Talk:List of Fables characters

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

Expand[edit]

In the future, the article could use entries for Mowgli, King Cole, Weyland Smith, and probably a few others. Elijya 20:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also anyone know who 'Kay' (with the all seeing eye) is (what fable he's from)? --24.116.69.69 06:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
YES! I've been wondering that for ages. I know a few of the characters have come from really really obscure places, so it might not be something so obvious. Elijya 16:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He's from The Snow Queen, along with, naturally enough, the Snow Queen. Stilgar135 15:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some more entries, including all those listed above. I've put Mowgli in under The Tourists for now. --Tailkinker 14:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Individual entries[edit]

The major characters deserve their own entries. Bigby, Snow, Boy Blue, the Adversary, and Jack to start. I'm going to do Bigby now. Stilgar135 16:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking about adding jabberwocky to the list of characters, but I am not 100% sure if that is the character that boy blue slays with his sword on his journey to the adversary.flyboyz2000k 13:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any character that can remotely be identified as the Jabberwock. We see Blue defeat a couple of goblins, Governor Chernomor, the dragon, which it's never suggested is the Jabberwock (and certainly bears no resemblance to the Jabberwock as illustrated in Carroll's work) and finally the three knights of the Rus before his fateful encounter with the Emperor. --Tailkinker 18:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jack[edit]

Should Jack be moved under Others? I don't think he qualifies as a resident of Fabletown, what with his exile and all. JQF 22:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit, I've never liked the title Fabletown Residents for that section. Kay doesn't live there, nor do the Tourists and, as you say, neither does Jack these days. Having difficulty coming up with an improved title, through. Maybe something like Fabletown Regulars? Hmm, not sure about that one either. But, yes, I think that Jack certainly ought to be moved. Probably the Tourists, too, unless we come up with a better title for that section. --Tailkinker 12:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe make a header "New York Fables" or something, and split it into "Farm" "Fabletown" and "Others", and add an "International Fables" section? JQF 14:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good title - I'll alter it to that for the time being. I don't think that we really need to split the Fables between the Farm and Fabletown itself; if we just leave it as 'New York-based' then we can keep Kay in there without any difficulty. I've moved Jack and the Tourists down to the Others section. --Tailkinker 20:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feathertop[edit]

To whoever it is who keeps adding Feathertop into the New York Fables 'Others' section. Please stop it. Firstly, Feathertop is already listed under the heading of The Tourists in the bottom section of the page. Secondly, as one of the Tourists, he's not based in New York, so would not be appropriate in that section even if he wasn't already listed. I've had to remove his name three times now so I would take it as a kindness if you desisted from adding his name in again. --Tailkinker 19:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apoligize profusely about that. I didn't mean to keep putting him back in, but I thought he kept being remove because of internet pranksters or a refusal of being a character. Again I apoligize for continuing to reenter him, keep up the good work.

Totenkinder[edit]

I don't know who translated "Totenkinder" with "Childeater", but it is wrong. The closest translation might either be "Deadchildren" or "ChildrenoftheDead". The problem with translating it, is that "Totenkinder" isn't a real german word. It is a combination of "the dead" and "children" with probably some accusative for good measure. 87.123.198.47 01:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, somebody just altered it to from "Dead Children" to "Death of Children". Is that in some way more accurate? Can somebody with decent German skills make some definitive statement on this one? --Tailkinker 06:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frau Totenkinder's section is becoming long enough that creating a separate article and leaving a small summary and a link is beginning to look attractive. Any objections? Caerwine Caer’s whines 22:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At one point in the section about Frau Totenkinder it states that she "turned out to be Cinderella's fairy godmother" but, at the end of the section, it says that she definitely isn't as she can't be any witch who was actually named in a particular story (even though I don't remember Cinderella's fairy godmother being named). Anyone know which of these opposing statements is true? 85.210.6.86 17:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jack of Fables[edit]

Shouldn't we add the characters from Jack of Fables to this list? While at present there are only two characters, Jack and Goldilocks, that have appeared in both books, the two series exist in the same fictional universe and there is bound to be more characters moving between the two. Caerwine Caerwhine 00:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think there are enough characters from both series to support a seperate seperate "List of characters from the Fables universe" page or thereabouts, with no descriptions whatsoever (think List of characters in A Song of Ice and Fire). Stilgar135 00:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Baba Yaga[edit]

i personaly thought that it was of worth to note that prior to Baba yaga been used as a main character in Fables, she has had apeared in other Vertigo titles. the ones i know off are a story in the sandman fables and reflections tradepaper back where she transports the protagonist to his lady love. as well as a more prominent role in the original books of magic series ( the section where Timmothy hunter steps off the path in the lands of fairy. i thought it was impotant to put this down even if it was a bit just to prevent confustion. also it is worth noteing that both these pror apearances where penned by the same author neil gaiman.

I don't think it's necessary to go to the level of detail that you put - the exact places where she appears is largely irrelevant, as is the fact that Gaiman wrote them both. The only thing really worth mentioning is that the characters shouldn't be confused as they exist in different continuities. --Tailkinker 07:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Willingham likes this page[edit]

http://www.sequentialtart.com/article.php?id=525

About 3/5 of the way down, Willingham says that this article is "wonderful"... good work, everyone. Stilgar135 21:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's certainly something for us all to be pretty chuffed about. We're all reading Willingham, but, hey, he's reading us, too... --Tailkinker 10:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zephyr[edit]

I thought Ghost had been humanely put down by his grandfather, because he could only exist by killing.

Lots42 01:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost wasn't killed. If he was killed it was never mentioned. First off he can exist by sucking the air out of living things (we know people -Mr. Webb- and animals -Mary's Little Lamb-) plus Bigby used that power of Ghost's for Fabletown's benefit. Also, I doubt Bigby'd do that to his son, he seemed to be close to him and also in the Christmas issue they had a ninth stocking with out a name, I'm not saying for sure it's his cause it could just be an art error, but I think it was ment to keep us wondering, since it happened twice, though maybe Willingham forgot to tell Buckingham to just do 8 stockings- and the colorist was told not to put the name. I don't know. All I know is that its safe to presume Ghost alive until other evidence is shown.

Could Ghost's birth defect have been caused by Max Piper's curse on the Fables? Green Herring (talk) 01:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The mention of Ghost being gender neutral where did this come from? Characters referring to ghost have used "son" "he" and "him" I've never heard of Ghost being regarded as anything but male so why the sudden revelation on the wiki that Ghost may not be gender neutral as no one even referred to Ghost as being gender neutral in the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.222.172.245 (talk) 07:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked and found why the sentence regarding this gender-neutral revelation is of no concern, is incorrect and not a revelation is that in the earlier story arc in which Ghost is given his name - Ghost is called "son" multiple times by his father Bigby and also referred to with the terms "him" and "he" by both Bigby and Snow. These are not gender-neutral terms (last I checked) and mean that for as long as the readers have known him as Ghost he has been regarded as male (slightly incorrect he was referred to as "son" before his name was revealed as "Ghost"). The origin of the gender-neutral Ghost concept mentioned in this wiki entry is unknown. I don't know if the person who entered that sentence has not read the story in which Ghost is given his name but I have deleted the gender-neutral belief held by this person from the wiki to avoid confusion. (I also checked the web to see if there was any reference to Ghost being gender-neutral and the only hit was this wiki entry) Ghost is male.

Bluebeard[edit]

Does anyone know what this, currently the last sentence in Bluebeard's description, is supposed to mean? It doesn't make sense, especially since the previous sentence emphasizes that he'll likely stay dead after having been thrown down the witching well.

Bluebeard appears along with other deceased Fables, Bluebeard says that he has learned to be virtuous, though Lancelot and Fly believe that his position of villain has not changed.

Obviously the sentence emphasizing on his death was written long before the current arc which has all the fables thrown into the well "alive." I'm not exactly sure if they are considered "living", but all the same they aren't exactly "dead" either. And if you ask my opinion you really shouldn't say anyone in a comic book will "likely stay dead" I mean how many times do they resurrect characters? There's a pretty good chance anything can happen. 70.171.66.169 23:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Nome King[edit]

When does he show up? I am a major Buam fan, and was expecting to see him in volume 6, but he hasn't been introduced yet in that volume, which is as far as I've read so far. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 16:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Volume Nine. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 20:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Section for Fables Living in Flycatcher's Haven[edit]

Since many Fables now occupy the Haven, shouldn't there be a section for them? The occupants do not fall under the Homelands, Farm, or Fabletown. It would definatly clean up the information regarding the questions about a Fable's status once dropped down the Witching Well. It would also clear up the debate as to if they are considered living or dead, since they would be considered ghosts-given-form. A list of known occupants would include Flycatcher, Riding Hood, Weyland Smith, Gretel, the Spider (Miss Muffet's husband), Bo Peep's Little Lamb, Thrusty John, Cock Robin, the first set of three pigs, and Boo Bear. Also Grinder the goblin giant, and Mr. Brump, the small goblin; both were part of the Adversary's army who joined Fly that were given formal names. Possibly more since Flycatcher is taking in Farm creatures so they won't have to be confined to the farm. 24.252.106.82 (talk) 14:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did Rose Red lose a foot?[edit]

In a panel of Fables #80 (the first panel with Colin), Rose Red is depicted missing her left foot. I would think that this was a simple art error, but her shadow in the same panel has the leg end in a stub. Except for one panel where her left foot may or may not be depicted, her feet are not in-panel for the rest of the comic. I can't remember her losing a foot (and this article makes no mention of it) and she seems to walk normally , but the panel clearly shows her without a foot.--Marcus Brute (talk) 09:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given the super-human powers many Fables have, maybe she lost it and it grew back. Lots42 (talk) 01:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Literals[edit]

Unless I missed her, "Eliza Wall" has yet to be mentioned on this list. I don't know how you'd describe her as anything except a fourth-wall-breaking narrator, without revealing something that isn't immediately obvious (in fact I, forgetting she was supposed to be a Literal and not a Fable, kept trying to pin down where I was supposed to "know her from") until you think about it though: she has three brothers who are identical to each other and who don't understand "who she's talking to" when she speaks directly to the audience... she also deconstructs Jack's fanciful teaser texts, talks about the story in actual story terms, notes that the reader will understand Priscilla's method of dealing with rejection "[in another] seven pages", and even warns the reader that she's going to interfere in the story later to prevent a dire end for Jack Horner... in short, she's the personifcation of the fourth wall itself. I don't know how you'd include this without it being original research though, unless the people who've worked on the series confirm it in an interview. Sort of frustrating, since this is one of those things where if you realize it or someone points it out, it becomes obvious, but it's just subtle enough (since it's not outright stated) that WP rules may count this in-hindsight-obvious fact as original research without a resource confirming it outside the work itself. :\

Less awkward though - and I also did not see this guy on the list, though the list is long so I could have missed it, which is why I'm not "being bold" here - is the introduction of the Literal "Deux Ex Machina", whose respective personification is made much more explicit. 70.118.24.50 (talk) 04:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bo Peep & Peter Piper[edit]

They are residents of the Farm.Green Herring (talk) 01:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Cubs[edit]

A couple of possibly unsubstantiated suggestions here in case anyone would prefer to include them?

"Still according to Bigby's new fate, all of his cubs will lay waste to worlds (meaning they will all do terrible things, eventually - though this is contradicted by Dare's noble suicide before he had any opportunity to commit any crime of any kind at all)."

Bigby's fate when applied to its previous recipient had the seven children laying waste to worlds and acting as 'gods and monsters'. However, there's at least one reference to the cubs within this context in already-published content; we are told that "They would have been gods and monsters if they'd been brought up differently". I'm of the impression that this implies that aspect of Bigby's gifted fate has been rewritten according to the differences the cubs' parentage and parenting have made in their outcomes. They are, however, still extraordinarily powerful.

I feel this actually works perfectly with the story and is more or less solidified, if we're including the chance of their still being on that track of fate; perhaps we should include the appropriate likelihood that they are not? 87.112.30.71 (talk) 17:35, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Others?[edit]

Am I missing something or is this a case of too many unorganized additions? In the table of contents, section 3 is called "Others" and then section 7 is once again called "Others". In my humble opinion there should either be a single section called "Others" or more description as to which characters belong in which "Others" section. Any consensus on this? 96.238.237.149 (talk) 03:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article as of this date[edit]

The article is crammed full of original research. I'd work on it more but I've alrady spoiled myself to stuff I haven't read...don't want to spoil everything. Lots42 (talk) 01:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

puppet Adversary — Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not censored[edit]

Wikipedia needs an article section (or a whole article) on the literal "puppet Adversary"-- the one made of wood. While avoiding spoilers would be ideal, Wikipedia's purpose takes precidence over any desire to avoid spoilers, be Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not censored. Besides, anyone reading about Fables (comics) on Wikipedia has to know they risk seeing spoilers. tahc chat 21:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Size split?[edit]

Split - Article is over 100 kB, and should be split, starting with "New York Fables". Thoughts? Suggestions?--Jax 0677 (talk) 21:57, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Before splitting, how about the massive plot dumping be attacked? That is a more immediate problem. - J Greb (talk) 21:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A year on, and there seems to be little activity on attacking the plot dumping. I suspect the large size of the article makes cleanup difficult. I am going to split by major section. By all means merge back in when sections have been reduced to a sensible size. Op47 (talk) 17:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. Sorry for the fans (and I do like the series) but this is list is largely WP:FANCRUFT, and any article or list that is split needs to meet General notability guidelines,. If people want to build extensive, in-universe minutiae, without demonstrating real-world significance, please see Fables Wiki. --Animalparty! (talk) 05:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bigby article[edit]

With the release of The Wolf Among Us, Bigby might just be about to make the push for an article. Found this already, but Lee got a fair amount of attention and Bigby's already been a major character in the comic series. Nothing definite yet, but I'd say it's worth keeping an eye out.

Some IGN sources:

Others:

Having some difficulty locating non-IGN sources, but there's a start. – Bellum (talk) (contribs) 20:26, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

Splitting off List of Fables characters (The Farm) was a bad idea to begin with. The article should be trimmed of excess cruft instead.) And the execution of it wasn't done properly: material shouldn't be duplicated between the two articles. The result of that has become a trainwreck of inconsistent edits between the two copies. These articles need to be merged and edited to WP standards. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:35, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge; unnecessary duplication. Klbrain (talk) 21:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reversed the split. Klbrain (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Fables characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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) 17:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Fables_characters&oldid=1199493264"