Warriors Wiki

Welcome to the Warriors Wiki! Want to edit and see less ads? Consider creating an account! Registered users will be able to edit pages, will only see ads on the main page, and more.

READ MORE

Warriors Wiki
Advertisement
Warriors Wiki
All casual conversation belongs on the Discord server
Forums: Index > Suggestions > Nominate Official Warriorcats site as unsuitable source?


I'm suggesting that, not currently, but in the future, the official Warriors site warriorcats.com be listed as a source that is not suitable to take information for articles from. The site is loaded with inaccuracies, especially some of this "new content" that they've been adding to the new version of the site. Here's a list of just a few:

  • Family Trees: Numerous cats have been listed the wrong genders, or listed as having no family when we know they do. For example:
  1. Hollykit, the kit of Ferncloud and Dustpelt, is listed as male when in Midnight Hollykit is specifically called a "she."
  2. Swiftpaw, the one who died in A Dangerous Path fighting the dogs, is listed as female
  3. LONGTAIL was listed as female
  4. Bluestar's only family is listed as Mistyfoot and Stonefur, when, according to Secrets of the Clans, she has a sister named Snowpelt, a mother named Moonflower, and her nephew is Whitestorm.
  5. Numerous others that will take too long to list
  • The "official" color-coded Old Forest map has RiverClan owning Sunningrocks, and previously had ThunderClan owning the Riverbank (which they do not own, according to Into the Wild)
  • The "official" color-coded NEW Forest map does not have the ShadowClan/ThunderClan border at the Clearing, as they agreed it would be (trust me, I'm reading Starlight just now), and RiverClan owns the swamp. The neutral ground is the area within a certain amount of tail-lengths of the lake.
  1. Thornclaw is not a part of Bluestar's past. Thistleclaw was, but not Thornclaw.
  2. Hazelpaw is alive and well. It was Molepaw who died.

More inaccuracies will most likely appear as time goes on. But as there are so many, I'm not sure we can really trust how reliable the rest of the information is on there. If so many inaccuracies are on there, how do we know what's an inaccuracy and what isn't? My belief is that it's better to just find our sources elsewhere, like the books, possibly author chats, but not a mediocre official site. Opinions? Gorse 01:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Advertisement