FANDOM


Earth Kingdom box This is a page archive.

Please do not add or remove any content from it. (113,887 bytes)

Southern Raiders ship Edit

This article is small, doesn't say much, and violates the policy of not making articles for objects of minute importance. I say deletion. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 22:31, December 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 22:31, December 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — It shouldn't even be discussed since it does violate the policy. Delete. And Merry Christmas! Water Spout tаlk • blog 22:51, December 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support SupportDcasawang1 - Talk 20:11, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — Well, i have just improved it, and i think this ship is important for the series. If wasn't this ship, the Southern Water Tribe would be powerful like the Northen one. Think about it... Renatabls 14:01, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Nothing suggests that that was the lead ship during the Fire Nation Raids years ago. It was just the lead ship when Katara and Zuko decided to find Yon Rha. We know nothing about its history as a war vessel, it's design we know very little of, and we don't know anything about its crew. If we are to keep it, then I suggest that someone improve it at least to the same standard as the Empire-class battleship. Water Spout tаlk • blog 17:44, December 27, 2010 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Article deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Sokka (Games) Edit

This article has an infobox and nine words...does it really need to be kept? Carloso 00:51, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — Sure it's a little page, but we can improve it. Keep it. 1stAvatar (talkcontribs) 00:56, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — I agree with 1stAvatar. If someone were to add info to it, then it could be useful.

Support Support — It can be made when sufficient information is gathered. For now it's just there and it serves no purpose. Water Spout tаlk • blog 01:54, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 02:18, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — An article needs to have more than one sentence. Surely it can't be too difficult to recreate the information that is there at the moment for when we actually need it. The 888th Avatar (talk) 03:42, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose —we don't need to delete it, we just need to expand it Victory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 03:02, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

This discussion was resolved. The result of this discussion was:

Article kept (no consensus).

If you wish to restart this discussion, please post under a new subheading below.

Variations on the Bending arts Edit

It's a duplicate of Specialized bending techniques essentially.--

As in the page only had the template delete, i have deleted it :) Renatabls 01:42, December 28, 2010 (UTC)
Um, you aren't allowed to delete it, no rollbacks are, you can only delete pages in an "emergency." Moreover, VfD pages can't be deleted without discussion, but what's done is done....-- 01:45, December 28, 2010 (UTC)
Sorry..i didn't know that...but...someone created the page again...so...let's discuss about it. Renatabls 02:26, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 02:26, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 02:27, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support SupportCarloso 02:27, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — 02:30, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — I had changed to Speedy Deletion because I was thinking it doesn't need a discussion, but it's ok... Dcasawang1 - Talk 02:34, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support SupportMillennia2 (TalkStart Running) 02:43, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This page serves the same purpose as Specialized bending techniques and is essentially a duplicate. It is not subject to discussion.
Please do not edit this discussion.
I'm going to delete this article now, but in future, remember that admins determine consensus on this page as we're the ones given the responsibility for deleting pages, so leave it to admins to close deletion discussions :) The 888th Avatar (talk) 07:06, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Greetings in the world of avatar Edit

Unnecessary.-- 09:41, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — Now that i re-think the entire concept of merging it(and also Vulmen's reply), i realized it's just too minute of a detail to set up a section within the four nations.And i can't believe Aang playing with Sokka is also considered as a formal greeting! AvaFan (talk contribs) 04:25, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — Merge it, perhaps separately with the Four Nations ? AvaFan (talk contribs) 03:27, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

I can't even see merging it really. I mean, it seems irrelevant and unneeded wherever it's added. It's not like we need somewhere telling us "Bowing is the most popular greeting" - that's actually also not true. Yes, bowing is used to show respect/greeting, but even the pictures used on the page for that are for entirely different purpose. (Accepting a mission from the rich/powerful Bei Fong's, playing around Aang/Sokka) - etc etc :| Vulmen (talkcontribs) 03:39, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — Can you give me a week to work on it, because it could be improved. If in a week you feel it is not up to standard, it can be deleted. Will94|talk page 11:11, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — Not needed. "Hey is a popular greeting in the world of Avatar." I don't think that it's a valuable article. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 13:11, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 14:10, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — As per above. Dcasawang1 - Talk 18:02, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — I think it should be merged with some other page. VJavatar says Happy holidays 19:10, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

What I said up there ^ Vulmen (talkcontribs) 03:39, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — I agree with Will94, let's try to improve it before deleting it. Why not after all ? French Froglegs (talkcontribs) 19:18, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Because if this is allowed to stay, then that would open the door for pages like "Farewells in the World of Avatar," "Lighting in the World of Avatar," etc. I think that this page is a waste of an article and deserves to go. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 20:02, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — This page contains extremely unneeded information, very blunt obvious mentions - such as quote from The Bos previously. This shouldn't exist and allow room for... well, The Bos said it all really. And the page really is just a conglomerate of pictures than text as well. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 20:16, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — As Bos said, it's completely unneeded. "World of Avatar" pages are supposed to be large pages that cover a variety of sub-topics. Greetings is just minor and does not warrant enough information for it's on page. Water Spout tаlk • blog 20:21, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — Delete it. It has no purpose. 1stAvatar (talkcontribs) 20:28, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support Support — Eh, the article is not really that needed Chapreyes (talkcontribs) 01:57, December 29, 2010 (UTC)Chapreyes

Support Support — Uneeded. Carloso 02:04, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — Merging the hand signs with the culture in the world of avatar seems appropriate.. Is being mentioned throughout the series and it is true i think it is significant...if things such as berries which hardly come in the entire series can bve a part of an article why not this...

Support SupportMillennia2 (TalkStart Running) 23:46, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

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

Lightning Bending Edit

Not need. Renatabls 03:26, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 03:26, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

I made it into a redirect

Water Spout tаlk • blog 04:35, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
This is a duplicate of Lightning.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Plantbending Edit

Unlike other techniques like lightning, Metalbending or Bloodbending, Plantbending does not warrant enough information to have its own page. We have no clear indication of its history and we don't know who developed it.

Any expansion of this topic should be added on to the Plantbending section of Waterbending.

Water Spout tаlk • blog 22:28, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

I expanded the page! Can I convince anyone to change their vote? Thebiguglyalien (talkcontribs) 01:56, January 5, 2011 (UTC)


Support SupportWater Spout tаlk • blog 22:28, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — This article can be fixed up if effort is put into it. Look at Bloodbending. I know we don't have as much info as that for plantbending, but we can still do something like that. Thebiguglyalien (talkcontribs) 22:33, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Like I said, the reason Bloodbending has its own page and it's remaining as its own page is that it has sufficient information to support it. Plantbending does not. And no offense, but why would you create a page, only to leave it as a stub? Were you expecting someone else to expand it? Even the anon who created Bloodbending left at least four sections of information, but you barely did two. We have enough stubs, under constructions and low-class articles as is, and one that doesn't need its own page shouldn't be created, or should be left till we fix the others.
Water Spout tаlk • blog 22:37, January 2, 2011 (UTC)
I created a stub, because that's all I did at that time. I figured more information could be added all of the time (by me and others). Thebiguglyalien (talkcontribs) 03:37, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — I don't even think the other sub-skills should have there own page. The Crystal Bender-32x29px|link=User talk:The Crystal Bender 22:35, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support —in doesn't warrant its own page, mainly because of lack of information VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR) 00:30, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Information is being added constantly. (I would like to say thank you to The Ultimate Waterbender for helping out on this page.) Eventually, it should have lots of info. Thebiguglyalien (talkcontribs) 00:35, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportSpecialized bending techniques. Dcasawang1 - Talk 01:38, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 02:32, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support —-- 02:53, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — As per WS --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 03:41, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

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

Azula's sleeping robe Edit

Seriouisly, it showed up....maybe twice in the show? For a minture? Shouldn't this be a redirection to Fashion in the World of Avatar? The Crystal Bender-32x29px|link=User talk:The Crystal Bender 22:39, January 2, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — The page is in a good standard for the wiki. Renatabls 02:33, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — I'm quite positive that this was documented by the official site, and as we make articles on everything it features, it should stay. Water Spout tаlk • blog 02:36, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose —-- 02:53, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose — --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 03:39, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose OpposeDcasawang1 - Talk 03:53, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose OpposeVictory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 02:13, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

This discussion was resolved. The result of this discussion was:

Article kept.

If you wish to restart this discussion, please post under a new subheading below.

Coughing Guy Edit

Unneeded-- 22:14, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportMillennia2 (TalkStart Running) 22:19, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 22:20, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportFrench Froglegs (talkcontribs) 22:23, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportCarloso 22:28, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — wtf is this. Water Spout tаlk • blog 00:10, January 4, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 00:51, January 4, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support —-It might be ok if he was an actual guy, but because it's a effect, no. VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR) 02:05, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support —we don't need this Victory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 02:09, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — lol. cough ('nuff said) Vulmen (talkcontribs) 02:17, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — It amuses me that an article of that kind exists.AvaFan (msg) 08:54, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportDcasawang1 - Talk 12:35, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

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

51st Earth King Edit

Not necessary.-- Courage the Cowardly User Message Me Friends 01:48, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportWater Spout tаlk • blog 01:58, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — Who? Where'd this info come from? I don't know it? If someone can verify the accuracy and source it I would change my vote. Because otherwise I like the various extra added info. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 02:02, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

PS, I'm serious, I would like to know how this information ended up on the wikia...where did it come from? Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:36, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose —This article has relevant information Victory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 02:05, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportDcasawang1 - Talk 12:35, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 17:05, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

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

Pickled fish Edit

I think its mention here is enough. Dcasawang1 - Talk 20:09, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportRenatabls 20:26, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support Support — What DC said. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:34, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Support SupportWater Spout tаlk • blog 00:03, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

Edit: You know what, this is probably a policy violation, considering how insignificant it is. Should it be up for discussion, even?
Water Spout tаlk • blog 00:05, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
Of course, the Deletion policy is very subject to interpretation, but I personally think this one qualifies. The 888th Avatar (talk) 00:15, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
This discussion was resolved. The result of this discussion was:
Article deleted (probable policy violation).
If you wish to restart this discussion, please post under a new subheading below.

Chicken Pig Edit

Discussion started as requested by page creator.

Pickens and Pigsters are already documented under Hybrid pigs. Either it is deleted, or all the other pig variations should get their own pages, as well. I'm against that as the articles would be relatively short and generally repetitive with no special information to warrant their own page.

25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 02:11, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — It's already on the Hybrid pigs page.Delete it.Chapreyes (talkcontribs) 02:14, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
Delete Delete — No need for it. Toph Lover. 02:22, January 13, 2011 (UTC)Toph Lover

Keep Keep — It has real informations about the animal, besides, there are alot of pages tha has Main article: some page we should put the template in the Hybrid pigs page. And by the way, we don't need to create pages for all the animals in the Hybrid pigs page. Because this is the only hybrid pig that has a good info to make it as an article. Renatabls 30px|link=User_talk:Renatabls 02:43, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

There is a sentence of its anatomy, then two paragraphs about real world animals related to it. We can easily do the same with all the others.
25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 02:45, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
Not really, if we "see" this wiki "closely", we find some pages that are in the "same" position as Chicken Pig, like Firebending training; we don't have a page for waterbending training. Renatabls 30px|link=User_talk:Renatabls 03:05, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
That's funny you say that, I'm making a draft for Waterbending training right now lol
25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 04:02, January 13, 2011 (UTC)
XD Renatabls 30px|link=User_talk:Renatabls 04:11, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteDcasawang1 - Talk 15:30, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

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

Film:Toph Bei Fong Edit

The second film has not even been green lit yet, and too much unconfirmed info is there (ex:How do we know she's an only child? Is Lao her dads name?)07:21, January 18, 2011 (UTC)


Delete Delete — the movie hasn't even come out yet... Toph Lover 30px 07:27, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — For now. News on whether the movie is green-lit or not should be close. Nice template btw! AvaFan (msg) 07:37, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral NeutralDcasawang1 - Talk 13:10, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — I don't see the point of creating yet another stub film article. Develop those already in mainspace first. 25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 18:05, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — No point, plus the image is from the series. VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 22:12, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteRenatabls 30px|link=User_talk:Renatabls 22:24, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — As per Water Spout. We don't need a stub article waiting on Toph's release when the movie hasn't even been green lit yet. Besides that a majority of the text that is there is just speculation. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:25, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

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

Colossal Inferno Edit

Colossal Inferno doesn't need a page.

  1. It has no history considering it is a machine.
  2. All machines from the game should be compiled. Making separate pages would result in many unneeded stubs.
  3. Colossal Inferno had a very minor role. Nothing apart from saying it used fire and it tried to kill Aang can be placed.

Delete Delete25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 01:03, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — That is a miserable page. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 01:04, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteRenatabls 32px|link=User_talk:Renatabls 01:11, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —One line of writing. No info, no pics. Definetly. 1KB|link=User:JaidynM JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 01:15, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteDcasawang1 - Talk 01:58, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteAvaFan (msg) 07:36, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete1KB *~~Ian Bernard~~*1KB| 07:41, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteVJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 02:10, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — This is just plain stupid and pointless. Victory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 05:26, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — There's like no information on it. And no one seems to be expanding on it AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 17:39, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

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

Sokka (Games) Edit

I am putting this page up for deletion once more. I see no point in keeping a blank article. One can argue that it "can be improved" or it "is important". If that is the case, work with it and improve it.

It has been nearly 2 weeks and no changes have been made to the page in question. None. Therefore, the argument that it would have been developed is invalid, and as such, it should be deleted, as it serves as nothing more than clutter. Allowing this page to stay would serve as an indication to users that it is acceptable to make substandard articles (refer to Colossal Inferno, for example). That is not something we want to promote.

The page can be easily created when information has been gathered and written. For now, delete it.

Delete Delete25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 01:12, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
Delete Delete — If someone ever takes the time to put the page up later; maybe it'll get more info. For now... blegh at it. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 01:14, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —Delete it. It's a fail of a page. :) 1KB|link=User:JaidynM JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 01:16, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteRenatabls 32px|link=User_talk:Renatabls 01:29, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteAvaFan (msg) 07:10, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — It's kinda worthles...Toph Lover 30px 07:18, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteVJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 02:10, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — We might as well delete it since nobody's going to fix it. Victory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 05:28, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Spout. Dcasawang1 - Talk 14:00, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — If it could get some content, it would be a nice addition... but sadly.. as much as it breaks my heart to say.. it does need to be deleted. :"( 1KB *~~Ian Bernard~~*1KB| 15:19, January 25, 2011 (UTC) (from iPhone)

Delete Delete — It's pretty much just a picture. And not a very good one either. AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 17:32, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

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

Azulon's relationships Edit

Analysis of relationships is rather basic due to not having seen them for a long period of time. In addition, much of the article itself is pure speculation as to Azulon's relationship with other characters. The remaining information can be easily integrated into Azulon's article, though it likely already is.

Delete Delete25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 17:30, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Not need Renatabls 32px|link=User_talk:Renatabls 17:58, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Half of the info on this page is speculation, we don't need it Victory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 18:03, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Most of the info is said elsewhere. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 18:41, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteDcasawang1 - Talk 18:45, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteMillennia2 18:53, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Speculative info. We don't know that Azulon cared in the slightest nobody knew for certain whether the Avatar had survived or perished in the Air Nomad massacre, and yet the page claims Aang was his target for many years. No clue as to such. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:24, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — A lot of the information in this article seems to be speculation. It's like trying to create information that doesn't exist. AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 23:37, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Azulon is only seen in one episode, therefore we do not know much of his relationshippys. Hehehaha!!!!!!!! 69.205.195.136 23:44, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteVJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 02:38, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete25px|Dbdbzdbgtwoo 02:54, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Should only be for main characters. 1KB|link=User:JaidynM JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 01:34, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — I agree with JaidynM. Relationships pages should only be for main characters. Plus, about half of those sections are about Azula's relationships, not Azulon's. --The Ultimate Waterbender 01:50, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Although he got the ball rolling, what with the massacre, starting the war, and all, there's just not too much known about him. I think he did specifically say he spent years hunting Aang, but still . . . DesertDog (talk) 15:13, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I think we should keep it for right now. Azulon's relationships --Mataang (talkcontribs) 01:46, January 28, 2011 (UTC)Mataang

Why are you suggesting we keep this page? Last time I checked it had presumptuous information that can't be verified on it. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 02:01, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — We know nothing really about Azulon, so a relationship page is not necessary.--Skybender101 (talkcontribs) 02:35, January 28, 2011 (UTC)Skybender101

Delete DeleteChapreyes (talkcontribs) 22:26, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Azulon doesn't deserve a relationship page. 1stAvatar (talkcontribs) 17:23, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

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

Category:Weapons Edit

I'd like input on what to do with this - as the category "Military" and "Equipment" exist (any others?) that might serve this categories purpose. If it is agreed they do, then a weapons category is irrelevant as it would be a somewhat duplication. Either that, or add it into a subcategory. Thoughts? Vulmen (talkcontribs) 18:54, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to Spout and Renata for very meaningful contributions and insight to this. I like to see that we're discussing reasons for its keeping and dismissal, please continue that rather than just a vote if possible. :) Vulmen (talkcontribs) 05:22, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — as soon as it is a subcategory … French Froglegs (talkcontribs) 18:55, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — It's like this page the Timing device has Equipment and Military as it's category but it's not a weapon, i say keep. Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 18:59, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — If it's not a subcategory, delete it. I think it should be subbed under "Equipment". JS.. 1KB *~~Ian Bernard~~*1KB| 19:02, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep —--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 19:03, January 30, 2011 (UTC)Skybender101

Delete Delete — The Equipment category serves the same purpose as the Weapons category, but with a broader capacity. It is not required. Categories should not be so specific that they become so limited. When I made Equipment, I did so in the sole argument that it could host more than just weaponry, and it does. I don't see a point of establishing Weapons when there is already Equipment and Military that functions in the same manner. Military was already specified to be for objects and weaponry in entirety, and the majority of Equipment are already weapons- do we really need one article to be in four categories that all link to each other in the first place? If this continues to be the case, we're going to end up having 10 categories to place in any given article, and articles will start to end up cluttered. Weapons would be expanded to swords and armor, then to other trivial divisions and it will end in a mess. I strongly vote for the deletion of this category.

In response to Renata, there are always going to be differences between articles. It's a fact. Even in Weapons there is great variety. The matter of the fact is that a category is a "general class of ideas, terms, or things". They are not to be specific to an overwhelming extremity. This would be a different case if specification was of extreme importance, such as say, in biology, but in this particular case, it is not.

25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 23:33, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Spout. Dcasawang1 - Talk 02:04, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — We should keep this page. Victory Shall Be Mine!!! (talkcontribs) 05:12, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Definitely keep. Possibly as a subcategory of Equipment. Weapons is something that people commonly search for and having a category entitled weapons is beneficial. AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 18:46, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

That is why there is Weaponry in the World of Avatar, and to a certain degree, Technology in the World of Avatar. In addition, the Military section in itself is consisted of weapons, along with the Equipment category. Yet another sub-category for convenience is merely a waste of space.
25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 01:27, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
This discussion was resolved. The result of this discussion was:

Article not deleted.

If you wish to restart this discussion, please post under a new subheading below.

Re: Weapons Edit

I am bringing this category up for deletion again. My argument still stands.

25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 05:54, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete25px|link=User:Water Spout Water Spout 05:55, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —WS brought up some very good points.-- Courage the Cowardly User Message Me Friends 05:58, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete The reasons to keep I have seen are that it is unique to have Weapons on an article while equipment on another, and that the title "Weapons" is nice. But I do feel that WS' reasoning is sound; Weapons in the World of Avatar covers everything and then some than the category would. Hmm. Maybe someone offer some further reasoning? -- Oh and, the above votes do still count. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 06:08, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I do not believe this category is too specific. It is true that categories that only contain a couple of pages are a waste, but this category, even after weeding out items not specifically designed as weapons, has a resonable number of articles left in it - much more than some of those battle categories, anyway. Actually, I would go further to say that there are a lot of potential categories that are similarly specific, but just haven't been thought of. This goes back to the fundamental question: what is the purpose of a category? Categories were actually created as a navigation tool, not merely as a tool of organisation. Categories are the way through which readers can find articles very similar to the one they are reading. I feel that categories as navigation is a concept that has been neglected here, especially considering that we no longer have a sidebar menu capable of displaying so many links to the articles that matter. The 888th Avatar (talk) 06:16, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — As per what AvatarRokusGhost and 888 said. Having a category means a faster and convenient way to visit these articles that some might not even know existed, especially weapons. If anything should be done, it's reconsidering whether articles are suppose to be categorized in said category. Weapons can be equipments, but not all equipments are weapons. AvaFan MsgMe 06:24, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — We're having this discussion again so my response is the same. Having weapons as a category is good because that's something people would commonly search for as a category. Having an article: Weaponry in the World of Avatar is fine, but is not sufficient if someone is looking for something more specific. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 06:48, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

While what you say is true...something I would like to add is the page Weaponry in the World of Avatar is much more specific than the category could ever claim to be, down to even showing weapons that do not have pages/cannot be categorized, as well as breaking up the weapons/organizing them according to what Nation they hail from. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 06:56, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
The purposes of the article and the category are different - one is supposed to provide a general overview of all weapons ever used, including those that don't need articles, and the other is supposed to organise all articles we actually do have about specific weapons, and help navigation between them. Having the article does not mean we don't need the category, and vice versa. (Otherwise, I would have never been able to start the whole "World of Avatar" project in the first place...) The 888th Avatar (talk) 07:12, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
I didn't say I disagreed with that. :) Merely pointing out that AvatarRoku had said the category would be more effectual than the page, when it's actually vice versa. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 07:15, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
If a weapon or detail is too specific to have its own page, then it can go on the general weaponry page. But if it is something that is significant enough for its own page, then people may search for it more efficiently within the weapons category. This makes it beneficial to have both a weapons category and a weapons page, even if it understandably seems redundant. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 07:17, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I will have to change my opinion this time. After check wikipedia categories about this, I think the category should not be deleted. Per 888. Dcasawang1 - Talk 13:52, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — As I don't disagree with said reasoning (I have categorized my fanon with that navigation becoming a useful feature) I must consider turning my vote as well. I just don't want to see it get out of hand, or lots of unneeded "Duplicate" parent categories being added to pages when it already has a sub-category applied. Example, "Earthbending Characters" is sufficient to not placing the "Characters" category on a page. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 18:08, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — As per i said in the last discussion about this category. Renatabls 32px|link=User:Renatabls/Zuko's_Life 18:15, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Why do you want to delete this so badly? Victory Shall Be Mine!!! 05:06, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — As per all of the above arguments. Items like the timing device, or eclipse glasses should have a separate category from weapons such s sokka's sword. 1KB|link=User:JaidynM JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 06:47, February 17, 2011 (UTC)

This discussion was resolved. The result of this discussion was:

Article not deleted.

If you wish to restart this discussion, please post under a new subheading below.

Yue's mother Edit

Delete Delete — The page has apparently been deleted before, and the page is insignificant. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 21:53, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Bos. Dcasawang1 (talk) 21:59, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Reasons said by za Bos above and beyond...--Iceland77 MessageMePeople • In Azula's Mind 22:01, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Bos. I didn't even know such a page existed. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 22:04, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —@ARG someone just made that page.--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 22:09, February 23, 2011 (UTC)Skybender101

Delete Delete — I'm with the Bos, but the information should be put somewhere, saying in the Yue page or Arnook page Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 22:10, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Just fixed the link to the page. Like I said, I'm all in favor of deleting it, but I think its only right in principle that the page be visible at the time of voting. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 22:19, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — There really is literally nothing to put on this page. WYSIWYG. "What You See Is What You Get" Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:50, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Bos and Vulmen Renatabls 32px|link=User:Renatabls/Zuko's_Life 23:56, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Everyone. VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 23:23, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — There's not enough info about her. There's just a picture. My Fanon|link=Fanon:Avatar Wiki Farm JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 01:07, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Vulmen AvaFan MsgMe 01:09, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Eh,not enough info on herChapreyes (talkcontribs) 01:12, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

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

Aang's parents Edit

Delete Delete — It's such a minute detail it's really unneeded. Millennia2 00:43, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — I'm half and half. I feel it's okay. After all, we do have articles with less information. The Ultimate Waterbender - talk32px 00:47, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — It is not needed. Dcasawang1 (talk) 00:49, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — They didn't even like show their faces... --Toph Lover 32px 32px 00:50, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — This page is not needed. First, we have no idea what there names are and we have no idea who they are. So no this page should be deleted.--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 00:55, February 27, 2011 (UTC)Skybender101

Delete Delete — There's not enough info on Aang's parents to have a page about them.Chapreyes (talkcontribs) 00:59, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — What Skybender said --Iron avatar (talkcontribs) 01:01, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — Its of decent length, but I'm not sure if they are significant enough to warrant a page.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 01:03, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep —Even though they never appeared in the show (in The Avatar and the Firelord, it isn't his parents holding up Aang, it's a nun and two other nuns nearby.) I think they are a prominent enough detail to warrant an article because they were originally going to be in an episode centered around them. The page itself is of decent length and with a few edits it can become a better article.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 18:41, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Too small of a page. My Fanon|link=Fanon:Avatar Wiki Farm JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 01:07, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Millennia2 AvaFan MsgMe 01:11, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — I can't even believe that this page was created! Are his parents ever even shown? Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 01:32, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — The page is not necessary..too little info and not a thing known about them. I smell deletion. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 03:07, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — No need for this page. Delete ASAP. 1stAvatar (talkcontribs) 03:09, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — This page is useless. If you want things about Aang's parents put it in to a fanon. Jennythe3 (talkcontribs) 03:43, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I usually would vote no for these types of pages and they were only seen briefly. However, Aang is the main character of the show and they ARE a part of his past. I think the page should stay even if it is mostly speculation. Maybe add a picture in, too. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 20:03, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

We don't keep speculative information on this wiki though... Vulmen (talkcontribs) 20:06, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
I have seen speculation on a number of pages. Speculation is sometimes in the main sections of pages and often in trivia and other sections. Because of Aang's significance and his complicated past, I support this page. But I agree with you in general. I think this should be the exception, not the rule. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 07:23, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
And on that note; there has been a discussion and pretty much agreement that such speculation should be removed from said articles too. We shouldn't host information on main articles that clearly has no basis for why it is there. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:12, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Not needed. Aang20791 Talk Fanon 32px|link=User_blog:Aang20791 21:19, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Keep it, I agree with AvatarRokusGhost DigiPen92 (talkcontribs) 03:07, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — This page is completely relevant to the Avatar Universe, and most certainly should not be deleted. They appeared in an episode, are the parents of the main protagonist of the series, and their page doesn't have any speculation other than their deaths, which was confirmed by Bryke anyway when they stressed the fact that Aang is the last Air Nomad. The page is of reasonable legnth, has a trivia section, all that lacks is an infobox image. This article should not be deleted. Rassilon of Old (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 09:25, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Now the page has an image for the main template :) Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 22:24, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — Per Olórin; Rassilon has a good reason to it not be deleted. Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 18:55, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Per Olórin (again) Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 18:47, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Keep it, I agree with because they are part of Aang's past. So the page should remain on the wikia. User:Colonelsam

Delete Delete — I'm 99% sure that the profile picture thing is just of three nuns, because all of them have hair, which none of the men have. So at the least get rid of that picture. Ike 22:47, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

The way they're positioned, they clearly look like his parents to me. Right after he was born - its obvious. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 23:00, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Minor detail the does not directly relate to the plot, and is shrouded by speculation, rendering any information on the subject unreliable. Bassmasta2012 (talkcontribs) 22:50, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Where the even seen? VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 23:42, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

They are seen in The Avatar and the Firelord. Rassilon of Old (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 00:09, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — There is no need for such an article and we don't know enough for Aang's parents or any other Air Nomad parents to write such an article. AvatarFreak21 (talkcontribs) 17:55, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Changing my vote. I agree entirely with what Rassilon says. My Fanon|link=Fanon:Avatar Wiki Farm JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 07:51, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

So then wouldn't you cote keep? :O Rassilon of Old (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 07:53, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — I know I'm voting at the eleventh hour, but having just read this article, I can't not have a position on this article. I'm sorry, but I really don't see the point — the article states the obvious and offers nothing that viewers wouldn't be able to infer by themselves. The exception is that triva tidbit, which, let's be honest here, is not something that's important enough to justify having all this fluff around it for. Delete. The 888th Avatar (talk) 07:30, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I say it has relevant information and it should be kept. Kilo99 05:50, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

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

Yum Soon Han Family Edit

They were mentioned once, this is a very minor detail....-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 08:02, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — As per Olorin Millennia2 15:05, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —Per Olorin--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 16:20, February 27, 2011 (UTC)Skybender101

Keep Keep — It has just as much information as the page on the Pang family, and since we are not deleting that, I see no reason to delete this --Iron avatar (talkcontribs) 19:27, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Well that is the problem. It's really just a copy of that page, while remaining that small a page. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:08, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
Are you suggesting we should delete both articles?--Ironavatar

Delete Delete — It's pretty much just a soundbite in the show. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 20:04, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I made this page because it was mentioned the same amount of time as the pang family and that still gets a page. I do not think this page should be deleted but if it is, then the pang page should be deleted too. My Fanon|link=Fanon:Avatar Wiki Farm JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 08:14, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — It does contain information that ties to the Beifong family, perhaps a merge with the Pang family since it's both relatively the same. AvaFan MsgMe 08:32, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

What are you suggesting - a "Prominent Earth Kingdom Families" page or something of the like? --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 18:51, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
That makes sense. Better than two midget pages on unimportant stuff is one big page on unimportant stuff. Ike 22:58, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
There are a maximum of three named influential families. Besides, this has all the same content as the Pang family page, so there is no reason whatsoever to keep it or merge it.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 23:07, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
We could, like ARG suggested, make a page on Earthkingdom families and place all those informations in it instead of having separate articles bearing the same content. Besides, it is canonical info so we should have a page for this. AvaFan MsgMe 04:34, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — Per Avafan Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 18:38, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — I'm with Iron Avatar, but we could make a prominent Earth Kingdom Families page. Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 20:36, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — Eh, I don't care if it goes either way. 1stAvatar 23:03, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral NeutralVJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 23:42, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — Yes i'm nuetral as well. I'm definately with Avafan. --TophLover (talk 30px contribs) 23:50, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral — Changing my vote. I like Ava's idea. My Fanon|link=Fanon:Avatar Wiki Farm JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 08:03, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — If we have Pang Family we might as well have this page. Kilo99 23:59, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

They both contain relatively the same information, with the exception of only a different family name for each of them. There's really no significant dissimilarity between those two.AvaFan MsgMe 06:35, March 26, 2011 (UTC)
I think it should be merged with the Pang family. I'm not sure how to do that so if someone else was to do it, that would be great. Oh, and that was 888s idea. JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 07:12, March 26, 2011 (UTC)
@JaidynM: it was not 888's idea, he said: "Hmm... wasn't someone going to merge that page?". Dcasawang1 (talk) 12:10, March 26, 2011 (UTC)
If it really matters so much; it was someone elses idea and 888 simply reminded us. Now, is there anyone who knows how to merge a page? JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 08:50, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — The page has been mentioned and...well....it seems to me that they kinda have their own little place in the series.

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

Roundtable Discussion with M. Night Shyamalan Edit

It is a very minor detail that should not be included in our wiki. Do we have a page for every interview with Bryke on the canon section? No, because they aren't needed.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 18:23, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteRenatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 18:46, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Any important information here can easily be moved to either Shyamalan's page and/or The Last Airbender's page. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 18:47, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Olórin. Dcasawang1 (talk) 21:36, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Olorin and ARG. Chapreyes (talkcontribs) 22:35, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per ARG, move it to Shyamalan's page. AvaFan MsgMe 00:55, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Looks like I am late to the party. I created this page after 888th Avatar complained to me about excessive external links in the TLA2 page (and TLA page). Instead of having 8 references, I just use one wikia link to refer to the roundtable discussion. I need this article on its own page for practical reasons, NOT to highlight its importance. Otherwise, the external links on this page will get mixed up or confused with the external links in M.Night's own page - it will mess things up again. I am probably going to be outvoted anyway, so I plan to move this page as subpage under Film:M. Night Shyamalan.

Hasdi (talkcontribs) 05:58, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Before Hasdi's comment I probably would have said delete but if 888 says so, then... My Fanon|link=Fanon:Avatar Wiki Farm JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 08:17, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

What exactly do you need the page for? Also; surely one more link will not hurt.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 08:22, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — I'm with Olorin on this one, would one more link kill anyone? It might be confusing to new wikia members, but us who've been on a while, it won't be difficult. Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 13:51, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean by "one more link"? There are 11 external links that refer to this same event, and those are the ones I have found so far. At first, I have been using IO9 link but only ATLAO has the audio in multiple pieces. LAF link is slightly more complete but no audio. MTV link is the somewhat 'official' coverage of that event since MTV owns Nick hence A:TLA and A:LOK. Otherwise, there is no single "authoritive" link I can use. If you think this information "does not deserve" a page of its own, I can put in a section in Film:Development of The Last Airbender that can I collectively link back from the other film pages. I tried to put it under Film:M. Night Shyamalan but apparently this event does not deserve its own section either. What else can I use? A template? A category for links? This is getting silly... Hasdi (talkcontribs) 14:35, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
Why would you need eleven links? Why can't you just use one and then refer to the link in other parts?-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 18:00, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Because each link is incomplete picture of the same event. M.Night's plan for Appa being captured for example wasn't mentioned in IO9 link and his pronunciation for Toph and Bumi is only in the audio version. Anyhow, I understand where you are coming from: having a page or a section with his mugshot for those eleven links (plus others I have seen scattered on youtube and the net) is kind of overkill. Since I haven't any heard more suggestions, I am just going to use ARG's first suggestion. Those links can be moved under the External links for Film:Development of The Last Airbender, grouped under a subsection with one or two descriptive lines, which would comply with external linking policy. If that works, we can go ahead and delete the page. Hasdi (talkcontribs) 19:37, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

UPDATE: 888 suggested that I turn the page into a redirect, effectively deleting the page. Hopefully, we can close this out. Hasdi (talkcontribs) 01:16, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Article made into a redirect.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Wei Bei Edit

Literally the only information we have on him is "He's a character in ALOK" and even that isn't 100% confirmed. I say we delete.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 21:54, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Recreate the page when A:LoK is released. Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 21:55, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —If we get more info on him/her/it,then we should put the page back up.Chapreyes (talkcontribs) 22:33, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per everyone. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 00:08, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Renata AvaFan MsgMe 00:53, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — There is only one sentence that is not speculation. Thebiguglyalien (Yell at me here) 00:57, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — One sentence and not even confirmed. VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 01:02, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — As per Renata. My Fanon|link=Fanon:Avatar Wiki Farm JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 09:23, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Once again, I'm with all, but I think we should make an A:LOK character page so we can know some of the names of the new characters. Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 13:58, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Keep it. There might be more news this week from Wall Street Journal. (I think) DigiPen92 (talkcontribs) 00:38, March 7, 2011 (UTC)


You think we should keep this becuase there MIGHT be information coming out LATER? (Key words might and later). If more info comes out, then we'll just recreate the page, it's not like writing that one sentence again will be hard. Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 02:11, March 7, 2011 (UTC)


Delete Delete — I agree, this page should be deleted.--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 01:10, March 7, 2011 (UTC)Skybender101


Delete Delete — Since nothing was leak on who is voicing him, I have my dbouts he will actually appear. Iron avatar~

Delete Delete — When we learn more about him we can create it again. AvatarFreak21 </font>]] http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/aang-fnrobe-c1.gif (talkcontribs) 13:40, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

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

White Lotus Tile Edit

The information for this tile is just not necessary. The information and then a whole lot more is actually found on Order of the White Lotus, while some is also found on Pai Sho. The tile itself does not warrant a page and should be sufficiently described on both of said pages. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 01:38, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep —Maybe the page can be merged into The Order of the White Lotus or Pai Sho? Thebiguglyalien (Yell at me here) 01:58, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

You're kinda missing the point that it already is.... :) Otherwise I wonder what for expansion you have in mind. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 03:08, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
I meant actually taking it, and putting it in a section on one of the pages. Thebiguglyalien (Yell at me here) 04:24, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral —Like TBUA said. Give it a new title in one of those pages.AvaFan MsgMe 07:58, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Integrate it completely into the Pai Sho article, under section, White Lotus Tile. Rassilon of Old (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 09:30, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Neutral Neutral —Per AvaFan--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 12:03, March 9, 2011 (UTC)Skybender101

Delete Delete — Per Will. Dcasawang1 (talk) 19:59, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I'm with Thebiguglyalien, this is an important page. Here at the wiki, we are supposed to inform people of important things in the Avatar world. I think this is an important thing. Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 03:17, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — It is not neccessarily a redirect page to Order of the Whit Lotus, and I think it should be kept. Kilo99 05:53, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — It's already on the Pai Sho page, so why have its own page? 1stAvatar 05:58, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — you may aswell make a page for every pai sho tile. And no, it's best to just keep with the Pai Sho page ;) --TophLover (talk 30px contribs) 06:02, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I was undecided on this one. Still a little indifferent about it. But considering its a small remote object that plays an important role, I'm side with keeping it. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 07:43, March 16, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Dc Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 14:20, March 20, 2011 (UTC)


This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Article merged into Pai Sho.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Water Tribe Names Edit

Not needed. I'm not sure if this is against policy, so I put it up here. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 19:51, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — This could simply be a section under the Water Tribes page if it isn't already. The Ultimate Waterbender - talk32px 21:10, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't require a vote. Speedy deletion was sufficient. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 23:05, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Article deleted.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Anti-Bender Revolt Edit

It should be created after more information becomes available.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 00:18, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Incorporate the fact the Anti-Benders are involved in this "revolt" on their page, and I agree, this should be deleted following that for the time being. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 00:20, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Vulmen. Dcasawang1 (talk) 00:23, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Insignificant information, can be remade as more is made known. Bassmasta2012 (talkcontribs) 00:33, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — We should keep it, we allknow that the revolt will happen, and for insignificant info, we have all of these pages of characters that are no longer than this one. Kilo99 00:42, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Vulmen, DC, and Bassmasta. VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 01:10, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete DeleteRenatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 01:23, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 01:27, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Vulmen, why need it? 1stAvatar 14:15, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Olórin, Carloso - Talk 19:52, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

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

Film:The Last Airbender 3 Edit

It's just got too much unconfirmed info.-- Olórin The White TalkFriends 04:56, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

I thought about deleting it for some time because it is just too much hassle to update both F:TLA2 and F:TLA3. It may make more sense to just delete F:TLA3 and add it back if and after F:TLA2 comes out. HOWEVER, past comments will deleted and cannot be recovered!!! Hence, I suggest turn to page to a redirect to F:TLA2 but leave the F_talk:TLA3 page intact so it can be reactivated once F:TLA3 is ready to turn back into a page. Hasdi (talkcontribs) 05:11, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
Very good points Hasdi. I think the page should be removed as well, as we really have no set certainty that even the same actors, producer, writers/etc will be involved. The page can be safely recreated when the time comes. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 05:22, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Ok then, let's turn F:TLA3 into a redirect to F:TLA2 (effectively deleting it) but I suggest leaving F_talk:TLA3 intact (esp. if the comments are worth saving) until the time comes (if ever)

Delete Delete — Recreate it when TLA3 is released. Renatabls http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/Zuko_Sprite.gif 15:58, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Unconfirmed. Dcasawang1 (talk) 21:12, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —Per Renata. This page should be deleted.--Skybender101 - Talk 32px|link=Special:Contributions/Skybender101 21:19, March 23, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — As per Renata. JaidynM (Talk) - (Blog) 06:04, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —Same here.AvaFan MsgMe 06:27, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — What Renata saidChapreyes (talkcontribs) 06:41, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — At the terrible reception given for these movies, who knows if this one will even come out! Spo55 - Message Me Friends1KB 16:41, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — It's unknown if the film will ever come out. Aang20791 Talk Fanon 32px|link=User_blog:Aang20791 16:57, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per everyone. Millennia2 02:36, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Millennia2. Thebiguglyalien (Yell at me here) 01:29, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per Aang20791 AvatarFreak21 The First Storybender http://i1221.photobucket.com/albums/dd470/Renatabls/aang-fnrobe-c1.gif 16:14, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — We should wait until The Last Airbender 2 for a couple of months and add cast Toph's, Ty Lee's, & Mai's until they announced in TLA2. DigiPen92 (talkcontribs) 00:24, April 6, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete —We should indeed wait until we know more about casting and the second move before we do a page on TLA3. That's why I vote to delete it (for now, anyway). Btw, sign with 4x"~" so we know who you are. --AvatarRokusGhost1KB|link=Fanon:Avatar:_Energy_Saga 06:06, April 2, 2011 (UTC)

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

Black Snow Edit

This page shouldn't be deleted it has no reason to be deleted. This is my first page i've created and it should stay. (Agent Slash 20:37, April 17, 2011 (UTC))

  1. Support Support —- Random objects of unimportance are random and unimportant--Jack's Posse Fic (talkcontribs) 20:48, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
This is very insignificant, and a very small page with little information and even a default picture/layout. This is not even necessary to be voted for deletion. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 04:45, April 18, 2011 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:

Article Deleted.

Please do not edit this discussion.

Zheng, Pipa Edit

These two articles are short, rarely trafficked, and have very little information, most of which has been copied to the Music in the World of Avatar page. Though they had a reason for existing when I created them, that purpose has been mostly superceded by the Music page. I suggest deleting them and merging whatever content is left onto their respective section on the Music in the World of avatar page (In general, actually, it might be helpful to do the same to all the random object pages - put them on their "[Objects] in the World of Avatar") telane (talkcontribs) 23:13, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

The articles must be kept since the objects had a description in the old Nick.com site. Dcasawang1 (talk) 18:01, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, neither of them had a blurb on the Nick site. I wrote both articles myself, using my own knowledge combined with the intros to their Wikipedia pages as templates. telane (talkcontribs) 01:29, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Yea, I can confirm that neither use Nick.com material. Nick.com generally only had material on stuff completely unique or very important to Avatar, and these two are just real world Asian instruments seen in the show. The 888th Avatar (talk) 03:12, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
If the content is valid, it could easily be merged into the music page. That seems the best course of action. --AvatarRokusGhostARG32px|link=Project:Fire Sages 07:07, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Quotes (Books 1-3) Edit

These pages should be deleted because we are currently transcripting all of the episodes. They were originally here to start off the transcript project bit by bit, but the project is already deep in, and I think they should be deleted.--  Sokka-spriteOlorin The White  Talk  Contribs  Friends 19:49, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — These pages will be an unnecessary redundancy once the Transcript Team has completed its mission. Bassmasta2012 (talkcontribs) 19:54, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I think until the transcripts are done, let them stay. Plus, if any quotes come unclear to the transcript writers, these can be used. KataraFanboy Send me a messenger hawk Read my fanon! http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o82/yankeesrule4ever/santa-katara1.gif 19:56, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I'm with PSU on this one. I think we better keep them around until the project is truly finished. Lady Lostris 19:57, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — As ARG said here, the Quotes pages are for notable lines, they are different from the transcript articles. Dcasawang1 (talk) 20:14, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — After all the transcripts are done, it should be deleted, but not now. Renata Talk - Survivor 21:42, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — What I said on 888's page per DC. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message meRead my fanon) Aang Cosmic Toph-DoBS-2 02:32, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — per ARG. —Haybernathy talk http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff433/Toph_Lover/KataangSprite.png 02:37, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Bring this up once the transcripts are done. AvaFan MsgMe 02:41, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — They're good for looking specific quotes up quickly. Sirius 13 FP 02:42, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Those three pages deserve to stay. Like Dcasa said, they're different from transcripts in that they highlight only notable quotes, not entire episodes. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:46, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — They don't need to be deleted, at least not yet. VJavatar The Last Wikibender(AR)25px 17:23, June 29, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I value those pages highly, in that they give me something to do when I'm bored; reading aloud quotes in the voices of characters also helps activate the prefrontal cortex. The transcripts will be great, but the Quotes pages are the place to quickly find notable quotes. AvatarHaiLi 32px|link=Special:Contributions/AvatarHaiLi 17:19, July 3, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I would like them to stay. – Natsu11 · (wallNanatsu no Taizai) 16:35, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

Keep KeepKing Marth 64 (talkother wikis) http://i1116.photobucket.com/albums/k576/DigiPen92/25px-Marthsprite.gif 03:49, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

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

Melon Lord Edit

This is just an alternate persona for Toph, the same reason why we don't have a page for The Blue Spirit; it's the same person under a different name.--  Sokka-spriteOlorin The White  Talk  Contribs  Friends 19:14, July 16, 2011 (UTC)

It was featured on Nick.com. It will not be deleted. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 19:18, July 16, 2011 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
Article kept.
Please do not edit this discussion.

Zhao's Flagship Edit

Delete Delete — I do not think this page is really needed. It is nothing more than a typical Fire Navy Empire-Class Battleship, and has no unique features (I don't believe it is twice the size of a normal FNECB ship either). KataraFanboy Send me a messenger hawk Read my fanon! http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o82/yankeesrule4ever/santa-katara1.gif 15:51, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Per PSU. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 15:53, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — Its not needed. – Natsu11 · (wallNanatsu no Taizai) 15:54, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I think we should keep it. --Commander In Chief of the Fire Nation Navy (talkcontribs) 15:56, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — Though the article is rife with speculation and unfounded presumptions, maybe this could be merged with the Empire-Class Battleship page. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 16:00, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

This sounds like a vote delete, but keep bits of detail. Bits of detail are already on the suggested page, so...really this is a vote delete it seems to me...? Vulmen (talkcontribs) 21:28, July 28, 2011 (UTC)
This is more of a 'vote keep' for the information, rather than the article itself. --I'm The Bos - Talk - Guardian 21:31, July 28, 2011 (UTC)
Yes - to which some of the info is already on the suggested page. Vote keep is a misnomer here, as we aren't keeping the page then. ^^" Vulmen (talkcontribs) 21:33, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — The information just added to the Empire-Class Battleship article is enough. Dcasawaang1 (talk) 16:07, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Keep Keep — I say we keep it. --Imperial Firebender (talkcontribs) 21:01, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — You guys are saying vote keep, but the reasons given are vacant. Such votes do not account for much, as we don't need to keep articles simply based on a "well, because" idea. As was said earlier, it's speculative - and, information is already present on the suggested page as Dcasawaang1 has stated. This article should be deleted. Vulmen (talkcontribs) 21:27, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

Delete Delete — There's not much information and if it can be found elsewhere then there is no need for the page. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message meRead my fanon) Aang Cosmic Toph-DoBS-2 15:25, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

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