Talk:Avatar: The Last Airbender

This page has a linked list all current and archived topics for easy searching and browsing.

The Awakening Full Episode Review

And here we are again.->[1] Just givin a heads up in regards to all the Avatards that are gonna read it and start posting the info up left right, and pretty much anywhere they see fit. Believe this happened last time with that whole Secret of the Fire Nation thing. Can't quite remember how it went down, but I'd assume that the info was held until the episode aired. Could be wrong, so is that how its gonna be this time round? Father's Wish II 10 September 2007 (UTC)

New Article for the Movie?

Why don't we make a new article for The Last Airbender? I've got sources lined up that we could use. -Dylan0513 (talk) 21:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Then go ahead, be bold in doing so! I'll help out if you wish. NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 23:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I put a start on the article. Please everyone feel free to help in expanding it! -Dylan0513 (talk) 00:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:NFF. Why this particular film deserves an article when filming has not begun is something you cannot justify. Alientraveller (talk) 16:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, first of all, you are being rude. Secondly, you need to discuss changes before making them yourself. I agree that we shouldn't have the article now that I read the policy, but 2 does not make a consensus. The article stays as an article until discussed first. -Dylan0513 (talk) 17:25, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if you feel I'm rude, but I believe you are ruder for violating guidelines without a decent reason. For this, I will nominate the article for deletion. Alientraveller (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

So, if I understand correctly, taking action against a non-user-related article based on personal offense against an individual user, after said user admitted their error and offered to discuss the matter, while throwing out consideration for the opinions of others and refusing to discuss the matter civilly, is not rude? Ngorongoro (talk) 18:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I've lost track of what's going on myself, but if anyone's interested here's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Last Airbender. Again, sorry for whatever unintended offense. Alientraveller (talk) 18:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Continue discussion here alientraveler, and please, make it civilized. -Dylan0513 (talk) 19:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Look at my sandbox please, its there temporarily until production starts. ChaosMaster16 (talk) 01:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Ok, I'm back

Who else wants to help make this article Featured again? The Placebo Effect (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm in :) Welcome back. NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 19:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back Nico! This article's been unfeatured for too long. -Dylan0513 (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'm putting this article ON peer review so we can get this ball rolling. Also, I think we should try to work on getting as many character article either Featured or Good clas so that way we can make it a Featured Topic as well. (Great Job when I was gone by the way) The Placebo Effect (talk) 04:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

While we are talking about Featured Topics, Wikipedia:FTC#Seasons of Avatar: The Last Airbender is pretty relevant :)

As for the character articles, we don't really need to GA too many. It might be hard to do so, especially with the lack of sources. One easy solution is to try to improve the Aang article and merge everything else with List of characters in Avatar: The Last Airbender. Then a massive cleanup project for that should be done, and we should have everything done for a basic FTC. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 23:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, for this article, I think I know what needs to be done. We should try to reorganize the lead and also the entire article. I'm thinking we could do it like the 30 Rock article, which is really really good.

1. Production - Conception, Influences, Storyboarding
2. Cast and Characters
3. Series Synopsis
4. Response
5. Releases on DVD and other media

What do you guys think of that? NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 23:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The Last Airbender redirect

I'm sure I am not alone in this, but when I am looking for this artical, I simply type The Last Airbender into the search box (it is too much hastle to type Avatar: The Last Airbender and Avatar has many meanings). Anyway, I have just done this now only to be redirected straight to the bottom of the page to the film information. Can someone change this (I have no idea how too) as The Last Airbender is (even though the series has endded) more commonly refeded too the show more then the film at this moment in time and it is annoying to have to scroll up to the top of the page when you shouldn't have too.Wild ste (talk) 19:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The Last Airbender is the name of the upcoming movie, and actually was its own article for a while. If you have a source for TLA commonly referring to the show rather than the movie, we should do that, but it doesn't seem like that in my experiences. NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 19:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The main reason I said that was because this has happened before. Someone did this earlier last year and I put pretty much this same comment on here and someone reverted it. As the film hasn't even cast anyone yet, surely the show is more important?Wild ste (talk) 14:58, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The film already has cast some people, although it is still shaky and rather controversial. In any case, since there is already a section on the film, then the redirect should go there. For future reference, you can change the redirect by going to the redirect's name + &redirect=no in the url bar. --haha169 (talk) 05:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Article structure

Sometimes it gets really annoying when one has to plow through all these other cultural stuff to get to the parts directly related to the show. I think it would be great if those things could be moved under the show info 203.117.66.237 (talk) 15:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but the Manual of Style recommends that the article be laid out in the following format:

Production

Series

Other media

The cultural influences go best with production.

Consider using the links in the table of contents. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 00:07, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Fire Lady

Just something I noticed, the synopsis for the third seasons mentions "Fire Lady Azula". I don't remember this ever being mentioned in the episodes, she was refered to Fire Lord Azula by her father when he named her such, and she herself used Fire Lord rather than Fire Lady.

Where did this come from? 125.238.124.165 (talk) 10:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

It might have been a bit of assumption. If you remember Azula using Fire Lord, I'll change it. NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 13:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, they never use Fire Lady in the show. ..I remember having this discussion before here, wonder how it snuck back in the article. -Dylan0513 (talk) 15:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Anime Section

Why does the section even exist in the article? It's not an important part of the show. The section just includes some trivial quotes. There really is no controversy, Avatar is American Animation, not an Anime. -Dylan0513 (talk) 23:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps this shouldn't exist as it is own section, but points should definitely be made about this. Avatar is completely different from both Japanese and American animation, and recognition of that fact is a necessity. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 23:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, the section definitely shouldn't be titled "anime." What else might go in the section? Maybe it could be included in a "reception" type section. We've already got Ratings and Awards under Response, so we could put it as another sub heading under there with some other info on how critics have reacted to the show's style? -Dylan0513 (talk) 23:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

New award nomination! :D

Avatar is nominated for another award! :) Here's the link: [[2]]. --Freespirit1981 (talk) 20:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Forgive my belated response. Thanks for keeping us updated with this! It has been helpful. :D --haha169 (talk) 04:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Oooh, I'm sorry I missed this.

Haha, tell me when you are thinking about doing a GAN push. I can drop another project to help out then, as Universe of Avatar: The Last Airbender has finally been mainspaced. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 04:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Good God. That universe article needs some serious cut-down, but that can wait. I've given this (not the Universe one) article a read-through, and it certainly has potential. But there are still minor issues (like the lead, it mentions "making it a mixture of what were previously traditionally separate categories of anime and US domestic cartoons." That has a cite somewhere down in the article, which should be duplicated here. In any case, I'm too tired to do anything right now (after running 5 miles in the pouring rain), and I'm going on a ski trip. I'll be back next week if you have any questions, although I have some free time tomorrow as well.

But my impression of this article is that it could pass GAN if someone responds to problems promptly and fixes them. That's essentially the only skill required to pass GAN - all in all, it is much simpler than FAC. (One reviewer verses however many). --haha169 (talk) 02:51, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm on call enough to fix GAN problems, but there might be a bunch of edits to do.

As for the Universe article, it has already been cut 1/3. It has down to 100kb now, from 150kb. Feel free to help cut though; it took me like three weeks to do this much. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 02:54, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Games Section?

Does this article really need an entire section on the console games? They have their own articles, and they're mentioned in the introduction.

Furthermore, there's conflicting information-The section here claims that "The Last Airbender" video game was THE top selling THQ product of 2006, while the actual article for the game claims that it was the top selling NICKELODEON product. Could we get some verification and cleanup here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.44.120 (talk) 02:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

They relate to the article, and are written as one sentence summary style pieces. I see no reason to remove it. Also, I have fixed the mistake I had put when writing it. Thanks for noticing! NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 02:40, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

For this being the main article there is not only no problem, it is necessary as the topic covers the entire series and all notable media to some extent. That they all have their own article is irrelevant. Whether they had their own article or not, they are still relevant to the series.じんない 08:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Leaving messages to WT:AVATAR and Talk:List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters

I've been looking through the List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters article for a while now, as I have done in the past, and I just don't believe that it deserves its own article. A lot of that information is repeated information , and honestly, 50% of that information at the very least, does not need to be on Wikipedia. It would be so much more useful on the Avatar Wikia, where they have the project scope to go into massive detail. We don't. We are supposed to keep things nice and short, not go into every little detail. I propose that we expand the Characters section on this article by merging in List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 20:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we should be expanding the character's section in this article. But I wouldn't argue the proposal to remove the list. I'll see what other reactions are. --haha169 (talk) 01:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

This has been something that's been debated here for as long as I've been editing the Avatar articles. I always have though the characters article is pretty stupid. But if you merge it, you'd have to include the secondary characters on the main page, who shouldn't be there. I think we should either bring back the minor characters article (an article just for the minor characters) and delete the characters article or we should put the minor characters into the universe article and delete the characters article. -Dylan0513 (talk) 01:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, I don't really want to crunch together more into Universe than it already is. What I'm arguing for is the removal of secondary character information altogether. They're just simply not worth keeping an entire article dedicated to them. At most, this would require a few hundred to a thousand extra words in Avatar: The Last Airbender#Characters. Doing that would allow for much easier maintainence, get rid of list and fancruft, and give to Wikia what we don't really need - excess fan details. These articles are supposed to have have some real world connections in them. Articles like Universe we might just need, as there is too much to say otherwise and is citable, but Characters is minor enough that it is possible to exclude without losing any major points. In addition, Characters has nothing that can really help cite it, and we aren't losing any well-written information at all either, as the article is in pretty bad shape and whatever is there is duplicated at the Wikia anyway.

Hopefully, that ramble made sense. If not, tell me, and I'll give it a better shot. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 02:14, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Nuke. I think it should be merged - as long as too much information is not taken out. Rashu0 (talk) 02:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)