Earth Kingdom box This is a page archive.

Please do not add or remove any content from it. (98,355 bytes)

  • This archive has reached its maximum of thirty headings.

Avatar: The Abridged Series

As much as I love the series it does not belong on this wiki. It is a FAN creation and no fan creations are allowed on here. I vote for an immediate delete. Jason Garrick 20:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

You do have a point. That policy applies more to adding fan fiction to articles as if it were canon. Personally, I say keep for now, though I am very open to changing my mind if others think differently. Howabout1-(Talk) 04:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, on other wikis that are about a show, that too has an abridged fan made series off of it, they usually have it on their wiki, but do make sure that the information on that page is sure to be non-offensive to any reader, and that it is easily seperable from cannon information, so the reader won't think it is or question it, thanks. Joey - Talk 04:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

  • It doesn't matter if other wiki's have it. We're avatar wiki, (the best!! hehe) and I don't think we should be giving any special treatment to anyone. What are some other wiki's you can name that have it? If Abridged is NOT a canon series then it should NOT be on the site. Jason Garrick 01:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Fine the Yugioh Wiki, Naruto wiki, off by heart and some others for sure too, thanks. Joey - Talk 01:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Can we get some other admins input here? I would personally vote to have the policy only apply to adding fiction as canon. Howabout1-(Talk) 02:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Joeyaa and Howabout. I'm the one who added the link to the fanon wiki to the front page and I only meant that to be there for people who wanted to make their own sequels to the series and stuff like that. I think we can keep the abridged series page without compromising the integrity of this wiki. Puragus - Talk 02:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

It's fan made, so I don't think it belongs here. The chibi shorts aren't canon, but since they were made by Nick, it's ok to have them, I think that TAS has to go. Omnibender - Talk 22:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Omnibender.

--8th Mizukage 00:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Personally I really dont see any reason for it to stay. But many for it to go. I'm with Omni on this one. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 02:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it has a place on this wiki but I think it would be great on the Avatar fanon Wiki. Lord Momo 05:35, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

That could work. What do the others think? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 07:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Ya I think we should definitely get rid of it. The article is about an avatar SPOOF, not actual information about avatar itself. So ya i think we should get it off this wiki and possibly on the fannon wiki. Alex101313 20:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

If no one objects in... a week, I say we delete it. Omnibender - Talk 22:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

fair enough, though I haven't seen anybody that REALLY wants this article to stay. Alex101313 15:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

It has been over a week, are we getting rid of it or not? Alex101313 15:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, when you read the entire discussion you can see there are mixed feelings about whether it should stay or go, so I suggest a simple vote. How does that sound, because personally it isn't hurting anyone for us to keep it, and a lot of people coming to this wiki will probably be interested in it. I vote keep, what do you guys think? Joey - Talk 04:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I say get rid but that's just me. Alex101313 01:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

This is for Omnibender or any other admins, why dont we just create a template tha says something like "Warning! This article is not canon, and is fan made." Like other wikis use. Scott (Lets Chat) 02:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that all fan fiction articles are supposed to be on the Avatar fanon Wiki, not here. Thats why we're having this debate on whether to delete this article. Why dont we just copy it and paste it on the said wiki. Then we can delete this article from here. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 07:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not against putting it in the Avatar fanon Wikia. Omnibender - Talk 23:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Then, lets do it. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 05:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Fine, I added it to the Fanon Wiki, so the question still resides, will we delete it from here? Thanks. Joey - Talk 08:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Well if its about a fan made spoof of avatar and since the admins and users (myself included) strongly believe this wiki is for cannon information only, I think I speak for most when I say delete it. Alex101313 00:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

So it has been a while, what are we going to do about this page? Delete or keep? Joey - Talk 22:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Right now Joey, nobody can come to a straight conclusion. I would personally like to see it gone. Alex101313 00:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Lets Put it to a vote. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 06:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Omnibender, replying to your question, there is no such thing as cross-wiki redirects, the best you could do, would be to put on the page, or on a heading as a subsection of another page, would be to link to it. That's the best thing we can do, similar to the, main article point right under a sub-heading. Thanks. Joey - Talk 01:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, we need a vote deadline. Alex101313 - Talk 03:49, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I suggest Friday, Nov. 7. Anyone else have an objection? Alex101313 - Talk 03:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Can somebody please delete this? This has been going on for far too long and nobody is objecting it's deletion. Alex101313 - Talk 15:18, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Ummmm..... disregard the last thing I said....... Alex101313 - Talk 22:54, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


  1. Omnibender - Talk 14:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC) (It's already on the fanon wiki, so the info isn't lost, if anything, we can redirect it to that page, is cross wiki redirecting possible? I think so.)
  2. Alex101313 02:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC) (It is not canon, and like Omnibender said, its not like we are getting rid of the info entirely)
  3. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 03:39, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
  4. Puragus - Talk 03:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC) (I've followed the argument, and the answer seems pretty clear)
  5. Please get rid of this. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


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

Four Nations

Adds nothing to the wikia, and the links to locations are already available via Location template. Omnibender 19:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

People want to delete this page but not Nick's mistakes? Why?

--8th Mizukage 03:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Cause no one who thinks it should be deleted tagged it with {{VfD}}, which puts a link to this page where arguments for and against the page are weighted to decided if the article is kept or not.

I agree this should be deleted, there are several reasons for this to be deleted. 1. There are seporate pages for each nation. 2. The information is very vague. 3. The images are not in proper spaces. Scott 21:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the problem with having it. It gives a basic description of how the world is divided and where the land are and if improved would be better.

--8th Mizukage 06:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

It needs serious rewriting if this is going to be kept. Omnibender 23:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it only needs a little work. I mean it only needs to give a small overview of the four Nations. We have the Seperate Articles for the in-depth explanations. What difference does it make if it stays? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 12:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

We could make it a disambiguation page. Just a thought.Puragus 17:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Umm, I dont wish to seem ignorant but if I dont ask I will remain Ignorant. What's a disambiguation page, exactly? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 17:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

A single page that leads to multiple articles, like Lightning. Puragus - Talk 21:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

It's a good idea.

Yeah. We could do that. I'll link the links. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 05:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

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

Nick's Mistakes

This site is about the show, etc. That has nothing to do with this site at all.

--8th Mizukage 08:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

This site is about information about the show. This shows false information on a popular resource show that some of their information is inaccurate. Scott 14:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

You just contradicted yourself. This site is about the show, not other sites.

--8th Mizukage 01:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no reason for it to be deleted. This wiki is about everything Avatar. Howabout1-(Talk) 16:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Saying another websites mistakes is not important to this site at all.

--8th Mizukage 01:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

But people coming from the Nick site would be confused and believe the wrong things shown there, so the page could help to counter the confusion Felinoel 04:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

If this page is to be kept, it should be revised and given a new title, like "Errors within Avatar: The Last Airbender" or something more professional sounding. But really I do not believe an entire page should be kept to record mistakes in the show, such things should be mentioned on the behind the scenes sections of existing articles. General Iroh 05:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Is the page going to be about the actual errors of the site and the series in general or is it going to be an event/concept thing only? Cause if that's the case, I believe "Continuity Errors" to be a more suitable name. Omnibender 23:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been redirected to and Official Errors.
Please do not edit this discussion.


There are eight words in this page and it is pretty useless in my opinion, any comments? felinoel 04:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Its a disambiguation page, I'd vote to keep it. Howabout1-(Talk) 04:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I thought disambiguation pages weren't actual articles Felinoel 04:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
They aren't, which is why you don't hold them to the same standards in terms of words. Howabout1-(Talk) 15:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
But this page seems like an actual article, unlike a disambiguation page? felinoel ~ (Talk) 00:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
If you mean it's different like it looks different, no. Maybe you're thinking of a redirect? Disambiguation pages just avoid confusion. Howabout1-(Talk) 03:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I added the disambiguation tag, it should appear as a disambiguation page now. Omnibender 23:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we should keep THIS page. It has 8 words, doesn't have any pictures and is just, like, there. ChaosMaster16 21:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Disambiguation pages are supposed to be small, their purpose is to direct people to similarly named articles which may cause confusion due to the name similarity. No need to delete it. Omnibender - Talk 22:37, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Now that the solstices have been added to the Avatar Universe Template there is no more need for this page. But the choice is all yours. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 09:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been kept as a disambiguation page.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Sokka's Innovations and Abilities

Can we get rid of this page? The information is already covered in Sokka's character page, and I feel that if we keep this page, we have to make seperate pages for every character's abilities section (I feel the same way about Katara's Waterbending). Shall we delete?Puragus 05:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I think I'm neutral when it comes to questions like these, the original purpose of the page was to shorten Sokka's page, his page and Katara's Waterbending were the only abilities section in each character that were well developed enough to be split into a new article, it works either way for me. Omnibender 22:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I had hoped an article wouldn't be relisted for deletion. This already was, and keep was decided. We'll have to make a new deletion system now, with individual pages for debates. For the meantime, this is still keep. Howabout1-(Talk) 22:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I hadn't realized a decision had already been made for this page. It still had a tag linking here.Puragus - Talk 22:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Guys, this is what I designed the Template:Discussion Closed for. You can Use it, now that it's been made, to display results even if you delete the rest of the Discussion. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 05:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Or we could put it in the discussion page of the article? felinoel ~ (Talk) 01:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I like that idea. No need to be sorry Puragus, it was my fault for not removing the tag. Howabout1-(Talk) 02:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

By discussion, does felinoel mean the discussion page of this article or the article in question (ie: the article that was to be deleted)? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 09:41, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

In question. felinoel ~ (Talk) 08:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. The problem might still come back to bite us in the blubber. Why dont we make a seperate section here that says Resolved Deletion Conflicts or something for the articles that have this problem as well. That would be good. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 10:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any problems that would arise with my idea that wouldn't arise in yours but they are both relatively enough of the same felinoel ~ (Talk) 06:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe we can combine our ideas. Put the result on both talk pages. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 06:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

That seems redundant, and I am pretty sure I remember you remarking a distaste for redundancy... felinoel ~ (Talk) 07:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Not when its this important. You see putting it simply on the article's talk page can still result in slight problems. Especially if someone comes along and just puts it there without bothering to even visit the Talk Page. However if we put another section here and state the names of the Artcles that have had their deletion requests resolved (in Bullet List Form) then it would be much simpler. But I'm just giving my point of view here. You guys are gonna make the decision on this one. Its up to you. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 09:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

You know what I think? I think this page should be deleted. I mean, it doesn't seem necessary.Cari1994 19:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Then, could you please cast your vote by putting your signature in the voting section? Puragus - Talk 19:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


  1. I don't think it is needed. If it must be kept, put it on Sokkas page. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. It's the same as what's already on Sokka's page. Puragus - Talk 23:59, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
  3. For reasons above. Alex101313 - Talk 00:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
  4. The same is said on section of Sokka article. Energybender 19:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  5. It beats me why this article existed in the first place. The 888th Avatar 02:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


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

High Class Fire Nation Citizen

Nothing about the social levels and workings of the Fire Nation was ever said, explained or in any way clarified, other than the list, the only information in it is based on assumptions. Omnibender - Talk 22:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree completely, and couldn't have put it better myself.Puragus - Talk 23:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I thimk we should we direct this to Fire Nation.Kevin 19:22, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

No need to redirect it, it was never mentioned in the show. I vote to delete. Howabout1-(Talk) 19:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Then I also vote to delete it. Kevin 19:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Is this true or is it part of your "suck up the admins" idea I saw in Lord Momo's talk page? You put it there at least twice, and both times he deleted. He clearly doesn't want that on his page, if any admins are interested, check User talk:Lord Momo's history. Omnibender - Talk 23:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Since no one voiced against deleting it an almost a month, the article has been deleted. Omnibender - Talk 16:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

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


The character in it is simply a form of the Ocean Spirit, and it can be properly sequestrated into the article as a section, much like Than's Sister was in Than, furthermore, the name Koizilla was only used by writers and animators during the production of the episode, calls it "Koi fish Spirit Monster". Omnibender - Talk 22:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this article is pretty superfluous. The information for it is already under the Ocean Spirit's page. I say we redirect it to the Ocean Spirit. Puragus - Talk 23:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The creators named it, they saw it as its own entity apparently felinoel ~ (Talk) 19:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

It's just like Puragus said, the info on him/it is already available at the Ocean Spirit page, it's redundant to keep Koizilla. Omnibender - Talk 20:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

But the creators saw it as its own entity felinoel ~ (Talk) 22:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you people not get it the creators saw it as its own enitiy like felinoel said.Kevin 19:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

And it can be mentioned in the Ocean Spirit page, just like Giant Avatar Spirit Aang is mentioned at Aang. Omnibender - Talk 19:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

But Koizilla is not just La, it is the combination of La and Aang, unlike the Giant Avatar Spirit felinoel ~ (Talk) 20:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, it is not just La it is Aang to so you would have to put on Aang's profile too but what is the point in repeating it twice? Get it in your thick skulls Omnibender and Puragus that it is its own enitiy.Kevin 19:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Kevin, you certainly have no right to accuse anyone of not understanding something that someone thinks is clear. Try to keep civil. I would suggest that you limit your editing to this page in the future. Howabout1-(Talk) 19:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Well I mean its pointless to have it twice for Aang and La it is not just one person it is two therfore it needs its own article. The Great Avatar Spirit is just Aang, not two things like Koizilla.Kevin 19:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Than and Than's sister are two different entities, and the lack of information on one of them caused the article to be deleted, with the information put on Than.

Is their any proof that this being is truly called Koizilla? It sounds like something made up by a random user. Also, I feel that this info should be put in La's article. I don't feel it really needs its own article. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

"Koizilla" is actually a name used by the creators. As to whether Aang, La and Koizilla are three separate beings...that's debatable. I tend to think they are, although I used to think Koizilla was just La. Puragus - Talk 10:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

If no one objects in twenty-four hours, this page will be marked for deletion and put into the La article. Energybender 23:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

How many times is an article allowed to be marked for deletion for the same reason? This articles has been here several times for the same reason and it has always been decided to be kept, why is it allowed to mark an article for deletion, if it doesn't get deleted, over and over again until it does get deleted? felinoel ~ (Talk)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been redirected to La.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Unnamed Kyoshi Warrior

Can anyone see anything that can be done with this page other than deletion or a redirect to Kyoshi Warriors? Omnibender - Talk 18:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

ummm.... couldn't you make a new page, and add the information on the un-named kyoshi warrior and the other minor kyoshi warriors and just use that page to describe them all on that one page with each having a section, and a link to the main article; Kyoshi warriors, like with the actor pages because we don't have much information on these people to make a descent article. Joeyaa 18:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

We can easily add that to Kyoshi Warriors. Omnibender - Talk 19:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Yea this page doesn't even really have any info on it anyways felinoel ~ (Talk) 20:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Lets redirect this there is not enough information for it to be an atricle it is already mentioned at the Kyoshi Warriors article.Kevin 19:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm with you guys on this one. Redirect it. Alex101313 15:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

After thinking about it, it is best to delete it, how many editors would actually link to this article? It would be a useless redirect. Omnibender - Talk 16:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok Omnibender, whatever you think is best. Now can you help me out with the avatar map at the bottom of this page? Alex101313 16:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

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

The Complete Book 1 Collection

This isn't necessary because every episode in the first season is already listed in the article for Book 1, Water. Unless a page explaining all the separate DVD's material is created in this page's place, I personally feel it should have a VfD tag on in for now. Energybender 22:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm neutral on whether this page should be deleted, for now. But I should point out that if we have a page for one DVD release, we should have something for all the others too. Puragus - Talk 00:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, the grammar and spelling and punctuation; or lack of, I think this page is unnecessary and just repeats the similar acrticle, yet with better grammar. I think it should be deleted, as it is just a waste of space, what does everyone else think? Thanks Joey - Talk 00:28, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

While I do think that the page could be turned into something for the extras on the DVD, like commentaries and etc, we would need someone who has or can rent the DVD, neither of which is my case, so unless someone can and is willing to write the page (the user who made the article said he'd work on that later, he said it in May and it's September) it should be deleted. Omnibender - Talk 15:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I vote keep. I agree with Omni it needs work. Many other wikis have the DVD releases on them. Scott (Lets Chat) 21:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Just looking at this page is a headache, is this even necessary? We could put a subsection under each Season's page, that is called "DVD Release" and put basically the same info from her, to there? Joey - Talk 22:40, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

When will this vote finish? It has taken a long time already. How about tomorrow, on the 22nd? 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 03:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess I'll go for improving it, and possibly making it into a table? I'll close this in 24 hours. Joey - Talk Contribs 23:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Keep and improve

  1. Energybender 01:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 19:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. AlexTalk 21:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. Joey - Talk Contribs 23:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


  1. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 13:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. FireLord18 03:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been kept.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Avatar Map

I marked this for deletion because it basically just copies what we have at the Four Nation disambiguation page, but with less information and more grammar and spelling errors. What do you guys think? Thanks. Joey - Talk 20:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Ya I say get rid of it. The info described has already been said in countless other articles. Alex101313 15:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I made the page into a redirect to The World of Avatar, at least for now, if anything we'll delete it. Omnibender - Talk 18:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I like it, it gives a quick reference to locations. It has helped me numerous times.

--8th Mizukage 03:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

We already have the Locations Template and the Four Nations Page. Why do we need this? I say we delete it or (as Omni did) we set it up as a redirect. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 05:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes there is the location template, but this shows where they are, what is wrong with that?

--8th Mizukage 05:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The wrong thing is that we already have a page for that. The World of Avatar Page. The info should have been added there, not on a completely unneeded NEW page. This page is unneeded. Its far better to add the info to the World of Avatar Page and delete this page. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 05:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought you meant deleting the map, my mistake.

--8th Mizukage 11:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you meant the article. Yes, I agree the map is good but the article is pointless. Alex101313 15:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been redirected to The World of Avatar.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Bending arts

This article adds nothing new to this wiki, it would need a lot of work to become something even presentable, and in reality it just lists each Bending form with little detail, what do you guys think? Thanks. Joey - Talk 01:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I vote deletion.

--8th Mizukage 04:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I second that motion. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 06:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The only reason I see for this page to be kept is to me made into a disambiguation, just like the Four Nations page. Omnibender - Talk 00:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha............. Ya get rid of it. Alex101313 01:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Omni. The Four Nations page sets a precedent for this kind of page. Puragus - Talk 00:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

So, who's up to it? Omnibender - Talk 23:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not an admin (although I wish I was), so I can't call it. Alex101313 00:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I edited it a little, but someone else will need to smooth it out, after that we can remove the tag. Joey - Talk 02:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. Its still not good enough. I still say we remove it. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 08:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm okay with removing it, but we have to see it reach it's greatest potential or we won't know if we made the right decision. Joey - Talk 08:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll work it a bit, trim it and see what comes up. Omnibender - Talk 15:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

So, what shall we do know? I have to give you props for making it a lot better, but should we keep it or not? Joey - Talk 22:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Its looking good now. We could keep it as a disambiguation page. Plus the pics are mostly great. Good enough to warrant a place on the top of their respective bending pages. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 03:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm liking it, anyone disagree? Joey - Talk Contribs 04:52, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it is just restating what we already have on multiple pages. AlexTalk 16:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah but it can now be classified as a disabiguation page. Cant it? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 17:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Not really, no considering it only provides 4 links that are really easy to find. AlexTalk 17:53, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Just leave it be. It's like a Short Summary of all the bendings. Besides I thought that was what disambiguation pages were. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 18:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes that is what disambiguation pages are. Ok fine keep it. AlexTalk 18:55, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Anyone object to it staying before we close it? You have 48 hours from now. Joey - Talk Contribs 22:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

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


I added this because we had already decided not to make a user infobox and besides this one is not very good as it doesn't display much information. What do you guys think? Joey - Talk 08:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

You're right. Lets see what the others think. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 08:50, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Um… what is it exactly? Alex101313 14:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I think this one isn't such a bad idea, this template isn't a proper template, it's more of a tag, Wikipedia and other Wikias use it a lot, it has a similar function to categories, but for users instead of articles. Omnibender - Talk 15:24, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, when you take a look at the coding, you can see it was copied directly from Wikipedia, but I just can't see us using this. Besides, other wikis, and even Wikipedia use this more for a joke, not to help organize, they put little gags inside them, and try to make them look nice. So what's the point?Joey - Talk 17:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, what is it? Alex101313 21:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, on other wikis, and Wikipedia, they use them as a joke to portray on their User Page, for example, one may have a picture of eggs, and it will say the user likes eggs. They are quite pointless, and aren't necessary. Joey - Talk 21:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh I remember seeing some of those on the star wars wiki. But if you click on the article link, I think its already deleted. Alex101313 23:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

So what do you guys think we should do about it now? Is it worth it's keep? Joey - Talk 22:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

It could possibly be worth it if it at least told you how to post them on a user page. But it does not and therefore it is useless. Alex101313 00:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

No way. This page serves as an example of how to make a userbox. I say we keep it. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:10, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll fight for this one. It is an example template. It is put here to show users the proper way to create a userbox. I think it is a good thing to have and helps the newer users understand better. Mattkenn3 Talk 22:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

That is where you are wrong Joey, this is here for a purpose. It serves as an example tool to help new users see how exactly to make a userbox. Mattkenn3 Talk 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

No, it is completely unnecessary and doesn't add anything. Why do you guys look to delete articles of characters that appear in the show and on, but think that a stupid joke is worth keeping? I know many wikis in which they had major problems with it. Besides, it is just unneeded hassle to have it. All they are used for are to say a single line joke, nothing more. Joey - Talk 23:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I do not see it as a joke. I would not vote to keep it and argue about keeping it if I thought it was a joke. It is an example template. I think it helps users design their own userboxes. See what I put on my page. I realize that we are probably not going to come to an agreement, but that is why we have votes like these. Mattkenn3 Talk 02:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

It is not a user template, or an infobox. It is a one-line piece of information that users input so that they may move-on that information to the reader. We already have a User Template; even though they had problems with having it, and it was here as well. In reality, these boxes add nothing at all, click here to see exactly what they are used for. Thanks. Joey - Talk 02:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The majority rules that this template is deleted, and so it will. Energybender 23:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

This vote should either close now or tomorrow. It has gone on too long, over half a month. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 03:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, lets say in 24 hours from now I'll close it. Joey - Talk Contribs 23:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's past the deadline. Please delete, admins. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 22:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


  1. This page is not needed. We already have the user character infobox. For discussion on its deletion see Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion. If I remember correctly the result was that we would let that template stay. So don't tag the User Character Infobox for deletion. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 08:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. Unnecessary, and is simply a bad joke that some wiki's use when they have thousands of daily contributers who like to make jokes. Quite frankly, we're just copying them, and for something not worth it. Joey - Talk 05:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
  3. I simply don't like it. Energybender 00:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. Huh? We need a "user box"? Come on people. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 00:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. FireLord18 03:16, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


  1. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:10, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. Alex101313 - Talk 02:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC) I vote keep as long as the article gives the coding for the template.
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This template has been deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Opening Sequence

I can't think of any reason to keep this, it's useless, the entire article could be a subsection on an article about the series itself. Omnibender - Talk 23:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Ya I don't think it should have it's own article. Like you said, add it to the article about the series itself. Alex101313 23:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Really? The article has a lot of information on it, more than a lot of other articles on this wiki. With a few screenshots, and if we categorize it, it could be a pretty good article. If we made it a subsection of the series article, it would be quite wordy for a subsection. Puragus - Talk 02:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it should stay, just needs a bit of editing snd screenshots. APAD 06:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok but i'll only be happy until we somehow make a link to this page from the series article. Alex101313 00:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

If someone wants to nurture this article into something better, be my guest, but if no one takes action to make it a proper article, it will be deleted. Omnibender - Talk 01:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

So now, what are we going to do, does anyone mind adopting this article to make it better, or will it need to be deleted? Joey - Talk 22:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it's pointless to have an article about the opener by itself. I mean, we could easily type up what katara is saying and who is bending what element and add it to Avatar: The Last Airbender Alex101313 00:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

We already improved it with a category and gallery. Seriously, why not have an article on the opening? It's not pointless, it's an area of the show we can cover in this wiki. Puragus - Talk 00:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Puragus on this one. If we have articles for the Creditors then why not for the opening Sequence? Besides, Its looking good now. I could even put youtube vids if you like. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 03:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Youtube would be nice. Go for it Zero. Alex101313 - Talk 20:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

If Zero or someone else goes through and adds a video for it, then I think we could probably leave it where it is, seeing how it is in every episode and a large component of the first and the following. Joey - Talk Contribs 04:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah but I cant fnd a video for both the series premier and the normal opening. If someone were to upload/find the videos on youtube and send me the links then I could do it. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 17:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


  1. AlexTalk 21:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. I like this article!Pizzahut101 22:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. Energybender 22:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 23:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. FireLord18 03:16, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


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

Iceberg spikes

I don't understand why this has it's own page. I think it could be merged with Waterbending. What do you guys think? Alex101313 00:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

It had its own entry in, we usually try our best to include every piece of info provides. Omnibender - Talk 01:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand but it is a bending form and we don't have articles for every single bending form. I also discovered that it already is on the waterbending article so if we just expanded it then everybody would be happy and we don't have to delete it. Alex101313 01:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

So is the Dancing Dragon and Rock gloves. Omnibender - Talk 01:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

So Omnibender, what is your suggestion? The article needs help. Alex101313 21:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

About the Dancing Dragon, I really dont think it can be truely pushed into this category. It's a series of moves while the others are basically one move each. Also, the Dancing Dragon has way more content on its page, not to mention the Pictures. Another thing, it has a special place in the Avatar Universe since the Dragons required it to be performed before showing Aang and Zuko the true meaning of Firebending. And last but not least, I worked really hard on getting the best pictures, of the Moves of the Dancing Dragon, that I could get under the circumstances and there is no way I'm gonna let something happen that will jeopardise the continued survival of that page. If you guys can improve on the Iceberg spikes page then that's fine by me. But if you guys choose to delete it then please bear in mind not to use the same arguments on the Dancng Dragon's page. Thanks. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 08:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh man, i wasn't suggesting at all that the dancing dragon page is the same quality as iceberg spikes. I apologize if you thought that. Alex101313 20:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

It's okay. I know you were'nt suggesting that. However when it was mentioned in this section I was afraid that whatever decision was made about the Iceberg spikes might just affect the other mentioned pages. Thats why I wrote that. Okay? Now about the Iceberg spikes page. More content is needed if it is to stay. How about you add all the times it has been used in the series (Much like all the times that the Avatar State was used was listed on the Avatar page) as well as some pictures of them. That's sure to improve the chances of it staying. Well... Hop to it. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 07:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Hopping to it. I will expand it to as far as my knowledge can go and then I will check other sources. However, someone else will have to add images. Alex101313 20:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Great, thats more like it. Make sure you take a good look at how the Avatar State appearences are written on the Avatar page. Write the Iceberg spikes' time used the same way. Keep up the good work. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 11:25, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

At its current length, I think it would be Ok if we left it where it is, what do you guys think? Joey - Talk Contribs 04:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it's fine now. I've seen pages on animals that are shorter than this. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 17:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

So. If no one objects in the next 24 hours then this discussion will be declared resolved. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 08:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

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

51st Earth King

This page really doesn't give much info. As far as I know, he was never even mentioned in the series. I think he is a minor character. Any comment? Alex101313 01:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

He may not have been seen or mentioned, but he had a great influence over the events of Ba Sing Se. His death allowed Long Feng to manipulate a young Earth King, Kuei and eventually allow for what Long Feng did to the Earth Kingdom happen, as well as the events with Aang and the Coup led by Azula. Joey - Talk 01:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

True, but the article is not that long and could easily go in Kuei's article.

--8th Mizukage 06:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I am going to suggest that this be at the top of Kuei's article. There really is not enough information. Alex101313 21:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

We did it before, with Than"s sister, and she was actually shown onscreen, unlike this guy. Puragus - Talk 23:56, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Puragus. Alex101313 00:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Top of Kuei's Article? No. Bottom? Yes. It would be better that way. I mean you dont go around talking about someone else first when the focus is another person do you? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 17:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


  1. Put information on Kuei's article. Let's do it people! Mattkenn3 Talk 01:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. Merge it with Kuei. Alex101313 - Talk 02:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
  3. Ditto. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 17:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  4. I don't even know why this article existed in the first place... The 888th Avatar 00:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)



I would be okay with putting this information perhaps at the bottom of Kuei's article. What does everyone else think? Joey - Talk Contribs 04:46, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Thats fine. The 888th Avatar 00:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Little boy's Mother

If this is still an article, then why did we delete "Than's sister" and "Nini"? Energybender - Talk 00:30, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Mmmm-mmm. (Shrugging Shoulders) Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 05:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


  1. This needs to go. There is not enough information, I see no point in keeping it. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. Merge it with The Painted Lady if it isn't already. Alex101313 - Talk 23:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
  3. Shouldn't get its own page. See comment below. Energybender 19:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  4. Merge with Painted Lady. The 888th Avatar 02:57, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. Realistically, it generates few hits and does not contain much interesting information. I agree a separate page should be made to deal with characters like this. telane 17:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)



It may be small, but gives it its own page, so I think we should as well. Besides, she did motivate Katara to do what she did. Joey - Talk Contribs 04:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

That is a good point, but we can just create one page for all of the small characters, which would include this one, and Than's sister. Energybender 19:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I do think she deserves her own page as she does motivate Katara to do what she had did, she supports another character; her son, and she is notable from the episode and that location. Joey - Talk Contribs 22:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

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


I think this page needs to go, it is mostly for one person and adds nothing to this wiki, or anything about Avatar. Thanks. Joey - Talk 06:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Besides it has wrong info on it. Earthbending isnt based on Karate but on the Hung Gar and (in Toph's Case) Praying Mantis Styles. The Page is useless. So who else thinks we should delete it? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 09:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Delete it, like you said, it has wrong info, and in certain ways, it can be considered spamming. If Warrior Suki presents a good enough reason, which I find hard, we can simple move it to her name, kind like I did with the archive of my talk page. Omnibender - Talk 13:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

So be it. I will delete it. Now. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 16:41, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick. Alex101313 18:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Avatar Shoka

It is very obvious this is not canon. Alex101313 - Talk 16:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

It has been deleted. There's no need to bother with a discussion or a vote with this kind of page.Puragus - Talk 16:58, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I know as well as you do that a discussion was unneeded, but to be honest, I was not sure how to delete the article. Alex101313 - Talk 18:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, you can't delete it yourself, because you're not an admin. I didn't mean to sound like I was criticizing you, I was just saying that an admin can delete something like this without a lot of talk is all. You did exactly what you should have, by marking it for deletion. Puragus - Talk 20:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well Alright. Alex101313 - Talk 20:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

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


It is useless. Alex101313 - Talk 22:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

We could add the entire article (minus the useless parts) into the Avatar: Legends of the Arena as a subsection? That would be handy. Joey - Talk 23:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. Alex101313 - Talk 23:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I just deleted it. Puragus - Talk 23:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Puragus I'm really getting tired of these. Alex101313 - Talk 23:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

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

How To Make Your Own Film Like Avatar

It is even more useless. Alex101313 - Talk 22:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

It's gone. Puragus - Talk 23:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Zuko's Firebending

Completely unneeded. Alex101313 - Talk 02:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Discussions about speedy deletions do not take place here dude. see top of page for link to the page you want. BTW no one has been there for a while. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 06:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I visit it a lot, as you may notice I am the primary person of giving articles that tag. (Admins don't need to) I just don't usually see need to talk about what I add there, speedy deletion is usually spam, vandalism, or speaks for itself. Thanks. Joey - Talk 06:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

A short decription will do. One Line. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 06:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I just deleted it. For future reference, there is absolutely no need for pages on certain character's bending when their character pages have Abilities sections. Even those that don't have abilities sections shouldn't have separate pages for their bending or abilities. This is exactly why I integrated "Katara's Waterbending into an Abilities section on her character page. Puragus - Talk 09:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

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


I am very well aware that there is a speedy deletion page, but it is not very speedy. Hardly anybody ever goes on there and I think the vandal articles are quicker established as existing here. Did that make sense? Alex101313 - Talk 23:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

We used to go there. Before I was an admin that was where we went do discuss deletion (back in the days when a coke and burger cost 30 cents, and we didn't know nothing about this "Rock and Roll" tomfoolery, and young folks had work ethic!). Now, we just go here. Is there really any difference between the "Votes For Deletion" and "Speedy Deletion" page? Do we need both of them just to delete an article? Puragus - Talk 23:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Lol Puragus that was funny. And no we really don't need two pages. Alex101313 - Talk 23:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Votes for Deletion is for pages that will need to be debated for deletion, (Specifically see the ones with long discussion above)whilst Speedy Deletion usually requires no discussion, this is the Wikia standard. Usually only pages that will be nearly split or will have a debate over go here. Speedy deletion is usually for vandalism, spam or obviously unnecessary pages (Like Zuko's firebending). Joey - Talk 00:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

But lets just say for a second that there was a vandal created article called "Naruto is better" or something and you were the first one to notice it existed. If it were me, I would bring it here because you obviously want to get it off as soon as posible. And ironically, speedy deletion is not as speedy as this because it is not visited as often as VFD. If faced in the situation above, and you wern't an admin, where would you honestly bring it to? Alex101313 - Talk 01:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Just a thought but maybe its time we removed the speedy deletions page and template. Just a thought though. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 03:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually Alex101313, when I mark a page for speedy deletion, one of the admins usually removes it within an hour or two, depending what time it is and all that. I think it is important to keep Speedy Deletion because things like spam don't require a discussion. The Speedy is more like a non-admin's way of deleting a page, it is surely faster than votes. Joey - Talk 07:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

An hour or two? Really? Alex101313 - Talk 16:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

It usually gets resolved quickly when the page is vandalism, but Alex has a point: no one ever goes to the speedy deletion talk page any more. Puragus - Talk 17:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

The talk is empty because unlike Votes for Deletion, Speedy Deletion requires usually no discussion. If there is any possible reason to say it shouln't be deleted, a line in the summary can easily clear it up. I am not to worried about the talk page. Perhaps, if we get some unresolved Speedy Deletions, then maybe a line on the talk may be necessary. That's just how it works. Joey - Talk 21:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I say we keep this going. When an admin sees someone put the template on a page, then they will most likely delete it without a second thought. That said, users ought to be wise in deciding to put in here or on the category talk or template talk page. Energybender 23:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

If they want a reason, and you can't cram it into the summary, it is possible to revise the template so it can show the reason in it. They do this on many wikis. Joey - Talk Contribs 23:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


  1. Joey - Talk Contribs 23:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 13:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. Energybender 19:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. --Mattkenn3 Talk 22:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC), Delete the delete template? I wouldn't.


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


It's a TCG ability and it is not really long enough to keep (note: this is not a vandal-created article). Alex101313 - Talk 16:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

We have pages for TCG characters, only fair we have for bending sub-skills as well. Omnibender - Talk 17:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

We could merge it with Malu Alex101313 - Talk 18:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

But that would be like taking Airbending and puting it on Aang, it may not be widely seen, but is still notable to the TCG and thus important for us to have. Joey - Talk Contribs 04:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I would have to agree with Omni, except all other bending sub-skills aren't given their own articles, why don't we do what we do with all other bendung sub-skills and put it on its main elemental bending's page, yes its not a canon thing, but we could say in the subtitle that it is not canon. felinoel ~ (Talk) 04:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
We already even talk about it there felinoel ~ (Talk) 04:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually, we do give sub-skills their articles, but only to the main sub-skill. You won't see a page for Bloodbending and Plantbending, but there is one for Healing, and since this is the only sub-skill for Airbending, it is considered the main one. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
But according to an interview with the creators when asked what the sub-skill for airbending was they said they saw humans being able to fly as a good enough sub-skill, we talked about that often here and one sub-skill getting its own article shouldn't count for all of them, if healing has its own article I say it should get merged too felinoel ~ (Talk) 19:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Good, but your vote is already in to merge the article with Airbending so no argument is needed. Energybender 20:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

It has been shown two times in the series. Once in the The Tales of Ba Sing Se and the second possible time in The Firebending Masters. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 19:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

It is a minor technique; as Zero said, it has only been shown twice. For this reason it can be merged, but not kept as an independent article as Zero voted. Energybender 19:04, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
I am going to have to disagree with it being shown in the series… felinoel ~ (Talk) 20:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
When I said the above, I meant please state when soundbending was shown in the series, so yea... Please do that felinoel ~ (Talk) 09:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not talking to a certain someone. Besides I've already answered that certain someone's question in my last post. Anyway I just noticed that the article has already been turned into a redirect page that redirects to Airbending#Special Techniques. So this discussion is now effectively useless. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 15:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


  1. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 19:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. Joey - Talk Contribs 08:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)



  1. felinoel ~ (Talk) 04:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. Energybender 19:04, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. AlexTalk 21:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 23:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. FireLord18 03:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been redirected to Airbending.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Avatar Wiki's Holidays

No one seems to be contributing to this project. ChaosMaster16 created it, but now that he is longer here, there isn't anyone keeping this moving. Are we going to do something with this? I mean, it's kind of hard to celebrate a holiday with cake, ice cream, and donuts in cyberspace anyway... Energybender - Talk 16:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)



  1. Alex101313 - Talk 22:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. Mattkenn3 Talk 04:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
  3. Omnibender - Talk 11:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
  4. Puragus Talk 22:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
  5. Energybender - Talk 00:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments Wow, never seen that one before. Yes that is a very good point but I can't come to a decision. Alex101313 - Talk 16:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I never saw exactly the point of that project, but if no one's going to work on it, it should be deleted. Omnibender - Talk 17:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
It's out of date, anyways. Halloween was over a week ago. No one seems willing to keep up with it. Puragus - Talk 17:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, if no one is willing to continue with it, then I say delete. Alex101313 - Talk 18:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
What? Get rid of this. Mattkenn3 Talk 04:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, no one says keep. Please delete this. Energybender - Talk 16:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

News archives

This page used to provide a list of every past news update, but ever since I discovered what people were putting was just saying the same thing one person had already said, I deleted the things that said what already had been said. What is left on the page now is exactly what the main page states. Please, just rid the wiki of it. It is no longer useful now that the series has ended, and no new things happen anyway. Energybender - Talk 00:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Episode and Movie Information



  1. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  2. AlexTalk 20:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  3. Joey - Talk 06:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  4. The 888th Avatar 12:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. Energybender 23:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


Doesn't really give much information we don't already have. Alex101313 - Talk 13:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we need this. I want to see if the others feel the same. Also, look at my holiday edition sig. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
And plus we really don't need to know the episode lineup for Asia and places around the world. It's like: who cares about the avatar schedule in other countries when it doesn't affect us? Alex101313 - Talk 02:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
That's correct, Alex. I think I've noticed a pattern here. Three pages that are here now, News archives, Episode and Movie Information, and Avatar Wiki's Holidays, all happen to be created by ChaosMaster16. I'm beginning to wonder if he actually thought these pages would be found useful by anyone other than him. Not enough thought was put into them on his part upon their individual creations. It's unfortunate that they weren't very useful, but they really have to go. Energybender - Talk 00:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Per Energybender. Time to vote. Mattkenn3 Talk 01:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
No one says keep for this article. Could an admin delete it as soon as possible? Energybender 23:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.


What do people think? Puragus Talk 04:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, it can be kept if we really envy Wikipedia and want to be just like them. Also, during this part of the process, Category:Female need not be created yet, right? Energybender - Talk 00:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I find it awkward that you restored that category Puragus, you yourself deleted a category much like this one a while ago, either that or you mentioned being against creating a category like that one. I see neither harm nor benefit in having this category, but I'm concerned that we might slowly get more Wikipedia like, and not in the good way. Omnibender - Talk 13:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I think it is simply unneeded. AlexTalk 20:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I think if this wikia dint need it so this wikia dont need

Categories then!? Young Piece 05:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I dont really see the point of this. Its already clear by the pics (except maybe the Boiling Rock Warden). Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 08:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Young Piece, Wikia obviously needs categories, but just not this one. Please, bear with us. AlexTalk 13:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Overall, it's quite vague and will just half the characters, although overall in a category tree this would be beneficial to help one find whom there are looking for. I am neutral on this one. Joey - Talk Contribs 04:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the category is useless. See Zero's comment. The 888th Avatar 02:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it has been decided, can an admin please delete this (Again). Thanks. Joey - Talk Contribs 21:04, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

This was voted on nearly a week ago, four to nothing. Delete. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 03:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

This article has finally been deleted. Puragus Talk 10:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)



  1. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. AlexTalk 21:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 23:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. Energybender 00:20, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This category has been deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.


Can someone please delete this? I made it before I realized that it won't be needed until he Last Airbender movies come out. Plus it's page already been deleted. --SuperFlash101 02:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I put the speedy deletion template on the page already. When Omnibender or somebody comes on, they'll take care of it. Energybender - Talk 02:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

LOL. You know I made a similar template long ago when the Sozin's Comet Spoilers were coming out. AHAHAHAHAHA. I deleted it after the Episodes were run. Okay I'll see what I can do. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 04:42, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

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


What was the point of this category in the first place? Usually we go towards not being just like Wikipedia. There they split up articles into their many parts; here we don't have to. What we should do is include these all in their articles. Energybender 00:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

There was no point. So who (by which I mean admins) is going to delete this or say something? The 888th Avatar 06:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
No one said we are going to delete this yet. Does anyone have any ideas on this? Should we keep the relationships pages, or merge them with the character articles? Energybender 19:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
This is basically a category in which to keep the relationship articles, it's more of a way to organize things really. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


  1. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  2. Energybender 18:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  3. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 18:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  4. AlexTalk 21:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  5. Very well, Omnibender's right. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 23:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


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


I've never seen an actual time in the series where someone was praying or giving any indication to a so-called "greater power". The characters may or may not worship some divine spirit off-screen, but the wiki doesn't cover that. The one instance that was made to contradict this would be in Bitter Work when Zuko frustratingly spoke to God. "You've always thrown everything you could at me. Well now I can take it, and I can give it back! Go on, strike me! You've never held back before!" Energybender 00:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, the show is influenced by eastern religious ideas and philosophies, but the issue is always sort of danced around when it comes to religious practices of the characters. I think there is religion in the show (remember, Aang's a monk) but it's never spelled out what the characters believe, other than references to Buddhist and Hindu practices and ideas. I don't necessarily want to delete this page, but I'd rather it be expanded to something more out-of-universe, so we could cover the topic more realistically. I'd like to change the page to "Religion and Spirituality in Avatar: The Last Airbender", or "Religious influences in Avatar: The Last Airbender". If we did that, we could write a much more broad and accurate article. Puragus Talk 01:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's any contradiction here. If you would read the instances I've given on the page, you'll notice that none of them relate directly to the main characters (with the possible exception of the quote from "The Great Divide"). Many of the instances are either taken from various pages, or various throwaway quotes (such as Kyoshi's shrine previously having been used as a temple). Furthermore, you'll notice I haven't had time yet to deal with either the Northern Water Tribe (with its worship of the Moon and Ocean), or the Air Nomads, who actually present a unique problem. I personally see this page as having the possibility to generate good discussion and grow - there's much evidence lying just below the surface. On a more practical note, if we have room for pages like "Little boy's Mother", I don't see why there isn't room for a legitimate analysis of a topic with so much potential. telane 01:39, 3 December 2008 (UTC) P.S. I seem to have tried to post this at the same time as Puragus, so it may not address the issues containted therein.

I really dont think that we should even use the word religion here. The show always stated spirituality. Its close, but not religion. If you must, then rename the article and the instances within the article with spirituality or spiritual practices but dont put religion. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 10:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Zero. I've never really seen much religion or religious influences in Avatar (I never even thought of that until I saw this discussion!), but I have seen a lot of spirituality and philosophy. The 888th Avatar 10:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

If so, we can move the page to "Spiritual beliefs", I think it's the most appropriate title. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 13:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Omni. It sounds much better. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 13:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with Omni. Also, just to clear something, they actually have had an instant where someone worships a spirit, you remember, in the Book 1 finale, where the Water Tribe bows down to their faces to Aang/Moon Spirit. --SuperFlash101 21:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Do they do it all the time? No. Maybe they did it to show respect to the ocean spirit. Anyway religion is defined as a complete code of life as well as the worship of a higher being. Thus the reason for this discussion. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 04:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

"Spiritual beliefs" sounds good. The 888th Avatar 04:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay guys, I don't mean any offense here; I realize that religion is a very touchy subject, and it can make people very uncomfortable. I think you all know this, and I think you guys are kind of writing off the religious stuff in the show as "spirituality" in an effort to get around it. Just hear me out: you are all right in saying that Avatar is not a religious show, but there are religious influences on certain concepts within the show. Just read what I have to say:

First of all, I agree that "Spirituality" would be a better way to describe the beliefs of the Avatar population, and the themes of the show. The people (or at least most of the "good" people) of the world Avatar seem to be very spiritual when it comes to things like nature and morality. However, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of orthodox or structure (the mark of a religion) to those beliefs, just general ideas. And when it comes to the themes of the show, many of them are spiritual (For example: the conflict between advanced scientific civilization, as represented by the Fire Nation and their determination to consume the worlds resources to build their great civilization, verses the natural world, as represented by Aang and his deep connection and love for nature.) But none of these themes are exactly religious.

However, there are definitely certain aspects of the show that are influenced by certain eastern religious ideas. The word Avatar is originally a Hindu term, and you read the article, you'll see that the Hindu concept of an Avatar is similar (not exactly the same, but similar), to the show's Avatar. And the Chakras in the show are almost identical to the Hindu concept. I've also thought the way the show uses the spirits and the Spirit World is very similar to ideas in Shintoism and certain tribal religions. Also, everyone agrees that there is philosophy in the show, but those philosophies espoused by the show are originally Buddhist ones (religion and philosophy are often related and, in certain cases, intertwined).

Now, once again I'd like to say that Avatar is absolutely not a religious show. There are no direct instances or references to religion within the show itself. But if we were to say that there are no religious influences on the show, we'd be ignoring facts that are right in front of our face. I don't feel that what I'm saying is very extreme; the only thing I am saying, once again, is that certain aspects of the show are influenced by certain eastern religious ideas. I feel it would greatly benefit the wiki if we were to have a page that deals with these influences. Puragus Talk 21:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

So what shall we call this page: "Spiritual beliefs" or "Spirtuality"? Let's see if it's not centered on one thing, and I'll create a vote box. Energybender 23:50, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I think the way to go is to name the page "Spirituality" and discuss morality, philsophy etc. within it, and then have a small heading at the end called "Religious Influences in the Show". Religion can come under spirituality after all. However, if we don't like mixing them up, we should create a page for religion called "Religious Influences in Avatar: The Last Airbender" and a page for spirituality called "Spiritual Beliefs". The 888th Avatar 03:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I kind of like the idea of two separate pages. We could have one page like "Spiritual beliefs in the World of Avatar", which would deal with the in-universe belief systems of the characters and civilizations. We could have another page that, like the 888'th Avatar said, could be "Religious Influences in Avatar: The Last Airbender" that would deal with out-of-universe Religious influences.

Actually, if we wanted to get really specific, we could create a third page called "Themes of Avatar: the Last Airbender", which would be out-of-universe, and detail the themes, philosophies, morality and symbolism in the show. Puragus Talk 04:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Themes page...a good idea. We'll just need to be careful that whoever works on that project has good English and can pick out the themes etc. We'll also need to careful not to go too far with the idea. Drawing "themes" from stupid places looks just bad. The 888th Avatar 06:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Your choice. The only reason I said anything was that I did not think that Religion was the correct word for the name of that article. See, Religion, as I stated before, is not just the belief in a supernatural being or the collection of rituals and beliefs but also a complete code of life. That is what religion used to mean long ago and what it means in many parts of the world even today. That is why I say spiritual belifs is better suited. Anyway It is also true that I think that religion should not be used due to the recent problems in our world. It could lead to an increase in vandalism as well, if any vindictive people get involved. I honestly think that we should steer clear of that word, that is why I think Spirtual Beliefs is better. Its close enough, yet different so it wont cause any affront. Anyway, I'm gonna gracefully bow out of this discussion. All I ask is that we should think carefully on this. All I really suggested was the renaming/moving of the article. I leave the rest up to you. I am trusting you guys to make the right decision. Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 14:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I've created a page Cultural Influences in Avatar: The Last Airbender, which addresses the out-of-universe religious influences that I raised above. Anyway, I support naming the original article "Spiritual Beliefs in the World of Avatar", and having it deal with the spiritual/religious belief systems of the population. Puragus Talk 19:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I support it too. I'm going to enjoy editing the Cultural Influences Article in the mean time... The 888th Avatar 14:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

So... move the article or delete it. Which is it? Zero Sign - Zero - Talk 10:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

No one has objected for nearly a week to moving the original page to "Spiritual Beliefs in the World of Avatar" so that's what it should be named. I'll move it. 888th Avatar - Talk - Contributions 11:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This article has been redirected to Spiritual Beliefs in the World of Avatar.
Please do not edit this discussion.