This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — I created this page before I had knowledge that this page existed. All the information can easily go on that page. Chakra Sandwich 01:45, March 21, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page will be merged with Ceremonial markings.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Merge — I suggest we broaden the scope of the Water Tribe markings page to include markings of all kind all over the world, ranging from the war markings to the ice dodging ones (and others I missed). Also the occasions mentioned on the Body paint page could be included. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 22:15, April 2, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — I like Lostris's idea. If we made some sort of general "Ceremonial Markings" page, we could everything together in one article. Also, the "War Paint" page includes Kyoshi's makeup, but I think that's a bit of a stretch. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 22:28, April 2, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — I like the idea - it would look better to have all these ceremonial/cultural markings and whatnot combined into just one large page - it does look all a bit disjointed on separate articles. My only question is, what would be a good name for the page - something like Markings in the World of Avatar? PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 17:04, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — On the subject of the article's name, I go with Omashu Rock's idea of the name "Ceremonial markings". I'm not sure if this article's subject matter is significant enough in the Avatar Universe to be a World of Avatar article. Krazykid51 18:42, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — I'm for Cerimonial Markings. I'm not sure about Kyoshi being War Paint worthy as she wore that all the time - not just during war. --Tech Addict, Fan-Fiction Writer, and Aspiring Filmaker 12:59, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — I like the idea as well, though I don't have any particular preference toward the name– either sound good to me. Truly Ferret 00:27, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — This makes sense to me, as for the name, I cultural or ceremonial markings sounds good.--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:25, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page kept.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — This article is about fifty percent speculation, seeming to debate itself over whether they're made of soy, rice and nuts or meat. I also think its likely that the nick site may have confused itself (as it occasionally does) and used a second name for fire flakes. This is mainly because it uses the image shown is also the one used on the fireflakes section of the website. Misnaming things is not entirely uncommon either, as the Seedy merchants pier was also referred to as the Merchant's pier on a different section of the website. Even if the two were completely different things that happened to look identical– I still think that it should be deleted because most of the article's content is speculation. Truly Ferret 03:41, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — I doubt that it was a misnaming. The mistake would be using the same image, but the explanation on both snacks is completely different from one another. The debatable info comes from the nick.com site themselves, so it's an "in-universe" theory. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 08:47, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — Per Lostris, and the fact that they were also named as such in "Appa's Lost Days". PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 12:15, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — We could simply incorporate this minor article into the Cuisine page. H-Man: Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 12:43, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — Per H-man --Tech Addict, Fan-Fiction Writer, and Aspiring Filmaker 12:55, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — Per Lady Lostris. TheBigO Fan Be the leaf 13:02, April 9, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — After cross-referencing I've concluded that all the information in the article comes from the Nickelodeon website (http://kr.turbonick.nick.com/shows/avatar/index.jhtml). For clarification, the exact wording for the passage on Sizzle-crisps on the website is as follows: "Spicy-hot, crispy goodness, with a mouth-watering bacon-y crunch. Some insist these meaty-tasting treats are actually veggie-based and made from rice, soy and nuts, but they're probably wrong." While I agree that we should keep the article, it could benefit from re-writing to avoid any ambiguity such as that pointed out by A True Fire Ferret. --Vespus (wall • contribs) 16:35, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — I don't think this is needed to help navigation purposes, as they are clearly distinct air temples with different titles, unlike how characters have pages for films and games. Likewise, the sanctuaries article is also clearly distinct from the temple itself. The five air temple links can be found on the main article for it, and the rest are just episodes; differences of which can be covered by the line in italics at the top. PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 02:20, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — I created this page because there are so many things that pertain the the phrase air temple, and while an experienced wikkian or avatar fanatic (myself included) may know each and every difference, others may not. I thought it would be useful for someone to have a single place to go to so as to quickly ascertain the differences and events that are specific to each individual temple, episode, and place brought to mind by the simple phrase "Air temple".--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:36, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — I agree with KFB. The main article pretty much covers the part about the different cardinal names, and it seems more likely that a reader would type in the name of a temple to search for the corresponding episode, rather than go to the general disambiguation page, which is longer and not as easy to search through. That just about renders this page null. Sparks • From • Hades 14:51, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — Handy for navigational purposes. --Tech Addict, Fan-Fiction Writer, and Aspiring Filmaker 17:51, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

As I said in my opening point, I don't see how this really helps when you have all five temples already linked on the air temple article, with the rest just being distinct articles like episodes - which can be separated with the message at the top of the individual air temple articles. PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 17:55, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

I looked at the other Air Temple articles, some have disambgs to pages with more info about them; now if I were on one Air Temple, with a click to a disambg, I could see everything about all Air Temples, be it an episode, a battle, or part of a film. Tech Addict, Fan-Fiction Writer, and Aspiring Filmaker 22:12, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

The only one with its own disambig page is the Northern Air Temple - the Southern and Western are covered by simple captions, and the East and Island do not have any further links at all. As Sparks also pointed out, you are more likely to see someone search straight for a temple or episode name; if they get the wrong one, those messages at the top will take them right to the page they need to be. No further disambig should be needed. PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 22:17, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

If we provide a link to the disambig in question, like so, This article is about The Northern Air Temple. For other uses of Air Temple see here., something like that, would get rid of any need. If that is done that NAT disambig needs deletion. As for links on the page, it can be tiresome to read it to find links the article the user is looking for. Tech Addict, Fan-Fiction Writer, and Aspiring Filmaker 14:32, April 19, 2013 (UTC)

I fail to see the "tiresome" argument if they just go to the main air temple article, the other temples are described basically right there and all linked. People are more likely to know the difference between looking for an air temple or its episode (Southern Air Temple vs. "The Southern Air Temple") - and again, if they make a mistake and land on the other page, there's easy guidance on each the episode and temple article. The NAT has its disambig because there's more to it than just the temple and episode. PSUAvatar14 Want to have a word? 16:29, April 19, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — As KFB stated, Air Temples are summarized in the Air Temple page, and the episodes are noticed by the "The". Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 05:02, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — I don't really see what use this page has. The air dates for each of the episodes are already stated on List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes, so I don't see what need there is to repeat this on a separate page. Any other events that might be listed, such as comic or film releases, would be covered on their respective articles. Overall, I just don't see what use this page has. HAMMEROFTHOR 13:31, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — Per HoT. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 13:54, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page will be made into a redirect to Project:Avatar fanon, and as such, this page on its own is "deleted".
Please do not edit this discussion.

The page doesn't needs to be a non-fanon article since it's obvious that there is a fanon and all the information is included there. For a matter of fact, I've never heard of it. I came to it by using the random page feature. Unnamed Airbender (Message Me · Read my fanon) 18:49, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — The page discusses what Avatar fanon is, but only gives a very brief and broad description and that pretty much renders the page null, since it does not have enough detail to show how Avatar fanon, specifically, is distinguished from the fanon of other media. I would perhaps vote to keep this page if it was expanded and more in-depth, but really, I'm not sure if that could be done. Sparks • From • Hades 20:00, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — This page is irrelevant - it has all the same information as the Saber-tooth moose lion page. With an actual page for Foo Foo Cuddlypoops's and the moose lion, a page for an extremely minor character that does not give any additional details is pointless. fruipy oaty bar это курам на смех 23:27, May 10, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — It's definitely not an irrelevant page. She is his mother, and she attacked Aang, which might as well be Aang's enemies. Even though it has "Saber-tooth moose lion" information doesn't mean it has to be deleted, you might as well delete Foo Foo's page too because it has the information as well. Also removing the speedy consensus, the page isn't urgent for a deletion. Unnamed Airbender (Message Me · Read my fanon) 23:40, May 10, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — If Foo Foo Cuddlypoops has a page, the mother sabre-tooth moose-lion can have a page. Her screen time may have been shorter, but she wasn't less relevant. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 00:52, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — The page is irrelevant to have for the reasons Fruitpit gave. The argument "Foo Foo Cuddlypoops has a page, thus his mother can have one too" is faulty, since Foo Foo Cuddlypoops has a page because he actually has a name, and thus is distinctive from the rest of his kind. The fact that she attacked Aang and should therefor be given her own page is irrelevant, cause that information is already covered on the generic page of the species -as we always do. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 10:23, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — The page should be kept, if her son has it's own page then why she wouldn't have her own page? I think it should be kept though. Her mother is an important figure and is one of the enemy of Avatar Aang, the Avatar himself! Why you people are trying to delete it? I mean it's important to keep it! PEOPLE try to understand it! Now you all get it why this place should be kept..AvatarMJC (wall • contribs) 13:38, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, no, I don't get it. First, as I explained above, it's not because her son has a page, that that automatically means that she herself should have a page a well. Pages are gauged by the level of information on it. As it stand now, all the information on the mother's page is nearly an exact duplicate from the species page. Her son has a distinct page because he actually has a name. Saying "B is relevant solely because of A" is a faulty argument, as B on itself should have a merit as well, which in this case, it doesn't. And second: how exactly is the mother "an important figure"? She was an unnamed random animal that passed the revue, charged Aang thrice and then left the scene never to be seen or mentioned again. As for the importance to keep that page: all the information is already mentioned in the history section of the general saber-tooth moose lion page, so there is no point in keeping it around for informational purposes either. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 13:47, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — Per Fruipit and LL. Sparks • From • Hades

Delete — Per LL and Fruipit. Truly Ferret 20:50, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — Per the reasoning that Fruipit stated. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 12:28, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — Per above. DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 21:34, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page kept.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Merge — I don't we need an additional page where all of it's content can go into the Tattoos article or Fashion article. Unnamed Airbender (Message Me · Read my fanon) 17:35, May 19, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — It can easily fit onto the cuisine article (it's a food, we don't necessarily need to know about its history) and talks mostly about what experience characters had with it, not the food. Krazykid51 00:30, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — We don't have enough articles related to food. The article can be expended to contain more food related content. Deleting every food page isn't going to help. If there is a chance to mention, and it has any history whatsoever, then article should be made. Unnamed Airbender (Message Me · Read my fanon) 19:49, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

The amount of articles related to food holds no place in deciding whether or not a new food article should be created, nor should any article be made solely for the reasons you provided (that is, being mentioned and having history). The reason we have articles like "Cuisine in the World of Avatar", while primarily to give a broad overview of a wide-ranging topic, has taken on the cause of giving a home to information that doesn't warrant its own article. For example, we don't have an article for papaya. It is just a regular, everyday food we can find in the real world all the time (I believe that's one of the reasons we deleted the article titled "Apple": it's just a regular, everyday food). "Jook", on the other hand, is an article because, while it is a real-world food not particular to the Avatar World, it has enough info to warrant an article. Popcorn, been curb puffs, and tofu, however, are all real-world foods not particular to the Avatar World and all contain too little information to warrant three separate articles. Plus, these new food articles, when stripped of speculation, become even shorter. Without history sections (which are entirely unnecessary for most food articles), they'd be only a few sentences long. The reason I didn't put up "Unfried dough" for deletion is because it has a background entirely related to its reason for having been cooked in the first place (thus tying it both to its general cultural aspects in the Avatar World and a relevant history). And lastly, I never proposed or implied a proposal for the deletion of all food articles, just these three. Krazykid51 21:41, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — Per Krazykid. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 00:31, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page will be merged with Cuisine in the World of Avatar.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — It can easily be merged into the cuisine article, it includes character opinions that are technically irrelevant to the article's topic (the food in general), plus includes some speculation that cuts the article down a bit when removed. Krazykid51 00:30, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — We don't have enough articles related to food. The article can be expended to contain more food related content. Deleting every food page isn't going to help. If there is a chance to mention, and it has any history whatsoever, then article should be made. Unnamed Airbender (Message Me · Read my fanon) 19:49, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

The amount of articles related to food holds no place in deciding whether or not a new food article should be created, nor should any article be made solely for the reasons you provided (that is, being mentioned and having history). The reason we have articles like "Cuisine in the World of Avatar", while primarily to give a broad overview of a wide-ranging topic, has taken on the cause of giving a home to information that doesn't warrant its own article. For example, we don't have an article for papaya. It is just a regular, everyday food we can find in the real world all the time (I believe that's one of the reasons we deleted the article titled "Apple": it's just a regular, everyday food). "Jook", on the other hand, is an article because, while it is a real-world food not particular to the Avatar World, it has enough info to warrant an article. Popcorn, been curb puffs, and tofu, however, are all real-world foods not particular to the Avatar World and all contain too little information to warrant three separate articles. Plus, these new food articles, when stripped of speculation, become even shorter. Without history sections (which are entirely unnecessary for most food articles), they'd be only a few sentences long. The reason I didn't put up "Unfried dough" for deletion is because it has a background entirely related to its reason for having been cooked in the first place (thus tying it both to its general cultural aspects in the Avatar World and a relevant history). And lastly, I never proposed or implied a proposal for the deletion of all food articles, just these three. Krazykid51 21:41, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — Per Krazykid. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 00:22, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Merge — Per above. DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 08:52, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Page deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Delete — Little enough information to have its crucial information merged into the cuisine article (don't need to know all the history for food that showed up once), plus mostly about character interaction with the food, not the food. Krazykid51 00:30, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Keep — We don't have enough articles related to food. The article can be expended to contain more food related content. Deleting every food page isn't going to help. If there is a chance to mention, and it has any history whatsoever, then article should be made. Unnamed Airbender (Message Me · Read my fanon) 19:48, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

The amount of articles related to food holds no place in deciding whether or not a new food article should be created, nor should any article be made solely for the reasons you provided (that is, being mentioned and having history). The reason we have articles like "Cuisine in the World of Avatar", while primarily to give a broad overview of a wide-ranging topic, has taken on the cause of giving a home to information that doesn't warrant its own article. For example, we don't have an article for papaya. It is just a regular, everyday food we can find in the real world all the time (I believe that's one of the reasons we deleted the article titled "Apple": it's just a regular, everyday food). "Jook", on the other hand, is an article because, while it is a real-world food not particular to the Avatar World, it has enough info to warrant an article. Popcorn, been curb puffs, and tofu, however, are all real-world foods not particular to the Avatar World and all contain too little information to warrant three separate articles. Plus, these new food articles, when stripped of speculation, become even shorter. Without history sections (which are entirely unnecessary for most food articles), they'd be only a few sentences long. The reason I didn't put up "Unfried dough" for deletion is because it has a background entirely related to its reason for having been cooked in the first place (thus tying it both to its general cultural aspects in the Avatar World and a relevant history). And lastly, I never proposed or implied a proposal for the deletion of all food articles, just these three. Krazykid51 21:41, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — Per Krazykid's thorough reasoning. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 00:18, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Delete — Per Krazykid. DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 08:54, May 17, 2013 (UTC)