Talk:List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters

Make this a double article?

Do you think it would be a good idea to also make this "The Legend of Korra's" character page? Its the same universe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.126.92.2 (talk) 12:46, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

• I agree. Its the same universe. Don't see why we shouldn't merge them. Korra's already here anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.198.173.210 (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Characters

And how you are determing who should be on here. That sounds like nitpicking. All of the characters that were on here are major recurring characters (Jet, Long Feng, King Bumi, Combustion Man) and never should have been removed and even if they weren't there should be an place for them. There's no reason why certain characters should be left out hence the name of this article. Just for the record I wasn't edit warring I thought it was just some IP editor removing stuff or something. But still it doesn't make sense that some characters aren't in here. Jhenderson777 (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Plus I have ever hardly seen an article with a little amount of characters. I have looked at the AFD nominations to see if that had any thing to do with it but I haven't seen any sign of it. I have heard that there was a consensus on certain characters to not be on here but that doesn't make any sense why that was done. And the consensus should have either been in this talk page or or on the AFD to truly matter. There should be no limit on deciding what characters should be on here. Defianetly since a lot of characters that were removed are redirected here. So that means they belong here. Jhenderson777 (talk) 15:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not taking sides here, but I would like to see where this consensus discussion occurred so I can at least read the reasoning behind it. I can't find it anywhere. Derekloffin (talk) 18:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

That's what I recently asked User:Rjanag the one who reverted me of this. And he hasn't responded yet. Jhenderson777 (talk) 19:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

(zomg, 4 whole hours without a response. Pardon me for being in a different time zone from you and commiting the rudeness of sleeping when you sent me a message.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

As I have already explained to you, I did not participate in the FLC for this page and never personally expressed an opinion on what characters should be included or not. I have noticed, though, that JHenderson777 has recently re-created several articles that were formerly redirects (see Momo and Ozai) and are of questionable article-worthiness, so this user may have extreme views on what characters should be included. As for the issue of where consensus should be established, I have never seen a rule that consensus for an article can only be established on the talk page or AfD; anywhere where multiple editors weigh in about an article (including on a user talk page) can create a consensus, although consensus can of course change later. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok you had to put the articles on it. Fine!!! Let me explain myself, since Ozai was the primary antagonist of the show, I thought he deserved his own article and him appearing in a movie helped out a bit though. And as for Momo, since Appa had his own article I thought Momo deserved it too since he is just as major and recurring as Appa. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Extreme views? Please elaborate. How do you determine article worthiness? The only way I knew of was WP:Notability and I think they qualified. Keep in mind I do have an limit, I even put back an article of Avatar Roku back as an redirection because of redundance. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to get in this back and forth, but this doesn't address the issue. Where is this discussion where consensus was reached? I don't really care where it was, but I want to see it. Also, although there is no rule to say it should be here, generally it is nice to have some reference to it here for other editors. They aren't mind readers, and if they can't find important discussions like that, it is unsurprising that they ignore them. Right now, we have edits being made in reference to this consensus so it would be nice to be able to see said consensus, not only to confirm there was consensus in this regard, but why. I vaguely recall the discussion at the time, but it was quite a while ago so I'd like to see if the reasoning holds. Derekloffin (talk) 05:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

As I told Jhenderson already, you'll have to ask User:Haha169 about that, I was not involved in the discussion. rʨanaɢ (talk) 10:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Here it is. Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters/archive1 Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't actually see any comments in that link about inclusion or exclusion of characters. Is that the wrong link? Derekloffin (talk) 18:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I thought the same thing. But the one who you were talking to said it happened here. And I do believe him that this didn't originally come from him. He was just following it. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Given that neither of you has made any attempt to contact User talk:Haha169, who I already told you (twice) is the one who informed me of the prior consensus, I take it that you aren't too interested in continuing the discussion. rʨanaɢ (talk) 01:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I have a question: what characters are having their inclusion debated? I heard Long Feng somewhere in this conversation, but not much more. If we are going to discuss changes to the article, we might as well be more specific. Furthermore, consensus is not a permanent state; what was said in the FLC (or wherever consensus was last established) is irrelevant as long as we can hold a meaningful discussion here. Personally, I would be in favor of Long Feng's inclusion, primarily because his character has appeared in numerous episodes (even if he was limited to one season). Oh, and just as a general note, there is a discussion directly below this one concerning the Ozai and Momo articles. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 01:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Jet, Long Feng, King Bumi, Combustion Man (as mentioned in the original post) although a general guide line would be a nice. As to Rjanag and Jhenderson777, can we please keep the attitudes in check. They aren't productive in the least. I've gone ahead and asked haha myself since nobody else has. Derekloffin (talk) 01:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Derekloffin. And I think I agree with you on the general guideline idea, but we should put in a place where anybody can find it, so we don't run into this problem where we have no idea where the last consensus discussion was. :) Anyway, as for the guideline, we will have to use some in-universe criteria, since I cannot think of anything else. How about a character is only included if that character has caused a significant impact on either the plot line. That would include Long Feng (I'd say he had a pretty significant impact, kidnapping Appa and all), Combustion Man, and maybe King Bumi (you could say he helped Aang on his way to finding an Earthbending teacher in Season 2, but I'm not sure how significant that would be considered). Obviously, what "significant impact" means we have yet to define. Any ideas? — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 02:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to make any kind of guideline just yet before seeing the previous discussion. Obviously the character must appear in multiple episodes (otherwise they aren't recurring), and have a significant impact on the plot of the episodes they appear in. I do recall that appearing in multiple seasons was part of the reason for inclusion before, but that would exclude Zhao and include Jet, yet it seems the decision went the other way. Either way, I'm not sure I'd say that is sufficient or required (the tracker girl for instance appeared in 2 seasons, but her importance was pretty low). It really comes to a rather nebulous idea of impact on the show I think. Derekloffin (talk) 02:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Attitude? I don't remember any one of us having a bad attitude. If so I am sorry. I just discussed this because I was reverted and it didn't make any sense. But I was always calm about it and I am calm now. Anyways I am sure you can figure out something. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:44, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I take that back. User:Rjanag did sound hot on the collar with that last comment which I didn't notice until now. But I already said I didn't blame him for this. He was just doing his job. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Things seem to have died down here, yet users continue to add numerous characters to the list. Does anybody have any suggestions for inclusion criteria? — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 17:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems to be IP editors who normally are adding other characters down here. If that was the case you can always semi-protect this article but now we have that new article talking about minor characters. Which looks terrible. Not a single source. I was never the one who recommended a minor character section or article, just thought a litle bit more could be added in the major recurring section if they had a reliable source. Jhenderson777 (talk) 23:09, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you guys are still here, (and sorry, Derek, for not responding to your request. I seemed to have missed it), but I can provide links to the consensus. First of all, check out Talk:List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters/Archive 1. It appears MiszaBot I malfunctioned and did not archive these discussions as it claimed it did, so I went ahead and did that. Also, I would suggest checking out Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters/archive1, as trimming was approved in that process as well. (Specifically: DragonZero, "The recurring character sections may have un-needed characters and should be organized by appearance/impact on the plot instead of alphabetized.")

Second consensus

Personally, I am against all the new characters that were added (especially those images), but will not remove them immediately if someone speaks up in defense of the new additions. --haha169 (talk) 22:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I am looking at Ozai and would like to downgrade him to major recurring characters, the status that he previously held. I also feel that everyone in the minor recurring characters list should be removed except for Hakoda, (maybe Guru Pathik, if sources are created), Jet, Bumi, Long Feng, Pakku, Piandao?, and Gyatso. The rest of the entires are entirely fluff, imo, and have no citations whatsoever. Also, I would like to see the Organizations section removed, as they are not characters.--haha169 (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

There was a minor characters article that was nominated for deletion. And the result was to merge them here. You are going to have to do a new consensus if you want them gone. You just cant remove willy nilly. The images however were from merged articles of Ozai and Momo. They are only two images and I don't see them being aganst Wikipedia:NFLISTS except maybe the Momo image. In fact if you remove the Momo image I might as well just put the article Momo back because I merged it out of choice unlike Ozai that was AFD'd and because I don't like images being orphans especially mine. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

"Willy-nilly" is how its done in articles with no traffic or else you get nothing done. Which is why I said; "unless people object", in which case we will have a discussion. And that is what I am proposing right now. Besides, easy remedy for orphaned images, (required for non-free ones): deletion. --haha169 (talk) 22:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
WP:NFLISTS:

• Images that show multiple elements of the list at the same time, such as a cast shot or montage for a television show, are strongly preferred over individual images.
• discussion of the art style, or a contentious element of the work, are preferable to those that simply provide visual identification of the elements.
• representative visual reference for other elements in the article, such as what an alien race may look like on a science-fiction television show, is preferred over providing a picture of each element discussed

Per the guidelines that you cited, these images need to be (at least) replaced. --haha169 (talk) 22:46, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

As I said this is because of a merge and I don't want the images gone and it's as simple as that. No matter how much you stuff guidelines down my face. This article doesn't have be a perfect article (such as a featured list article) and you shouldn't want information or images gone just becuase of that. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Stuffing guidelines? I believe it was you who gave me those guidelines as a rationale for keeping those images! The argument: "because I want to" simply doesn't suffice. Any other tries? --haha169 (talk) 23:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Dude, I don't want to argue. I said I don't think they violate it, I didn't make them a excuse that they are OK. There is no image depicting Ozai so he's fine. As for Momo he is on the lead, although the seperate Momo image is probably good for showing his first depiction. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Of course. But like I said before, I feel replacement images are in order per the guidelines that you disregarded. Aside from images, which I didn't intend to even discuss yet, I feel like a character inclusion criterion needs to be included. Because the previous consensus was disregarded again, a new one needs to be reached. --haha169 (talk) 23:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Well I am mainly am voting on the images to be kept. As for the characters I stopped caring as much but I don't see with what's wrong with the inclusion. I am not disregarding the guideline, I still see them as essential and that they are not really breaking guideline rules. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:44, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

No, they aren't, but they aren't following guideline suggestions. Pretty much, if there is something better, use it. I haven't found anything better yet, and haven't the time right now. Maybe I'll do that later. For the characters, I see that they are wrong for inclusion because they fail notability guidelines. They have no citations, have no descriptions, yet they are still there. You might not care if this is a quality list, but I do. Of course, if someone could somehow establish the notability of, let's say Li and Lo, by writing well-written prose backed up with quality citations, then go ahead. But that's going to be a difficult task. FLs like Naruto's character list does not include every character in the universe, and I'm sure many are omitted. --haha169 (talk) 23:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Please no more debating this with me anymore. I am letting other people decide your consensus. Thank you! − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

The images shouldn't be included. The history of where they came for is not important (I'm not really interested in the fact that they're being preserved here because they were used in articles that shouldn't have existed either); the characters are not extremely important and there's nothing particularly special about their design that makes us need to display non-free images of them. Regardless of where these images were before, they don't meet WP:NFCC here. rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:57, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Saying that a image doesn't meet non free content criteria is a point of view. But I am removing them anyways. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 00:18, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I can easily see the point of the images and that is why I removed them. But be more specific why you want some characters decluded. And by the way moving Ozai to major recurring is fine by me. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 00:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Teo, Smellerbee, Ursa, Pipsqueak, Yu, Li and Lo, June, Duke, Kuel, and The Mechanist are pretty self-explanatory. Not only are they very very minor, but their entries are barely a sentence long, if any at all. They probably have a combined screen time of 5 minutes, max.--haha169 (talk) 09:21, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I am just going to let others decide who can stay. I just know they've been in screen more than that long and been in more than one episode for that matter, take that from one who watched the entire show. But I still can't deny that they are pretty minor. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

• Having personally pruned the "Minor Recurring Characters" section in the past, I know that the ones that were there when I last checked them had all appeared in at least three different instances withing the series, whether in different episodes, games, or in the movie. While I don't have the time to check them all right now, I do not notice any new ones since my last checking so they should all still be recurring. Since a lot of these characters appear in season 1 and 3 but not in 2, such a list aid those who watch the show as they try to follow the plot and remember where these characters come from and their relationships with the major characters. I do agree that they don't really need any images though, but the text describing the minor characters should not be removed in my opinion. —CodeHydro 03:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Merge

Decision to merge or not merge the articles Ozai (Avatar: The Last Airbender) and Momo (Avatar: The Last Airbender) starts here. I choose Keep. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for merging the articles before asking for discussion, but it is pretty obvious that these article have little, if any, useful content. Take the Ozai article: the Plot overview section is exactly that, a plot overview mentioning, with detail, everywhere and in what context his character is found. Such detail for a character who is barely seen the entire series is unnecessary. The personality and abilities section are WP:OR, and the video game appearances merely mention the fact that he was in the video game, which hopefully the reader already knows considering a) the video game is based on the series; and b) there is an article for the video game, in which it should be mentioned if it is not already that Ozai appears in it. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 19:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with a plot summary. It's probably what the reader wants to read the most when reading about a fictional character. I do agree that the article might need a creation and concept section to explain on his character outside of fiction. Maybe you might could help with that. And there is nothing wrong with having more detail with his media adaptions either. The main reason they are there I think is that they are pretty notable characters probably even outside of the cartoon people have heard of him, thanks to the movie. I mean Appa has got his article (and it's actually a good one because of good support) so there should be hope that the antagonist of the show and the flying lemur can be improved on like Appa who is not considered a major character on Wikipedia and Momo is just as major as he is. Jhenderson777 (talk) 22:51, 26 July 2010 (UTC) And the personality section is well sourced so I wouldn't say that's WP:OR. The ability one maybe could use sources. I am not sure that section is that important because the infobox already tells his powers. Jhenderson777 (talk) 22:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, there is something wrong with plot summary. Wikipedia records content from a real world perspective, not just plot-only descriptions (WP:PLOT). So while a basic plot summary is necessary to establish context in articles about fictional topics, it should not be so extensive so that the entire article is plot summary, as is almost the case here. And I would not say the personality section is well sourced at all. The Ozai article has three sources, all of which are the television series itself, and all of the information referenced is analysis of the show rather than just description, which constitutes WP:OR (see WP:PRIMARY). In fact, I might even argue that some of the information in the personality section is straight out wrong. As for the video game mentions, you say the characters are pretty notable due to the movie, but popularity does not constitute notability. The characters must have "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (from WP:N), and as far as I can see, the only sources at all are either from the series itself (which is not independent of the subject) or citations sourcing who voiced the character (which is not significant coverage). If you would happen to know of any secondary or tertiary sources that show significant coverage of these character outside the context of the show itself, then I would consider keeping the articles. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 00:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The issue of how much in-universe material to include, and what makes a fictional character notable, is one of the big things that's been under debate for at least a year (probably longer) at the proposed guideline for elements of fictional works. The disagreement, as far as I can tell, is usually something on the lines of: does a character in a fictional work gain notability if he's notable within the work, or only if he's notable within the real world? Personally, I fall in the latter camp, so I would be in favor of merging these articles if no one can produce sources to demonstrate real-world notability. rʨanaɢ (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't personally agree with the Wiki general policy, but I'm not the boss here, and in general, going with what seems to be the case across Wiki, 3rd party stuff generally is required to establish notability. So primary referencing, that being to the work itself, or associated works, is insufficient to establish notability. They are good supplements however, just not sufficient in themselves. Derekloffin (talk) 01:38, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I am not disagreeing with you on this but almost all the other articles of Avatar characters aren't any better. See Azula and Iroh. Why just pick on Momo and Ozai. Because I created those articles? Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I think all the poorly sourced ones should be merged away if we're to stick by general policy. I believe Appa was another that was poorly sourced for an individual article. Exceptions tend to cause confusion.Derekloffin (talk) 18:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I suppose I could agree with you on that. Aang seems to be the only good article. And I am not sure any of the other character articles meets WP:Notability but Aang. But that can be debatable. Jhenderson777 (talk) 18:38, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, most of the character articles should be merged. I would argue in favor of keeping Aang, though, as it does have some real world content. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 19:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

If done, try to save the images. Jhenderson777 (talk) 20:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

We may or may not want to save the images. The images are screenshots of a television series, and are therefore copyrighted. The only way we are legally allowed to use these images in the first place is because copyrighted images used specifically for educational (or encyclopedic in our case) purposes fall under fair use in United States copyright law. However, policy states that we should use as few non-free images as possible to convey whatever context is trying to be established with those images. Furthermore, we can only use images that would significantly increase the user's understanding of the topic. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 23:38, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I know how it works. The images need a fair use rationale on a certain article. And that's the problem if the images are orphaned they have to be deleted. Might as well save a few of them and store them here. Jhenderson777 (talk) 00:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that storing them here is not an option, because we are adding more non-free images to an article that probably has enough, not to mention most of the images do not significantly improve the reader's understanding as is required by policy. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 01:25, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Does anybody have any more objections to merging the articles? — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 17:47, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. I am not worried about those articles. At least they are useful. What about this new article. I defianetly think this should be merged. Jhenderson777 (talk) 21:08, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

That article definitely needs to go the way of the dinosaurs! I support a merge with this one. If you notice from the discussion at the bottom of this page, an anon editor keeps on trying to post 30,000 bytes of material from there to here. I have reverted the attempt on the basis that: 1) Combined with what is already on here, that is too much info to be one page; 2) A lot of those characters are so minor that they are even worth a mention. If people want such a long list of every character, they need to add it to the avatar wiki, instead. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

You seem to be talking about the minor Avatar characters article, right? Not the individual character articles.Jhenderson777 (talk) 22:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Correct. Although, I don't think Momo and Appa are major enough characters to have their own pages. My main concern, however, is the minor characters list. I'll let you guys figure out what major character pages need to stay or go. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 23:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I am kind of thinking the Aang article is the only one really necessary to stay if any of the individual articles are to be redirected. But at the same time I don't really have a problem with them having their own articles either. Defining major characters is hard though. Wikipedia states that all the characters that have their own profile on Nick.com are the major characters. But the end credits of the show always show Momo and Appa as one of the main characters. And I am not sure about Ozai, but he is the main villain which could make him considered to be a major character too. Even if not he's a driving force behind the entire show. Jhenderson777 (talk) 23:22, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Meng lists here in disambiguation but isn't listed on page.

Is there a reason to redirect meng to here? --Cflare (talk) 06:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Given there is no mention of Meng here, no, there is no good reason for the redirect. I loosely recall a Meng being a character in Avatar, but obviously a minor one. I'd say remove it from the disambiguation for now. Derekloffin (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, she was a very minor character, appearing only in one episode (The Fortuneteller). I'm surprised someone even remembered her enough to think to make a link on the disambig page. I have since removed the link. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 18:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Merge Order of the White Lotus

I purpose that the new article Order of the White Lotus should be merged in List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters#Organizations. Any thoughts? − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:45, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised it hasn't been merged in already. I fully support the move. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 02:22, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

A different approach.

I plan on merging/replacing the article Appa along with redirecting Momo (Avatar: The Last Airbender) to a fictional duos type like articles like this. I am just telling on here to see what people think about it. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

And also anybody can edit on the userspace draft if there's mistakes or anything like that. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

That whole draft only has one external source (one source that's not an Avatar episode or commentary from an Avatar DVD). rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:27, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I have already done it. But if there is any nay-sayers I will change it myself. Don't revert me, just discuss and I will do it for you. ;) − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 00:30, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I have done nothing new. The same sources from the Appa article and just a bit more for Momo. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 00:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

By the way, there are at least three sources that are external. Perhaps I will find more later, but right now I need to rest. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 01:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

This is definitely better than two separate articles, and although non-notable + non-notable does not equal notable, in this case I believe being treated as a pair rather than separate characters is a good compromise. However, plot summary still needs to be trimmed down and put in the correct tense. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 18:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

When it comes to not notable + not notable, I am well aware of that. Honestly though it's really debatable that both of them are notable but what isn't debatable is that they rank the same at how notable they are. I wasn't being very specific to you at the talk page ;) − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 18:55, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Regardless, the article still only has two external sources (I miscounted last time; there's the wired.com and the mustago.com; the first doesn't even mention either character by name—it's about the voice actor, not about the characters). The rest are all Airbender episodes, DVDs, or DVD commentaries. Substantial coverage in external sources is needed to demonstrate notability; if such coverage is not there, then notability is questionable. To be perfectly honest, this looks to me like an underhanded attempt to get the Momo article back in mainspace after it was redirected here. rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

What? I am the one that redirected Momo in my own free will. And what you are complaining about is a problem with all the Avatar characters article. Complain about them next time. Are you seriously going to question everything I do? − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The only reason I didn't complain about the other articles was because I didn't look at them (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:SEWAGE—the fact that there is a problem in other articles doesn't mean it's ok to make that problem in more articles). It looks, however, like most of them have the same problems as this article. I wouldn't be opposed to trimming and merging them all into a single article similar to List of Arrested Development characters (a show that ran for approximately the same amount of time). I note that you haven't put forth any arguments to address the substantive issues I brought up (lack of external sources and lack of significant coverage in the sources available), you've only gotten indignant. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I already know about WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and even though that guideline exists to prove that that's a not good excuse because it's mainly a fallacy. That excuse still makes a good point that you are picking on one imperfect article because either I had something to do with it or you don't like the idea of Momo having his own article but do like the idea of Appa having his own. That is beyond being neutral and fair. And it's not my room to argue about proving it's notability or what sources it has, my arguing is that you accused me of doing something uncivil when you didn't know the facts. And you are complaining about this article now that I have something do with it, if you wanted to be fair about it then you should have complained with it when was just about Appa because it isn't worse with Momo included, it has two external links now, your welcome for that! I am trying to find more, why don't you help instead of complaining about the new article, because new articles are always a good thing and we should strive to save them not victimize them. Please quit being all talk and no action because I know you are a better editor than that. I am not an administrator or a better editor like you, but it shouldn't take one to know this. Oh and by the way, I am sure it doesn't sound like it but I am cool and not mad. I know it's hard to tell on a computer, that's why I am a emoticon freak. :) − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷

The fact that I never complained about the Appa article before doesn't mean I supported it. I never paid attention to it. You just brought it to my attention and I pointed out that it lacks sources to prove its notability. It still lacks sources, and you haven't made any attempt to add more sources or to explain why it's notable, you've just kept complaining about how I am not being fair to you. Do you have anything to say about the article? rʨanaɢ (talk) 04:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for now at being specific at it but stating that it lacks sources is really going nowhere. I suggest we work together to better the article, according to this there is a few google results that could be promising. − Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 15:46, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ozai

Why doesn't Ozai have an arcticle? He's the main antagonist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.182.93 (talk) 04:16, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Try searching for it. There is one: Fire Lord Ozai (Avatar: The Last Airbender). But it is probably going to be deleted soon; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fire Lord Ozai (Avatar: The Last Airbender). rʨanaɢ (talk) 04:29, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I created a article about him originally but it's hard to find sources for him. And that is key to determining his notability. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 16:20, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Sozin

Sozin, I believe, is notable enough and influences the plot of Avatar enough to be mentioned. I'm going to add him. I recently created an article on him, hoping it'd get merged, but it didn't. If anyone has any objections, don't delete it. Discuss it here. M.R. DA BOMB! (Monster Rancher The Great). Play Monster Rancher! 20:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)Monster Rancher the GreatM.R. DA BOMB! (Monster Rancher The Great). Play Monster Rancher! 20:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monster Rancher the Great (talk • contribs)

Archiving broken

Just had to undo the 'archiving' process because it tossed it all to the big bit bucket in the sky, aka /dev/null. Could someone who actually knows how that bot works fix that please? Derekloffin (talk) 18:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL, looks like NuclearWarfare just fixed it. It seems the bot was configured to archive this talk page into the Talk:Avatar: The Last Airbender archives instead of here. XD — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 21:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Nope, still broke. The link looks like it is correct, but it still tossed to to dev/null. Also, it seems to be activating after 24 hours rather than 10 days like I appears to be set to do. Derekloffin (talk) 19:58, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

A trivia note about a minor recurring character -

- I found it interesting that Aang's friend/arguable father figure amongst the monks was named Gyatso, given the Buddhism-inspired teachings and appearance of the airbenders - the Dalai Lama is traditionally named Tenzin Gyatso. Atypicaloracle (talk) 06:41, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Rename

Can we rename this to Characters of the The Avatar universe? --71.160.93.144 (talk) 22:16, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

As there does not appear to be a consensus to list the Legend of Korra characters here I don`t think this is the right time to do that.--174.93.167.177 (talk) 03:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Not entirely sure Korra should be in here, but since she is, I expanded it anyway.

The Korra section has been marked "needs expansion" for some time, so I did it. But I suggest we need either to bring in more pageless Korra characters and rename the page (List of Avatar: The Last Airbender and Legend of Korra characters), or split it. Thoughts? Solarbird (talk) 09:28, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

• This is a rather nice page so I suggest splitting them, migrate Korra and Wan to a new page. Crowding character pages can get nasty, List of Assassin's Creed characters, it even had little flags once ugh. --Killuminator (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, upon thinking about it more, I'm kind of more in the "new page" camp now, particularly since a lot of my additions got hacked down - which makes sense in this context, but not in a Korra-era context. So I'm kind of thinking if we don't get anybody else with strong opinions soon, I'll start a List of Legend of Korra characters page and we can go at that. Solarbird (talk) 07:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm really busy with exams, so I can't be much of a help, but you have my support if any opponents appear. A good start would be with Team Avatar (humans first, the female part of the team already have their own pages so only the essentials, then the brothers and lastly the pets Naga and Pabu), then I guess a good choice for the next group would be the Air Temple Island gang (Tenzin and his family), and so down the line until you exhaust the characters whose debut is in Season 1 (Lin, Hiroshi Sato etc.). Don't even bother adding one off, meaningless, decorative characters and the likes of those like The Fire Nation Council woman :P. --Killuminator (talk) 23:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Splitting this would be as difficult as splitting List of Hercules: The Legendary Journeys and Xena: Warrior Princess characters; separate shows, same universe, same characters. --71.177.78.98 (talk) 19:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 21 March 2015

The following is a closed 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 result of the move request was: NOT MOVED.Per conflicting consensus at Talk:The Legend of Korra. Hadal (talk) 19:07, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

---

List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters → List of Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra characters – separate shows, same in-universe, same recurring characters, etc. (Example) 71.177.78.98 (talk) 20:14, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose Discussion above and at Talk:The Legend of Korra was in favour of a separate article for The Legend of Korra characters. It is currently being drafted at User:Solarbird/sandbox. Reach Out to the Truth 17:23, 8 April 2015 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080722031445/http://news.toonzone.net/article.php?ID=25009 to http://news.toonzone.net/article.php?ID=25009
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081119154732/http://www.mitchel-musso.org/filmography.php to http://www.mitchel-musso.org/filmography.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090317063646/http://scifiwire.com/2009/03/more-are-cast-in-m-night.php to http://scifiwire.com/2009/03/more-are-cast-in-m-night.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629022132/http://www.tv.com/avatar-the-last-airbender/city-of-walls-and-secrets/episode/591808/recap.html?tag=episode_recap%3Brecap to http://www.tv.com/avatar-the-last-airbender/city-of-walls-and-secrets/episode/591808/recap.html?tag=episode_recap%3Brecap
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110501125111/http://www.peabody.uga.edu/news/event.php?id=59 to http://www.peabody.uga.edu/news/event.php?id=59
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090409205025/http://www.animationinsider.net/article.php?articleID=2044 to http://www.animationinsider.net/article.php?articleID=2044
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081211001630/http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2008/12/shyamalan-casts.html to http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2008/12/shyamalan-casts.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090201032719/http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2009/01/29/News/Protesters.Oppose.whitewashing.In.New.Shyamalan.Film-3602449.shtml to http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2009/01/29/News/Protesters.Oppose.whitewashing.In.New.Shyamalan.Film-3602449.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Reasons for Editing (13 July 2017)

I decided to rearrange this page’s sections to correspond to which character is more important and/or appears more.

I put all the recurring characters and organizations sections into groups of who first appeared in ATLA and TLoK, so it’s more concise and easy to read.

1. The Boulder first shows up and has the same importance as the Big Bad Hippo, Xin Fu, and Master Yu, while he never shows up again until Season 3. He’s also above Long Feng and Joo Dee who while show up in the Ba Sing Se arc hold more importance than him. Xin Fu and Master Yu appear in the same amount of episodes, but Master Yu has no lines in one of them, so Xin Fu is more important. Albeit Long Feng doesn’t appear as much, he is a minor antagonist (or at least he just causes trouble), so he is more important than Joo Dee.

2. Azulon is only featured in Zuko’s flashbacks in Zuko Alone. Izumi only has 3 lines. Ursa only shows up in Zuko Alone in Zuko’s flashbacks (can be changed if this includes importance in the comics). Lu Ten only gets lines in Iroh’s flashback in Bitter Work. Mai and Ty Lee show up only 1-2 episodes after Azula, and are actually shown for the rest of the series. Mai appears more than Ty Lee, hence the order. Zhao is a Season 1 antagonist and shows up in Episode 3-19 (or 20, not sure).

3. The term Sky Bison is used more than Air Bison.

4. Hakoda appears in more than 2 episodes, Yue is very important to the plot, Kya from ATLA is important to Katara and Sokka’s development, Bato has an entire episode named after him, Arnook is in 2 episodes at least, Kanna is in 2 episodes and mentioned later on, and Hama is in 1 episode. Tonraq and Kya from TLoK appear a decent amount of times and are important characters. Desna and Eska are slightly more important than Hakoda.

5. Baatar Jr. is almost always around Kuvira, who is a main antagonist in Season 4 of TLoK. Wei, Wing, and Huan are side characters. Baatar is just Suyin’s husband. Suyin is important compared to the rest of them.

6. In my opinion, Ghazan is less important than Ming-Hua, but I haven’t watched TLoK in a while, so I may be wrong.

7. Pipsqueak shows up the least, so he’s at the bottom.

8. Rearranged the other characters and organizations in order of importance. Also changed Cabbage Merchant to Cabbage merchant, since it’s a proper noun, not a name.

9. I removed the individual Ember Island Players because adding each one of them doesn’t help at all.

Moved characters: Bato (he is directly involved with the Water Tribe) Dangronples (talk) 07:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090406075812/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/avatarvol1.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/avatarvol1.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:54, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Splitting The Legend of Korra characters from this list

Hi. I've started a discussion at Talk:The Legend of Korra#List of Legend of Korra Characters pt 2 about splitting the Korra characters out from this article into its own separate list. Bennv3771 (talk) 10:48, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Pinyin for Chinese names

According to China's National Standard GB/T 28039-2011 Pinyin Spelling Rules of Chinese People's Names (implemented in 2012), spaces only occur between the surname and the given name. I think we should apply this rule to the article. —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 23:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Zuko

The article doesn't have enough real-world information to stand on its own. Most of it is taken up by in-universe descriptions. It probably is best to have Zuko merged here. 76.119.231.225 (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I am not sure what the standards are for fictional characters from an animated series, but since each of the other main characters (Aang, Katara, etc.) have separate articles, and since the information within the Zuko article is quite helpful for understanding the topic (to me, that is the point of an encyclopedia article), and there is so much information it would overwhelm the list article--unless it is heavily edited and the usefulness diminished--making that article less useful. No. I do not think merging would help. If you want more real-world information added, then please do so. Or at least tag the article with such a request and seek out an appropriate WikiProject or subproject to help with that. Merging is not really an option for a main character (appears throughout the entire series from the first to the last episode, is at least equal to Katara in importance to the series, and is a highly complex character with a convoluted backstory. Merging would be a disservice to people (like me) who were interested in fining out more about (to me) the most interesting character in the series.—Willscrlt ( Talk | com | b:en | meta ) 21:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

The Kyoshi Novels characters

Hi. I just reliazed someone added Szeto to This list of the complete franchise. I wonder if we should include the rest of characters from those Novels and even comics from both shows. Regards. Miaow 19:31, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Ty Lee’s contradictory statement

The article mentions that Ty Lee joined the Kyoshi Warriors at the end of the show, which is “contradictory to her previous statement about not wanting to be part of a matched set.” It is later shown in the canon comics that she encountered some uncertainty whilst being a Kyoshi Warrior because it reminded her of her childhood, but I believe she worked through it in that comic. Unfortunately I can’t find the comic to cite it, and I can’t remember the rest of the details. If anyone has access, I believe this should be added to her section. Androvax (talk) 17:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 25 July 2021

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. No such user (talk) 12:01, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

---

List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters → List of Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra characters – This list covers characters from both Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra, not just characters from Avatar: The Last Airbender. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 00:12, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

• Support the last move in 2015 failed when there was a discussion to split the list for the two shows but since that hasn’t happened in over six years the proposed title should be used and if in the future a spit does occur we can move this back if that happens.--65.92.161.147 (talk) 03:49, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose for length. The "Avatar: The Last Airbender" in the title can be considered to refer to the entire Avatar: The Last Airbender (franchise). -- Netoholic @ 03:56, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose Avatar: The Last Airbender is the franchise name.--Doomslug1 (talk) 22:38, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

  It may cause confusion with the show, so it is better to have it be named after both shows. Plus, the name is more commonly used to refer to the show than the entire franchise. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 16:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose Unnecessarily wordy, the title is valid for Avatar: The Last Airbender (franchise). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:45, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.