Fireheart is bright ginger, like this cat, and his apprentice is Cloudpaw, which is fluffy and white like this cat. Paperback: Fireheart and Sandstorm. Fireheart is bright ginger, like the foremost cat, and Sandstorm is paler ginger, like the cat behind Fireheart. Plus, Fireheart and Sandstorm seem to be doing a lot together in this book.

A Dangerous Path: Cover: The confrontation over the prey stealers. The two lines aren't fighting each other, but seem to be posed to attack, and also seem tense (as they are in the book). But then, on the official Warriors website, it says this is ShadowClan territory, so you'll have to find something that fits this. ><; Center Cover: Fireheart and Bramblepaw. Fireheart is bright ginger, like this cat, and his apprentice is Bramblepaw, who is a dark brown tabby like this cat.

The Darkest Hour: Cover: Firestar, Sandstorm, Graystripe, and Bramblepaw watching the dawn in the final scene of the book. The sky is that of either sunset or dawn, and also, the official Warriors website says this is Fourtrees. Center Cover: Firestar seeing his reflection as a lion. The cat is ginger, like Firestar, and is drinking from a pool with a lion reflected.

Midnight: Cover: The six (continued on back) journey cats. There are six of them, and also, the official Warriors website says this is Highstones, which they pass during their quest.

Moonrise: Cover: The six journey cats (continued on back) heading home through the mountains, with Sharptooth's shadow. The mountains are snowy, like they are in Moonrise, and the shadow only appears on the front. Center Cover: Feathertail. The cat is a silver tabby with blue eyes, which Feathertail is. Stormfur is a dark gray cat with amber eyes.

Dawn: Cover: The Clans looking into the star-reflected lake at their new home as dawn comes up. There are many cats, and they're by a lake with a pink tinge of dawn on the sky. Center Cover: Squirrelpaw. The book is from her point of view, and the cat is ginger with green eyes, like Squirrelpaw.

Starlight: Cover: The cats fighting over Mudclaw's leadership. It's the only real fight in the book. Center Cover: Leafpool. The book is from her point of view, and the cat is a brown/ginger tabby with amber eyes, like her.

Twilight: Cover: ThunderClan as the badgers attack. There are badgers at the bottom, and it's in a hollow like ThunderClan's camp. Center Cover: Crowfeather. The cat is a smallish (WindClan-looking), dark gray cat with blue eyes. Crowfeather is a dark gray cat with blue/amber eyes. It could be debated whether this is Crowfeather or Cinderpelt.

Sunset: Cover: Leafpool looking into the lake during her dream. There is a lone cat, and it is looking into a lake with a single path of stars. Center Cover: Hawkfrost. The cat is an evil-looking dark brown tabby with ice-blue eyes.

The Sight: Cover: A thunderstorm. Do I really need to explain? Center Cover: Hollypaw, Jaypaw, and Lionpaw. The cats are gray with blue eyes, black with green eyes, and ginger with amber eyes, like Hollypaw, Jaypaw, and Lionpaw.

Secrets of the Clans: Cover: Shadowstar, Windstar and Riverstar under a starry sky. They fit with the center cover. Center Cover: Thunderstar. He is ginger with amber eyes, and he fits with Shadowstar, Windstar and Riverstar. These could be muchly debated.

The Lost Warrior: Cover: Graystripe and Millie confronting Duke and his gang. What else, really, could it be? Center Cover: Graystripe. The cat is shaggy gray, and the book is about Graystripe.

My input. :P

66.157.101.194 13:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 66.157.101.194 13:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm afraid I don't think this is enough to say that we know for positive that the characters can be named on the covers. I'm getting really sick of always explaining this. If you would like to know why this isn't enough proof, please see the following conversation. I know you think it sucks or whatever, but it's the rule and I would really appreciate it if no one else would bring up this argument again. Thanks,  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 21:52, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

ElectricTurahk asked. :/ So that's why I posted it. D:

72.154.53.234 13:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Lakestorm 72.154.53.234 13:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It's alright, I just kind of lost my temper there, sorry. I just would like to ask that no one posts anthing about this in the future unless they have written proof from the authors.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 15:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I pissed you off, I only brought it up because I did have proof for two the novels, but I've already explained those two. The others... Yeah, whatever... --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 20:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It's OK.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 20:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally I think we should just ask whoever designed the covers. If not that person then one of the Erin Hunters. ~Rainpaw

YARRRRRRGH!!!!! Do NOT say the "P" word! This is Wikipedia, not some forum where anyone can just mouth off any profanity you want to! OK, enough ranting...pant...anyway, I agree with Rainpaw. However, on Kate's OAQ page it says not to ask about the covers, that she only writes the books, not designs them. Man! BTW, here's the link: http://www.theguttersnipe.co.uk/  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 12:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't like the "P" word either, and would not like people to use it in the future, but Spottedstripe, I think you were getting just a little bit over the top since it was only the second time he did it. P.S. This sig looks amazing Spottedstripe!

 Bella Swan_(Talk!) 13:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm a dude. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 17:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Bella. Yes, I did get a little bit mad. I'm sorry, just one of my pet peeves is cussing, and since you see it everywhere these days...sometimes I just want to yell. I apologize, ElectricTurahk.  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 16:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Well we don't have to ask Kate. Who designed the covers? ~Rainpaw

Hm...well, I guess it would have to be someone at Harper Collins.  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 11:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

~|ET|~-- Sorry about the pronoun; I do that all the time and I'm really sorry. Didn't you also say that you were a member of wands and worlds? Is there any chance that you could explain this situation in one of those chats w/ the authors and just ask them to verify the info so we can cite it?  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 17:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm not a member; I don't want to have to pay to be able to post. I have been there, though. I think Spottedstripe's a member... Right? If really necessary, then somebody could ask in one of the chats, whenever the next one is. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 19:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't really know who it was but I think someone said they were a member in one of the archives on this talk page.... I would have done it myself but I didn't want to have to pay the fee either.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 19:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

TakraLioness is a member maybe she can ask. Griffenflash 19:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes! That's who was saying they were a member...I'll ask her on her talk page.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 21:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I just asked her and she said that she'll try to ask if she can make the next chat.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 22:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha, I wish I was a member, ET. Unfortunatly (I probably spelled that wrong) I just spent that last of my spendings account on a copy of Zelda Windwaker, so I'd have to wait for my next allowance. How much do you have to pay to become a member?  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 20:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

$5.00 per year, I'm not a member but I asked the same thing and you use PayPal, with a credit card to pay for it. Griffenflash 17:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Another thought, I'll as her if she can also ask about the "play" about Crowfeather's kits from the WindClan page. Griffenflash 18:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

What is the "play" about Crowfeather's kits from the Windclan page? Spottedstripe- Zelda Windwaker is the most AMAZING game- have fun!  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 18:52, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

She says she'll try. It's a talk Leafpool and Crowfeather have after Sunset and they just met randomly but their Clans turn up and almost have a battle. The issue is Crowfeather says he kits but it was supposed to be performed in Vicky's last tour somewhere but they ran out of time. So it could just be non-canon. Griffenflash 23:12, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You can find the link to the play on the Warriors site, in the new section. I don't know whether to count it as canon or not. It could kind of be like Jo Rowling's Black Family Tree for the Harry Potter series, which has a bit of a disputed status, but that's just mostly with the dates (though Jo admits to being bad at math; kind of like how Erin Hunter admit to not being able to keep up with their cats) than the people on it. Couldn't we just make a note of the script's implication of Crowfeather having more than one kit, though just saying that it may not be cannon? Until we get it all sorted out, I mean. Er. If we already have that or don't want it, forgive me and just forget what I said. TakaraLioness 22:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

So, was this thing supposed to be an actual play? You know, like singing, fighting on-stage, people wearing costumes, etc. Oh, and Bella, Windwaker is really fun, but I think my brother has played it more than I have...and I paid for it! :)  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 11:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, no not singing or fighting. It's just a drama, it seems, but yeah, I'd say it is a play. I know it got acted out at some of Vicky's tour stops, though I'm not sure if they had costumes or not. TakaraLioness 16:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I think we should make a new section, this is WAY long and not about covers anymore. And I agree, it is a play. Crowstar^{Vaseline-on-the-lens-Jitsu!fwends!} 16:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, isn't funny how you start a discussion about one thing, and by the time it's over it's about something else? Huh. Oh, and welcome back, Crowstar! I like the new siggy, but I have to ask...what in the world is a Vaseline-on-the-lens-Jitsu?  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 12:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

The Lost Warrior Article

Personally I think some work need to be done on the article. It acts as if the book hasn't been released yet and doesn't talk about the story at all. It also talks about the 'note' from Erin Hunter but we already know what it says. ~Rainpaw

I think SotC should be rewritten too, it's basically notes on how we knew the book would be like, and 1 paragraph detailing what it's about. ~Crowstar~ 20:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I could give it a shot if you like. I just joined wikipedia not too long ago but I'm a big fan of the warriors series and I have those two books. I can't say how good I'll be but... Barn Cat 22:16, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to to do Secrets of the Clans. 75.41.213.49 13:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ugghh. Never mind. I can't do the articles. I have to do a lot of work for another article, sorry. Barn Cat 15:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

And while we're at it, Dark River could be remade into a similar fashion like Outcast was... I suppose I could do that myself... --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 16:16, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

All right, this is what I'm doing for SotC. I'm going to keep the first paragraph and the excerpt link, but I'm going to delete all the little previews from the authors and the footnote section. Then I'll place sections for every chapter (except the territories chapter, because it's just maps) in the book: Clans, Places (modified name for Beyond the Territories), Ceremonies, Breaking the Warrior Code, Prophecies and Omens, Medicine, Cats Outside the Clans, Other Animals, Mythology, and the Glossary. Tell me what you think. I'll do it soon if everyone's okay with what I'm doing. 75.41.213.49 18:07, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

So you'll basically turn it into the Clan page? :P --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 18:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I really don't recommend redoing Dark River at all because when I figured out it was nominated for deletion, I worked real hard on it and fixed it up, but they still ended up deleting it with the idea that it was too early to really know too much about the book, and when the book came out we'd make an article about it. If you do want to remake the article, I suggest you talk it over with Metros, because he was the one who nominated it for deletion in the first place. ~Bella 18:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'm doing the Secrets of the Clans rewrite on Tuesday if no one has anything to say about rewriting it. So speak up! Shrewpelt 15:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I say go ahead, and it probably will be looking a lot like the Clan page, but I think it should be shorter, so it just shows a basic overveiw of the Clan page, not everything from the book has to be added.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 16:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

That's pretty much what I'm thinking. Shrewpelt 19:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Then I say, go for it, and be bold! :)  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 00:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Started! Shrewpelt 14:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Finished! I don't think it's great, but it's better then it was before. What do you think? If you think it's really bad, I'll change it back. Shrewpelt 15:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

It's much better then what it was, but I deleted the Glossary and Pictures section because they provided no real information. I would think that you might be able to quote the book, and list all the herbs used in the books. (I would be doing this if I had the book!) I just think it's a little too general, I think the rest of the section could be beefed up. Anyone who has the book could help out a lot with this!  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 18:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's a start. 75.37.214.171 22:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I good start, :) It looks a lot better then what it started out as. :)  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 12:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I own the book, and maybe I could help to beef it up a bit, but no promises. I will probably just be deleted by a certain SOMEONE whose name I WILL NOT SAY...sorry, just had to get that out. Anyway, sure, what have I got to lose?  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 11:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, someone really DID clean up the Secrets of the Clans page! It looks sooo much better. Can whoever did it please speak up so we can congratulate you personally?  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 11:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I did it. Shrewpelt 12:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, duh. I'm sorry, Shrewpelt, but I wasn't paying attention to the earlier discussion. However, you did do a very good job. Great work! :)  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 23:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Shrewpelt 16:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Manga Series???

I havent seen anything about Warriors Return, I think somebody should take it down unless yje person who put it up can cite their reference —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.229.154.85 (talk) 17:11, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Ummm...it is cited. Bella Swan 18:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Plus, The Lost Warrior has been out since...when? May? Anyway, of course the sequel's on the way. they wouldn't just leave it a cliff hanger.  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 23:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Um...

Uh, yeah, no one has been posting anything lately. Should we just take this as a blessing of zero vandals and move on?  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 23:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I can deal with that blessing; welcome it even. :) Bella Swan 21:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Heh, amen to that.  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 21:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I second that. :D TakaraLioness 21:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Lead

We need a better lead for this article. However, I haven't the faintest idea of what should be put in. That is why I'm bringing this up here - any suggestions? And, of course, feel free to try some things out yourself to try and improve it. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 19:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

What part of the current lead exactly needs improving? It looks pretty "encyclopedic" as it is, if you ask me. Spottedstar 20:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

It just looks cluttered to me... I think we could come up with something more than a very brief description of what the books are about, and then a list of the books and when they came out (That's the cluttered part). --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 20:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's true. Well, the only part we MUST keep in the lead is where it says, "Warriors is a series of fantasy novels written by Kate Cary and Cherith Baldry, with their editor Victoria Holmes, under the pen name Erin Hunter". All the other stuff, as you said, just gives descriptions of the series itself, which is what the article's for. So I'm not too sure what to replace it with, but my opinion on it is to keep that quoted part. Spottedstar 20:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I think one problem with the lead is that it just mentions the first name of the book in the particular series. We probably should remove all titles of actual books and just have the names of the series within the Warriors universe. That might help clear up some confusion.  Bella Swan_(Talk!) 22:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Someone just added all the names of the books in the series in the lead section and I don't think that that's good considering that...

a) We're being too specific according to WP:LEAD and b) You don't put the name of a book in quotation marks; you italicize it. I just thought that I would tell people here so that if someone would like to argue this point, they're welcome to, but for now, I'm reverting it. Bella Swan 01:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wait a Second...

The Clan of the spirits of warriors who died are called StarClan, not SkyClan. I know I'm right because I read the series myself. Also, you people might have to fix that page because when I made that small change, the old one disappeared! Sorry but I don't know how that happened though, but we might have to rewrite what we had. I really apologize for this if you're ticked, but I just wanted to change what is wrong. Alpha296 21:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. The ancestors are called StarClan, not SkyClan, but the link in the template isn't linking to StarClan, which you will notice if you click it... We don't have a list of StarClan cats article. Look at the Clan article to learn what SkyClan is. TakaraLioness 21:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, guys! I didn't know SkyClan was a article about characters from Firestar's Quest.

I thought you were refering to StarClan by the name of it. Forgive me, my mistake! Alpha296 21:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

It's alright. :) Anyone could make that mistake if they hadn't read FQ. TakaraLioness 21:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Warriors Book 3: Forest of Secrets

I just want to let y'all know that you made an error in the article, but don't worry about it because I just changed it. And if you don't mind, I think Warriors: Forest of Secrets could use a little more detail. I just finished reading it today, and the article could use more detail to make it more interesting. Will it be okay if I add a little more information to the plot summary? Alpha296 20:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead. You know the policy of Wikipedia: Be bold! Just try not to make anything biased or something like that.  Spottedstripe_(Talk2Me) 18:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The Lost Warrior Plot

Um. No offense to whoever wrote it but the plot summary for The Lost Warrior is kinda... bleh. I think I mentioned the article once before sometime. ~Rainpaw —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.239.216.52 (talk) 19:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

One question. Why was this put on this talk page instead of The Lost Warrior's talk page? And it's actually two questions... Well, you can just edit it if you don't feel that it's very good (I'm not saying I do, but you're fully capable of editing yourself...), so why didn't you? Yes, I know discussion is good, but if something is wrong/just plain bad (like this), then go ahead and be bold and change it. --~|ET|~(^{Talk|Contribs}) 20:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm. I guess I could try but I stink at writing. Give me a bit... ~Rainpaw

P.S. Oops. I had two windows open at once and accidently put the topic here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.85.163 (talk) 18:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

There. ~Rainpaw —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.85.163 (talk) 18:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)