Talk:Avatar: The Last Airbender

Essay Vibes
On the THEMES section of this article, there's a little bit too much of justification that reads as a college student's essay. This is the one:

The show also represents a diverse cast of characters in order to tackle the issue of marginalization. For example, in introducing a blind character like Toph and a paraplegic boy like Teo, the show depicted characters with vulnerabilities overcoming their physical and societal limitations.''' This is also true when it comes to the show's female characters. For example, female protagonist Katara faces systemic sexism when she reaches the Northern Water Tribe to learn waterbending. In another instance, her brother Sokka is initially dismissive of the all-female Kyoshi Warriors, but learns to respect''' and appreciate their skills. According to Kirk Hamilton of Kotaku, these themes represent the show's message that it is more important to be oneself than hew to societal expectations.

There is no need to explain to the reader and give them an opinion on how or why the show did what it did and to point it out. Let the reader form their own opinion and the series watcher too. Naming them and their diversity is one thing, but defining how their impact was in a specific way its a bit patronizing, as if the watcher needed help forming that opinion. SeleneMarie (talk) 20:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

"Bloodbenders" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bloodbenders&redirect=no Bloodbenders] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 14:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Article title change suggestion
Shouldn't this article title change from the current title to Avatar: The Last Airbender (2005 TV series)? Just like One Piece (1999 TV series). 98  𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂  19:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Article title change suggestion

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Killarnee (talk) 07:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Avatar: The Last Airbender → Avatar: The Last Airbender (animated series) – Both the animated series and the live action of 2024 are seeing very similar amounts of page views. This is despite the google search immediately taking you to this page, rather than the live action. 2 weeks ago both received around 150k views at their peak and both are now averaging around 25k. I think it would make more sense just to clarify that this is the animated series to make it easier for people to find the live action. Furthermore as the live action has now been renewed for both seasons 2 and 3, this will not be short lived problem, so it makes sense to fix it now, rather than down the line. Jasp7676 (talk) 23:39, 17 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose as proposed. "Animated Series" is not one of the options outlined in WP:NCTV. If disambiguation is needed, use the year - Avatar: The Last Airbender (2005 TV series), similar to how Avatar: The Last Airbender (2024 TV series) does. Gonnym (talk) 07:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The live-action series has just been released and has yet to show its lasting impact, it'd be a hasty move to change titles already at this point. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:06, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Side note: I think making Avatar: The Last Airbender (franchise) the main topic would make sense though. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 16:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'd Support franchise at base name, and DAB the shows by year.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:57, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per wp:PT2 and wp:Recentisim—blindlynx 14:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Weak support no clear primary topic.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 19:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:RECENTISM. Poirot09 (talk) 19:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose; the original series has a significant legacy and is still widely discussed in reliable sources nearly 20 years after it ran. I don't think we're yet at the point where the 2024 series is the common name. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per most others. Unrelated note but I got the entire series on DVD recently, and I was shocked because it was an unexpected gift from a certain someone I know. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 05:50, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * That's rad! I just got my physical copy of the series myself, after watching it twice on streaming services... Historyday01 (talk) 00:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per wp:Recentism. Remembering what happened with the film 'trilogy' (which as we know remained a 'monologue'), I think we could wait with any title change, at least until we see whether at least a second season of the present Netflix remake is launched. JoergenB (talk) 21:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose strongly. Besides, calling it animated series in the title would NOT be in-line with Wikipedia rules, as other commenters have pointed out. Whereas, the above suggestion of a date change (in a discussion topic earlier on this talk page) by @User talk:98Tigerius would be in-line with Wikipedia rules. Also, the original series has a legacy and influence. The new series does not.Historyday01 (talk) 00:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

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.
 * Oppose; kinda crazy you would even suggest this. Recentism has nothing on how the legacy of the animated show is gonna remain undefeated. ☞ Rim < Talk 07:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC)