This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nickelodeon, an attempt to better organize articles about or mostly related to Nickelodeon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or please visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.
This is a list of frequently asked questions relevant to editing this article. Certain questions crop up repeatedly on the talk page, taking up time and energy addressing the same questions more than once. This FAQ addresses these common concerns, criticisms, and arguments, and answers various misconceptions behind them.
Why isn't there a criticisms/controversies section?
Because a section dedicated to criticisms and controversies is no more appropriate than a section dedicated solely to praise and is an indication of a poorly written article. Criticisms/controversies/praises should be worked into the existing prose of the article, per the Criticism essay. In this case, the criticisms and/or controversy regarding casting has been worked into the casting section.
Not too sure if that section on the article is entirely relevant -- perhaps a summing up of that section (or maybe even the Reception section) is enough? --Adrian Dakota (talk) 16:17, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The Last Airbender → The Last Airbender (film) – Move this page to The Last Airbender (film) or The Last Airbender (2010 film) and redirect The Last Airbender to the main show Avatar: The Last Airbender. The Last Airbender is used to refer to the main show Avatar: The Last Airbender like how The Empire Strikes Back is used to refer to the main film Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back. The 2010 film should be titled The Last Airbender (film) or The Last Airbender (2010 film) (for if they were to reboot the Avatar: The Last Airbender film series). Light2Shadow (talk) 07:37, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Support While the show was not called The last Airbender (on its own) I believe that more people typing that will be looking for the show than the film. Also, if this is moved, can someone please move the redirect The last airbender since it currently goes here?--22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:55, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
I would also like to add that there is no reason to use The Last Airbender (2010 film) since the year is only need if there are more than one film of the same name and I am not aware of any other film titled The Last Airbender. If there is a reboot the title can be changed again once it's announced. In short it should be The Last Airbender (film).--126.96.36.199 (talk) 05:43, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Support I agree with the statements made above. I would also say that "The Last Airbender" would refer to the entire franchise, which includes the film, but is not wholly the film. "The Last Airbender" should direct to the original source of the franchise. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 05:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Oppose. Barring evidence that people who type in "The Last Airbender" (minus the "Avatar") are looking for something besides this article, I don't see this move as necessary.--Cúchullaint/c 14:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
While it would not exactly be evidence it should be noted that both Last Airbender and Last airbender have redirected to the series article for some time and I question whether or not someone adding the would be looking for the movie specifically.--184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Oppose per Cuchullain. When even one of the supporters admits that the show wasn't known by this title, it stands to reason that readers who type in only The Last Airbender are looking for the film. --BDD (talk) 23:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
The reason for the move is not very good or very clear. Is the real reason that the movie was terrible, so bad that people who care would like to hide it behind the very good TV series? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:11, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. A search engine test of "The Last Airbender" shows that Avatar: The Last Airbender comes up in reference to the show and that The Last Airbender (without Avatar) comes up in reference to the live-action film. The hatnotes that exist at this article and Avatar: The Last Airbender are sufficient to clear up any confusion. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 13:05, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
There should be lots more in this article about the reaction from the series creators. They don't talk about it often, but they did an interview here: http://www.nerdist.com/pepisode/nerdist-writers-panel-154-legend-of-korraavatar-the-last-airbender/ where they discuss it at length, describing how they had a major falling-out with Night, gave minimal input which was always ignored, and called it a "catastrophe". But I can't tell who's who when they're talking together. Maybe someone else can add some of this in? Staecker (talk) 15:52, 21 August 2014 (UTC)