This HTML5 document contains 6 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

PrefixNamespace IRI
n8http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/ontology/
n6http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/K13CHN0f3-Y92MtFUcbkAQ==
n4http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/avatar/property/
n5http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/vh5CELhUKYhchE01MHyOMw==
n2http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/ailBb1lWppkH6ZT4Q9EcCw==
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n7http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/GAKiAE0oHlIknFYdTGY0_Q==
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
Subject Item
n2:
rdfs:label
Avatar Wiki:War Room/Cactus Juice
rdfs:comment
__NOWYSIWYG__ As I was using the random page button, I came across the cactus juice page. The page has a lot of good information, but I soon afterwards discovered we had no page on cacti. In my opinion, this doesn't really make sense. Cactus juice is a product of cacti, so why would we have a page on what comes from the cactus and not on cacti itself?
n4:wikiPageUsesTemplate
n5: n6: n7:
n8:abstract
__NOWYSIWYG__ As I was using the random page button, I came across the cactus juice page. The page has a lot of good information, but I soon afterwards discovered we had no page on cacti. In my opinion, this doesn't really make sense. Cactus juice is a product of cacti, so why would we have a page on what comes from the cactus and not on cacti itself? The cactus juice page is linked to on the fauna page, though the title on the page is cactus, and I figured it would make more sense to rename the page to cactus, and put information on cacti onto the page, and keep some of the information on cactus juice on the page. I don't see the harm in doing this, and it would give a chance to add some more information to the page, other than the current history section and brief description. Thoughts? 21:29, December 16, 2012 (UTC) That would likely remove half the history section. Currently, the entire history section is just a detailed retelling of Momo and Sokka's trip, along with one long paragraph where the only purpose is to point out that Toph asked if Sokka was on the cactus juice again. With that said, I'm not sure just how much of a page history we can get on cacti itself. So I don't see a huge need to change the page itself, however it shouldn't be linked directly on the flora page; that can easily be changed though as the page already describes the juice briefly, and can be linked easily too. File:Katara End Sprite.gif Ruen File: Katara Sprite Season 3.gif 23:25, December 16, 2012 (UTC) There isn't much to say about the cactus itself, and the only reason why it has any notability is because Sokka drank the juice. Therefore, it's the juice that is most relevant; it became a recurring gag, and as Ruen said the events surrounding it are of particular interest though not necessarily related to cacti. I don't see a dire need to change anything, though if the proposal goes through there would need to be a separate section for cactus juice to make sure its notability is clear. A summary in the in the intro or history wouldn't be enough; all the information currently on the article is important and should stay (including the recurring gags). 00:07, December 17, 2012 (UTC) I see, but I'm not necessarily saying we have to remove anything. There could be a separate section on cactus juice with what happened when Sokka drank it and other things. I can kind of understand why the juice would have a page-- and I agree it is more notable. However, about one third the current history section is a detailed list of Sokka's reactions to cactus juice. The list of everything he said can be shortened down-- plus it could gain some more information, if minimal, to make up for what got edited down. I just think it is odd from an in-universe perspective to have a page on something like this, but not where it comes from. It is sort of like having a page on the egg of a creature, but not the actual creature when we know the creature the egg came from. Anyways, that's just my opinion. And I agree, implementing this isn't necessary, but I think it would make more sense. 01:35, December 17, 2012 (UTC)