Talk:Aang/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

E-mail

I'd like to talk to the editor of the articles regarding the Avatar series. Please reply with your email, thanks a lot! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.42.23.112 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Which one? Each article has several editors (such as myself). This is a wiki, after all. SAMAS

Content additions

I would really like to add one character description to the Aang page. It was for Toph, Aang's new friend from Avatar. Avatarblade

==Sozin vs. Sozen== Sozin is spelled Sozen. I have proof

I'd be curious to see the proof... there seems to be a lot of discrepancy over this, though I did discover today that the Official website (Australia) website has it spelled as it "Sozin" (see the "Zuko" character page), so I'd think that's how it should be spelled unless you have some conflicting evidence. Prototime 02:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
It's not good proof but if you put closed captioning on a tv when somebody says Sozen it shows up as Sozen i don't know if that is good enough but there's my proof.
Closed captioning is not always a 100% official transcript of the episode. Oftentimes, closed captioning will crop and rewrite what is actually said, so either the text can fit on the screen or the reader can understand the context easily. We can't be sure, then, if they read the script for the proper spelling of sozen/sozin.
http://avatarspirit.com/interviews.php?id=7 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.160.116.44 (talk) 15:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

Origin

But where is it comming from( abook or so) --195.85.191.218

Where is what coming from? The series itself? --Crisu 15:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

tidbit: Most searched for

According to google trends, Zuko is more searched for than Aang Sokka and Katara. Aang comes in second, with Katara in third.71.232.171.189 22:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC) That's really not that all surprising. H2P 05:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

No Hair

You shouldn't say he has no hair, you should say his head is shaved. Mace Windu (Star Wars) has no hair, but they stated that his head is shaved. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.4.79.82 (talk • contribs) 07:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

If his head is shaved, why has none of his hair ever grown back? Why have we never seen him shave it? H2P 18:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

HE DOES HAVE HAIR! IN THE EPISODE "TALES OF BA SING SAE" HE SHAVES HIS HAIR. IN SEASON THREE HE HAS DARK BROWN HAIR.

The issue of whether or not most Airbenders are naturally bald or just continually shave (if this is the case, Aang must be doing this off-screen), but either way, Aang does indeed have "no hair" on his head, so I don't see a problem with that wording. Prototime 19:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree Prototime, ‘no hair’ is covering both ‘naturally bald’ and ‘shaven’. ~ c. tales *talk* 21:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I guess we just got this question answered :-P H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 07:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

In the episode, 'Tales of Ba Sing Se', we see the group getting ready for the day and Aang is seen shaving his head.

They could just destroy the hair roots so hair doesn't grow.Xenero 18:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC) but then how do you explain him having black/brown hair in season 3?

i AGREE. HE DOES HAVE HAIR! IN THE EPISODE "TALES OF BA SING SAE" HE SHAVES HIS HAIR. IN SEASON THREE HE HAS DARK BROWN HAIR.

Mastered Waterbending?

I was just wondering if Aang has become a waterbending master? Katara mentioned in "Bitter Work" that he has the reflexed of a waterbending master. Does this mean he's mastered it?

I don't think so, the context in that episode didn't really seem suggest that. He probably is pretty close to mastery, though.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't you guys update the part regarding Aang's bending abilities? I mean he's already pretty good (though not a master) in waterbeding and in earthbending, as we've seen in SOFN. But how did they do that in the past?

I beg to differ. I believe Aang has mastered waterbending and his bending status should be updated. Besides I dought that Katara will come up to Aang and say "Your a waterbending master now! Good for you!" The reflex statement is probably as good as it gets. Whats a question? 00:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You have to get promoted to the status of master. Just because Aang has the reflexes of a waterbending master doesn't mean he is one. If it isnt explicitly stated in the show or on the website, we can't just assume things. Bagpipeturtle 03:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Remember the Airbending monks? When a pupil reached master status in Airbending, they got the arrow-shaped tatoos on their bodies, or, at least that's what our article says. What's to say that the Water Tribe doesn't have a similar mark of mastery? Kochdude388 13:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Katara is a waterbending master right? Her appearence doesn't appear to have been changed. I still vote Aang as a waterbending master. And if he has to be promoted to master doesn't katara's reflex statement count? Whats a question? 00:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, somebody has to give him the title of master. Nobody has. -Dylan0513 00:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Dylan, I respect you and all but... Did you even finish reading my comment? Whatever. You win! Congratulations! Heres your new car! Yayy! =) Whats a question? 00:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Katara also makes the comment to Toph first when she begins to teach Aang that he responds well to positive reinforcement thereby suggesting she makes the comment about his reflexes purely as a motivational tool instead of actually saying that he is a master.Geolly 00:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It sounds to me like Katara is saying that from experience the fact the he responds better to positive or negative reinforcement doesnt prove that he has mastered waterbending or not. Whats a question? 04:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I dunno about master, but I think we can list him as an expert in water bending, like we have for Zuko with Firebending. Should we change Earthbending, though? He had troubles with it at first, but since then he's used it comfortably in and out of combat. Keyblade Mage 22:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Aang has been training with Katara on waterbending for how long now....... I mean we have seen how easy it is for Aang to learn waterbending some how I don't think he would take this long becoming a master when it comes so much easier to him than even Katara I mean we have all seen the episode The Waterbending Scroll. And just to bring this up we are never really exposed to his waterbending powers in the episodes which can make it hard for us to determine the case..... Perhaps he doesn't want to show up Katara or something loving her and all...... a thought —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.34.194 (talk) 14:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

"A thought" is not how Wikipedia works, I'm afraid. You're giving your opinion, which Wikipedia frowns upon. I welcome you to join us below to discuss Aang's Position Field. I would like to hear your reasons for including links to each of the Bending Arts. Since there is no clear cut answer to whether Aang is a "Waterbending Master" or whether Aang is a Firebender that does not violate NPOV, we felt that stating simply that Aang is the Avatar is sufficient as his position. Clearly you disagree, and so I would like your input. Please discuss this matter below before making another edit. Harukaze 15:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

name meaning?

whats does aang's name mean? there is a chinese charcter for it i'm just curious what it means.Angelofdeath275 18:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

i don't think it 'means' anything.[[User:SxeFluff--SxeFluff 15:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)]] 10:30, 18 october 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by SxeFluff (talk • contribs)

change of picture?

May I suggest we change the main picture. All of the other characters have updated pictures that show them in season 2 but Aang's picture is still the same. I know he hasn't changed his appearance, but he has definetly matured over the series and it would be appropriate to show a better picture of him from season 2. -Wrestle593

Not a bad thought, but I'm not sure which to use. Personally, I'd think the best would be something showing the darker, brooding side of him that's emergered. One showing him doing advanced Water and/or Earthbending could also be good.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
We need to get rid of this one anyway, it's not sourced. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 20:44, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Here is a good pictures of Aang. http://data.nickelodeon.nl/misc/dynimg/media/av_aang01.jpg User:pride, kinji

I doubt it's a good pic since it looks like a drawing before the series actually started (note the difference in the facial features). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.160.116.44 (talk) 15:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

What the hell happened to Aang's old picture!!! When I clicked on his page, I almost had a heart attack (seriously). Please don't make him have a picture where he has big ears and that picture doesn't show that he has matured. He actually looks younger.

Don't worry about changing the picture till the start of the third season. It looks like everyone gets a new look. Aang even grows his hair into a style similar to Zuko.

Might it be time to change his picture? This one looks somewhat scary, and it doesn't provide the best summary of his character--it's a matter of opinion, obviously, but the image in the character profile box should probably be something different. The image can set the feel for the article, after all. And he has grown hair for the third season. Just suggesting.... Wikiswan 20:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Probably best to wait until season three starts, see if we can get a high quality shot of him with hair.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I WAS GONNA SAY THAT!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyuuga-sama (talk • contribs) 16:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

There are already good pictures of Aang with hair out there, can we change it now? 201.37.26.20 22:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

we should put the one when Aang grows hair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.110.195.204 (talk) 21:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Meng and Koko

Do these characters really need their own sections under the Relationships header? I mean, they only appeared in one episode, probably never will again, and had no real lasting effect on the plot.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

This is a very good point and has been seconded. With rumours that the show has been successful enough for a fourth season, these relationships will seem insignificant by the end. 202.72.187.152 17:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I posed a similar question on Zuko's page. I think we need to prune relationships as time progresses. Such that, Zuko and Song had an encounter but unless they have an encounter again their relationship is summarized on The Cave of Two Lovers and that should be enough. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 23:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

After looking at the other characters I suggest we delete a few people in the relationships section. Many of them are just a small summary of the episode the minor character showed up in. I think we should limit the relationships to those who have interacted with the characters multiple times. Example would be that Iroh has no purpose on Toph's page (they met once and their meeting is summarized in The Chase) but Suki could stay on Sokka's due to two encounters having deep inner impacts on Sokka. However we'd also have to limit those characters who have had no real influence on the character in question, example being that Sokka has not influenced or done anything to affect Zuko and doesn't need to be on the page.

I think something like this needs to be done to allow the pages to be more direct. Lengthy does not necessarily mean its better. Discuss here. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 08:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Images

I removed several fair-use images per WP:FUC #3 and #8, as the images weren't subjects of commentary but merely decoration. We don't need images to identify other characters who have their own article (and thus an image there), and we don't need four different images of Aang. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok I can agree with you on the pictures removed after I actually looked at them. My main question is if this should be done to Zuko as well. Zuko's page is like 10 pages long and without the pictures it's boring and just looks bad (granted some can be shuffled away). If you take it to the Talk page for Zuko there is already a discussion there.
Well, it probably should, but I mostly just get the pages in front of me. Remember, having fair-use images just for decoration is not allowed. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:47, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
You and I both know that's a horrible reasoning. With enough bull-crapping skills any image can be justified as important. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 05:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, it's a good thing I have a sensitive bullshit detector, then. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Major problems with the page

As you can plainly see, Aang's page has had those two stickers at the top saying the thing needs some major cleaning up. The thing is, I'm not exactly sure how to go about it. The other character pages seem to just have a great deal more information than this one and aren't too different in any other respects. Anyone got some really good suggestions? Y BCZ 22:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't really agree with the either of them, now that I look into it. The article seems to be in the proper context to me. What I really think they need is just some pruning. Many of the character descriptions have basicly become summaries of everything the character does from episode to episode, and that needs to change.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 22:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge

Call me crazy, but seeing that the Avatar Spirit is a part of Aang, it probubly should be here instead of being a minor charchter. The only place i can see it fitting is under "family" though. Cnriaczoy42 19:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Heck, the Avatar State doesn't even need to be there. I figure it should just be deleted, as it's covered pretty well here already. Y BCZ 19:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Looking at the article again, iw would go under avatar (stupid me), but it is covered well enough except for a picture perhaps Cnriaczoy42 19:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I know I'm commenting like 2 months after, but it's still (kind of) relevant. I think these two articles should be seperate, since one is Aang and his stuff, and the other one, the Avatar Spirit, is a lot of people, including every other Avatar there has ever been. whatever, though. Bagpipeturtle 02:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Zuko

Under Zuko's relationship description with Aang it states that he and Iroh could be Aang's firebending teachers. Though this is the most likely situation there is no actual facts backing it up. That is simply an opinion. Anyone could be Aang's firebending teacher so that sentence does not really have much merit. I suggest it should be deleted. Anyone agree?

It should never be there. Whenever you see it feel free to remove it on the grounds that it is speculation. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 16:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Just to tell you poeple. (spoiler) In the 2nd part of the Invasion ZUKO confronts his dad and tell him that he is going to join the Avatar to stop the fire nation. Also (Spoiler) after zuko confronts his dad. Fire lord Ozi shoot lightling at zaku, suddenly zuko shoots it back.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.204.211 (talk) 07:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The Guru

In The Guru, I'm not sure of what Guru Pathik actually called the seven parts of the body which must be released (the four elemental parts: Earth, water, fire, air, plus the throat, the sixth one, and earthly attachments), and to control the Avatar State. I have them down as gathiks for the time being. Is that right? If not, can someone change it to make it correct? Kochdude388 02:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

They are called chakras. :)--Freespirit1981 01:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Curse you, writers, leaving so much open to speculation...

Alright, the finale's ending was downright evil, especially for we, the editors bent on keeping only factual information in the Avatar articles. Unfortunately even I'm not sure what to make of the end of Crossroads of Destiny. Aang enters the Avatar State, allowing the seventh chakra to flow and separating him from worldy connections (Katara). However, Azula strikes him down, and the symbolic representation of Aang conquering the seventh chakra collapses around him. I'm almost certain we're going to have to say that it's not certain what this means- Kataangers'll rampage on us if we say outright that Aang has let go of Katara, and for another thing we really don't know for sure what this means for the upcoming season.

What do you guys think? Y BCZ 02:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I saw the glow happen when he was revived, so we know the Avatar reincarnation cycle/Avatar State is not dead. Maybe they'll pull a Buffy and have another Avatar walking around in the Water Tribes. Though I doubt it. I just want people to leave the pages alone for a bit so we can have a chance to EDIT THEM. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 03:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

---

I'm not going to touch any of the pages concerning what the ending could've meant, but I'll just state my opinions here.

Every account of the episode states that Aang was stuck by Azula before he could fully transform into the next-level Avatar State. However, the end suggests that at least some form of the Avatar State remains within him, but it's not the first time we've seen his tattoos glow in a non-AS fashion. They do that when he goes to the Spirit Realm and did that when he "saw through the trees" in The Swamp. Perhaps the 7th Chakra locked again since Aang wasn't able to fully transform, ridding him of the Avatar State but retaining his love for Katara. Or perhaps he truly did release the chakra, and now no longer loves Katara but is, practically speaking, all-powerful. Hell, perhaps the disruption of his transformation reset the AS to trigger when he's in critical danger or really pissed off (maybe it went as far as letting his chakras becoming clogged all over again).

Personally, I think that no matter the outcome, in the end Aang will regain the Avatar State and retain his love for Katara, obtaining the latter and then the former. I believe this because:

-It'd be pretty lame if he didn't get the AS back at some point.

-The writers are not simply going to make such a powerful relationship vanish into thin air like that.

-If you think about the nature of the chakras and the way they are represented in the show, to release one is not so much to rid oneself of the ability to feel whatever it is that blocks the chakra (if that were so, it would mean that upon releasing the 5th Chakra Aang wouldn't be able to lie, but he lied to Sokka about his progress with the Guru), but rather to not let it be a burden upon one's mind (as the Guru said: "life is messy" and sometimes the chakras get clogged with emotional baggage, and so that baggage must be let go so the chakras can flow cleanly). So if you look at it like that, releasing the 7th Chakra would still give Aang the ability to love Katara (and anything else that "attaches him to this world"), but he would have the wisdom to realize-and to constantly be aware-that as the Avatar he has duties that are infinitely more important than his personal affairs, and thus wouldn't let said affairs get in the way and affect his judgment.

Psydon 03:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

'Justin'

What's with 'Justin'? Seeing no proof, I went ahead and deleted it. 67.172.125.13 18:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

From the look of it, just random idiocy, nothing to worry about.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Apparently it's been popping up on a whole bunch of Avatar related pages recently, it's just fluff. Delete it if it pops up again. JBK405 18:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Season 2 Finale Information

What do you guys think? Keep or no? Most of it is speculation, but other shows have done similar information on their Wikipages (example: Paranoia Agent). H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 15:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

It appears that we have official information on the whole thing now that the Nick site has been updated.
They say Aang was mortally wounded, but not dead. And they say that Aang was unable to master the Avatar State and clear his chakra due to Azula's interruption. Sage of Ice 00:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Huh? Im pretty sure that Aang was killed, because it showed the avatar state spirit thing dying when he was struck by the lightning. Also in the first episode (Avatar State) Avatar Roku or someone told Aang that if he died in Avatar state then the avatar would sieze to exist. Is that true? And if it is then Aang is no longer the avatar and there will never ever be a avatar. OMG this will be so cool if its true! 122.57.209.140 06:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Tibet

Has anyone noticed the fact that Aang and the rest of the airbenders are/were reminiscent of Tibetan Monks? One dead giveaway (which I just added) is explained in the trivia section:

In "The Storm," it was shown that the four toys Aang chose that determined his destiny are a turtle (Water), a string-powered propeller (Air), a Hog-Monkey (Earth) and a drum (Fire). This is the same procedure a child must go through in order to be recognized as the reincarnation of a Tulku Lama in Tibetan Buddhism. According to the book Magic and Mystery in Tibet by Alexandra David-Neel, “A number of objects such as rosaries, ritualistic implements, books, tea-cups, etc., are placed together, and the child must pick out those which belonged to the late tulku, thus showing that he recognizes the things which were his in his previous life.

Tulku Lamas reincarnate as many times as they see fit. This is very similar to Aang’s situation. There are a lot more similarities between airbenders and Tibetan Buddhists, but I can’t think of any right now as I just got home from work (9pm – 5am). (Ghostexorcist 11:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC))

Another thing, Aang's teacher, Monk Gyatso, has a Tibetan name. As it says on the List_of_Avatar: The Last Airbender minor secondary characters page, 'Gyatso' (the Tibetan word for 'ocean') is the name given to each incarnation of the Dalai Lama when he takes the position."(Ghostexorcist 22:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC))

Eye Color

I know it says grey and even in a bunch of pics. from book 1 he has grey, but they seem to be brown now (see the drill at the part when the camra zooms on aang's eyes while fighting azula). I could be seeing it differently, but what does everyone else think? Momoroxmysoxoff 18:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm...[1]..kinda hard to tell with that one...[2] and that one could just be the weird lighting. So let's try the finale, shall we? [3] Ah, that looks grey enough, don't you think? The thing to remember about reflective objects that are white or similar hue is that they tend to shift color more easily based on the light that hits them. If you've ever looked at a very shiny golden or silvery object, you've probably seen this happen.Y BCZ 21:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. That's been bugging me for the longest time! Momoroxmysoxoff 00:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I think it has to do with the element he's bending. Heavyccasey 03:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
That's pure speculation. It's just reflections off of other objects around him. It's the same thing with how people say "that shirt really brings out the color of your eyes." It's because the shirt is reflecting off your eyes and making them look brighter. His eyes don't change color, they just reflect. Bagpipeturtle 22:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Twinkletoes

The article has this as an alias, isn't it more of nickname? And isn't an alias a name you pass off as your own to hide your true idendity?--Editmonkey 06:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess if that's the case then it shouldn't be there. But why would aliases be in the template instead of nicknames? -Dylan0513 14:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Maybe because with aliases some (non-observant) people might not be able to tell that Bonzu Pippenpaddleopsokololis the third (or however it's spelled) was Aang. With nicknames, it's kind of common knowledge. maybe. Should there be a nicknames section? Enough people have nicknames (Aang, Katara, Zuko, et cetera), maybe it should be added to the template. Bagpipeturtle 22:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
The whole Pippenpaddleopsokopolis thing should stay...Aang and Katara used them as their real names to get past the guards of the Earth Kingdom, so they're aliases. Same as how Zuko called himself "Lee" and his uncle "Mushi". Nicknames aren't used this way, they're simply ways of addressing a person if you already know their real name. Y BCZ 23:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Pippenpaddlewhatever was only used for one episode, and it was more for comedic effect than an actual alias. If Aang were to have been using that as a real assumed name, he would have made it more believable, like Zuko and Iroh (Lee/Junior and Mushi)'s in most of Season/Book 2. As for Twinkletoes, that's a nickname, and there's not really enough for any of the other characters, is there? Unless you wanted to add 'Zuzu', to Zuko's page... Kochdude388 23:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Categorie

Since when does Aang moves in superhuman speeds? Does that have something do to with minimazing the wind resistence or something? 201.17.63.235 17:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

He does it in The Blue Spirit, when he is going to get the cure for Sokka and Katara. -Exhibit A 17:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It's seen in several other episodes, too. Though never explicitly explained in the series, it likely has something to do with decreasing wind resistance (As you said) or propelling himself with gusts of air. JBK405 19:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Pretty much what the official site says. ~ 66.250.190.115 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Relationships Removal

This is just a personal opinion but I think the relationships aren't really needed for the character pages. It seems since the relationship pages were created, it has only sprouted more controversy on what is considered a relationship, and what is merely fandom. Add on to that, with a future season coming, there's only going to be more increase to that particular section.

The character pages (Mainly Zuko's and Aang's) are far too long and the character relationships is the only reasonable thing to cut out. And I personally think there already enough on the pages without relationships, to give anyone enough insight on the characters. Lionheart08 20:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

---

They aren't NEEDED, sure, but that's the same thing as how a cherry on top is not needed for a sundae; it improves the package on a whole, even though it is unnecessary. I think we should keep the Relationships sections; they act as very good complimentary passages to the Personality sections (showing them from alternate perspectives via their interactions with others).

Psydon 02:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

They shouldn't be removed, but definitely pruned. I'm seeing a lot of information that should be in the articles for the characters and episodes being described. For example a lot of the stuff under Aang#Katara can be moved into episode descriptions, if they aren't already there. Gh5046 05:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the relationships should have something added because Katara actually kissed Aang in the solar eclipse part 1 so it isn't not fandom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.226.25 (talk) 23:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Except that that episode hasn't even aired yet, so it stays off. 春Harukaze風 23:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Uniformity

Okay, you know how There is a 'Story' section on this page? well, these are the subsections: Book I: Water, Reawakening, Winter Solstice, Practicing Water, and Future deadline. I'd just like to point out that if you are going to put a Book I: Water, there really should be a Book 2: Earth section. I'd change it myself, but I didnt read the section recently and I don't really know where book one stops and book 2 begins in that section. And I have school, so I have to go to sleep. Bagpipeturtle 04:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Uh, wow. How did I mess that up so bad? Bagpipeturtle 04:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Eh, nevermind. I think I fixed it. Maybe. Bagpipeturtle 04:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Trivia Section

I just integrated the trivia section as according to the tag that is on the page and an automayed comment on the peer review page. Why was my edit converted? --Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 23:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure. The comment was that it didn't integrate well. If the information isn't vital it can simply be removed. Jay32183 00:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

GA nom

I'm failing the GA nomination because:

  • There are no references/citations in this article. Significant facts about character/character development should be referenced with an episode number where appropriate.
  • More pictures wouldn't hurt, either.
  • There isn't anything out-of-universe, such as director's comments, etc; From the peer review:

—Disavian (talk/contribs) 21:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

We've been told NOT to use more pictures...? H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 02:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Knew we should've never gotten rid of those pictures. Well its these guys who are the ones flip-flopping anyway. But yeah, people have an subconscious little habit of failing to see the more figurative point of the show and sometimes just plain seem to forget that everything that goes on in it, every blink and twitch, is being coordinated by a team of people with pens and pencils. Anyway, may qualify as Aang's "conception"- [4] ~71.163.70.6 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Site kinda vandalised

I come by this site every so often because i enjoy watching this show, the animation is great and I think the story is very well told, having said this, i recently viewed the avatar: the last airbender: 'Aang' page and noticed that a couple of thing were odd, chiefly the use of the word 'fag' which appeard as Aang's name and also appeared in the throughout intro. Anyway, I don't want to judge, I do however think that if people are going to read this page that they should leave it as is unless it's relevant information. Vandalising pages on wikipedia can be fun, nonetheless, i would prefer reading this info without having to come by some stuff some bored guy wrote so he could have fun. Anyway, I edited the page a little so i hope it looks like it did originally before the derogitive terms were thrown about. Thats it for me all, and if you do see that kind of trash talk and find it offensive, do feel free to re-edit it and post a message like I did.

65.93.227.195 02:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)big fan of the show

Yeah, we get vandalism all the time. You just happened to see it before we could get to it. -Dylan0513 02:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

All the time? theres gotta be something the site can do to stop that. Still i guess its that whole freedom of speach thing, and the right to edit.

There's not a lot that can be done, there's no way to tell who's going to vandalize an article before they do it. Exhibit A 18:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

---Yeah, but its just sad to come and read info on a site you trust and find that someone vandalised it just for fun.

Exactly. That's why we need to revert it back as soon as we can. -Dylan0513 19:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
You know, we could just lock the article...Y BCZ 19:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
It's not vandalized enoough for that too be allowed. The Placebo Effect 19:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
And Aang is too minor to get locked. The main Avatar article on the other hand... -Dylan0513 19:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Any page can be protected if there's a valid reason to. As it is, though, this one isn't being vandalized nearly enough to do that. Its really a last resort option. As it is, its plenty just to revert the vandalism and warn the offenders, then report them for blocking if it continues.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 01:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

---that sounds like a better idea, I didnt know you could block people from wikipedia.

We can't, but the admins can. It's a touchy subject, though. Page blocking and editor blocking/banning are things that are normally taken with heavy consideration. This is because either of those actions goes directly against the very foundation of Wikipedia which is stated in the main page: "The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". So while users can be blocked, they first need to be reported and be a continuous offender in order to merit the "drastic" measure.
Pages get blocked even more rarely and how they decide what pages get blocked are a mystery to me. I do not see how the Def Jam: Icon page warrants a block more than the Avatar pages. Go figure.
So essentially, you'll continue to see vandalism for as long as Wikipedia exists. Vandals spawn and procreate more rapidly than we can exterminate through Wikipedia means. So what can you do about it? Join us! Be an editor and a vandal police here on the Avatar pages. We could always use a hand. Sage of Ice 09:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need "Bonzu Pipinpadalopsicopolous III" in the infobox?

Honestly, do we? I mean, its a a one time joke, I can pretty much guarantee they won't be using it again. I mean, OK, put it in the article somewhere, fine, but I just don't see that it needs to be in the infobox. Quite frankly, it makes the thing ugly.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

While Aang might have been a bit goofy when picking such an unnecessarily amusing name for his alias, it was a serious attempt to obscure his identity and present a false name, which I'm pretty sure is what an alias is. It might not have been particularly successful, or even long-lasting, but it was an alias. JBK405 20:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It was a one time alias. Zuko and Iroh's were for a good portion of season 2. This doesn't count and should not be there. -Dylan0513 21:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Zuko was only called "Junior" in a single episode, and that was only as a joke, too, (Iroh obviously enjoyed it) but that alias is on his page, and the Blind Bandit, Dong, and Kua Mei are all on Toph and Katara's oages, despite likewise only being in single episodes. JBK405 21:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The Blind Bandit was a very different case than Bonzu Pipnpadawhatever, as Toph had been fighting the Earth Rumble competitions under this name on a previous occasion (she was addressed as the reigning champ, if I'm not mistaken). As for Dong and Kua Mei...are those the names Katara and Toph used to get into the Earth King's party in City of Walls and Secrets? If it was, even that's questionable, as it was used once and only once, and Long Feng presumably later found they were lying. And Zuko's name got much more use than just one episode - I distinctly remember Iroh referring to Zuko as Junior/Lee in Ba Sing Se on more than one occasion (in the tea shop, I believe). Besides, Junior was actually more of a nickname ("Well, that [Lee] was his father's name, so we sometimes call him Junior" -Iroh in The Cave of Two Lovers). Kochdude388 22:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm quite sure that Iroh never used the nickname "Junior" other than in The Cave of Two Lovers, it was always Zuko when in private and Lee/Li (There seems to be confusion over which precise spelling) when in public (Or "My Nephew" or "Prince" or other such things). And yes, Dong and Kua Mei are the alias's Toph and Katara used when entering the Earth Kings party, and they're on the two character pages (And they have not been contested, as Bonzu has been). I think that frequency of use really shouldn't even be a factor here, because how much use a person gets out of something doesn't change what that something is; Bonzu was used as an alias of Aang and, even if it wasn't particularly effective, it still happened. JBK405 22:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It was barely an alias. It was a joke that wasn't that funny. Kua Mei and Dong were way more important and had the theme of the scene before. Bonzu's random and a joke. Iroh's and Zuko's were used on more than one occasion in more than one episode. -Dylan0513 22:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It's a questions of consistency, Fyre. Pure and simple. An alias is an alias regardless of when, why, or how it was used. Toph was only called the Blind Bandit in one episode, but it's an alias that all of us see as important because of its history. History is not important in defining an alias.

The nature of an alias is not of the essence, it only matters that it is, in fact, an alias. By definition. We can't exclude Bonzu simply because the name itself is somewhat silly. Mushi is somewhat silly as well, but it's still an alias. Used once or used often, it was used. Still in use or retired, they're still alias. We're not going to remove The Blue Spirit from Zuko even though he threw away the mask.

Bonzy needs to be kept for consistency, aliases need to be kept for organization. That's really the only thing that matters: consistency. We use all aliases or none at all. Being selective would be a double standard that is frowned upon.

What one THINKS of an alias's worth does not matter. That is an OPINION. All that matters is this: was it ever an alias in the context of the show? If the answer is yes, then we have ourselves a FACT which MUST be presented for the sake of CONSISTENCY regardless of how we FEEL about it. Sage of Ice 22:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't agree. This particular alias is an unimportant detail. Others, Lee, Mushi, Blind Bandit, and so on, were all things people were known as for a significant time. An infobox ought to list essential facts, leaving details to the article's content. This is not an essential fact by any means. I think you're presenting a false alternative in this "all or nothing" argument. Nothing stops us from using some judgment, and blanket statements tend to do more harm than good.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 22:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Importance does matter more than consistency. -Dylan0513 22:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Using one's judgment causes one to omit facts. Wikipedia is based on facts and nothing more. That shouldn't change. One's judgment is no different from one's opinion. You judge the alias as expendable. I judge it as needed. No difference from "I think it's expendable" or "In my opinion, it is expendable". We can only judge what is and isn't fact, not what facts are worthy of presentation. We CAN, however, judge HOW a fact is presented. If you do not like Bonzu or June or any of the others in the infoboxes, then perhaps the infoboxes should be changed to display "Important aliases" instead.
Once again, importance is RELATIVE, however, and is something that heavily relies on how one PERCEIVES the fact as opposed to the undeniable truth that it IS a fact. Sage of Ice 22:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Fine then, I want you to prove Bonzu is an alias. -Dylan0513 23:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=alias
–noun
1. a false name used to conceal one's identity; an assumed name
OR http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
Function: noun
: an assumed or additional name
Aang's use of the name fits both those descriptions perfectly. Thus making it an alias by definition, not because I feel it is. Rather pointless request, but there you are. Sage of Ice 23:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

(un-indenting)We most assuredly can judge which facts are worthy of presentation. Truth is not Wikipedia's sole qualification for inclusion. We can indeed discuss this sort of issue and attempt to reach consensus. That's what talk pages are for.

Regardless, I'm not making a case that this should be completely omitted, I'm simply saying it doesn't need to be listed in the infobox. We don't list everything about a character in an infobox, so we're already making a judgment. We don't, for example, say Aang sometimes Airbends when he sneezes in the infobox. I could edit the infobox, add a field for "Things done while sneezing", but that wouldn't make sense. Why? Its just not important enough to mention there. Unless we wish to inculde the entire article in the infobox, we're already making judgments, one more is perfectly fine.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Like I said, we can only judge HOW it's presented. And that's exactly what we've done with the infoboxes and what is included in them. Once again, like I mentioned before, if you want to change how a fact is presented, then you need to change the category. Changing it to "Important aliases" would be a change in the presentation. Keeping it as just "Alias" submits it to consistency. Consistency is more important than opinions on worth. That is all it comes down to.
Now, if we were to change the infobox to "Important aliases", where exactly would you include Bonzu in the article? It doesn't really fit anywhere unless we want to toss it into trivia. Sage of Ice 23:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Frankly, I think the need to add the word "important" is a bit of a demand for a shrubbery, but I can live with it as a compromise (although "Significant aliases" may be a better choice of words). In this particular case, I'd just add it to the bit about the visit to Omashu, being that that was the occasion in which it occurred/was relevant.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
It's hardly a demand for a shrubbery. If anything, your request would better fit that category since there's no real reason within canonicity to remove Bonzu from the infobox. You want it gone because you feel it's unimportant even though it played a vital role in allowing the characters to meet King Bumi in Omashu. So you see, within canon, Bonzu should stay. I was offering the compromise not for my sake, but for yours. I only care about consistency. If the infoboxes (for all the characters) read "Significant Aliases" instead, then I have no qualms with Bonzu being removed since there is no consistency being broken. Same logic would then also apply to Kua Mei, Dong, etc.
Personally, I think that the need to remove Bonzu from the infobox just because it "makes the thing ugly" is being all too picky for all the wrong reasons. It does more good than harm staying there. Sage of Ice 03:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow would ya look at all this. For that "harm good" bit, no not really. Yeah its not killing any puppies but its not particularly helping anything either. Seriously though, it was from the early days of the show, it was this little joke (along with the Kangaroo Island bit), and its just, eh. You'd think they'd make a reference to it by now. ~Father's Wish 11 March 2007 (UTC)

They haven't referenced the Blind Bandit since the eponymous episode. They may mention her fighting days (mostly through Xin Fu and Master Yu) but they have never again called her by that name. Doesn't mean the name didn't serve a purpose and isn't worth mentioning...
Really, I don't know what's so hard to get here... it was an alias, like it or not. Stop trying to argue importance and just accept the fact that it is what it is. It helps more than it hinders so what exactly is the issue at hand here? Appearance? Come on... Sage of Ice 06:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
...I say we take the alias catagory off the character templates at all. Doesn't really apply to Avatar too much... -Dylan0513 10:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
All they seem to do is cause arguments. I nominate it be taken off too. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 14:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I've got no problem with it so long as I don't start seeing "The Blind Bandit", "The Blue Spirit" or "The Dragon of the West" being listed under their character's "Position" category, which was what was happening before "Aliases" was added. Sage of Ice 19:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Agree with keeping "Bonzu Pipinpadl...." and I sugest to add "Soft feet" an other false name given to Aang in the chapter The blind bandit. Si

Remove the Alias section of the infobox?

Since this has come up, let's give it its own little discussion corner, m'kay?

Personally, I vote that it be taken off. It's really not that important, and if you want the aliases in there so badly, we can stick them in the Trivia. Raven23 20:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I've moved the discussion on this subject to Template talk:Infobox Avatar: The Last Airbender character, the more proper place for discussing a change to the template.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I vote not to removing the mentioned section (especially Aang´s, if you mean "Allias section" as general for all characters). Although others can consider it unimportant or removable I think it´s a good detail that embellish the article and we don´t need to take it off, in the trivia section this embellishment will disapear. That´s why I would like to keep this as it is. Opinion 19:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Hair color

If anyome deletes the "black hair" thing, they are wrong, because Aang has black hair. The S3V1 box art has been revealed and Aang has black hair. So please dont delete it. (RedwallFreak305, 7-10-07 9:55 pm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.133.79 (talk • contribs)

As I said when deleting it, DVD Box Art does not count as official art from the show. Until we have confirmation from screen shots from the show, it shouldn't be up there. -Dylan0513 12:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Err...why not? I mean, it's not like this is just random fanart or something. We are talking about an official product here. I don't see any reason to disregard it.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Becuase it's not from the show. DVD arts have been different from the show's animation in the past. This is not concrete enough for Wikipedia. -Dylan0513 23:45, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
True, but offical artwork from nick has only had different outfits for characters, which we already knew was going to happen. The PLacebo Effect not signed in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.19.14.21 (talk • contribs)

Let's wait for a screenshot. While that DVD box is awesome (and Katara looks beautiful in it by the way), the background color causes a lot of darker shades and Aang could very well have brown hair but the red darkens it. Either way, currently he is bald and his hair color doesn't show anyway. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 07:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Secondeded..ed. Probably said it before, but its time's like this I wish Avatar was produced in Japan. Then we'd have everything on em: Hair color, eye color, estimated height, exact age of everybody, date of birth, blood type, favorite food, etc, etc. Come to think of it, a show doesn't even have to be an anime to do that, maybe if someone asked real nicely at that next Comic-con.... ~Father Wish II 14 July 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Father's Wish II (talk • contribs)

Okay. We've seen Comic-Con and Aang's hair is still black. Can I change it now? (RedwallFreak305 July 29 2007 8:43 am) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.186.212 (talk • contribs)

I'd say it's more of a dark brown. ;) -Dylan0513 14:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

How can we discuss this?!?! There is a Book 3 preview out and its CLEARLY shown that Aang has BLACK hair. Now tell me thats not official enough. Its actual clips from the show. Wikipedia really has a couple of mourons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicoler1 (talk • contribs)

What if I think it's dark brown? Show me proof it's actually black and not just dark brown. -Dylan0513 11:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

You're color blind. Is that proof enough? PS why are you so desperate to prove we're wrong? (RedwallFreak305) (July 30 2007 10:32 am) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.186.212 (talk • contribs)

I'm not. I'm saying that it's not proof enough yet. Give me some color comparisons on black and dark brown next to his hair. -Dylan0513 22:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh shut up!!! You're so annoying. You must be seriously color blind, idiot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicoler1 (talk • contribs)

Or he's just trying to be accurate since this an encyclopedia. The trailer for season 3 was low quality so it's impossible to judge solely on that. And the Season 3 DVD cover had an obvious darker shade. Looking at the next All Avatar Cover for te Nick Magazine, he has Dark Brown hair. See for yourself: http://www.avatarspiritmedia.net/images/nickmag2/nickmag2_cover.jpg Lionheart08 18:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree. -Dylan0513 19:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh...well its a pretty dark shade of brown, you have to admit. (RedwallFreak305) (9-8-07 3:05 pm CEN) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.100.227 (talk) 20:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)



I have a screenshot; if anybody feels as if it should be the new picture' address me and i will put it. [IMG]http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff55/bigghedd/aang.jpg[/IMG]--74.244.47.83 16:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Pepe007

New image for profile picture?

Could his image be changed from this: Avatar-book 1 Chapters 1 And 2 0003.jpg to this? [IMG]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:The_Avatar_Is_Back_01.jpg[/IMG] It is more current and is also appropriate for the article. The current profile image is somewhat unsettling, too. Wikiswan 20:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Any opinions?

A haired picture of Aang might be more current, but his shaved visage is more appropriate. He's been bald for the entire series so far, and even if he keeps his hair until the end of the series it still won't last longer than his previous style. Additionally, it's more representative of who/what he is; it's the style of his people, as well as his personal preference, and the shaved/arrowed head has always been synonymous with "Avatar" (More than one scene has gone to an extreme close-up of his arrow when people realize who he is). I think we should keep this picture, or at least this style of picture, until something more drastic than new hair occurs; this article covers Aang's whole being, not just the newest and latest, and we need to keep a picture that's similarly all-encompassing. JBK405 02:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Yue Boost

I might be wrong, but didn't Yue used her powers for Aang to make a bigger wave? It seemed to me that she opened her arms just before the wave got bigger. 189.4.246.93 20:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Without some form of confirmation, we'll never know. JBK405 20:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The confirmation is in the clip and in logic. She raises her arms, and the wave grows even bigger. The moon is what pushes and pulls the tides--she's the moon. Unless there's some sort of logical argument against it, it is safe to assume that she was key in creating the wave. Wikiswan 23:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Er....Maybe if two people say it, it'll work. How about, "No"? Keyblade Mage 00:45, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

I don't know...I thought it was pretty obvious Yue was doing so. I mean, its not OR to say what we see in the show...--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright...Lemme chack out the episoide agian. Keyblade Mage 22:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Oh.....Yeah, watching it agian, I gotta say, she definatly seemed to help him. But, you gotta admit, even before Yue helped him (if she helped him), that was still some pretty good Waterbending! Keyblade Mage 22:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

New Lead Image

I am wondering if the current picture of Aang should be replaced with one that shows him with hair. We should at least include one in the article somewhere.Darth G 23:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I mentioned the issue two posts above. :) Wikiswan 23:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Human Popsicle2.png

Image:Human Popsicle2.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

UK info

Should the information about Aang from the episodes not yet aired in the US but already aired in the UK be added here? Like his training section with Toph and Katara (specially when his use of Tophs vibration technique) or him being nervous during Nightmares and Daydreams? Other pages have been updated with significant info from those episodes. 201.17.28.73 00:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Simple answer: Yes. JBK405 03:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Redundancy in Position Field?

I've deleted "Firebender" twice now from Aang's list. Aang says himself in episode 309 - the most current episode to-date - that he doesn't even know the Firebending basics. Don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure that that means he can't bend fire and thus isn't a Firebender. Until Aang does learn Firebending, please don't add it back again.Harukaze 11:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Three times now. Harukaze 23:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
If Aang's not a Firebender, then how should we call what he did in The Deserter, when he shot fire from his finger tips and accidentally burned Katara? 189.32.147.22 23:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Failing to Firebend? He certainly didn't succeed. (continued below) Harukaze 00:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, he is a firebender. Guru Pathik says so in the "The Guru." I believe the term firebender is used to describe anyone who has the potential to firebend. Although Aang is not necessarily experienced or skilled at firebending, he is the Avatar, and hence by definition a firbender. b.y.w 00:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you and 189.etc spoke up. This brings up a very important point: namely, how does one define a bender? Is potential sufficient? Or must one have at least some degree of control to be a bender? Personally, I feel that if someone can't actively bend an element - meaning, if they can't control that element - then I don't think you can call them a bender. But now we've come into a problem. There is no definitive meaning to the term "bender", and you and I disagree on the point at which one can be considered a bender. The problem is that we both have our opinions, and that opinions don't have a place in the Wikipedia.
Might I propose a compromise? Tell me what you think of this. You said that having potential in an element makes one a bender; and that being the Avatar makes Aang by definition a Firebender. I think it's safe to say from that that we both agree, being the Avatar gives someone potential in all four elements, yes? So why do we need to list "Airbender, Waterbender," etc? Why not just say that he's the Avatar and leave it at that? In my opinion, that says it all anyway :)
The other thing this would do would finally put an end to the "Is Aang a Waterbending Master?" question. If we remove "Waterbender"/"Waterbending Master" from his Position entry, along with Earth and Fire, we remove the revert war that pops up every few days.
What do you think? Harukaze 00:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I think that is indeed a fair compromise; removing the redundant information should satisfy both sides. However, I must still disagree on whether Aang is a firebender. Regardless of what a firebender is defined to be, the exact phrase "You (Aang) are a firebender," was said in the show.
Before we actually make any changes to the page, I think we should wait for more feedback on the matter since I'm sure some other pages will need modifying as well to maintain consistency. b.y.w 00:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd agree with you on waiting for more feedback, but other people don't respect that. Even while we're talking about this, even with a comment that says "let's discuss this on the Talk Page", it's still getting changed without discussion. If other people start commenting that they disagree with us, and have some good reason to keep the redundancies, we can always put it back. Right now, I think I'm going to go be bold and update :) Harukaze 00:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
69.225.34.194, clearly you have a problem with our decision here. Please, share with us your thoughts. A revert war will do none of us any good, so I invite you to explain why you think all those extra links are necessary. Harukaze 10:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Totaly I agree with both of your statements about The Deserter and The Guru. Aang has firebended in the past and people who do have the potential are firebenders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.34.194 (talk) 00:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
See response above - was writing that while you commented and got an edit conflict. Harukaze 00:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

previous reincarnations

I added info under 'spirit' about the previous reincarnations. If there is a better place for this info, please move it, but I have found no better spot within the avatar articles. I think that this is important info about who aang is, and since two of the previous avatars have only been seen in video games, it is important to have a hub for connecting their entries in one place —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.171.34.56 (talk) 23:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Importance

I know this is a minor point but shouldn't this page be top level importance. (zuko's page is).

Ziphon 09:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Keep in mind, the importance scale is not just for the Avatar Wikiproject, it is for all of Wikipedia. Therefore, since Avatar: The Last Airbender is rated as Top (though even that may not be an appropriate rating), this article should be rated as it is since Aang is a character of the show. In addition, I do not know why Zuko is rated as Top. It should share the same rating, if not lower, as this article. If anybody objects to my argument, please say so. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 22:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless I'm much mistaken you've got a totally warped concept of the importance scale thingy. They are indeed just for specific Wikiprojects, and the same article can (and commonly does) have different ratings in relation to different projects.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, the Avatar Wikiproject does have its own importance scale which I created, but the others refer to the Version 1.0 Editorial Team Release Version scale. Because of this, I think that the importance on the Avatar WikiProject should be increased.
Never mind. I am a little bit confused. The Version 1.0 Editorial page says that the importance is based on the project scope but then the wikiprojects themselves say something else. From here I think I am going with your description Fyre until I find other evidence. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 23:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

I have heard about earlier complaints about too many pictures, but now the article has only three or four pictures! Is there any reason why we should not be using pictures that I am not aware about? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 00:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Kuzon nad Sokka?

Under the Kuzon section, it says he was mentioned by Aang to Sokka when discussing friends and enemies. But He told Zuko about Kuzon, not Sokka. I just saw the episode too, it was "The BLue Spirit". Mew Mitsuki 21:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It probably just happened offscreen.59.167.128.186 00:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
he mentioned kuzon to sokka in season 3 episode 2 the headband. i thought it was katara and toph too but i'd have to check Akuzio (talk) 09:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

right, but still, he also mentioned him to zuko first, in The Blue Spirit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kataang editor (talk • contribs) 03:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I know, i never said he didn't. I said he told sokka because mew mitsuki stated that he didn't. Akuzio (talk) 09:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

GA review

Hello, I am the GA reviewer for this article. If you have any questions, please leave them here or on my talk page. Regards, Daimanta 22:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

"Aang is a 112-year-old monk of the Air Nomads and the current reincarnation of the Avatar." The article almost immediatly jumps into the universe. Make it more gradual. Try to refer to the fact that this happens in the series. Regards, Daimanta 22:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, there is no explanation of "books". Make the reader know when the series starts. Regards, Daimanta 23:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

"When Prince Zuko arrived on Kyoshi Island, he realized that by staying too long he had endangered the people, it is here that Aang and his group learn they need to be constantly on the move"

It is unclear who "he" is. Please clarify that. Daimanta 01:01, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

"While spending 100 years of his life in suspended animation, a war between the belligerent Fire Nation and the other more peaceful nations breaks out."

I am missing the context about the 4 nations, that needs to be clarified. Daimanta 01:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

"Aang is briefly captured by the Yu Yan Archers under Admiral Zhao while collecting a remedy for his friends' illness."

This is the first mention of Zhao but there is explation given about him. Daimanta 01:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Please note: The article is under constant review. Regards, Daimanta 11:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

"During one of their detours they land on Kyoshi Island (an island named after one of his incarnations), where they were captured by the Kyoshi Warriors;"

Again, it is unclear who "he" is. Daimanta 11:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

"We still do not know if they actually kissed or not."

Remove the "we" and make it more neutral and encyclopedic. Daimanta 13:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The previous GA said : "

  • There isn't anything out-of-universe, such as director's comments, etc; From the peer review:
  • Needs a "Concept and creation" section discussing how the writers, animators, and voice actor created the character of Aang."

" I would also like to see this. Regards, Daimanta 15:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I was asked one final time to review this article. I have seen this article improve alot but unfortunately I still think that it's still not just ready for GA. There is no "concept and creation" part so it's just too in universe. Based on that aspect I say that it isn't GA just yet. But it's very close and making the improvements I pointed to will make it a fine GA article. Regards, Daimanta 23:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Kuzon

Is Kuzon really a notable alias. I mean obviously he used it as a disguise in an episode but does the usage of it make it that important? Just asking because the sidebar says "Notable Aliases", and I think that for an alias to be listed there, that it should be at least somewhat important. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 03:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Good question. I left it alone, because I couldn't remember where I saw it. Where does he use the alias Kuzon? 春Harukaze風 19:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I believe that in a recent episode, Aang is accidentally mistaken for a student at a Fire Nation school, so he uses the name Kuzon as a disguise until he is able to get out of the school. I am not sure however, since I missed that episode. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 21:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Ohhh, okay, so it's basically his name in the Fire Nation. Hmm. Well, I don't think I'm particularly for or against listing that as a "Notable" alias. What does everyone else think? 春Harukaze風 21:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Not sure. I think we could find some more important aliases than a temporary disguise used is one episode that we may never hear of again. (Oh, and just for those who would argue "What if we do hear of it again?", then we would put Kuzon as a notable alias when it does pop up again.) Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 22:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable to me. I'm going to try to find that episode, make sure we're right on that being the source of Kuzon, then make the edit. If someone has a compelling reason why it should stay, they can add it back and post here why it's necessary. 春Harukaze風 22:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I checked it and he used the disguise when his clothes tricked some people into thinking he was from a Fire Nation school, just as I thought. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 16:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

New outfit

After it has aired [and may I stress that: after it has aired], could we get an image of the outfit seen in the two-part Day of Black Sun sequence? I think it would be a more appropriate image than the one currently in use as the main infobox picture. It seems to me that it is the best possible representation of Aang as the Avatar - it is the first time he is wearing traditional airbender garb that is not that of a student. It seems to be his own personal acknowledgement that he has "graduated", so to speak.

I'm bringing this up now, because I know people have copies of these episodes, and someone can probably screen capture one of them. We can't upload it yet, for legal reasons, but it would be nice to have ready for when we can. 春Harukaze風 16:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The first part has now aired so could someone upload an image if they have one (I am unable to as I don't have one). Joeking16 (talk) 19:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-Protected Status

Please note that I have requested and received semi-protected status for this page. The protection will stand for 18 days, until the actual airing of The Day of Black Sun episodes. As these two episodes were leaked and have not aired anywhere legally, we should not include content from those episodes on these pages.

I have seen varying release dates for these episodes overseas. The only "official" date I have seen for the UK is the 30th, like the US, but I have heard that the UK and Canada might see these episodes one week earlier, on the 23rd. If this is the case, I will request for these pages to be unlocked - US release, as one user pointed out, is not the original air date.

Until then, please, please do not make edits to these pages regarding the unaired content. They will be reverted. 春Harukaze風 20:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Automatic Archiving

I know this is being lazy and all, but instead of constantly having to archive this page (usually nobody remembers), we could put a bot on the page and have it automatically archive conversations older than, let's say, 21 days. We could use this bot to auto-archive the page, making sure to change to a different archive page after it has reached a certain size. Do I have anybody that agrees with me?

If anybody is willing to consider my proposal, all we need to do is post

{{User:MiszaBot/config|algo=old(21d) |archive=User talk:Aang/Archive %(counter)d |counter=1 |maxarchivesize= 250K |minthreadsleft=10 |minthreadstoarchive=5 |archiveheader={{talkarchive}}{{archive-nav|%(counter)d}}}}

Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 22:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I approve. Anyone else have thoughts? 春Harukaze風 03:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
I think since nobody has objected the idea and since it has been almost two days, that we should put it up. I just need one more person to agree. In addition, does anybody know what the name of that template which shows that the page auto-archives? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 16:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Never mind. Found one. Should I set everything up? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 16:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

What I did was, I set up templates for an auto-archiving bot, an archive box, an auto-archive notice, and a bot that creates a page with links to every topic (topics are denoted by H2 headings, as always) in a nice, assorted list. I put comments around everything so it would not go into effect yet. All we need to do is remove the comments and its done (all of this is in the lead section of this page). Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 20:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

All that's new to me, so I barely followed what you were doing through my watch page. Any reason we should keep it still commented out though, or should we remove the tags? 春・Harukaze・風 22:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry, that was the easy stuff (compared to other concepts like parser function, magic words, etc.). Since nobody seems to care about this topic except for you and me, I'm assuming that nobody else is objecting to it. Therefore, I am going to uncomment it and see if everything works out. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 17:00, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Honestly, I'm not surprised no one else is interested, but I won't get into that here. Cheers to you for doing something good for the page! 春・Harukaze・風 20:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible problem

Hey Parent5446, I think we might have a problem. The bot ran an archive, but it archived it to "/dev/null"... unixspeak for deleting it. There's no archive link under "archives" up at the top. I think it's just "gone" - though of course nothing is gonegone in Wikipedia, I'm still worried that the bot isn't functioning properly. Should I just sit on it for a few days, and wait to see what happens, or should we do something about this? 春・Harukaze・風 20:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Simply wait it out. If nothing happens, just archive it yourself. Regards, Daimanta (talk) 21:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

It was sending them to /dev/null just because someone collapsed the whole template into a one-liner - sorry, it must be one parameter per line. Second, with the current setting of minthreadsleft = 10 it will take quite a while for this page to fill up to 10 threads before the bot acts. Миша13 18:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, hm. That's odd though, I've never seen any templates that required info to be on seperate lines. Or have I...? It just occured to me that infoboxes always seem to come on several lines.
Anyway, should I go ahead and undo the delete, so that your bot will properly archive the page? 春・Harukaze・風 19:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
It's not a usual template as, being empty, it does not provide any added value above Special:Whatlinkshere/User:MiszaBot/config. On the other hand, the code of the page is parsed by a bot which expects parameters to be specified one-per-line or otherwise assumes their value to be blank (and a blank archive = means no less than /dev/null). And yes, once it runs, it should work fine now. Миша13 17:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, that was my fault. I accidentally tried to archive the pages to User talk:Aang/Archive 1 instead of Talk:Aang/Archive 1. Because of that, some error might have occurred. I changed it so lets see what happens. However, a sub-page I created creates a list of all the topics (discussions) in the current page and the archives. This is currently working. Just go to Talk:Aang/Archive Topics. There is a link at the top of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parent5446 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Zuko and Azula relatives of Aang?

I know that Roku is an ancestor of both of them, but should they really be classified as related? I'm sure that if you go far enough back through the Avatar cycle, that an Avatar is an ancestor of just about everyone on the planet (much like how JK Rowling says that nearly all wizards have similar ancestors). Should Zuko just go to relationships and Azula back down to enemies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.134.228 (talk) 04:50, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you are right. Even though Roku is Aang's past incarnation, they are not related. Therefore, Aang is not related to Zuko and Azula. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 14:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The Big Problem

We really need to get this out of the way. The problem is that the article is too in-universe, as you may have noticed by the message box on the top of the article. It is holding the article down from going any further than it is now. In addition, with the spoilers that some people are adding, it is becoming even harder. However, I think we should try and collect some ideas on what we should do. Just look around for something, maybe even give a source or two of something we could put in. Post anything that will be useful. Hopefully we will enlarge the amount of out-of-universe information. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 02:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I hope somebody helps me out. I have re-written the Story section, as almost all of the information is not important to this article. The way I wrote it include literally the basics of what the reader needs to know. I would like to hear any input on what else should be included or excluded. Here is is:

Aang's journey begins with a simple quest to learn the other three elements as his Avatar status guides him to do. However, in "The Winter Solstice", Aang discovers that he must defeat Fire Lord Ozai before the end of next year's summer, or the Fire Nation will use the power of a special comet named Sozin's comet to win the war, just like they used it one hundred years ago to start the war.[1] In "The Library", Aang learns that his deadline might be even earlier as his best chance at defeating the Fire Lord would be during an upcoming solar eclipse, during which all Firebenders will no longer be able to use their Firebending abilities.[2] By this time, he has already started to learn Waterbending from Katara, who learned after an interesting conflict in "The Siege of the North", and Earthbending from Toph, who the gang ran in to at an Earthbending tournament in "The Blind Bandit".[3][4] As for Firebending, Aang still does not have a trainer, though he has tried to find one many times (almost succeeding in "The Deserter").[5] As the day of the solstice starts to close in, and the planned invasion is just days away, Aang starts to go delusional in "Nightmares and Daydreams", before finally resting for the next day, which will be revealed in "The Day of Black Sun".[6][7]

Please not that it does not have wikilinks or references as it is just basic. Please reply. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 22:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I added wikilinks, I am not sure what kind of references should be put in. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 17:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for not mentioning this, but this small section will be combined with the History section to make one section. It may not be a lot, but keep in mind that this article is about Aang, it is not a biography, meaning it should briefly mention something about his role in the show, it should have some of his personality and relationships, and then concept and creation. That's it. It does not need an elaborate explanation about how the Yu-Yang Archers captured him in some minor episode before he was released by Zuko. It is not needed. Just look at other fictional character articles (you might find some good ones in the Manual of Style's sub-page for writing about fiction). Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 18:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I added references. Please let me know if anymore needs to be added. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 18:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
If nobody replies an objection by tomorrow, I am going to make the change myself, integrating the above paragraph into the History section. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 22:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
This sounds good to me. There are a few minor changes that could be made, but other than that, it's fine. Bagpipeturtle (talk) 22:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I edited and integrated some other sections. Does anybody have any other ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parent5446 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Why was the Relationships section removed? The character dynamics in Avatar play a big part in the story... Bagpipeturtle (talk) 00:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The relationships section is very important. SkepticBanner (talk) 02:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The Relationships section would be good but most of it is original research, almost all of it is in-universe info, which we need to get rid of, and this type of section is usually included in biographical articles, which this is not. The section is simply going against what the MoS states about writing about fiction. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 03:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
When the relationships between characters play that much of a role in the story, I'm sure it's okay to put a section in about it. The MoS isn't all-inclusive, I'm pretty sure. Bagpipeturtle (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll copy the relationships section to the Avatar Wiki in that case. SkepticBanner (talk) 05:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I do not mean this as a personal attack or anything, but I read about the whole Avatar wiki situation tha somebody came up with, and I think it is pretty pathetic that you people are abandoning Wikipedia just because admins are going to delete written information which could be easily obtained by just watching the show. For the stuff that can't be seen on the show, all someone has to do is look at the edit history of the deleted page. Before that even happens, at least try and fix the articles before exporting information to an inferior wiki. If all else fails, just look online. I mean seriously, is the information that important that you need to go elsewhere to preserve it? 71.247.132.173 (talk) 23:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not leaving Wikipedia because Admins are removing a lot of important information. I'll go to the edit history, copy it, then paste in in the Avatar Wikia. SkepticBanner (talk) 02:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I would like to point out that as of now I have yet to find any history of any deleted page. Pages that have been MERGED their histories are findable, deletion if I'm correct means everything is gone. That being said, I think Wikipedia would actually prefer it if the Universe stuff was to be moved to the Wikia, and all the factual mumbo jumbo be kept here.--TheUltimate3 02:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The relationship sections have to go. They're just such a minefield of fanwank and speculation. Don't get it wrong, like ya said, relationships are a big thing in this show, but why do you need to dedicate an entire paragraph overanalyzing something that was effectively touched on in less than two sentences in another section? Then there's how the term "relationship" is skewed. I've seen people jump up to cite how Sokka and Zuko or Toph and Azula have a "relationship" simply because they exchanged dialog just once, and dontcha just love how Katara had a relationship with Zuko before they had any substantial interaction? Rhymes with Sutara. They don't all have to go, just the redudant, obviously stretched out ones. Things like Aang and Zuko or the inevitable Aang and Katara fluff are explicitly the foundations of the show. Then there's less vital but still significant stuff like Toph and Sokka or Toph and Katara. But as for everything else. Yeah we all know Toph doesn't like flying but thats about it, no offense towards Appa. Aside from the explicit fact that they're friends, she's his teacher and the rough patches that had in the beginning, Aang and Toph really don't interact all that much. And for God's sake "Iroh and Zhao?" I liked that one part in the first season finale too but comon.

The relationship sections started out as a good idea, but ovetime it, like so, so many other Avatar articles, has just become an engine for the numerous Avatards online to dump every single little thing they see in an episode. Why we all get off to junk like that, who really knows? Abridgement. As for Avatar wiki, god no. Seriously though that (thing's) a joke. Fathers Wish II 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The whole section is basically the fans' opinions. It has almost no sources and is not really necessary for this article. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 02:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

History

Why is the History section back? I down-sized it for a reason and now it is back. Is anybody at least looking at the talk page or reviewing previous edits (or reading the MoS) before blindly making edits. The history section should not be in this article as this article is about a fictional character. This information is already, or should already be, in Avatar: The Last Airbender. This is not a biography. The most this should have is Concept and Creation (which has not yet gone int existence), Characteristics, and MAYBE a brief paragraph on his role in the show. THAT IS IT! I am going to remove it once more. If you have any arguments, post them here. I am not in the mood (nor do I have the time to wait out a block) to have an edit way. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 17:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC) It's a little bit better. (Please note the timestamp on the above comment is wrong as my browser took a long time to submit it.) The most we need now is references in the history section and we need a concept and creation section. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 18:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

We also need to resist the temptation to simply resummarize episodes, even given that his development is understandably highly lashed to the plot. We've got to keep it related to him overall, without "And in Name of Episode the other guys also did lots of stuff too, and a really cool thing happened, only Aang wasn't there at all, wasn't it awesome?" We need to eliminate this practice of organizing events by season too. I don't see it in other television character articles. --Buinne (talk) 04:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Television character articles, whether "good" or "featured" are apparently highly variable in how they present their character's in-show history and personality. Some examples: Series lead character Homer Simpson has fictional biography and personality subsections.
CSI lead chars Gil Grissom and Sara Sidle have sections detailing fictional pre-series biographies, character development (subgrouped into personality and character growth) and romantic relationships, including fan reaction.
Similarly for plot-heavy serials, Holby City's leads Joseph Byrne Kyla Tyson and Faye Morton detail development (subgrouped into personality and romantic relationships) and featured storylines. Does that help? --Buinne (talk) 06:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Lead Section

According to WP:LEAD, this section should be able to give all the necessary basic info a reader needs to understand the topic. If the lead section was the only thing in the article, then it should be able to tell the reader the basics at the least. This means that if something is mentioned in the sidebar, it can be mentioned again in the lead section, especially if it describes a voice. Think about it this way, since the main voice is also in the sidebar, should we remove that too? No. As for the other info, it deserves to be there because, even though the information should be in the history section, it should be in the lead too because, as previously said, the lead is a general outlook on the rest of the article. Finally, the lead is small enough. According to WP:LEAD, it should be three to four paragraph for this article, while we have about half a paragraph. Please do not revert the edits anymore. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 21:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I maintain my position stated on your talk that the level of specifity here is akin to going into detail about Zuko's Agni Kai and exile. It's not exactly "basic," to my mind. Even deferring to your opinion, I feel it currently reads choppily. If we absolutely must include the info, it could use some polish.

Again, I reiterate that mentioning Katara and Sokka invites a laundery listing of his current companions and pets. Would you support mentioning Appa, Momo and Toph?

Regarding mention of Musso's role, I refer to precedent set in other featured articles. In the comparable fictional character article Amidala Grey Delisle's significantly smaller contribution to the character is confined to the sidebar, while and her name is not mentioned in the lead at all, despite the fact that Clone Wars actually aired for a wide cable television audience. In Jason Voorhees only Kane Hodder, his most well known portrayer, merits mention in the lead, in contrast with his veritable army of sucessors. We really should aspire to that level of concision. --Buinne 22:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, if they remove the name in other FA articles, then I guess we should take it out. If you really think we should take the info out of the lead, then before it happens we need to come up with something to replace it. The lead is simply way too short. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 00:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I understand your misgivings about a short lead, but I have to say that keeping it smacks of padding on our collective part, given the precedent. What's worse, a short lead or a padded short lead? --Buinne 00:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
To furthur illustrate my points, though no character articles have made "featured," there are currently five American animated (television) character articles considered "Good" by wiki guidelines.
The only "Good" article for an animated TV series protagonist is Homer Simpson who's lead is a scant two paragraphs and 137 words despite his having been in a series far longer-running and more culturally impactful than Aang's.
Of the full fourteen "Good" TV character articles (American cartoons included) none has a lead that describes major events in the character's life in an "in universe" style like Aang, but rather detail the role the character plays in the story in a metatextual fashion. In other words, they describe what the character is (Protagonist, foil/happy, sad/mail clerk, princess, etc.) not the plotline of the series he inhabits.
They also summarize a collection of personality traits, the effect the character has had on a culture, first appearance, who portrayed them and what awards they won. Our lead is seriously off-model. --Buinne 03:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Padmé Amidala says "Hi!" --The Placebo Effect 06:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Should I say hi back? Our lead (and article) would be more substantial if we knew more about Aang's initial character conception, his VA's thoughts...etc. As it is we do have some, but I doubt we'll have the level of detail seen there until the Avatar universe expands to the size of Star Wars, or we get many more interviews with staff. --Buinne 06:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Rewriting lead furthur, Sokka did not free Aang. Aside from that, details of Aang's freedom are plot-driven. Recall that in Amidala her lead does not reveal her masquerade as a servant, the details of her political career, or her death in childbirth, though these are important, definitive events in her biography. In Jason Voorhees, the circumstances of his death and fixation on Camp Crystal Lake, which both define him and drive his actions, are not even cursorily summarized in the lead. Better to encapsulate what Aang is, his personality, and his role in the series, given their models.--Buinne (talk) 02:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Model Articles

I was incorrect in my above statement regarding television character articles. Apart from the fourteen catagorized as good,Troy McClure, Nikki and Paulo, and Bernard Quatermass are all featured television character articles that we can stylistically draw from ETA: Long running Eastender's lead Pauline Fowler too --Buinne 00:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Firebending Teacher

Since the end of Day of Black Sun Pt. 2, and Zuko's decision to join Aang, dosen't that mean that Aang just found himself a firebending teacher? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.116.27 (talk) 14:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would assume so too, but that hasn't come to pass yet, so technically it's not canon. Where are you going with this anyway? --Secretss (talk) 14:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Until it airs and we know that zuko's actually going to be his teacher, it's still speculation, and we cannot add it to the article.Akuzio (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The Western Air Temple has aired in Canada, Zuko will teach Aang, you can watch it at youtube. 189.32.153.180 (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Diction in Sidebar

Heading off any well-intended reversions, I would like to note in-sidebar that Musso appeared in the "original pilot." Like Billy West as Zim in Invader Zim, Musso had a one-time role in a "production pilot," shown to the network as a prototypical pitchreel for the series and never intended for air. After funding was secured, the "broadcast pilot" ie. "Boy in the Iceberg" was developed.--Buinne (talk) 23:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Relationships in Lead? Concerns.

Where applicable, character article leads will mention the character's most emphasized and developed relationship(s) in a series. Like say, Star Wars' Amidala: wife of Anakin, mother of Luke & Leia. Lost's Boone Carlyle: helper and protegé of John Locke. CSI's Sara Sidle: long fan-shipped, finally canon and now ex paramour of fellow principal Gil Grissom. See that last one? It brings up an issue. In the lead, should we even mention, however briefly, Aang and Katara's budding romance, let alone meta anticipation for it? The kiss would seem to render it canon, after seasons of tease. But is the opportunity for wank too great?--Buinne (talk) 03:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Book Summaries

Are we supposed to include summaries for the books? From what I've read in the talk page it sounds like the book summaries aren't needed. When I arrived at the article three hours ago, the summaries for books 1 2 3 are on the page, so I thought they're supposed to be there and just waiting for people to touch up and expand. I expanded Books 2 and 3, and after reading the talk page, I've cropped out plenty of unnecessary details in Books 1 and 2. They're both complete now, that is, I've looked through all episodes in both books and picked out the important details involving Aang. Certain episodes are not mentioned, because they're not needed. By "book summaries", I mean plot points directly involving Aang only. I didn't resummarise Book 3 since the entire book isn't out yet. I hope the summaries are good enough. I don't think anymore plot details are needed. --Secretss (talk) 15:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

You are right, the plot summaries do have too much unnecessary info. But I have tried many times to shorten them but somebody always seems to expand them again. Luckily, you were smart enough to look at the talk page and see that they should be shorter. wonder what we could do. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 21:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, we should try to pare it down furthur still. The pre-series "Background" section needs it too. I tried to both trim it and add what I thought was necessary, (lifted from an older version) but that has still left it roughly the same size. Still, it's a hard call. Aang has a lot of background history that explains his motivation. I'm going to actively try to shrink it now. For starters, I'd like to kill the details of that Air nomad Avatar-finding ritual. It seems more fit for the Airbending spirituality subsection and the episode details for "The Storm".--Buinne (talk) 20:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
How do others feel about that "On a trip to the Eastern Air..." paragraph? Since those events aren't concretely anchored to a timeline, and disrupt the flow of the biography, I'd like to just do away with it. We could leave Aang's fondness for Appa, travel, and freindships in his characteristics section, since they have never abated. i.e "Aang and his friends travel on his flying bison Appa, a companion since childhood. Aang is always making new freinds...etc"--Buinne (talk) 21:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, can we dispense with "In Episode X, this happens" in favor of citations? It looks terribly choppy. Also, mentioning episodes by name and season seems comparatively rare in television character articles, unless they've only appeared/been spotlighted in a bare few. We could confine explicit title mentions only to those considered most important.--Buinne (talk) 22:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree with you, Buinne. Having to remember to add in "In Episode X" is a bother and I tend to forget about it until I proofread the page =\. Plus it does come in the way of fluent reading. Does anyone else think the phrase "Aang and his friends" is a little redundant? The only time they don't travel together is when Aang visits the guru. --Secretss (talk) 10:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I've shortened the book 3 summary considerably, since there's still another half of the book to go. Currently it's half the length of the book 1 and 2 summaries (which both span 17 lines by the way =X). And there's that picture of Aang with hair. Is that really necessary? I don't exactly have any issues with it, but it's not exactly needed is it? --Secretss (talk) 12:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Concept and Creation

I think that we have spent just a little bit too much time on the summaries. They are very important, but we really need to concentrate on putting in a concept and creation section. Does anybody have any ideas? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 19:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Not to burst your bubble, but I think that's going to be slow going. We have to gather material from various interviews and commentaries and distill from these the bits that apply exclusively to Aang's conception and development, as distinct from the series premise. It's more labor intensive than viewing the eps, of course. avatarspirit.net seems fairly good in regards to aggregating press releases and interviews from other sources in its newsfeeds, for a start, and I think they've reported from convention panels. --Buinne (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, then let's get started immediately. I'll look up avatarspirit.net Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 21:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the Concept section was bare, so I thought I might introduce you to this magazine article in which the creators comment on Aang's origins. I hope this helps. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Another good article nomination

Quick-failed - no sources outside the show, a problem which, IIRC, was brought up in the last GAN. At its current state, it clearly fails criteria 1a. The page should have its fictional summary cut and the creation in. Will (talk) 23:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Article short?

i've seen several articles about the characters in the show, and some of the are longer (notably zuko's) than aang's. shouldn't we give more depth in this article? after all, aang is the major protagonist in the show.Tye blue (talk) 10:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Tell me, are these articles that you talk about GA. They are not. This is because the articles spend pages of space discussing plot and relationships (like family). All of this type of info is what every article is getting failed in the GAN for. All this info is in-universe and there is no out-of-universe info (like production or concept and creation). The Zuko article may be pages long, but its length will not be getting it anywhere as can be seen in its last nomination (it was quick-failed). In other words, do not worry about the length. It is fine. What we should worry about is concept and creation. The problem is that there are no sources for it. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 16:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

the picture

do we have one wre can repalce the character image, one from the 3rd book, i suggest we update all the pictures to 3rd book.--Cody6 (talk) 14:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Relationships

Why was the entire Relationships section of Aangs article removed? 189.32.153.180 (talk) 16:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

It was removed because it is all in-universe original research and is completely unnecessary for this article as this is about a fictional character. There are a couple discussions about it on this page and in the archive I believe. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 16:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Then every other relationship section of the other characters should be deleted as well. 189.32.153.180 (talk) 23:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Exactly! However, I do not have enough time to go to every character article, remove the relationships section, and then convince everybody editing the article that it needed to go and not to put it back. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 23:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I was being sarcastic, the relationship section is important, how could you delete it? 189.32.153.180 (talk) 01:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I realize you were being sarcastic. Only a newbie would not notice. (No offense to newbies, of course.) However, what I say stands true. The relationships section is either original research or information referenced to the show (known as in-universe). If you take a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction), WP:NOR, WP:V, and WP:NOT, you will see what I mean. In addition, examples like Zuko, which are all built upon Plot and Relationships, are all B or even Start articles. Finally, in the multiple Peer Reviews and GA Nominations, the main complaint that has been made was always that there was too much in-universe information. This is not a biography where every detail about Aang's fictional life should be stated, it is an article about a fictional character created by Nickelodeon. Therefore, the Relationships section, which is, without a doubt, all in-universe, is completely unnecessary for this article. I hope I have shed a new light on this situation. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 03:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The relationship section is important to the character section. It explains how the characters are influenced. Besides people like reading them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiimanwii1 (talk • contribs) 05:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

It explains how the characters are influenced IN THE SHOW, meaning in-universe. This is not a biographical article. It should not resemble one in any way. As for the other part of your comment, if this article was good enough, people would like reading the other parts too. If they want relationship info, they can just watch the show themselves. It does not belong here. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 15:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
And showing how the characters are influenced in the show is not important because... 189.4.252.251 (talk) 00:43, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Erm, maybe it would be a good idea to point out that this is Wikipedia, not a fan site. After all, Avatar: The Last Airbender is fictional. And Wikipedia has really strict guidelines. I mean, there has to be a difference between a fan page and a wikipedia article, right? A line has got to be drawn somewhere. Maybe when you're just looking at this wiki article you don't see why certain information are not included here, but perhaps if you hold wiki on one hand and a fan page on the other you can make a comparison. People who are really interested in knowing tiny details about fictional characters would google for fan sites instead of coming to wikipedia. Just my two cents. --Secretss (talk) 07:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I could not have explained it better than that. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 17:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
If that's the case, why do all the other main characters have a thorough Relationship section? 201.37.53.73 (talk) 16:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Because they haven't gotten around to cleaning those ones up yet. Make no mistake about it though, the effort is to lose them and integrate anything useful into the rest of the body. Derekloffin (talk) 02:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

"Fatally injured" vs "killed"

Re: The issue of Aang being fatally injured versus killed by Azula's lightning in book 2. I know this has been discussed on Katara's talk page before, but it seems more appropriate here. The sentence in the article has been changed quite a few times already from fatally injured to killed and now it's back to fatally injured. Currently it says "fatally wounded to the point where his spirit separates". IMO, that is probably the most appropriate phrase if you take into account the animated graphic novel on the dvd. Does anybody have an opinion about this? If we can find a good compromising sentence we can add a comment in the edit box requesting no more changes. Maybe the creators purposely left this issue ambiguous to confuse us wiki editors =S I personally have no idea what to think. I can't tell if he was injured or killed. What do you guys think?--Secretss (talk) 10:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I think, given the currently available information, we can't figure out if Aang actually died. The fact that his spirit and body separated seems to indicate he died, but that seems to happen even when he's alive and well. Consequently, I'd suggest removing both "fatally injured" and "killed." Instead, the article could simply say, "Azula struck Aang down with lightning." Whether Aang died or not is irrelevant to the plot and should be decided by the viewer. b.y.w (talk) 04:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Bending

Ok, why was the Bending section butchered out? 189.32.157.17 (talk) 22:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

About the "Relationships" section...

I suggest we remove it, it's just another extension of what Wikipedia is not. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

What the.. why is the relationship section back >.< I vote for removal too. --Secretss (talk) 14:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Further reading section

Whoever wanted the further reading section to be checked out according to WP:FANSITE, you do not need to worry. The page does not say much about fansites (it redirects to Wikipedia:External links), but as far as I'm concerned, the two sites qualify to be in that section because according to WP:GTL#Further reading, the section in question is for sources that have not necessarily been used in the article as a citation but contain valuable information relating to the subject, which they do. In addition, going back to WP:FANSITE, the links are not advertisments, do not install malware, do not require registration, or anything else like that. In fact, it might be considered that these links should be in the article because according to WP:EL#What should be linked, the web sites currently in use have "meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews." Luckily, I think the case is closed that the two sites, though they are fansites, do give reliable information that is not used in the article (or at least not all of it is used), and therefore does not need to be removed. Feel free to object in any way because I might have missed something. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 14:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Trimming

I know a lot of the editors of this page have migrated to the new season pages (especially Avatar: The Last Airbender (Season 3)), but I just want to ask anybody that is still here what the point of half the information in the "Avatar" section is. All that is there is one or two statements of Aang's avatar abilities and then a paragraph or two of plot summaries elaborating on it. Couldn't we just integrate the statements into another section and get rid of the repetitive plot summaries? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 00:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Powers and abilities

I have reverted Parent5446's removal of the section, mainly because not all of it is a repeat of the previous summary:

  1. It is the only section which mentions his practice of a martial art, ergo, the martial artist category is placed here for that reason
  2. It is also the only section that supports the flight category to be placed on the article because his ability of flight is unique to the fictional world
While I feel the rest is possibly a retelling, perhaps the rest can be removed, or expanded even. Any suggestions? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
You are absolutely right. Maybe we can move the important info into the Bending section (a sub-section of the Avatar section) directly above it since both his flying ability and his martial arts have to do with airbending. (Just so you know, there is a lot of repetition in that section as well, but that can be trimmed. See above topic.) Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 19:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad we come come to an understanding. Thank you, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Additional references

The main reason that the template at the top of the article states a need for additional references is because all of the references are from within the show. I think that, even though it doesn't actually add additional sources, if all the current references to the show are linked to their appropriate summaries at [avatarspirit.com Avatar Spirit] (along with a link to the transcript page) as done with some of the references, the citations might be able to be considered tertiary or at least secondary sources; this would make the references more reliable and thus removing some of our referencing problem to the point where we do not need to have it on the template at the top of the article. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 04:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Aang

May I just ask, in response to User:Sesshomaru's comment, where the other format of quotation is? In response to your second comment, I agree, I'll see what can do to change the case of every occurence. As for the links, I'll look over it and see what I can do. If you have any specific examples for anything, please mention it below because I might miss it myself and then the mistake remains in the article. Thanks for the advice. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 18:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I actually had a change of heart on something, I believe that in some cases Avatar should be capitalized, but I'll ask for a second opinion because I may be wrong. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 18:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

In Creation and conception, Characteristics and Bending, the text of the quotes are very small. Is there anything better than {{cquote}}? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

No, other than integrating it, which I think would make the article seems more of a blob of text. Maybe I'll just make a different template. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 02:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you check if the words firebending, airbending, waterbending, and earthbending are overlinked? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll get to work immediately. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 02:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for that edit. It wasn't until now that I realized what the difference was (the comma that the template puts in). I'll undo my edit. Sorry for any confusion. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 03:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

wikipedia is not a source

An anonymous user keeps on adding material to the 'conception' section and citing it with a link to the main avatar page. Wikipedia is not a source. I will continue to remove this information until they provide a reference for some outside material. I hope others will do the same. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Life would be so much easier if we could be our own source, but yeah, anything like that should be removed. If another page has something you want on this page, that page should itself be referenced, and you can echo the reference here. Circular referencing is just plain bad. Derekloffin (talk) 00:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Suggest pointing the ip to WP:SRTA if (s)he continues. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Nom Schedule

OK, for anybody that monitors this article, here is what is going to happen. The article has come a long way since its last review. It now has a creation and conception information along with other good stuff. In addition, the plot summaries have been seriously toned down by a visit from some angel-like author who copy-edited the article and gave it a chance. Anyway, the article is currently a candidate at WP:ACID. When Wednesday comes, and the article becomes the article of the week for the Article Improvement and Collaboration Drive, we will wait to see if anybody brings any more constructive edits. If so, we'll wait until the article's week is up and the next article goes into WP:ACID. If not, we'll start immediately. What do I mean by "we'll start immediately"? I mean we will hopefull hold out last nomination for GA status. Until that time, please make any last minute preparations you may have because I really want the article to pass. Best of luck. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 22:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

in other media

There was a game on Nick.com that had to do with the previous avatars in the spirit world. The game focused on Aang and exists in canon with the show. Should the events of the games be chronicled here, seeing as they did happen to Aang? Rau J16 03:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I think it would be more appropriate to put it in a separate section. If we did integrate it then there might be an dispute about whether we should include the cine-manga plots, and if you look at what happens in those books (I just recently removed some of it) you'll see that it goes off on a slightly different plot line. Anyway, I think it would be a good idea to put it in a separate section. In addition, we can add the game information to the Appearances in other media section. Do you have a link for the game? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 14:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I know we used it as a source for Yangchen, and Kuruk. but whether it can be used for something like this i do not know, i never finished it ;P.Escape from the Spirit World And yes, i do mean to place it in a seperate section, as it is not part of the show, just the story; kinda like
===Escape From The Spirit World=== Rau J16 17:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
That's perfect, then. I was thinking maybe we could put a sub-section under Appearances in other media. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 22:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Yea, I could definitely see that working out very well. Now we just need to find someone willing to play that god awful game; I could not sit through it, thats why I never finished it. Rau J16 23:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I am usually against wikis that only exist to catch the spillover of info that was rejected from Wikipedia, but on the Avatar wiki there is a detailed plot on the whole game. Too bad the game has no real-life importance to qualify as an article on Wikipedia. The link is here. I'll see what I can put in for now. But we might need better references. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 23:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, they even tell you how to beat the game.... And here i thought it was going to be a mirror of wikipedia, only with out the dedication and sources. Nice find. Rau J16 23:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, these mock encyclopedia are very useful. The only problem is that they are not reliable. I think we can keep it as a source though since there is no other site and an Avatar Wiki might be considered reliable for an Avatar. We have one more thing to discuss though, should we include the plot from the Tokyopop cine-manga? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 00:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Right off the bat, I am inclined to say yes, but only if reasonably sourced, Like the pages and chapters within the novel, I say the same about sourcing the game, although, that is a little trickier. Rau J16 01:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Is "spirit world" supposed to be capitalised? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
It should be, yes; it is the name of a place, making it a proper noun, which are always capitalized. Rau J16 01:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Someone should be bold and move "Spirit world (Avatar: The Last Airbender)" to its proper title. Then, every instance of the name should be corrected on Wikipedia. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
That is the proper title, Avatar is not the only series with a spirit world, therefore, it is designated as such. Rau J16 02:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I think he means it should be moved to "Spirit World (Avatar: The Last Airbender)" since that is capitalized. If so, the article has already been moved there. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 02:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Reception section

To tell you the truth, it is more proper to put it at the bottom. However, there is no policy, guideline, essay, or manual of style that says anything about it and the section is too small to be in its own level 2 heading section. In conclusion, it just plain looks better where it is. The only way it would look better at the bottom is if we could find any more information to put in it. Right now, I know I've looked, but if you can find any more reliable sources for that section and enlarge the section, then it can moved back. As for Walter (the edit war user), I contacted Placebo because I know he is involved with the project and he is an admin. If he does not respond, the user is still reported on WP:AN/3RR. Hopefully, this will all end before Wednsday because articles with edit disputes cannot be put on WP:ACID. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 03:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as the reception section goes, I still believe it should be placed below Appearances in other media to follow the same layout as other articles, primarily those of fictional characters. And if you ask me, I thought it was better below as well. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I am really not sure. I suggest we get Rauj into this discussion since he is the one that reverted your edits and I do not want to do something that another user will revert and potentially start an edit dispute. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 02:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I just felt that the reception of the character looked better under the "Characteristics" of the character. It did not make sense to me to have it under "Appearances in Other Media". Rau J16 03:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Score 1 for Team Avatar; Score 0 for Team Vandals

User:Walter Mellon Head has been blocked indefinitely so I do not think he will be interrupting us anymore. The page is currently in request for semi-protection, but it might fail since the user is now blocked. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 03:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It might also fail because of the fcat that there was only one primary user. But, YAY Team!!!! Rau J16 03:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I did initially protect it, but when I saw WMH was indef'd I lifted the prot. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 03:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, well you know, its the thought that counts, so thanks(i really do appreciate it, the guy was annoying). Rau J16 04:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The best part of it all is that according to WP:3RR, if he makes another account and comes back or just starts editing anonymously, we can revert him as many times as we want. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 15:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I tried playing that Escape From the Spirit World game and I couldn't get past level 1. The game got stuck at the Aang On challenge so we will have to use external sources for more info. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 18:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yea see, the game, although avatar canon, is not that good. Hopefully someone else can give it a shot and beat it, im going to try again when i have more time (probably in school). But YAY! for the reverts!! Rau J16 19:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I beat the game, but it revealed no more information than the avatar wiki did. In fact, the wiki gave more info since it had the codes and question answers. Oh well. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 20:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Now i guess it is just a personal victory. But at least the facts can be verified for peace of mind at least. Rau J16 20:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Unofficial Schedule

TIME OF POSTING: 20:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

CURRENT TIME: 17:48 2024-31-05 UTC PURGE

ACID NOM: 00:00 2008-02-20 UTC Finished at: 23:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

GA NOM: 00:00 2008-02-21 UTC Finished at: 21:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to change dates or time as this is not official, but please write your reason below. Once a deadline has arrived, cross it out. Hopefully our fourth GA nomination will be successful. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 20:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Just look how far the article has come...in three years! [5] Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 00:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Man, you seem to be off on your own little thing down here. But yes, the article has come a long way. And apparently I mean a LONG way. Did that person ever take an English course(no offense if the person still edits the article and sees this)? By the way, what happens if i click the little purge button? Rau J16 00:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I think that editor has left Wikipedia, but we do owe him for creating this article. Actually, if you think about it, somebody else would have created it anyway but that is beside the point. The purge button purges the page. Just in case you do not know what purging the page is (which I will assume because of your comment since if you knew what purging the page was you would definitely be able to figure out what the purge button does), purging clears the server's cache. Why? Because the server keeps copies of frequently used templates (including "magic words", which I used to insert the ever-updating current time on the top of this discussion). In order to update these templates, a user needs to manually clear the server's copy of the templates so the server will be forced to get the updated version. You can try it yourself. Make a minor but noticeable change in some template, maybe in your sandbox, while keeping the page with the template on it open. Then refresh the page that the template is on. This is getting confusing. Follow these steps if you want to see how it works:
  1. Make a test template in your userspace. This template will now be referred to as "the Template".
  2. Put the template in your sandbox or on some temporary page by putting "{{User:Rauj16/TemplateWhatever}}" on the page. The temporary page you put it on will be referred to as "Page A".
  3. Keep two windows of you Internet browser open: one with the template's page in it and one with Page A in it.
  4. While keeping Page A open, edit the template significantly and then save it.
  5. Finally, refresh the window with Page A. Most of the time, the template will not change on your copy of Page A. However, if you purge the page (by going to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PAGEATITLE&action=purge), the template should match what you changed.
That is the most useless explanation I have ever given but if it helps it helps. I doubt you will want to go through the trouble to try that out, as the explanation explains the point and that is what matters. I hope I was not too confusing. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 01:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Im pretty bored, so if i dont see any edits that need to be made now, ill give it a shot, but i'd better not continue this, its got nothing to do with the improvement of the article anymore; my question, not the section). Rau J16 02:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and by the way, the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive, which has existed under many names for years, is now holding a proposal for closure. The once active collaboration has fell to nothing. Personally, I think that the drive should have one or two more articles and then end. I encourage everybody to participate in the discussion and post your opinion on the proposal's discussion page. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 03:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Another thing, if you find yourself looking for something to do, try and review an article or two at the GA nomination page under the Theater section. Since Aang is at the bottom of the section, the more articles that are reviewed, the faster the Aang article gets reviewed. Not to mention that it helps improve your editing skills and helps improve whatever article you are reviewing. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 01:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Successful good article nomination

Believe it or not, Aang has finally passed and is a GA.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Thanks to all who contributed!Limetolime (talk) 17:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

YOU GUYS DID IT!!!!!! Now ONWARDS, Azula awaits. Rau's talk 23:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
You can go to Azula. I plan on helping the Aang article to FA so it can be FAOTD during the season finale for the show. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 23:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Tense

There have been certain complaints on the tense of the article. I think it says somewhere in WP:MoS that tense should be kept consistent. This rules should be standard anyway, MoS or not. Either way, I am not sure whether to put the whole article in present tense or past tense. I think we should put it in past tense since the episodes, etc. already happened. However, I wanted to discuss it first before changing tense just to have it changed back. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 02:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Past tense appears to make more sense to me. Rau's talk 03:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok, as soon as I can, I will evaluate each section for tense. Feel free to help out. Just watch out for edit conflict. I am putting an underconstruction sign on the page, just so people are prewarned for what will happen within the next day or two. Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 04:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Incorrect. The Manual of Style for fiction states “By convention, these synopses should be written in the present tense, as this is the way that the story is experienced as it is read or viewed. At any particular point in the story there is a 'past' and a 'future', but whether something is 'past' or 'future' changes as the story progresses. It is simplest to recount the entire description as continuous 'present'."
When an editor places an 'in-universe' tag at the top of an article, it can be for any number of reasons, including the actual tense used. Take Iroh for instance, it is written in the 'past' tense. It should be edited for 'present'. In the past, I had problems with keeping consistency in the tense used in some of my articles. But now I know the correct format. Of course, that doesn't mean that I don't make mistakes now and again. Try writing a huge article about a historical figure with a distinct fictional persona. One half is history (past tense) and the other half is fiction (present). It can be confusing at times! --Ghostexorcist (talk) 07:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
But should we change the whole article to present tense? Parent5446(Murder me for my actions) 12:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Anything dealing with the actual storyline. The passage I quoted above says "At any particular point in the story there is a 'past' and a 'future', but whether something is 'past' or 'future' changes as the story progresses. It is simplest to recount the entire description as continuous 'present'." Material pertaining to his creation and reception can be left in past tense. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 14:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Intro cat

Been wanting to ask about this. I know there once were the "Characters introduced in [year]" cats, but Avatar State is in a introductory cat so what's the deal here? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

One user has been going around tagging all of the article with this cat. I looked at other articles in the cat, and other than the Avatar characters that the user tagged, there were only one or two character articles, with the rest being product articles, such as Coke Zero and IPod nano. I figured the cat wasn't really appropriate for this article. — Parent5446 (t n c e m l) 15:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I think there are others erroneously categorized as well (namely some Disney characters like Jafar). BTW, this would have been better unsaid; the results of an afd are what they are and editors can not revert if they disagree with it, then again, consensus can change. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
It was not really the result. I was being bold so I closed the AfD prematurely and merged the article (mainly because of a suggestion made by a user on the AfD to do this). In other words, the merge was not really the result of the AfD. Either way, though, there seems to be no objections. — Parent5446 (t n c e m l) 15:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments

In response to a request to do so, I've done some copyediting. These have all been minor stylistic changes, aimed at shorter sentences -- roughly limiting them to three ideas, qualifications or asides per sentence.

More general peer review comments are the following. This is a solidly and broadly researched entry. There is admirable, controlled interaction with critical analysis. Quotes and references to the creators' intentions are outstanding content for the article. Synopsis of plot is also admirably restrained.

In fact, there is so much good material, presented so concisely, with substantial sources, that it invites expansion. Overall, the feel of the prose is, I think rightly, slightly clipped, energetically and economically progressing content with each sentence. I think this is exemplary for encyclopedic style.

The only quibble I have with the entry is three underdeveloped allusions to vegetarianism and Buddhism. Perhaps this is due to sources not really developing the point. Either these need fuller treatment (maybe even a Cultural Milleu section), or they should be dropped, as true and verifiable material, but tangential to the main thrust of the article, and of the sections that contain them. My advice is, "develop or drop" this point.

Finally, I concur with current GA status. Regarding FA, this depends on personal philosophy. My feeling is some entries ought to be short and shouldn't really be expected to be FA (after the analogy of lists etc.). Given my ignorance of the topic area, I really don't know if this is an article that could accumulate enough content to be considered for FA, or whether it should stand as a fine example of a GA that knows its limitations -- it's brilliance is shown by its brevity.

Thanks to those who have provided this article. Best wishes to all who work to develop it further. Cheers. Alastair Haines (talk) 23:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Final picture

We have a picture maybe of aang in his monk robes for the article?--Jakezing (talk) 02:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps. But let's wait until the DVD comes out, that way we get quality. Rau's Speak Page 02:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
we could try the internet sites,--Jakezing (talk) 02:30, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Those are even worse. I mean DVD quality over TV quality. We only have to wait a few weeks. Rau's Speak Page 02:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Plot?

Shouldn't this be in the Avatar: The Last Airbender section? It doesn't make much sense for a character to have a plot synopsis or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.224.134 (talk) 02:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

It focus' solely on the character. It belongs here. Rau's Speak Page 02:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Why no Avatar State?

I'm just curious as to why there isn't anything about the Avatar State. It's a very important aspect of the series. I would put it in, but I'm just starting. I don't know how to add a new option in the info box. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holymasterchief (talk • contribs) 02:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Because it's really not important to the character. Rau's Speak Page 03:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Considering the main article links to this page as the one about the avatar state, I think it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.243.165 (talk) 05:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's an error. Because this is about Aang, not the Avatar State. Rau's Speak Page 06:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
who is the avatar.--Jakezing (talk) 15:26, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Why isn't it important? The Avatar State is the only way to defeat the Fire Lord, and Aang used it many times, as did past Avatars. So why isn't it important? Holymasterchief (talk) 16:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


It's not important to Aang, its important to The Avatar. It doesn't belong in this article. Rau's Speak Page 18:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Your insisting so much that The Avatar state is soo not important, that your coming as stubborn. Sheesh, is saying even a teeny mention of The Avatar State gonna makes you still come off as stubborn?? It is important to Anng because 1.)....thats how he encased himself in ice in the first place.. 2.) ....He the current avatar 3.)Azula nearly killed him in the Avatar state which would end all future Avatars 4.) Wasn't he going to be taught how to control the state by some guru??

I'm certain that separate article in the Avatar state is outta the question. So, mentioning the Avatar state is not too much to ask for yes? 75.72.221.194 (talk) 22:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

A mention is not too much to ask for. Actually it should be mentioned. It is important to the mythology of the series. But it shouldn't be mentioned here. This is about Aang. Not "Avatar Abilities." And the plot of three episodes is not enough to make it important to the character. Rau's Speak Page 22:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
It's already mentioned in the main avatar page. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Bending

Should Aang get a bending section based on his skill with firebending, earthbending, waterbending and airbending, his status as a bridge between the Spirit World and Earth, and the Avatar State or something. Elemental5293 (talk) 16:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

A bending section would be all plot, and he never really acts as the medium between the worlds. And the Avatar State isn't important to the character. Rau's Speak Page 20:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Now I think there should be a seperate article for the Avatar and his/her abilities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holymasterchief (talk • contribs) 13:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Missing Alias

Toph always used to call him "Twinkletoes." (due to her naming him that based on his fighting style of rarely staying on the ground when they first met in the Earth Rumble VI tournament) Actually, I don't think she ever called him Aang in the second season! Since Zuko has "Zu-Zu," mentioned about twelve times, at most, shouldn't Aang get "Twinkletoes?" KremTell me stuff♫Whaaaat I've Doooonne!♪ 19:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Mastering all 4 elements

I just included a section with short descriptions about Aang learning the 4 elements and his other skills, such as energybending. I know it's a given that the Avatar learns the 4 elements, but to the newcomer they won't know that. I justify the section's inclusion because otherwise it's unbalanced that the other characters have descriptions of their skills and Aang, the titular character, doesn't have anything. Also please don't expand on it too much if you don't have to. I tried to keep the section short and to the point to keep in flow with the other character pages. I'll cite references in that section soon. MisterZeppo (talk) 06:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. We don't need that much info saying "he mastered five elements and has the avatar state." He being the Avatar implies that. Rau's Speak Page 11:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
By your logic, then why do the other character pages detail their abilities and skills? We know Katara is a waterbender, Toph is an earthbender, Zuko is a firebender, Sokka is a warrior... Do they really need such detailed descriptions while Aang, the main character, gets nothing? Sorry I disagree with that logic wholeheartedly. Azula's "Abilities" section is so detailed and was longer than the section I wrote about Aang's skills, so was Zuko's abilities and personality sections before I edited it down. If you want to be fair, include Aang's abilities or remove the other character's. I was mainly looking to create more of a uniform look between all the character pages. I won't undo your removal of the section, YET. I'm waiting to hear more opinions. MisterZeppo (talk) 15:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Agree with Rau. That information is WP:CRUFT and is best suited for the Avatar wiki. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Are any of the other articles GA? No, this article is of a higher quality. And the content of one article does not dictate the content of another. You want to be uniform? Bring them up to GA. Don't bring this down to them. Rau's Speak Page 16:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I see your point. I'll start editing the other character pages to bring them to the same standard of Aang's page... MisterZeppo (talk) 17:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Relationship with Katara

Since he spent about the whole series crushing on Katara, it seems apropriate that the fact he did end up with her be mentioned —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.58.192 (talk) 00:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

No. Relationship stuff is considered 'in-universe' material because the info is not crucial to understanding the overall plot of the show. Another example would be to give a character's favorite color. Does this color preference influence their day to day decisions? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Initially I agreed about including Aang and Katara's relationship, but I can see why it's not included because it doesn't really have to do with the main story of defeating Ozai. Plus the shipping is kind of a big spoiler that isn't critical to understanding the show. MisterZeppo (talk) 06:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Picture

Why is it, that while pretty much everyone else gets a new portrait, Aang is still, still, stuck with that same old, eternal, butt-ugly pic? 84.250.246.11 (talk) 15:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't like the other new pics. I liked the face shots. Rau's Speak Page 16:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't like them either, but that's beside the point: The thought of perfectly good pictures being switched to something worse, instead of a bad picture being changed to a better one, is what sickens me here. 84.250.246.11 (talk) 18:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree. I don't like them either. But I can see why they got rid of the face shots as they are screenshots. While I love the carefree nature of the picture, the image is old, ugly and also doesn't really resemble the character. There are better images out there. It's a matter of easily identifying the character. The old promo art with MoMo is out of date and doesn't truely do the job. MisterZeppo (talk) 05:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I've replaced the image from face-shots mostly; and Mister Zeppo pretty much understood the point. I'm aware that they are outdated...but the face-shots are simple screenshots. Most character bios (not all) usually use a full-body portrait, or otherwise an official image. Image:Pikachu.svg, Image:Ganondorf-Brawl.png, Image:Spongebob-squarepants.png. It voids any fair-use concerns since these images are widely circulated anyway. Screenshots pose problems in such cases, and are generally avoided. As to answer the question as to why this image wasn't replaced: It was in .jpg, and I don't like uploading new images if I can avoid it. :P Call me lazy. --haha169 (talk) 20:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Anyway, there's a reason why I didn't update Zuko's image...he changed too much since Season 1. Katara, Sokka, Toph, Appa (duh), and Aang haven't changed much, so I don't think that should be a big issue. --haha169 (talk) 20:56, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair use

Can some one check if the new picture of aang deals with copyright problems adequately. (i.e Fairuse) I think it might need meet the fair use criteria but I'm not too sure. Thanks. Ziphon (ALLears) 11:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
It's sourced from the Musagato website. The current official character images for Mai, Ty Lee, Appa, Toph, Sokka, and Katara are all from the same website and meet the same fair use criteria. MisterZeppo (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I have made a few adjustments to the article. How does it look now? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
You mean image? :P MisterZippo, I've left additional comments to your talk page. --haha169 (talk) 20:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the info haha169. Question. Are you allowed to photoshop the images like you did with the current one? I noticed you removed the staff and edited the hand. I thought that wasn't allowed... MisterZeppo (talk) 04:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Photoshopping is always fun. I noticed that the staff was extremely long, and would make Aang's body really small if we were to fit the entire staff into the box. Therefore, its removal would have been best. I claim WP:IAR if there is a policy against it - since photoshopping increases the article's quality. :) --haha169 (talk) 17:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

In the words of User:AnmaFinotera, "IAR doesn't apply here".... Rau's Speak Page 17:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
AnmaFinotera thinks IAR doesn't apply anywhere. As long as a rule is preventing you from improving the article, it can be ignored. Anyway, I highly doubt that there is a rule preventing photoshop in the first place. Obviously, its common sense not to photoshop a perfectly good picture - but I don't think its a policy. --haha169 (talk) 05:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Avatar State image

Either that or the explosion with Momo should be removed. Either way, one has to be because they don't really give much to the article. I propose a discussion here before removal. --haha169 (talk) 01:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Since neither add anything, maybe they should both be removed. Rau's Speak Page 02:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok then, do it. --haha169 (talk) 04:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Fictional characters who can move at superhuman speeds

Folks let's settle this once and for all: does he belong here or not? If so, there should be references that suggests so. If you ask me, using wind for quick maneuvering is not super speed. This is why Storm has not been placed in the category. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:48, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, he uses his airbending to propel himself. He can't move at those speeds with out it. Which means it's not "superhuman." *SIGN* 19:02, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I would say yes. This dictionary defines superhuman as "having powers or a nature above that of man; divine; supernatural, greater than that of a normal human being". Not everyone in the avatar world can bend. Whether are not he is moving fast with his muscles or wind, he can still perform feats--such as running quick enough to run on walls and ceilings like The Flash--that normal people can't. However, I realize a published source associated with the show stating the fact has more strength than anything I could possibly come up with to support my stance. (By the way, I'm not the person who added the category to the page.) --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:07, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
You attempted to add it before. The point is, Wikipedia requires you to source this despite it being "obvious". Read WP:VERIFY and WP:ORIGINAL for further information. There's a difference between running and using an implement to go faster than the norm. See, Green Lantern isn't categorized as such because he doesn't run at superhuman speeds, he flies at superluminal speeds. Flash qualifies, even Superman qualifies, but Aang does not since the air is his medium. Does that make sense? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:37, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes, back in May! It's now September. I get the feeling you think I was the anon who added it. If so, you are mistaken. Please read what I said again about how "I realize a published source associated with the show stating the fact...." --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm aware. Just wanted to clear up what a "speedster" actually is. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Duly noted, but I still think he can run at superhuman speeds. I've never seen the Green Lantern do anything but fly. The Flash feeds off of the speed force. Superman seems to be the only one of the bunch who is actually using his muscles. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, Superman does everything at super speeds if you know what I mean. But yeah, that's about it. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hair Color

Look, okay, Aang has BLACK HAIR. You'd have to be blind to no be able to see it. I would've changed it, but it said to discuss it here first. So there, he's obviously black-haired. --SuperFlash101 (talk) 18:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree, his hair is definitely black - i'm going to change it. --Rashu0 (talk) 15:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Dylan and I both implicitly have stated that we disagree with this. A peer review earlier also stated this. Can you get a source (besides that Avatar Wiki) that supports your claim? NuclearWarfare (Talk) 16:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Could you get a source that supports your claim? Also, do not erase his alias of Bonzu - there is a source listed for that information.--Rashu0 (talk) 16:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Bonzu isn't a notable alias; it is only used in one episode and for maybe a few minutes at most. We don't spam the infobox with names like "Kuzon" (season 3, episode 2) either.
Also, there was a consensus reached at [6]. That would be the default position to stick to, as that is what most people could see from the link that they used. Also, check out this, which clearly shows brown hair (download the picture and look at the hexdemical code). NuclearWarfare (Talk) 17:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
If anything those screen shots show that aang's hair is black. And that consensus you mentioned did not reach the conclusion that his hair is brown. Also, Bonzu is as notable an alias as any other one. For example - Toph's alias, the runaway, is used in only one episode but it is still mentioned on her page. So keep Bonzu. Rashu0 (talk) 20:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
See my post below Rashu. That consensus did reach the conclusion that Aang's hair was dark brown, I was there. -Dylan0513 (talk) 20:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
I can't remember off hand what colour his hair is. The best reference for this would be an official web site, or an official screen shot. I think it would be better to look at episodes where the heroes aren't wearing disguises though, since dying one's hair is often part of a disguise. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the artists differed between using a dark brown or black. In certain cases they'd be indiscernable, shadow or wetness could make brown appear black. So these, along with if it's natural or disguised, are factors to consider in judging the weight of a screencap. Tyciol (talk) 17:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Look guys, the reason why Aang's hair color is listed as dark brown is because of this image: [7] I think it's that one, may have been a different one from the same magazine though. -Dylan0513 (talk) 17:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Your image does not prove that Aang's hair color is dark brown. In fact, i think it shows his hair color is black. It is obvious that we won't be able to come to an agreement. Why don't we describe his hair color as Dark Brown/Black? Rashu0 (talk) 21:09, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
His hair is clearly dark brown in that picture. Past consensus and current opinion will verify. -Dylan0513 (talk) 21:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Well obviously current opinion is not verifying since there are some opinions in favor of black hair. Also, Aang's hair is described as black on other forums and Avatar Wikia. Finally - you failed to answer my proposal - why don't we describe it as dark brown/black? A direct answer would be nice. Rashu0 (talk) 21:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
You are currently the only one who thinks that Aang's hair is black in the link I provided. The more specific the better and Aang's hair is dark brown in the source we can use for it. -Dylan0513 (talk) 21:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
We should be using screen shots from the actual show when determining Aang's hair color - not a drawing in a magazine. Therefore, your source is not good enough to make the conclusion that Aang's hair color is brown. Looking at various screen shots it can be seen that his hair is black. Also, just because I'm the only one currently voicing my opinion on this talk page does not mean I'm the only one who thinks his hair is black. - Rashu0 (talk) 22:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Check out this screenshot: [8]. Compare aang's hair color to katara's dark brown hair. Aang's hair is clearly not the same color as Katara's and is clearly black. Using this screenshot as a source, we can say his hair is black. - Rashu0 (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
That looks dark brown to me. Herein lies the problem with using screen shots for this situation, there's never enough lighting. The drawing from the official nick magazine has more lighting I'm pretty sure than any screen shot you'd find. BTW, you're going to have to get like 5 other people on your side, because this issue already has a consensus. We've discussed this several times before. -Dylan0513 (talk) 02:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, if you still won't see that his hair is black, then i think we should describe the color as dark brown/black. That will appease everyone. In the end, it is a matter of opinion - so both sides should be represented. Rashu0 (talk) 03:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
I had already made that change. Hopefully, everything is resolved now :) NuclearWarfare (Talk) 03:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
The post isn't to appease people, it's to be factually accurate. Dark brown/black doesn't sound like a hair color to me, it sounds like a color range. -Dylan0513 (talk) 23:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Just deal with it. Rashu0 (talk) 00:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Wow, you're engaging in some good discussion. This along with you keep reverting on the article means you're getting reported if you keep this up. -Dylan0513 (talk) 11:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Nothing would happen if you did, since you have absolutely no reason to report me. Rashu0 (talk) 20:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh, you've broken 3RR several times. I'm giving you one last shot to stop and discuss before making any more changes. -Dylan0513 (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
No, I have not broken 3RR "several times" - look at the history. And I have discussed changes before making them unless they were minor. Also, this is supposed to be a talk page about the article - and you are clearly getting off subject - which is considered breaking the rules. - Rashu0 (talk) 22:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Ok then, you've broken 3RR once or twice and have edit warred several times. Minor changes can still be controversial and need to be discussed. Stop being a hypocrite and saying to not get off topic when you are replying to me. -Dylan0513 (talk) 02:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I say you both are being ridiculous, he has the hair for what, one book? This is a pointless and stupid argument, he had brownish black hair, does it matter order they are in or what's capitalized? Soxwon (talk) 02:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) Capitalization matters grammatically. I have no idea why he changed which is first. -Dylan0513 (talk) 02:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Since you are so observant about everything - if you must know, there is something called alphabetical order. The B in "black" comes before the d in "dark". Is that a sufficient explanation? Please stop discussing pointless, irrelevant topics and calling me a hypocrite. Rashu0 (talk) 02:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh, you felt the need to put it in alphabetical order and had nothing to do with your opinion going first and being capitalized? Show me the rule on alphabetical order anyway. -Dylan0513 (talk) 21:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh, there is no rule - it's just what makes sense. Even though I'm telling you i did it to put it in alphabetical order, you can think whatever you want about the reasons i made the change and you can make a big deal out of it. Or you can stop discussing minor topics and leave it alone. Your choice. Rashu0 (talk) 21:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
To avoid stupid discussions in the future, don't make stupid, pointless changes. -Dylan0513 (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I will continue to make minor changes to make the article look better. You should just stop discussing them - especially if they are, in your opinion, pointless. Rashu0 (talk) 22:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
My point is, if it's pointless to change the article, don't do it. -Dylan0513 (talk) 22:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
My point is that i had a reason to change the article. Since it was a minor change, there was no reason for it to be discussed. And on that note, let's stop discussing this. Rashu0 (talk) 22:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I believe that Aang's hair color is black. But to be sure, can't we ask this problem to Nickelodeon? Dar book (Complains?) 03:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Sure, if you want to send them an email and tell them to email ORTS; that would be great. I doubt you'll get a response though. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 04:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Aang and Katara

For a discussion about in the inclusion of Aang and Katara romantic relationship, please see Katara's talk page. NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 15:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Page sysop protected due to edit warring. Tan | 39 16:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Name in Chinese

Based on a poster in the 17th episode of Book 2 which was intended to look for Appa, the poster reads

尋飛天野牛
名阿柏有六足重十噸
如有消息請聯絡
降世神通安昂
上環九十六區第二百一十七棟

The 4th line "降世神通安昂" clearly shows "Avatar Aang". So I guess we could include the name "安昂" for Aang.--Tricia Takanawa (talk) 16:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm asking about this over at the talkpage for the List of Characters. Please have your say over there as this concerns more than just a few characters of the show. Thanks!--Secretss (talk) 15:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Eyes

Aren't they black? --Dramartistic (talk) 00:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

lead photo (again)

Is there anyway we can change the lead photo back to the stock picture that used to grace the page? The currently picture just looks so unnatural. I don't know too many 12-year-olds that are rocking a six pack. (Yes, I have seen little kids that were so skinny you could see their abs, but the picture is drawn with muscular abs.) I also think the background is too distracting. The original picture was just fine. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I certainly have no objections, but it is all down to the deletion nazies to allow it, so just be sure it has the info and such on it. Derekloffin (talk) 23:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I third that. The oririnal picture was so much better.Zuko Halliwell (talk) 03:17, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
You mean the Sozin's Comet picture of him. Jhenderson 777 13:28, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Correct. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 15:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't know. At least this one's got plain Aang, not Aang in the Avatar State. Jhenderson 777 17:40, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Plus the use of all the words in the image seems to advertise the finale more than Aang himself. If there is an same image of Aang without distracting words. I might consider. Jhenderson 777 17:48, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Both of them are good images being put here. But I feel the current one is a better main image for Aang. But the one you are talking about is now on this article too. Just to keep a neutral point of view. Jhenderson 777 18:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
As long as it's not the lead photo, I really don't care if it is on the page or not. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh I got you now! I thought you wanted the other way around. Jhenderson 777 18:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Avatar State link

OK, we have a bit of a problem. The caption for the photo in the Plot overview section has a link for the words "Avatar State". While I agree it should be linked, as many readers will not know what the Avatar State is, the link actually redirects to the Series overview section of the main article, where there is not any clearly discernible information about the Avatar State. We either need to link it somewhere else or explain what the Avatar State is inline. Any thoughts?

If there is a power and abilities section of this article that would be a better place. But Plot Overview does have best information for the Avatar State thus far. Jhenderson 777 22:42, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
The Plot Overview states in the third paragraph "The Avatar possesses a unique power called the Avatar State, which endows the Avatar with the knowledge and abilities of all past Avatars and acts as a self-triggering defense mechanism, although it can be made subject to the will of the user through various methods, such as extensive trial and training. If an Avatar is killed in the Avatar State, the reincarnation cycle will be broken, and the Avatar will cease to exist."

That's the best information we have so far. But like I said I strongly encourage a Abilities section, possiby a sub section of the Characteristics section. Because that does explain some of his abilities. Jhenderson 777 22:48, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Got it. So that means we should probably remove the Avatar State link entirely. — Parent5446 ☯ (msg email) 22:49, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Well mainly. But since such a redirection exists. It's good to have a good more clear placement for it to be explained. For if it could be a link that is. Seriously we got too many things linking to Avatar: The Last Airbender like all the bending arts for example. We need to find better link placings for these redirections. Possibly a section that focuses entirely on that individual subject. Jhenderson 777 22:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Avatar disambiguation page

I'm not a wikipedia user, but I wanted to tell you that in the Avatar disambiguation page, the links leads directly here instead to the Avatar: The Last Airbender page. For a while I thought the two articles had been merged, and I'm pretty sure it must've happened to someone else. It would be best if that link redirected the other page instead don't you think? --200.125.83.181 (talk) 03:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Legend of Korra

In the sequal series to Avatar: The Last Airbender, Aang and Katara have a son, Tenzin. Link: http://lytherus.com/2010/12/16/avatar-the-legend-of-korra/. 142.26.194.190 (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

True but we don't need to rush it. Jhenderson 777 19:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Protagonist to Main Protagonist?

In the infobox, shouldn't we change "Protagonist" to "Main Protagonist" not to be confused with other protagonists (Toph, Suki, etc). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.182.93 (talk) 02:55, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I see what you mean, but actually Toph, Suki, etc. are not protagonists in the first place (especially Suki). Aang is the real protagonist, with most everyone else being supporting characters (though one could argue Katara is the deuteragonist). — Parent5446 ☯ (msg email) 03:14, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
It's good to see you back, Parent5446. And I kind of agree with you on the Katara being deutragonist. We probably need to get rid of the Zuko article stating that he is a deutragonist because that can be considered original research if not proven. Jhenderson 777 18:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Nice to be back. :) And yeah, I would consider Zuko more of a false antagonist, if that's even an actual archetype. — Parent5446 ☯ (msg email) 23:09, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
False protagonist sure but false antagonist hmm. Jhenderson 777 19:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Lightning abilities

I did remove a category saying that he has lightning abilities but I am deciding to discuss it first. Last I knew he could only redirect lightning and I am not sure that should count. What do other editors think about that? Jhenderson 777 19:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

For sure he only has redirection abilities. Only Ozai, Azula, and Iroh can create lightning (and even Iroh I'm not sure about). — Parent5446 ☯ (msg email) 01:38, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
I do believe Iroh can. But the question is does redirecting lightning count as a lightning ability to support inclusion of that category? Jhenderson 777 14:56, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, that's a good question. Personally I think it should, but I'm speculating at best. — Parent5446 ☯ (msg email) 00:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Cause of death?

I removed the line:

"Aang's early death can be explained by the effects of being frozen in an iceberg for one hundred years."

It cites no references and sounds like personal opinion. It carries the same weight as speculation that he was assassinated by Amon's agents. Sings-With-Spirits (talk) 12:22, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Avatar article link

As is customary for many Wikipedia articles, the first instance of the word Avatar links to the default Avatar article. However, it is not the fictional character cycle that is part of the cartoon show. It directs to the idea in Hindu culture. I did not want to remove it in case that such a link is warranted, but it seems to me that such a connection is only an allusion on the creator's part to use the term for Aang and his predecessors/successors. Should the link be removed, since it directs to an article that's not directly related to the subject matter of Aang's article?--134.129.205.102 (talk) 22:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Removing Twimkeltows as an alias

I have removed name from the alias section since an alias is a fake name used by a person to hide their identity. It has nothing to do with nick names used by other people to make fun of the person. Here is a link to dictionary.com to prove my point [[9]] which proves that a nickname used by Toph regarind Anng is does not meet the definition of an alias.--70.49.81.140 (talk) 05:34, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Aang/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

3 images, 40 citations, still reads in-universe information by a characters, needs out of world perspective. JJ98 (Talk) 10:22, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Last edited at 10:22, 31 October 2014 (UTC). Substituted at 14:07, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Avatar as the spirit of the Earth

Shouldn't this be updated since The Legend of Korra confirmed that the Avatar is a human fused with the light spirit, Rava? 68.188.56.8 (talk) 00:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

'significant other' in infobox

Given that the most common usage of 'significant other' confers a sexual or romantic hint to a relationship, on the talk page for Korra, I'm proposing that we add a new category(or categories) to list characters with whom she clearly has a intimate and important relationship, but not a romantic one. In the interests of consistency, I'm bringing this here as well, as I think this article's infobox could also benefit from this sort of change. As important as Appa is, I don't think many people would call him Aang's significant other. Feel free to participate in the discussion there. Cannolis (talk) 03:33, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Aang. 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:

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) 03:55, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Aang. 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:

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) 18:33, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Aang. 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:

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) 12:01, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Age

Since the whole series took place in under a year how can he be 113-114 in book 3. Eberhard513 (talk) 00:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


The following discussion 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.

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Aang/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.


Starts GA Reassessment. The review will follow the same sections of the Article. Thank you --Whiteguru (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

 

The page number is incorrect for this GAR.

 

Instructions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment

Observations

   HTML document size: 189 kB
   Prose size (including all HTML code): 28 kB
   References (including all HTML code): 66 kB
   Wiki text: 55 kB
   Prose size (text only): 18 kB (3112 words) "readable prose size"
   References (text only): 14 kB
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  • Gyatso is a personal name. There is no need to put Monk before Gyatso after the first occurrence.
  • Book Two: Earth → If we are talking about a book, why is the second season, in the text instead of second book? Ditto following sections.
  • Link in the Lead to Air Nomads loops back to this article.
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  • Lead addresses different formats: trading cards, video games, T-shirts, web comics and the live-action film The Last Airbender
  • Avatar: The Last Airbender gives a succinct intrduction;
  • Book One: Water develops plot;
  • Book Two: Earth addresses Earthbending and acquiring the Avatar state via the chakras
  • Book Three: Fire addresses learning Firebending;
  • Graphic Novel Trilogies - overview of comic plots;
  • The Legend of Korra: reincarnation as Korra;
  • Book One: Air - the education of the young Korra;
  • Book Two: Spirits - about Tenzin and Korra losing spirit contact;
  • Book Three: Change - Korra seeking spirit contact and guidance;
  • Games: expands the references to games in the Lead;
  • Films: the film comic and the film;
  • Creation and conception: backstory to plot development;
  • Personality and characteristics: formation of character, diet and behaviour;
  • Bending the elements: Aang is capable of bending all four elements (air, water, earth and fire)
  • Some overlinking follows: living memory, Tenzin, metallurgy, nature, cultural heritage, confiscated or destroyed, material world, spirit world.
  • The Avatar State: the link to Avatar State in this section loops back to this section; should be removed.
  • Critical reception section has Expand section tag
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  • The article presents neutral point of view
  1. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  • Page created 23 May 2005;
  • Page has 6,038 edits by 2,373 editors
  • Majority of page edits in 2007;
  • Page has 191 watchers;
  • Wikidata is most comprehensive;
  • 112 bot edits on the page which ClueBot NG has the largest count. Page is subject to vandalism.
  • 90 day pageviews = 67,740 with a daily average of 744 views.
  1. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  • File:Avatar Aang.png = illustration of a character or characters in a comic book = fair use under United States copyright law.
  • File:Legend of Korra Aang.png = illustration of a character or characters in a comic book = fair use under United States copyright law.
  • File:Avatar reincarnations.png = illustration of a character or characters in a comic book = fair use under United States copyright law.
  • Images appropriately tagged; fair use rationale appropriate.
  1. Overall:
  • A number of minor issues noted, links that loop, overlinking.
  • Article provides both foundation and exegesis of the Chinese and Buddhist (including Tibetan) influence and disciplines acquired and practiced by the principal character Aang.
  • There is coverage of other media with links to main articles (comics, video games and the like)
  • The article has minor excursus into plots but these are managed well.
  • With some attention to the minor issues raised above the article remains at Good Article status. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:31, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

 

 Passed

 

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.
  1. ^ Co-created by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko (2006-04-15). "Avatar Roku". Avatar: The Last Airbender. Season 1. Episode 8. Nickelodeon. {{cite episode}}: Unknown parameter |episodelink= ignored (|episode-link= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |serieslink= ignored (|series-link= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ Co-created by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko (2006-07-14). "The Library". Avatar: The Last Airbender. Season 2. Episode 10. Nickelodeon. {{cite episode}}: Unknown parameter |episodelink= ignored (|episode-link= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |serieslink= ignored (|series-link= suggested) (help)
  3. ^ Co-created by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko (2005-12-02). "The Siege of the North". Avatar: The Last Airbender. Season 1. Episode 20. Nickelodeon. {{cite episode}}: Unknown parameter |episodelink= ignored (|episode-link= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |serieslink= ignored (|series-link= suggested) (help)
  4. ^ Co-created by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko (2006-05-05). "The Blind Bandit". Avatar: The Last Airbender. Season 2. Episode 6. Nickelodeon. {{cite episode}}: Unknown parameter |episodelink= ignored (|episode-link= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |serieslink= ignored (|series-link= suggested) (help)
  5. ^ Co-created by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko (2005-10-21). "The Deserter". Avatar: The Last Airbender. Season 1. Episode 16. Nickelodeon. {{cite episode}}: Unknown parameter |episodelink= ignored (|episode-link= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |serieslink= ignored (|series-link= suggested) (help)
  6. ^ Co-created by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko (2007-10-26). "Nightmares and Daydreams". Avatar: The Last Airbender. Season 3. Episode 9. Nickelodeon. {{cite episode}}: Unknown parameter |episodelink= ignored (|episode-link= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |serieslink= ignored (|series-link= suggested) (help)
  7. ^ Co-created by Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko (2007-11-23). "The Day of Black Sun". Avatar: The Last Airbender. Season 3. Episode 10. Nickelodeon. {{cite episode}}: Unknown parameter |episodelink= ignored (|episode-link= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |serieslink= ignored (|series-link= suggested) (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aang/Archive_1&oldid=1224465030"