Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Avatar: The Last Airbender task force/Archive 2

Bender Templates

So, I'm new to this project, so please politely remind me if I make the occasional stupid mistake. Anyway, the Earthbender, Airbender, Waterbender, and Firebender pages all have drastically different page setups. I was wondering: is there any agreed-upon template for these? If there isn't, I suggest that we come up with one pronto, because currently the '-bender' pages are quite confusing. Sandmouse 15:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

OKay, since no one seems talkative right now, I'll propose one myself:

• Origin & History (Badger-moles for earthbending, the moon for waterbending, etc.)
• Fighting Style (The Martial Art it is based on)
• Forms (i.e., for waterbending, there would be Northern, Southern, and Swamp styles)
• Tecniques & Weapons (for Airbending, there would be the glider and the air scooter; for firebending, lightning would be here, as well as Zuko's flame-swords; one for waterbending would be healing, etc.)
• Culture (Agni Kai for firebenders; that airball game Aang taught Sokka; the Earthbending game the kids were playing in Iroh's tale. Also would include Elemental Symbol)
• Notable ___benders (self-explanatory; replace ___ with Earth, Fire, Water, or Air)

Anyone have any other suggestions? Sandmouse 02:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

You guys might want to throw in some input on this...

A new proposal regarding some restrictions for fair use images has been put forth. Seeing as this proposal would, if passed, have a major effect on several Avatar-related articles, I figured some of you guys might want to give some input.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Members List

Getting kind of long, and most these people I never actually see edits from. Is there a way to prune it? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 20:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we could put a message on the user talk pages of less active members, asking if they still wish to participate in the project. I agree something should be done, though, I've not seen edits from many on the list in a while, and it would be nice to have an accurate number of how many people we really have working on Avatar articles.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Fandom

Should there be an article on Avatar fandom? Richardkselby 20:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

To put it bluntly, No. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 23:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you give a reason, as there is an article on Harry Potter fandom? Richardkselby 00:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Reviewing that article (Harry Potter fandom), the Harry Potter stuff is a whole different league. All an Avatar one would really be is a shipping guide and a list of fansites.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

well, we could ass fanfiction and fanart and fanvids to here. The only differense is that Harry potter has that Harry and the potters band on there. Richardkselby 04:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I still really don't think its notable. I mean, if Wikipedia had fandom articles for every show made, it would just get absurd. Harry Potter is one of the most popular book series of all time. Avatar is nowhere near that.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

But Avatar is GOOD Richardkselby 02:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Avatar fandom is different than Harry Potter fandom. I dont think there should be a page for Avatar's fandom. Bagpipeturtle 21:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia

Beginning cross-post.

See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 23:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.

Avatar Article

As many may know, somebody looking to find out about the show will want one article in front of them giving them a full description of why they should watch it. However, current fans who need more information on an epsiode or character will look for an individual article on the subject. Therefore, the main Avatar article ( Avatar: The Last Airbender ) should have a brief description of every character and epsiode, a full description of the shows creation, etc. (since it is a TV show article) and links to the seperate articles for every character, epsiode, etc. This may seem as if it has already been done but the main thing missing is the episodes in the main Avatar article. There is not even a list of the episodes, let alone a short description. In addition, Appa and Momo are rarely mentioned in the article even though they have a big role in the show. 71.247.34.36 15:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The episodes are fine with a separate article. It's pretty easy to click a link to find out. And Appa and Momo are mentioned frequently. Though they are not main characters. Appa even has his own article now. -Dylan0513 16:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Each individual episode shouldnt have a description in the main page, but I think the box with links to each one should be included, for easier navigation. Bagpipeturtle 21:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Sub-skills for Airbending?

Does airbending have any sub-skills? No airbending sub-skills were shown in the series (possibly because Aang is the only airbender in it), so we have to assume that airbending does not have a sub-skill, and thus all that "each bending style has a sub-skill unique to their element" statements in other bending articles have to be removed. Sure, we know that the fire nation has electrokinesis, waterbenders have vitakinesis, earthbending has ferrokinesis, but until it is proven that airbending has a sub-skill, to say that each element has a unique sub-skill is purely speculative and should not be in Wikipedia. What do you guys think? - Stretchyrubberbands^{( Tell me how to overcome my stupidity)} 17:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Season Finale Airs Today

Just a reminder to everyone. Too bad I'll be missing it because I have to stay at the office. Can someone please send me the episode? Or at least post it on Youtube? - Stretchyrubberbands^{( Tell me how to overcome my stupidity)} 16:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

YouTube doesn't allow that anymore. Just torrent it. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 23:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't allow it anymore? But I just watched it on Youtube. If you were talking about the 10-minute limit, then the obvious way to get around it is to post it in several parts.Stretchyrubberbands^{( Tell me how to overcome my stupidity)} 16:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Youtube suspends all the users that post Avatar episodes, in parts or as a whole. It's violating copyrights or something like that. Bagpipeturtle 21:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes

Hey i saw all those userboxes that were on the site and well I did not quite fit with any of them so I made my own.

This user believes that all the elements can work together to achieve a higher goal.

{{User:Phoenix741/Avatar}}

Not sure if anyone else would want to use it but if you do, be my guest. Tell me what you think.

I'm guessing that could be the template for the peace loving hippy non-bender :-P. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 03:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

meh mabey 8-) Phoenix741 03:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

NOTICE TO ALL EDITORS

From the comments that I have noticed that were being left recently by members of this project, I have noticed that some of the more prominent members of this project seem to be very harsh in their edit summaries when removing trivia or shipping, from aricles. Many of these editors are new and believe that the article needs this. PLease just post a nice aand friendly comment on their tlak page. If any non-avatar editor saw the attitude that was being sent to new people who believe they are trying to help, they would immediatley chastice us. Please read WP:GF, WP:CIV, and WP:EQ to see the standards for being nice on wikipedia. It's comments like the these that encourge people to either be vandals or not become frequent contributor. Cnriaczoy42 03:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I know I'm trying hard, but I have to at least say a little silly stuff to not go paranoid for everything. I usually state the reason it's being deleted somewhere in the description of the edit. -Dylan0513 03:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, the happy pills aren't working. Let's see, I've been warned of this I think 3 times now and yeah... it's probably not going to happen, especially when we have specific notes EVERYWHERE not to add shipping. As for the nonsence posts, they should know better. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 03:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand, it can be frustrating. But if we make trivia guidelines for our project, and post a link to them on either their talk page or the edit summary, you can stop these repeat offenders. And for shipping, redirect them to WP:8W and mention that it is not factual and verifiable. If you were just joining like them, I'm sure that you would not like to continue writing. Cnriaczoy42 21:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I try to be polite as I can, but really, when they just flat-out ignore comments/talk pages, I have little sympathy. Besides which, compared to these shippers when their toes get stepped on, we're downright polite. And honestly, if you think just showing a link to some polices/guidelines will stop many of these people, you’re kidding yourself.

Oh, and FYI: posting a section header in all caps really isn't needed.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article

I have nominated the Avatar: The Last Airbender article to be a featured article. You can follow the nomination conversation below or leave a comment.

jeremybelpois 21:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Elemental images' color

I've noticed the images for the elements have a whitish background, which is slightly different than the greyish side-boxes they are usually pictured in- for example, Iroh and Aang's pages. Making it a transparent background would screw up some of the userboxes, but I think that although making their backgrounds the grey that'd match would be good for three of the elements, and wouldn't interfere with the templates, it might make the symbol in the Airbender one hard to see.

Hmm... now that I think about it, can changes to the images be made at all? -- Sarranduin ^(Talk) 03:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure, images aren't really my thing. Those images weren't orginally made for those infoboxes, so its no surprise they aren't quite right for it.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Notes sections

There are a two things I want to discuss here so there are two seperate sections. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 01:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC) I also have two things to discuss. Cnriaczoy42 02:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The first time..

Are these notes really necessary? I mean, in the context that people are reading from episode 1 to the 40th (or atleast are looking at them in canonical order) is it really important that we list that "This is the first time X has done Y". One example is The Deserter. There is a note that says "This is the first time Aang has used firebending." Well if you've read them in order (because it's really weird any other way) you'd know that already. There are other instances that just bending that are involved too, such as "This is the first time Sokka has been stuck in a hole" (exageration). Discuss. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 01:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

for the recoed i deleted the one in the Deserter. But I would have to agree with this. Unless is is something really important to the plot it shouldn't be mentioned in the notes. Cnriaczoy42 02:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Chinese/Japanese (?) Writing

These are English articles. Why are we putting up writing in other languages and then making assumptions on connection. This is mainly targeted at the Minor characters page. None of the suggested namesakes actually have a citation, so who exactly proves them true. Many also make an assumption as to how the name relates to the character, most of which being speculation. They've been removed and added back by multiple users many times, lets come to an agreement here on these. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 01:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. I'm a part-chinese who knows a little about the language, and I still have absolutely no idea what the chinese characters in the avatar articles mean. If the characters are gibberish to a guy who knows some chinese, I can't imagine what it would look like to a guy who understands only english. - Stretchyrubberbands^{( Tell me how to overcome my stupidity)} 04:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd say it seems fair to limit it to the ones we have confirmation for: things taken from title cards in The Tales of Ba Sing Se, stuff seen on wanted posters, and so on, plus anything confirmed in interviews (like the Momo-peach thing).--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok so is it safe to assume that we should delete all uses of Chinese/Japanese/Whatever writing unless the writing was seen in the show? Because other than that it's pretty much just guessing and pulling at straws. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 05:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Bending template

Does any one mind if delete {{Infobox Avatar: The Last Airbender Bender}}? It is not in any of the appropriate aricles and serves no purpose right now. Cnriaczoy42 02:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

If you wish to use it, go ahead and put it on the pages it would go on. If not, pitch it. I think that it would make them look a little better, but some of the information on that box can't be answered, mostly by the Firebenders. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 02:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Collaboration of the half month

With the aproval of other members of this project , i would like to start a Collaboration of the Month. I would manage it and it will start on the 15th. THe page is here. Cnriaczoy42 02:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Leader

Is there a leader of this group? Richardkselby 03:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Na, not really needed. The only Wikiprojects that need any kind of hierarchy like that are the real massive ones, otherwise consensus is the way to go.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Why exactly are you asking? Something you want to address, ask, etc? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 07:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• According to the Project Guide, it is a good idea to have at least one member who tries to ensure that all of the assessed articles within the scope of a project that does assessment get assessed every three months. Granted, that person does not necessarily, or even implicitly, qualify as a "leader", but it is a kind of unofficial/official position which the project might consider appointing or electing someone to. Badbilltucker 13:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• All our pages get assessed pretty much daily. YBCZ has been doing a lot of rewrites (because he needs a life :-P) and most all of us guard the pages daily from vandalism. JBK has been going through most of them and just going delete happy recently. Don't worry, they're getting... pruned. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 03:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm a journalist and I'm trying to interview members of the Avatar fandom Richardkselby 23:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

the most prominent people are me H2P, Fyre2387, Dylan0513, YBCZ, and Sage_of_Ice. I wouldn't mind be interviewed, but i am definitely not the biggest name here The Placebo Effect 00:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

and parent5446(Sorry i forgot you), (by the way i am cnriaczoy42, i just love placebo) The Placebo Effect 00:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

If we had to pick a real leader currently, it would either be Fyre or H2P with it probably being H2P since he is on more. I don't edit enough of the articles and am too new to wikipedia and others don't edit enough or are still new. We don't have a leader not need one in my opinion though. -Dylan0513 02:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Nah, Fyre has done much more than me for these articles. Fyre is the quality, I've got that quantity (that is, until JBK decides to quit his day job to become a full time editor :-P). H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 03:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I pretty much do the same stuff you do. Yeah, Fyre does do more of the article work. I guess another example of how there isn't one leader. -Dylan0513 04:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

quis custodiet ipsos custodes? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 04:27, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

As said before, this Wikiproject is too small to need a leader. With the concensus of all of the members, it becomes more of a democracy (not that the project is like a country or something). However, unless some kind of organization is created, like a page, where things can be voted on, the project will not make much progress. Therefore, the choices should be between what I said beforem or assigning a group of people leadership under certain terms. In addition, remember this is a project and not much of a governed organization.Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 16:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we make amazing progress the way we do things now. Once we all/most of us agree on a way to do something, it goes into action. Why would we need to vote if that is what we're practically doing now and what we're doing now is working? -Dylan0513 18:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. If it ain't broke...--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

One thing some other groups have done regarding somewhere for things to be voted on is to create a special subpage of the project where the various members can vote on which articles they think are of top-importance to the project, in the hope of trying to bring the greatest amount of attention and input to them. I'm not sure whether you would want to try that here or not, but it is an option. Badbilltucker 18:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I really don't think we need to vote for anything. We usually come to a consensus. Creating a special page to discuss the way we're going to do things... isn't that practically this page? -Dylan0513 19:01, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I know. But for the "just-in-case" incidents, you can go to WP:AVATARVOTE to make a decision, etc. If not, leave the page, it will be deleted soon if it is not used. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 00:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I feel really bad. I just wanted to do a story and it is turning into a big deal. Richardkselby 03:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Most people here will answer your questions for your interview guy, but you're question you originally put actually made us question some things about the project. Don't take it as anything that's your fault. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 06:15, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm trieng to find people that have been really active in this group, as there is no leader. Richardkselby 14:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Well you've got a huge list to chose from just in this section alone. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 23:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Article for "Avatar"

Somebody has created an article for the Avatar itself, a sort of a character page for the ethereal spirit wich is continuously rencarnated. Not a problem in and of itself, they did it by removing sections of information from other pages and slicing them together (For example, Roku's section on the "Major Secondary Characters Page" is now just a redirect to that Avatar page) or just throwing down a few lines of text (Aang's section on that page is little more than a redirect to his main page). While I have no objection to having a page explicitly explaining what the Avatar is, it took me much longer than I'd like to admit to figure the whole thing out, it shouldn't be done in such a way. Other articles are now lacking, and the information there isn't composed in an easily understandable way. I'd have reverted everything back myself, but I'm not enough of an expert to know where all the information came from, and I also have no authority to delete a page just because I don't like it. Should it be taken apart, or just improved? JBK405 01:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It should be taken apart and then reshaped. An article like that should be about the rules and such for the Avatar, not about the other avatar's themselves. Roku should be back on the major characters page. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 06:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Roku and Kyoshi are back on their respective pages (Main and Minor characters), should we remove them (And Aang) from that Avatar page, or just change the info? JBK405 18:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Could we turn it into a character page for the Avatar spirit? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 22:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I suppose we could make it a character page, but should we? I mean it's not really a character in and of itself, it's always acting within or through somebody, has no personaility of its own, and doesn't even seem to have a concious mind. I think it should be more like the articles we currently have on the bending arts or the various nations, a description of a thing which impacts the series, but not a person. JBK405 23:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Do we have enough information to have it need it's own page? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 23:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

No, not really, all the information there is already on Aang's page or the series page; as I said, pretty much all the info was just sliced from other articles. JBK405 00:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

If there is no reason to have the page, well then we shouldn't have it. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 01:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Then we should go ahead and delete that article...I have absolutely no idea how you actually go about deleting an article here, all I ever do is talk about it. JBK405 00:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Avatar: The Last Airbender

I noticed that some of the biographical articles about people included in the category above have had the project banner removed. If this project believes that the project scope does not include these articles, then I would suggest that the articles be removed from the category above to avoid confusion. Generally, any article within the scope of a category bearing the same name as a project is counted as within the scope of the accompanying project as well. The specific article in question is Michael Dante DiMartino. Badbilltucker 17:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

WPAVATAR Template

On most WikiProject templates, there is the article's rating and its importance in the project. I was thinking, just for improvments. Like other WikiProject templates, the template could have the articles importance in the Project (according to a scale we could create) and it could have a mini-section at the bottom where users could post changes that have to be made (like a mini-ToDo list). The reason this should be is so we could make articles that needs improvement more important so members can find the best way to improve the articles (since that is the goal of the project. As for the mini-ToDo list, it is self-explanatory. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 02:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a very good idea, particularly if the number of articles expands in the future. The two ways this is generally approached are (1) the pages which are basically expansions of sections of the main article are the ones that count as "Top-importance", with the rest being determined by one or more of the more knowledgable members (WikiProject Germany being a good example), or (2) to have the members themselves arrive at the consensus of articles to the project. Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels is basically doing this with their top-importance articles, although, with the probably somewhat smaller scope of this project, the members could probably try to arrive at a basic consensus of most of the articles. Badbilltucker 22:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I built in the importance scale and To-Do list into the {{WPAVATAR}} template. To complete everything, the importance scale needs to be edited. I just put a quick thing so the whole add-on could be established. The scale, as you said, should have a consensus section. I have something to ask: How come the project worklist did not mention any importance ratings when I did a test? Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 23:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

That's a new one to me. You might want to leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team about that. I honestly don't know if it's supposed to be on the worklist or not. Most of the projects I've worked have too many articles to have a worklist of the kind you have here. Badbilltucker 19:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

One slight concern. Based on the existing scale, the importance of an article could (and probably should) change every time the article is significantly edited. This involves having the editor remember a lot of things simultaneously, which is something that can't always be predicted. Maybe changing the importance scale in such a way as it is more static (like, for instance, dealing exclusively with the relative importance of the article) might work better. Or maybe not. I dunno. Badbilltucker 21:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Going on a Wikibreak

Just a head's up to everybody, I'm not going to be around for the next week or so. I'm just getting too stressed. Since I don't really trust myself to stay away, I'll be using some enforcement, but you can still email me via the user email function if anything is truly important. For now, bye for now, and see you all in 2007!--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

GAH, FUCK IT, I'll join you. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 19:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Just A Reminder

I would just like to remind everyone to read over anything you added before saving the page to look for spelling and grammatical errors. It makes it a lot easier for everyone to not have to correct misspellings and bad grammar all the time. This is kind of hypocritical, since I make a lot of spelling errors, but I just thought I'd point it out. Bagpipeturtle 21:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The Lost Scrolls

Recently, there have been a string of edits to Fire and Water related articles (Firebender, Waterbender, Fire Nation, Water Tribes, etc.) using information coming from "The Lost Scrolls," what I've learned are books recently published detailing various things in the Avatar universe. Now, normally I'm glad for any new information, it usually clears up all those endless "I think" arguments that spring up on every Avatar related Talk page, but the information from The Lost Scrolls is...iffy. It's often in direct contradiction with previously stated information, it's occasionally inaccurate in and of itself, and some of it just doesn't make much sense. I'm wondering at the authenticity of these edits (if they truly did come from The Lost Scrolls) and if the Scrolls count as canon.

Unfortunately, I am quite ignorant of all facets of The Lost Scrolls. I had not even heard of them until I began deleting their edits from the Firebender page, and I do not know if the creators authorised these books, if the authors consult with the shows writers and producers before publishing, or even if these are licensed by Nickelodeon at all. If they're not, then they're on the same level as fan-run web-sites filled with Zuko and Katara love stories, and should not be included on these pages. If they are official, I'd like some kind of confirmation that these books really do contain the info that they are said to contain, since nobody but the original editor seems to have read them.

Are any other members of the project familiar with these books, and do they know of their official canon-level? JBK405 08:50, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Lost Scrolls? Where'd that come from?--SUIT 07:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

That's what I'm trying to find out. As far as I can tell, the first two books were published a few weeks ago in December, with two more planned for release this January. JBK405 13:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You've just gotten an FA, what are you going to do now?

First off, congrats again to everybody on getting our flagship article up to FA status. That was a big achievement, and I think it proves we're doing something right, despite what...well, let's not go there. Sure was nice knocking something off the to do list that's been there...well, as long as we've had a to do list. The question now is, what next?

I think it would really be a good idea to get a lot done during the season hiatus: we've got no new content to write, and vandalism and what-not is down. I think the next thing is refinements to our characters pages. The minor one is a mess. we've got a discussion going now on how to address that. Splitting this needs to be done, but it will be a lot of work: there's a lot of links that will need fixing, and we won't have redirects to lean on.

Also, there's the issue of List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters. Its there, and it doesn't look like its going anywhere, so we have to deal with it. I honestly think that, with the split of the minor characters page, it can be made to be useful. Opinions on that page's talk page would be helpful, but, dealing with that page, I'd ask everybody, well, just don't poke the bear, if you catch my meaning.

As for other goals for the hiatus, I think getting another page up to FA status would be great. I'd say Zuko is the closest to being there, but anybody else's comments on that would be great.

In closing (how the heck did this turn into a speech?) I'd just like to congratulate everybody again. What we have here is great, but we can get it even better, I know it.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

DRINKS ALL AROUND! I'M BUYING! Anyway, I think our next target should easily be Zuko. I've brought it up before that he's ready to get sent to FA approval and I think he is. There are some minor things needing to be done, like sourcing episodes and such, keeping his episode descriptions short, etc. It can be done.

As fyre stated we REALLY need everyone's opinion on the minor characters page. That needs to be addressed ASAP. I also agree that when the split happens, the Characters page will actually have a purpose, but currently someone seems to think they WP:OWN that page and we need to make sure it's a team effort to give it a use.

A lot of Season 1 episodes need rewritten too. I know Y was working on them and he got a fair few done thankfully. Any help is welcomed. Basically what we want to do is make sure that everything is ready before Season 3 starts, because, admit it, no work will be done before that seasons hits a break. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 20:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Zuko can definitely get there. And sorry, but, I ain't doing anything with the characters page. I nominated it for deletion, Manticore's being an... idiot (holding back) and I don't feel like dealing with him anymore. I think we need a lot of sourcing mainly for the character pages. If we do that, half of the FA work is done for them already. -Dylan0513 20:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The most important Thing to do currently is to work on getting Zuko refrecned using the cite episode template. A little cleaning up of the "fancruft" from the article, and I'm sure that it will be featured. Couldn't we get the charchter page deleted for being a content fork of the section in the main article. I am pretty sure that that is grounds for deletion of some type. The Placebo Effect 23:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Please nominate it again. The current one isn't closed yet, but it will be soon. I'm just not good at the wiki technical stuff. -Dylan0513 00:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Guys, really, chill out with that. Forget about it getting deleted: it isn't going to happen, and the more time we spend trying to kill it is less time we spend doing something worthwhile. Besides, if we're going to end up with four character lists, it really kind of makes sense. Just let it go.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Nah, this isn't that much about the articles, XD. -Dylan0513 02:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Tremendous membership

We've got a large number of members that really haven't been doing very much on Avatar-related pages. I suggest we inform the less active members of this, maybe require a certain level of activity in Avatar-related articles to be part of the Wikiproject. Y BCZ 21:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd really like to do something, as well. We really only have 4-5 truly active members. People just see a list and slap they're name on blindly, it seems.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:53, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I suggest constructing a standard, polite message, asking people to actively participate, and posting it on folks talk page's. There might even be a script/boilerplate method to do it already. FrozenPurpleCube 17:11, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Lists of participants / members is usually not very "active" for WikiProjects. Also, some people just watch discussion but feel their views are already represented so they don't really add much. I don't think there really should be any requirement for someone to claim participation. If you want a way to indicate active participants then maybe make a subpage that says "active members" and clear it out every month. People would have to re-add their name, and if they're not active they'll probably not add their name, etc. So there would be an over-all list, then an active list. -- Ned Scott 20:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

In other words, a dead man's switch. -- Ned Scott 20:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the Star Wars project has a regular monthly "roll-call" where members have to indicate their being a member at that time. Also, some other projects have created "inactive" members sections where people are moved if they haven't edited any related articles within a given time or some other reason. I can certainly see how having an "active" member section of some sort or other would be useful to help identify the people actively working on the articles, though. Badbilltucker 21:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Since we were able to make the main article into FA status, on Friday I am going to do an active role-call and delete all the names currently on the list. All you have to do is resign your name. This way we know who is still active and we can get a grasp on how many hands we have for upcoming projects. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 21:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion on "content guidelines"

I'm pretty content with how the content guidelines are currently constructed, but there's always room for improvement. As of right now, they're all pretty much based on estalished Wikipedia policies/guidelines/essays, but we can get more specific to the show if need be, or include more Wikipedia info. Any ideas how to make these guidelines better? Prototime 05:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Speculations

Where exactly are we drawing the line on this? I realize all shipping is off but other small things are everywhere. Here are examples:
YuYan Archers using Firebending
Koh and Lu Ten's face
Ty Lee looking like an airbender
H2P 18:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Do people look ethnically different between the nations? What makes Ty Lee look any more like an airbender than anyone else? They all look like Chinamen to me. -PolikLu0452

She has gray eyes, a common trait in Air Nation while Fire has gold. Her body features are also very soft and round while the Fire Nation characters usually have sharper features. Also there is her free personality. Her jumping skills also show her as very light on her feet. We can't prove any of it but that's the main argument. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 23:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

There is indeed numerous instances of this, unfortunately. These theories all violate official Wikipedia policy on having only verifiable information. One of the major ways this WikiProject can serve to better all articles related to the show is by removing these speculative statements and ensuring that they stay off the pages. Prototime 21:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Tense

Something which needs to be clarified is tense. Right now, it's very inconsistent. MOF 09:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I think all articles should be written in present tense. I learned that all book reports and such should be written in present tense, since the work of literature/art still exists today. So when describing any episode, it's always "Aang does" and not "Aang did." I would use past tense only when describing a flashback in an episode, because that is deliberately an event in the past (from the current frame of reference).

The "History" sections for all character pages could possibly be written in present tense, too. I've helped to write Toph's history in present tense, since her story is mostly told in the present-time reference of the series. I haven't read through Zuko's history yet; it makes sense to do his past tense, since a lot of it happened before the start of the series, but with more and more flashbacks being aired, you could possibly shift the frame of reference so that his history could be written in present tense (and not sound awkward). --Crisu 15:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Reading in present tense is weird and always will be weird. And how do we know the events of the show didn't happen hundreds of years ago?H2P 21:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that at least things which happened before the first episode of the show need to be in past tense. As far as events which happen during the episodes go, I'm not so sure. We rather need to do away with these blow-by-blow synopses anyway. If we had a brief overview of the episode, rather than every little event, it would seem only natural to write in past tense. As it is now, however, either way can really be argued for or against. MOF 21:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, in line with Wikipedia's guidelines regarding writing articles about fiction, I tend to write everything almost exclusively in present tense. The rewrite of Zuko's history that I'm working on is also in present tense because I'm putting it in chronological order and thus changing the frame of reference to support present tense. This is because I agree with the sentiment that fiction exists in perpetual present tense, in other words, by virtue of the fact that it never happened, it's better referred to as if it is always in the process of happening since whenever someone new experiences the fiction, it is. Raceberry 17:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree; perpetual present tense is defined in the Wikipedia guidelines as the correct tense to use for works of fiction (and it makes sense intuitively since it really hasn't ever truly happened), and I feel we should stick with Wikipedia guidelines on the issue. Prototime 18:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Are we in agreement, then, that perpetual present tense should be included as a content guideline? Prototime 18:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Featured Episode articles

Don't know how much you all have paid attention to WP:FAC but Pilot (House) is a featured article. I think that we would be able to do this to many episodes. The most important thing would be to listen to the episode commentary and take notes. Does anyone else think this is possible? The Placebo Effect 17:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it's do-able, but not all episodes have commentaries on the DVDs. I don't seem to have the time I usually do either (*insert frowny face*). H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 17:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

From what I've heard of the commentaries, they're more about Avatar in general and less about the specific episode so I don't think they'd help much. I think that the character pages would be much easier to get FA than episodes. How do you source an episode article, with many references to the same episode? -Dylan0513 02:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Found Unneeded Article

While browsing Avatar-related articles, I recently found the article entitled, "The Serpant's Pass," in that exact spelling. It is merely an episode article, written in pre-air sort of way. It is quite similar to the pilot aritcle with a brief episode summary and a list of notes. Not only do we have a Serpent's Pass article, but this stub-class aritcle does not contain any helpful information and should be deleted immediately. I'm not good with deletions so I request that someone delete this useless source of information as soon as possible. Thank you! GeneralIroh ^{(Leave a message after the beep if you gotta problem.)} 02:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, "The Serpant's Pass" should be deleted. "Serpent" was spelled wrong. -Dylan0513 02:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Reassessing Articles

Several articles are no long properly labeled. Azula and The Avatar Returns are no long start class and List of Avatar: The Last Airbender minor recurring characters and Spirit world (Avatar: The Last Airbender) arn't even assessed Tremewanbill 00:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Names

We have a serious problem here. The Avatar site is controdicting other sources like the magazine! Just go look at Hei-Bai's name! We need to figure out what we are to trust. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 07:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

After cruising through, I say we trust the site below the magazine and such, mainly because the site itself has many accidents and doesn't look like any effort was put into making everything work right. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 07:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Next FA Article

We now have the Avatar main article and the episode list featured. What's next? Previous discussions have said Zuko, but I'm having my doubts. Mainly because of the length, possibly too much detail, and it being like episode recaps. We might have to totally reconstruct it to get it featured. Right now, I think Katara's article may be easiest to get featured at the moment. Thoughts? -Dylan0513 12:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Our example to get characters should be Queen Amidala. She is a FA of a fictional character. Her page should be our building block. Zuko's would be easiest because, due to it's length, there is little to add information wise, we just have to source it out and listen to the reasons it failed GA. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 19:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that's a good example. But isn't the Zuko article too long and too much of the episodes? It might end up requiring more rewriting than some of the other characters. -Dylan0513 19:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Page setup for automatic archiving

Since I think its fair to say this page has needed archiving for a while, I've set it up for automatic archiving by Werdnabot. Basiclly, its an automatic bot that'll check the page once a day and move any topics with replies that have been inactive for more than 30 days to an archive page. The archive doesn't exist now, but don't bother making it: the bot should do that itself on the next run.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Image resolution

I'd appreciate it if you could go through the fair use images within the scope of this project and make sure all the images are of sufficiently low resolution. Image:Avatar world map.jpg, which was being used in the featured article Avatar: The Last Airbender, was bigger than my wallpaper, which should not be happening. If there are any high resolution images (usually defined as either aspect being 500 or larger), please tag them with {{fair use reduce}}. ShadowHalo 00:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

We've got a lot of pictures :-(. I uploaded the world map. It was big because, well, the bigger the better in my opinion, it makes size adjustment easier. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 06:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

What's Next?

Well, we've done everything we can with the main article. It's time to move on and get another one featured and on the main page. The Zuko article has said to be the most FA ready. Once we've in agreement with that, we've got to get moving sourcing it! We've probably got until September and then we have to deal with next episode articles and whatnot. So first things first, is everyone in agreement that we should try and get the Zuko article featured next? -Dylan0513 00:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Si, though feel free to read the problems I had trying to get it a Good nomination. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 00:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so other things needed are: A longer lead, sourcing, no original research,no trivia, and out-of-universe information. Still not that much and things we can get to work on once we're in agreement. -Dylan0513 00:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

What's next for me is a Wikibreak. I spend too much time here without getting enough done, and I need to see if I can keep myself away for a while, and be more productive in the real world, and here when I get back. So now that Avatar's off the Main Page, I'm giving Wikipedia up for Lent. Just a heads up; see you all after Easter! --Herald Alberich 15:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Content Stealing

A site called Avapedia found here [1] is stealing Wikipedia's Avatar content. I'm not sure if this is against the rules or is illegal. -Dylan0513 23:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

as long as they cite us, which they do , then its ok. The Placebo Effect 16:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Humm, its more or less done right, but there are some wrong things I can see...I've listed it at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/Abc#Avapedia, let it get the attention of some folks more familiar with this sort of thing.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Ongoing AfD discussion

Just wanted to give a heads up: there's an ongoing AfD discussion regarding Avatar-related articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Painted Lady.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Deleted as they should have been. But you guys are representing the titles wrong. They are the season 3 episode titles, they just can't be used on Wiki without a source. Pooldude's been proven right countless times with these as his source is very reliable. -Dylan0513 00:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I was just about to move them into our project space so they would already be made. It didn't occur to me until dinner. The Placebo Effect 00:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Avatarspirit.net pictures

Can someone replace all the pictures with that watermark? I'm sure no one likes it and it takes away from the picture. The Placebo Effect 20:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol, easier said than done. I could do a few with no logos but it takes a while. -Dylan0513 21:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's not exactly a simple matter, and frankly, I can think of more worthwhile ways to spend time and effort. Good as a long-term goal, but I wouldn't worry about it too much.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Definitely. Oh, BTW, I just downloaded season 1 on itunes so I can now replace any picture if it's that important. The chatacter pictures may be worth changing though. -Dylan0513 22:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

That has been bugging me too. I'm glad someone brought this up. I don't think it looks good for a FA to have a bunch of rolling advertisements. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{talk • contribs}} 22:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I contacted the Administrator of AvatarSpirit.net, and one of the conditions that they requested of us is that if we use their pictures, we need to leave their logo at the bottom of the photo, as well as credit them in the Image Tag. If I need to, I can post the email in the WikiProject front page. Aang-kai 18:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure what they meant was getting other shots that don't have the watermark.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:55, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I see. Well, then I guess someone should start taking their own screenshots Aang-kai 19:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? He just said that was about the shots that don't have watermarks meaning the ones we have now are fine. -Dylan0513 19:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, all the one's we have now are fine. Replacing them with unmarked versions (either self-taken or from some site that doesn't mark the shots) is desirable, but it'd be a lot of work for little gain, so I'd call it a very low priority.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

(Unindent)Not very low, if I found an easier way to do it than itunes, I would. -Dylan0513 19:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

If it's needed, I could take screencaps myself, but only of Season 1 at this point. Firebender.com had screencaps, but it's closed now. If anyone remembers where it sent all it's caps to (I think it was air-something.com), we could look there, as the ones on Firebender didn't have logos. Millancad 14:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes. They went to airbender.net and it says you can use them freely on there. They're not the best quality but they're better than the ASN ones. Let's get to replacing! lol. -Dylan0513 15:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The ones at ABN have a screen around them. I could cut this in photoshop or something, or should we jsut stick with the ASN ones? Millancad 23:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

{{Infobox Avatar: The Last Airbender episode}}

Can I replace the second box in the {{Infobox Avatar: The Last Airbender episode}} by {{Avatar episode}}?"--JSH-alive ^{talk to me}_{see my works}^{mail to me} 11:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I like it the way it is. We have the episode template at the bottom of all the episode pages anyway. -Dylan0513 12:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Role-Call

Last Role-Call January 25, 2007. Should be updated Xavcam 07:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Attention!

Please see Talk:Avatar: The Last Airbender media information#Revamp this article..--JSH-alive ^{talk to me}_{see my works}^{mail to me} 09:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion debate

Consensus is clear already but here you go Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avatar: The Last Airbender (disambiguation). The Placebo Effect 12:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

pic question

Image:Avatar - The Last Airbender 112 The Storm - Nomads.jpg doesn't one of the monks look like Long fea In 2nd season in Ba see ca --Coallen 15:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Heads up for everybody

OK, I'm not sure if this guy is a vandal or just an idiot, but Jimblack (talk · contribs) has been making all kinds of hell lately. Specifically, he's been making articles about minor things that only need to be redirects, trying to merge articles for those special event episodes (Secret of the Fire Nation, Fury of Aang, etc), changing titles given for some episodes (just in the text, he hasn't found the move function, thank God), changing all kinds of images to worse ones, and throwing some kind of code into Ba Sing Se (looks like a bad attempt to use an infobox that doesn't exist.) Not trying to be mean or anything, but you may want to watch for this guy. I've been trying to ask him to stop, but he hasn't responded at all, at least not yet.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I was just about to mention this. I don't have all the episodes on my watchlist, but he'd edited pretty much everyone that I do. Thanks for reverting all that. ɱўɭĩє^{What did I do}_wrong 19:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Further notice: I'm about 99.9999% sure the currently active Soniclord (talk · contribs) is Jimblack, and he's up to many of the same tricks. Keep an eye out.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Another AfD

One more Avatar-related page up for AfD: War (Avatar: The Last Airbender).--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Episode coverage

The WikiProject Television episode coverage taskforce have recently been working on a review process for episode articles. There are a rash of articles about individual episodes which fail notability, and are unlikely to ever reach such requirements. Many contributors are unaware of the specific guidelines to assess notability in episode pages: Wikipedia:Television episodes. We have expanded these guidelines to make them more helpful and explanatory, and we invite you to read the guidelines, and make any comments on its talk page. After much discussion, we have created a proposed review process for dealing with problem articles. See: Wikipedia:Television article review process. We invite discussion of this process on its talk page. General comments about this whole process are welcome at the episode coverage taskforce talkpage. Thanks! Gwinva 10:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Episode merge proposal

A discussion of a proposal to merge all episodes into their respective Books is taking place here. Thanks, Will ^(talk) 23:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Avatar: The Last Airbender Season Three

Just saw This on AvatarSpirit.net

link to page [2]

I am posting for the first time here so please excuse me if I make a mistake.

Hope it helps you.

--tejas 12:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

A new rollcall?

A lot of people here seem inactive... 00:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Not a whole lot going on between episodes. You can only do so much editing to articles. Eban 19:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Bender or Bending?

Somebody brought this up on an article talk page a little while ago, but it didn't go anywhere and I think its worth looking at. Curently, the bending articles are all called -bender. However, they're really about the art, not the people. What's everybody think about moving them to new titles? Waterbending, Firebending, and so on.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC) I agree with "-ing" instead of "-er" The Placebo Effect 01:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Let's go with bending. Keyblade Mage 02:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Agreed. --Herald Alberich 02:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright, the system won't let me make the moves over the redirects, so we'll have to use WP:RM. I've got it all set up, discussion is here: Talk:Firebender#Requested move.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Season three information

There's only a week until Avatar Season three comes out (which is awesome), but there's so much stuff going around now. Everyone's editing all the pages, and it's getting pretty bad. We can't be on all the pages at the same time, and people are editing stuff left right and center. But anyway, people keep adding and deleting information found in the trailer, and since everyone's seems so sure that what they're writing in is correct, I just wanted to double check with people who know the rules better than I do. We're not supposed to put season three trailer in the articles yet, right? I think that's right, but I wanted to be sure. Also, to those people who keep working hard to keep the pages in their rightful state, I wanted to congratulate them, and to say keep up the good work! Keyblade Mage 21:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Well...I've seen stuff removed under that justification, but I think we need to take a bit of care with it. If something is properly sourced, there's really no reason not to add it based on airing schedules.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Navigation Boxes on user pages

Are we allowed to put the navigation boxes on our user pages, like along with those templates that say stuff like "This user is an Earthbender", and stuff like that? Keyblade Mage 20:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Sure, no reason why not. Heck, I've got a page full of them in my userspace.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Here we go....

Well, S3 doesn't even start for a few hours yet, and we've already got issues. An annoying annon on the main article (Avatar: The Last Airbender keeps changing and adding useless content to the bios section. Since its not really out-and-out vandalism, I'm going to stay on the safe side of WP:3RR (really don't need a trigger happy admin blocking me for the next 24 hours) and just ask that somebody else revert that stuff.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

You know what, maybe we should just leave them to their own stuff, and come back in and pick up the peices after the airing is on. It'll be WAY too much work to be doing it right now, and we don't even know what's gonna be what. Let's just run through the articles after the showing, and make them alright, 'cuase all heck is brakin' loose. Keyblade Mage 23:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Oh god, this is worse than I expected. The editing's really getting out of hand. Still, the episoide WAS SO COOL! I mean, the fire went "FFRRAAH!!!", and the Serpent went like, "BVAGHA!!", and the water......the water was.....Ah, that was the best! Keyblade Mage 02:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Avatar Kyoshi Article

Back in August, a user created an article for Avatar Kyoshi. She already has a section within the List of Avatar: The Last Airbender minor recurring characters page, and I believe she has not had enough screen time or impact on the show to warrant her own page. As such, this article is kinda pointless. We should either delete it or, if it is better than her section on the recurring characters page, merge it into the larger article. JBK405 20:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Chibi Shorts?

Do you think we should add a page for the shorts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.199.68.242 (talk) 17:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Just an idea.....

Do you think maybe we could have an area where we can see any and all editions made to any Avatar: The Last Airbender pages? Sort of like a big watch page, just to make sure no one does any vandalizing or anything, or to make sure everything's okay. I'm not sure how to do it, but I thought it'd be realy useful, because it's so hard to catch these things somtimes. Keyblade Mage 00:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Just add all the articles in WP:Avatar to your watchlist. That's what I did. Bagpipeturtle 02:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Right, I'm fairly sure there's no way to create a "master watchlist" of Avatar articles that anyone can look at (someone correct me if I'm wrong). --Herald Alberich 03:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Allright, they're all on my watch list, so that's that, then. Just, are there any WP:Avatar pages that aren't on the templates? Because I just used those, and I'm not sure if there are any more. Keyblade Mage 12:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Or you could add the related changes to Template:Avatar and Template:Avatar episode to your favorites tab on your toolbar for any internet thing. Using this feature you or anyone else can access, at any time, MOST of the Avatar articles. The other articles, such as Pai Sho, Avatar State, Ba Sing Se, List of minor Earth Kingdom locations, Timeline of Events in Avatar: The Last Airbender, List of Avatar: The Last Airbender minor recurring characters, List of Avatar: The Last Airbender minor book 1 characters, List of Avatar: The Last Airbender minor book 2 characters and Pilot (Avatar: The Last Airbender) (I think takes care of it) can be added to the watchlist along with any other very important articles that need immediate assistance always such as Avatar: The Last Airbender, List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes, Zuko and Aang.

Although technically this isn't a master watchlist, this really helps out! :) I reccommend you try it. Remember -related changes to Avatar templates on favorites. Hope that helps! GeneralIroh ^{(Leave a message after the beep if you gotta problem.)} 03:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow.....my head's spinning after that one...Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyblade Mage (talk • contribs) 22:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

A new project page?

Of course the necessary subpages would have to be added, but that's simple.

I'm sorry, this was linked to my sandbox. It's fixed now. Beast of traal T C _ 23:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)Beast of traal

If no one has any objections, I'll go ahead and start updating. Feel free to make suggestions! Beast of traal T C 23:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)Beast of traal

Eh...what's the point? I mean, the page works fine as it is, I don't really see the value in spreading stuff over that many subpages.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Right now the main page is extremely cluttered. The value of subpages is in their ability to clean up a main page without taking any information away.

Also, the current page doesn't look very official. Avatar is a very popular show, however there are vanishingly few members of the project. As both a fan and a newly joined member, I can say that the project page disappointing compared with the hard work displayed in the articles.

If you have no objections to the page, but just think it is unnecessary (I do agree with you that the functionality of the old page is fine) then does it make a difference to you which one is used? Beast of traal T C 23:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)Beast of traal

If there are no more objections, I'll change the page at around 10:00 EST ~B —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beast of traal (talk • contribs) 00:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd really rather you didn't. The project page is just a resource, it doesn't need to be pretty. Spreading the contents over multiple pages like that just makes it harder to find what you need.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll have to agree with Fyre on this one......just one project page would really be best. We've got one project group here, and we really just need to keep it all onto only one single page to make it easier for us all. Keyblade Mage 23:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Sure Beast of traal T C 02:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)Beast of traal

"Sure" to what, Beast? Are you for it, or agianst it? Keyblade Mage 19:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Deletion disscusion

see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Runaway (Avatar: The Last Airbender) The Placebo Effect 15:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender minor book 1 characters The Placebo Effect 00:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Another one : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters (2nd nomination) The Placebo Effect 16:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Minor character pages deleted?

Okay, I've been gone for awhile, but what happened to the minor secondary character pages? Only the list of recurring characters is still up. Book 1, 2, and 3 characters are gone.Y BCZ 19:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

See the deletion discussions 2 pages up The Placebo Effect 19:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant. And nobody bothered to salvage any important information there might've been, I see.Y BCZ 19:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I can get it, what information are you talking about? The Placebo Effect 20:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm more worried about the mess this made. Not really even broken links, they're a pain but easy enough to fix. Thing is, now every instance of linking to those things need context added, context they relied on the links for previously. But hey, who cares if the articles are now inferior, compiling with policy is more important than writing good articles, right?--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Lots of anti-WP:EPISODE work going on in this project.

There are a lot of individual episode articles consisting of only a verbose plot summary (though well formatted I'll admit). These are just the sort of articles discourage in the content guidelines at WP:EPISODE. I don't really expect them to all vanish, or even get redirected to the list of episodes, but I thought it should be mentioned. Treygdor 20:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Something will happen. Not in the immediate sense. but eventually. Someone will come along and play the "real world information" card and then it will blow up into a huge argument. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{talk • contribs}} 21:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Book 3 episodes

If you can add the new episodes on list of episodes here are some new episodes:

• Book 3 Episode 8: The puppetmaster
• Book 3 Episode 9: Nightmares and Daydreams
• Book 3 Episode 10: Day of Black Sun: Part 1: the Invasion
• Book 3 Episode 11: Day of Black Sun: Part 2: the Eclipse
• Book 3 Episode 12: The Western air temple.

23water23 19:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)23water2323water23 19:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

the real book

i need to know the answer to somthing very interesting and i was wondering if any of you could clear this up. My older brother has actually read the books this seeires originates from. he has forgoton the name an as of now I have found no indication of the name of the series of the books as it differes from the show's title, "Avatar: the last airbender." No spacifics are neccesary except the name. My older brother tells me that these books are incredible and watches the show are for this reason. i wish to read these books and if found these books are sure to hold the ending to the show and any other speculation. time is crutial factor as for most situations are with the new season around many people want to know what is going to happen next. The books (as my brother remembers) will go in the order of: 1. water 2. earth 3. fire. it would realy make me happy to know if the name can be found. im sure that this will spark many interests. pleas reply soon. THESE BOOKS ARE NOT MADE BY "Avatar: the last airbender" CREATORS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dengeki1 (talk • contribs) 01:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The shows weren't based on books, at least not that I know of. The Placebo Effect 01:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

They're not. I think this guy's liying, or else someone lied to him. Or, some fan made a fic and bound it as a book themself, to look ligit. Anyway, it's not based on any real literature of any kind. I think. Keyblade Mage 19:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Key words "I think" not trying to be mean or any thing i just want to know indefinatly. Dengeki1

Your older brother just needs an excuse to watch the show... just like I do.

Fair Enough :) Dengeki1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.40.89 (talk) 01:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Infobox - broadcast dates

What is "Original broadcast date" meant to mean? The first time it was broadcast, or the first time it was broadcast in the US? America is not the world, people. I suggest using "Original broadcast date" to represent the first time it was broadcast anywhere, and then adding a separate "US broadcast date" if people think it's notable. Ilkali 08:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

changed original to "Original US" and UK to "Original UK" The Placebo Effect 08:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Help! Re: Day of Black Sun

We've got a bit of a problem going on with some of the currently active Avatar pages [especially those of Aang and Zuko, amongst others. Episodes 310 and 311 have leaked online, and so everyone is editing pages to add this new information. These episode have not aired yet and so the information should not be up. Is there any way to lock pages, or semi-protect them, or something, in order to stop this? It's getting out of hand very quickly. 春Harukaze風 16:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection The Placebo Effect 16:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I added three pages to the list: Aang, Zuko and List of Avatar: The Last Airbender major secondary characters, all of which had the most Day of Black Sun related editing. 春Harukaze風 17:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy day. All three pages are semi-protected for eighteen days. This means that they will be automagically unprotected on the currently-scheduled airing date for the Day of Black Sun. We'll still need to worry about some "good faith vandals" who add illegal information without knowing it's illegal, but at least they have to have accounts, so that we can discuss the issue with them. When I get a second, I'll post something real quick on the talk pages regarding this. 春Harukaze風 19:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

in-universe violations and a possible AvatarWiki?

This has been kicking around in my head for some time, and I might look into the process during the long weekend. As it stands, the vast majority of Avatar-related articles are tagged for in-universe violations. This is especially problematic, as I've seen in the past couple days, because there are deletionists out there who just love to AfD as many in-universe articles as they can. And as it stands, we have no defense, because they're largely right. The most of our articles need to be rewritten almost from scratch to meet Wikipedia standards.

Similarly, where we don't have ginormous in-universe violations, we have mounds of WP:EPISODE violations.

The big problem though is that there's a lot of really good information currently under the domain of WikiProject Avatar, and it would be a shame to lose all of it. It can't stay, that much is pretty much fact. I started seeing the same thing on some Zelda related pages, and followed the deletionists' trails to a few other fandoms. I don't want to see them come here next, not before we've even had a chance to fix things.

My first proposal: let's create an AvatarWiki, where we can preserve all of the information we have. Want to have individual articles for some popular characters who get shoved into secondary character status? No problem! Mai, Ty Lee, Roku, Zhao, all of them could have their own article, because in the scope of an AvatarWiki, they're all notable! Every episode can have as detailed a synopsis as we like, without worrying about WP:EPISODE issues. Trivia? No problem. All the various information about this wonderful, incredibly detailed series, we can have it all.

And I wouldn't have to be gestapo about Day of Black Sun information either. I could happily just flag the whole damn thing as SPOILERS and read at your own risk or somesuch, and not have to delete anything.

Basically, in my own opinion, it would solve almost all of our problems.

Or am I completely missing something, and such a Wiki already exists? If not, and if there is any consensus, I will start the process on Wikia in the next few days. 春・Harukaze・風 15:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

So last night I found an Avatar wiki, which makes me happy. Less work for me. That site needs a lot of help, though, so we should start moving off articles that we don't need on Wikipedia, before our hand is forced. If no one's watching this page and no one's responding, I'll just start doing it myself, but I'd rather not see good info be destroyed. 春・Harukaze・風 16:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

If I transfer over the episodes, will you mind if they are redirected at this point? TTN (talk) 19:12, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Wait, is the point of the Avatar wiki to preserve info we have before the admins come and delete it all? This is not such an easy task. In addition, what would we do after that? Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 22:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

• An Admin says Hi* First of all, instead of transfering the episodes to another wiki, what should be done instead, is sources for episodes need to be found. A good place to get production notes would be the commentary on the DVDs. The Placebo Effect (talk) 22:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Roll-Call

The member list is getting quite large. Anyone else think an active roll-call is a good idea? Bagpipeturtle (talk) 02:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I also think we should make an easy way to do this. Maybe put a button that clears the user list or something like that. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 17:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, you can just go in and clear all the names...? It's not that hard to just highlight and press the backspace button. Bagpipeturtle (talk) 22:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

All right, I roll-called the page. I don't think that's quite the correct term, but y'all get it. Bagpipeturtle (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Image Deletions

We are losing countless images, especially screenshots taken, due to the lacks of free-use rationals. We need people to check every image, and insure that they have the free-use rational needed so as to not be deleted. Aang-kai (talk) 14:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Episode Articles

I'm in the process of tagging all episode articles for failing WP:EPISODE if no improvements are made I plan on taking them to AFD. Ridernyc 11:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe that there are two things we can do to prevent the INFORMATION in the articles from being deleted.

1. Move the director and writer to the List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes and change that list to use {{Episode list}}
2. Merge all the "chapter" articles into books. It is easier to find sources for the season or a review of one of the DVD's then it is too find sources for every episode.

These are just my thought, anyone else have ideas? The Placebo Effect 19:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

If you go for season articles, use Smallville (season 1) as a base. TTN 20:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

If it can be done that would be great, but I doubt the type of real world information in the small article can be found for Avatar seasons.Ridernyc (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

This was a reply Ao a comment left on my talk page, putting it here to keep the discussion centralized. :I appreciate that the project is willing to work to fix the situation. Just keep in mind that everything that would need to be added to the episode articles will also need to be added to the season articles. If they are just long plot summaries for one season they will they still fall short of policy. I think the best solution is to add small plot summaries to each episode on the episode list page. I'm watching this page so we can keep everything here. I will gladly help and respond to any questions. As long the conversation is kept civil and on track and avoids WP:ATA type comments, I will be more then willing to help in the process. Ridernyc (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but as I said, I have seen sources for groups of episodes and Seasons, but not for individual episodes. The Placebo Effect (talk) 23:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

If it works go for it. An idea might be to redirect all the episode pages now, and start working on alternatives in the project space. First we would avoid deletion and losing any information, two it would give editors who are focused on the project time to work on them uninterrupted without having to deal with disruptive edits, and give everyone a chance to see various ideas. Ridernyc (talk) 23:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, i can see deleted articles, but the project space idea is a good one. The Placebo Effect (talk) 23:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Disscusion can be found at here, the sand box for this article is [[here --The Placebo Effect (talk) 19:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Humm...I don't suppose its at all pertinent that this very idea got soundly rejected before? I doubt it is, but it might be nice to at least pretend we care the slightest bit about consensus. Make it look like those fancy talk pages have a reason for being there.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

We understand that was decided earlier, but with the threat of deletion upon us, we have to take measures to ensure that the information in the articles does not get deleted. The Placebo Effect (talk) 20:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

So in other words, all somebody needs is a maintenance tag to override consensus? Because really, if you'll pardon my French, that's pretty damn screwed up.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you can fix all the episode articles to meet the standards, then no it won't. But the fact is, if this goes to an Afd I can almost beat you that the final result would NOT be keep. By merging them into season episodes they stand a MUCH greater chance of surviving, especially if we model it after the Smallville Season 1 episode. The Placebo Effect (talk) 20:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Am I the only one that see something wrong with all this? Somebody mentions deletion and we toss everything else out the window? The whole thing is just absurd. We're talking about making new, inferior articles...geeze, have things really got so bad that that's the only recourse?--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

If I wasn't an avatar fan and I saw these pages on AFD, then yes, I would vote delete. And you need to read the past disscusion where you claim consensus. Many of the people who commented during that disscusion said that if things would come to it, they would approve merging the articles. The Placebo Effect (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Ugh. I guess, yeah, if its really the only recourse left...well, I don't like it, don't like it at all, but I guess something is better than nothing.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The point many people made in the previous discussion (myself included) was that, if the choice was between deleting the articles and merging, they would chose to merge; that is not the same as believing that merging is the appropriate action at this point in time.

Now, as I said in the previous discussion, I am not saying that every single episode article is a proper encyclopedic entry. In fact, I stress that there's no way in hell many of these episodes qualify as encyclopedic; many are, quite literally, solely plot summaries (The Boy in the Iceberg, for example), without a single bit of info on their production, broadcast or reception. However, and this is the important part, some episodes are encyclopedic, if not quite Featured Article quality. Manye articles go into detail on the inspirations for the episodes, their reception, their broadcast, etc (The Serpent's Pass for example). Not superb articles, not perfect examples of what a TV show episodes article should be, but also not fan-cruft, unsourced, irrelevent hog-wash. If individual articles deserve to be deleted, then so be it, but don't pre-emptively merge because of a fear that they might be deleted, and don't merge all articles because some are below snuff. JBK405 (talk) 04:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

First of all, he said if all the episodes are not brought up to standards, he would take it to AfD. The fact is, we can't get as good information as the Simpsons episode because people don't right whole books about what happens in eah episode. And if you look at the Smallville season article, at least one episode has it's own article. The point is, most of the episodes do nothing but summarize what happened and in a very Play-by-Play way, which violates policies. The fact is having individual episodes may be good for the Fan community, but we must think of what is best for the whole of Wikipedia. Wikipedia can do with an article for each episode, and I have personally believed that this was the right approach and was waiting for something like this to happen in order to merge the articles together. Besides play-by-play for the fan community, can you tell me what other purpose these episodes serve that cannot be replicated by merging them into a season article? -- The Placebo Effect (talk) 05:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

There may be some very descriptive and inspirational episode article, but the fact is that most are just plot summaries. If we have a legitimate threat of deletion on our hands and only a few articles are up to par, merge is the only way to go. It is not like we are being held back by one or two episodes. It is almost all of them (with a few exceptions). As far as an argument of the quality goes it is no doubt that most article are failing. The only debate here is whether we should merge about 40 failing articles into one big one, or let everything be deleted. I don't think that giving up and letting deletion take its course is an option. The only thing that would fade away this recourse was if EVERY episode article was improved significantly within a very short amount of time. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 00:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Woah, woah, woah, we'd be losen' some serioius info by doin' that! Also, if you wnat em' improved, I fix em' up, if we get to keep the articles. Keyblade Mage (talk) 22:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

OK then. It's settled. Keyblade Mage is going to find enough people to add production information and other section, in addition to cleanup, for forty different articles that do not usually get enough attention to have reliable sources. (Sarcasm) If you can do that, and fix up forty articles in a week or two, then go ahead, but the other editors here are already working on the merging plan which will replace the episode articles when they get deleted. (It should be noted that this is not cleanup. The articles need to be both cleaned, referenced, and seriously expanded, within a matter of weeks.) Good Luck! Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 01:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I would like to add that the only "serious info" that would be lost is information that is not appropriate for wikipedia. Extensive plot summaries are clearly not allowed, see WP:Plot. These plot summaries are by no means brief and they are not there to support any information on the real world impact and context of the episodes. Even if real world information were to be added, the plot sections would still need trimming. Ridernyc (talk) 03:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned, we should continue working on the merging project as well as the season 2 page. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 22:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

If we are going to merge these, we need to (again) focus on more than just the plot summaries in the new "season" pages (Personal POV Note: The current sandbox for the Season One page looks to be too long. All honesty, I would not want to read that if I was trying to get a summary of the Book One plot. Sure, it's probably no longer than even just two of the current episode summaries, and I have no constructive advice as to how to improve it, but it is not visually appealing or inviting).

Issues to address include, for example, translations of Chinese text (More of an issue in season two and three, which have a lot more text than one, but I've always felt that taking a "cross that bridge when we come to it" mentality usually results in "Where the @#$% did this bridge come from?"). Do we have one section at the bottom of the page with all the translations from the entire season in a single lump? Even with accompanying explanation ("This text comes from this episode where they were looking at this thing") that would be detached from the source episode and possibly confusing. Do we put the translations in those little plot summary boxes for their respective episodes? How about other non-plot information? Episode-specific, or even scene/frame specific, inspirations and intentions that get revealed in the audio commentaries, guest-star info, etc. Prose or list format?

We've pointed to the page for Season One of Smallville as a good guide, and it isn't horrible, but reading the "Production" section I see a lot of focus on season-wide issues; themes of the show, techniques developed for use throughout the run of the series, etc. There's little specific detail on individual episodes, except as it relates to those larger points. The articles is about the season as a whole, rather than any one episode, so it makes perfect sense that it focus on the large picture, but this ends up with us losing all that episode-specific detail that we currently have on episode pages (And, so we're clear, I'm not referring to the plot summaries; regardless of our differing opinions on merging, I think we're all clear that even I don't want to keep these huge blocks of text).

Do we have a plan on how to deal with this? Because, even if it's only text from a single page out of all the episodes, I don't want to lose important, credible info because we can't find a place to stick it into a season page. JBK405 (talk) 06:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, you are probably right. But what do you suggest we do with the articles if not merge them. Just let them get deleted? (Actually, that is not a bad idea because they are just plot summaries and we still have List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes.) Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 16:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

What we should do? That's simple: Improve the episode articles with the addition of secondary sources and an increased real-world perspective. What we can do? That's a different question entirely.

If these articles are going to be deleted and we do have to merge them then we need to do it properly; just shrinking all the plot summaries to one single page doesn't make them less plot-ish. We need to decide, before the merge, how to present valid info relating to the episodes, and how to keep this page from just becoming a large plot summary all over again. JBK405 (talk) 19:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Well. Here is how I see it. Right now, there is no information that is being lost as it is all plot summary, which can be easily obtained just by watching the show. In addition, there are not that many sources for the show anyway. I think that we should let the articles get deleted (as, yet again, we still have List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes) and just search for some sources. No info will be lost. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 21:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

And you apparently completely missed my point, as I specifically said I was not referring to the plot summaries. What I am referring to is casting information (Who guest-starred as what in which episode), real-world influences on the episodes (Did you know that the final duel in "The Chase" was actually an homage to/inspired by The Good, the Bad and the Ugly?), explanation of on-screen info (Translations of Chinese text, meaning of martial-arts terminology adapted for bending, etc.), and the other bits of info that Wikipedia requires in an article about a work of fiction. JBK405 (talk) 04:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Images with incorrect licenses

I discovered that the images Image:Airbend.jpg, Image:Earthbend.jpg, Image:Firebend.jpg, and Image:Waterbend.jpg were all marked with {{pd-self}}, when they were actually Non-free images. I have correctly marked the images as fair use, but there is no fair use rational on the page, which needs to be there within 48 hours otherwise the image will be deleted. Also you will have to take the images out of the templates because (as far as i know) you can't have fair-use images in one of those banner templates. – Andrew Hampe ^Talk 08:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

No, those aren't non-free...they aren't screencaps, somebody drew them, and that person uploaded them.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, no, that's only true if User:Vkapadia is the same person as FlyingLemur at [3], since the image pages clearly say that's where the images are from. --Herald Alberich (talk) 18:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)