User talk:Wolfdog

Feel free to leave comments or questions.

To Wolfdog
Are you the webmaster of this website. If so, I have been seeing creatures that I didn't read about in stories, see in the media adaptions, or saw in illustrations. Rtkat3 (talk) 1:52, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Some already have deletion templates, but no one deleted them yet. I don't even know why some people put them in if they weren't mentioned or seen. Also there was something that seemed to look like a hyena in the Disney version of Aslan's sacrifice, but might've been mistakened for a werewolf (though one with the fur color of one would've been considered a Gnoll). If any appear in future Disney projects of the Narnia series, then they can have their pages reinstated. For the animated version, the White Witch's army had various unspecified creatures like some trolls, a Bigfoot-like creature, an Ostrich-like creature, some Pig Men, a bat-winged bird, a hippopotamus-headed creature, a porcupine-like creature, a gorilla-like creature, something that appears to be a big pink slug with arms, a humanoid alligator, something that looks like a blue caveman, numerous horned things, some creatures that appear ghoulish, some creatures that appear impish, some creatures that resemble gargoyles, some creatures that resemble warlocks, and some creatures that resemble dragon-like creatures. Rtkat3 (talk) $;30, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Redirect
Thanks but all I did was put the link to Ram's page from the Shasta page. But I have a question, how do I redirect "Ram the Great" to Ram's page?

Main Page
Could it be possible for someone to change the main page so that it no longer says "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (Disney Movie)"? I'm getting kind of irritated with that, even though it isn't that important.

(Main Page>Left column>Movies>The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (Disney Movie). Change to "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (Fox Movie)" like the page it is redirected to. Thanks, Longliveaslan 04:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion
Sorry about the mass deletion requests, but in most cases what I meant to do was draw attention to problems with the articles. With the very low amount of action on this wiki, few people seem to pay any attention to the talk pages - I have complained in the discussion pages of several articles and received not response. Reporting problems does not seem to help draw attention either - several articles I reported in this way lay on the list for months without any interest being taken.

The articles that I have been really concerned about though are the ones on Narnian species - I voiced my concerns about these a month or so ago on the Main page discussion. There was a period where people seemed to be assuming that if a species existed on earth, it must exist in Narnia (even if never mentioned in the books) and thus merited an article (ie mammoth, mastodon). Another large quantity of articles regarded creatures (non canon) appearing unnamed in adaptations, clearly not needing their own articles. I know that we are trying to expand the wiki, but shouldn't we be aiming to maintain quality rather than going for quantity? If people want to talk about the creatures seen in the BBC adaptation, or mentioned in film design development, surely a more suitable approach would be to create a grouped 'bestiary' page, or something of the likes.

I am sorry for not justifying the my nominations for deletion (in most cases I considered it self explanatory!), and on my part, I will be sure to do this in future.

Poggin 17:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC)