Demona was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 June 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into List of Gargoyles characters. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
It has been proposed that Manhattan Clan be merged with this article. See Talk:Manhattan Clan
Corrected some info on Demona's past. -- Kevin Walter 18:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
It is now, officially, later. So go and buy the DVDs! -- Supermorff 21:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
An anonymous user has repeatedly been adding characters to this list that have never appeared in any episode of the television series, and only appeared in the fanfiction continuation called "The Gargoyles Saga". Such characters do not belong in this list.-- Supermorff 20:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay, we've got to sort out this Hunter descent thing. I've checked Ask Greg archives and it Greg has stated that modern Hunters were descended from "Donald Canmore". The particular question to which "Donald Canmore" was the answer was "which of Malcolm Canmore's children do the Hunter's descend from?" and Malcolm did have a son named Donald (although I can find precious little information on him), yet Donald Canmore is also an acceptable epithet of Donald III of Scotland, who succeeded Malcolm but was his brother not his son. This might be one of those sticky problems for which we just do not have enough information. The current situation, in which we have one fact stated on this page and a different one stated on the Hunter page is not acceptable. Does anyone have more information that might clear this up? -- Supermorff 11:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
It looks like you misread the history and have things mixed up. The real Duncan I had two sons. One was a Bold text Malcom and another was a Donald Canmore (who was not illgitimate) of which Weisman is basing his "Donald" off of. Both were alive when Macbeth killed their father, both moved to England during his reign, and both reinvaded Scotland and became king (though not at the same time). Malcolm did not have a son called Donald, hence why you couldn't find anything on that. According to this Malcolm had a Duncan from a first wife and his second wife his children were given English names.
The only Malcolm in the Gargoyles series is Prince Malcolm, Katherine's father. There was never a Malcolm Canmore mentioned on Gargoyles that I know of.
Perhaps Greg is confused himself, or probably chose Donald because he felt that another Malcolm would get viewers confused with Katherine's Malcolm, who knows? But if Greg says its Donald, then Donald it is. Remember, he is loosely basing this off of Scottish history and taking liberties with it (which itself is foggy at best). Shakespeare did the same thing with Macbeth. Eman007 12:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
You misread my reponse and the history. Once again:
Greg may have decided that Donald III was illigitimate, possibly on the back of some story he's concocted.
Perhaps you ought to take this issue up with him instead by leaving him a question on that forum. Eman007
I agree and have for quite a while; leave Donald Canmore completely out and just refer to them as "descendants of Duncan I". Something I already went ahead and did if you haven't changed it.
the story, Malcolm I (named Maol Chalvim I in the story) dies. Prince Malcolm is depicted as his third son, born after Maol Chalvim I's death. Also, were Prince Malcolm actually Kenneth II's father and not his brother, then that would make Princess Katharine Kenneth's sister and not his neice, as is claimed in the episode "Avalon Part 1".
This all does not tie into, nor make any sense in regards to Constatine and Finnella who are historically tied to Kenneth and are in "Avalon part 1". Another question to ask Greg? Weisman probably took liberties with history and made another gaffe in the process. Eman007 21:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I read the story and completely agree with you on the Malcolm bit. I'm still just confused as to why he bothered to include Kenneth, Constantine and Finngualla despite all of this. They can't be irrelevant because they are so central to the story and to history. I suppose that can be another question to pose to Greg, or something he'll clarify later. Eman007 17:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Can we please move the magic objects section to a new article? One that doesn't have "characters" in the title? I don't know what to call it. Maybe "Magic in Gargoyles" or, to keep in line with the recent "places" article, "Magic in Disney's Gargoyles"? Something. And does anyone have a picture of the Eye of Odin on its own, not being worn as a necklace? The Grimorum too, for that matter. -- Supermorff 21:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Or (still thinking about this) "List of Gargoyles items", "List of Gargoyles objects/artefacts/magic items", etc. I just don't think that the magic objects should be a part of this article. It would be nice to have a general title which we could then use to discuss the peculiarities of magic itself in the Gargoyles universe, too. -- Supermorff 11:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, I've done it now. Anyone is free to discuss name changes at the new page's talk page. -- Supermorff 18:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Image:Tomandkatherine.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 09:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:Ishimura Clan.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 22:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Guatemclan1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 23:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Several of the articles on the principal characters have been suggested for merger. I think this is contrary to the way practice at Wikipedia seems to be developing--the principal characters should have separate articles. It would, however, be a good idea to improve them. At the very least, sources to where the descriptive information is taken from the appearances in the work is necessary. 01:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC) DGG ( talk)
What's missing is a note of Alexander Xanatos. Also, I believe there should be an entry for Puck's illusion of the future from Goliath's perspective, including an adult Alexander.
Newwjakk ( talk) 23:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Working on that, but first I figure that I should source the existing material first. Antiyonder ( talk) 01:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Merge Proposal and / or
Redirect.
Please do not modify it.
The result of the request for the Proposed Merger of Gargoyle universe character articles into this talk page's article was:
I come with this proposal to merge all individual articles into this list. This is primarily because none of the characters, including the main ones, have managed to prove notability outside the Gargoyles series. With this, I mean that none of them have received deep coverage by reliable secondary sources, discussing the characters independently from the series itself. Also, none of them have impact in popular culture nor have become cultural icons like Darth Vader, Homer Simpson or Mickey Mouse. -- LoЯd ۞pεth 19:09, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Given the added info provided by the comic book, I think The Illuminati would merit their own page at this point. The mutates page was taken down for being a minor, but I think a page dedicated to the entire Labyrinth Clan (Clones and Mutates) might work out better.
I support a merger since there is a lack of independent third person information to assert notability. Dwanyewest ( talk) 15:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Strongly Against. I simply don't see how merging this article will be of any logical help nor would I support a deletion, for that matter, if it comes up. I say leave well enough alone and I don't see a reason to merge. 18-Till-I-Die ( talk) 21:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Against. -- DrBat ( talk) 03:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Support. I can't see these characters being independently notable. I suggest that each article be considered on a case-by-case basis, and that if no proof of notability be found we go ahead with the merge. — Mr. Stradivarius ( drop me a line) 07:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
David Xanatos and Goliath (Gargoyles) I now agree shouldn't be merged as they now have good sources. Dwanyewest ( talk) 18:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Macbeth has [1] and [2] for example, as well as some merchandise. Manhattan Clan has lots of merch. I rewrote just Goliath and Demona, but it's still incomplete. -- 194.145.185.229 ( talk) 15:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Please do not modify it.
A copy of this template can be found here.
Manhattan Clan, Hunter (Gargoyles), Pack (Gargoyles), Macbeth (Gargoyles), Oberon's children should be merged to this page any thoughts? Dwanyewest ( talk) 20:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Demona was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 June 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into List of Gargoyles characters. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
It has been proposed that Manhattan Clan be merged with this article. See Talk:Manhattan Clan
Corrected some info on Demona's past. -- Kevin Walter 18:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
It is now, officially, later. So go and buy the DVDs! -- Supermorff 21:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
An anonymous user has repeatedly been adding characters to this list that have never appeared in any episode of the television series, and only appeared in the fanfiction continuation called "The Gargoyles Saga". Such characters do not belong in this list.-- Supermorff 20:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay, we've got to sort out this Hunter descent thing. I've checked Ask Greg archives and it Greg has stated that modern Hunters were descended from "Donald Canmore". The particular question to which "Donald Canmore" was the answer was "which of Malcolm Canmore's children do the Hunter's descend from?" and Malcolm did have a son named Donald (although I can find precious little information on him), yet Donald Canmore is also an acceptable epithet of Donald III of Scotland, who succeeded Malcolm but was his brother not his son. This might be one of those sticky problems for which we just do not have enough information. The current situation, in which we have one fact stated on this page and a different one stated on the Hunter page is not acceptable. Does anyone have more information that might clear this up? -- Supermorff 11:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
It looks like you misread the history and have things mixed up. The real Duncan I had two sons. One was a Bold text Malcom and another was a Donald Canmore (who was not illgitimate) of which Weisman is basing his "Donald" off of. Both were alive when Macbeth killed their father, both moved to England during his reign, and both reinvaded Scotland and became king (though not at the same time). Malcolm did not have a son called Donald, hence why you couldn't find anything on that. According to this Malcolm had a Duncan from a first wife and his second wife his children were given English names.
The only Malcolm in the Gargoyles series is Prince Malcolm, Katherine's father. There was never a Malcolm Canmore mentioned on Gargoyles that I know of.
Perhaps Greg is confused himself, or probably chose Donald because he felt that another Malcolm would get viewers confused with Katherine's Malcolm, who knows? But if Greg says its Donald, then Donald it is. Remember, he is loosely basing this off of Scottish history and taking liberties with it (which itself is foggy at best). Shakespeare did the same thing with Macbeth. Eman007 12:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
You misread my reponse and the history. Once again:
Greg may have decided that Donald III was illigitimate, possibly on the back of some story he's concocted.
Perhaps you ought to take this issue up with him instead by leaving him a question on that forum. Eman007
I agree and have for quite a while; leave Donald Canmore completely out and just refer to them as "descendants of Duncan I". Something I already went ahead and did if you haven't changed it.
the story, Malcolm I (named Maol Chalvim I in the story) dies. Prince Malcolm is depicted as his third son, born after Maol Chalvim I's death. Also, were Prince Malcolm actually Kenneth II's father and not his brother, then that would make Princess Katharine Kenneth's sister and not his neice, as is claimed in the episode "Avalon Part 1".
This all does not tie into, nor make any sense in regards to Constatine and Finnella who are historically tied to Kenneth and are in "Avalon part 1". Another question to ask Greg? Weisman probably took liberties with history and made another gaffe in the process. Eman007 21:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I read the story and completely agree with you on the Malcolm bit. I'm still just confused as to why he bothered to include Kenneth, Constantine and Finngualla despite all of this. They can't be irrelevant because they are so central to the story and to history. I suppose that can be another question to pose to Greg, or something he'll clarify later. Eman007 17:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Can we please move the magic objects section to a new article? One that doesn't have "characters" in the title? I don't know what to call it. Maybe "Magic in Gargoyles" or, to keep in line with the recent "places" article, "Magic in Disney's Gargoyles"? Something. And does anyone have a picture of the Eye of Odin on its own, not being worn as a necklace? The Grimorum too, for that matter. -- Supermorff 21:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Or (still thinking about this) "List of Gargoyles items", "List of Gargoyles objects/artefacts/magic items", etc. I just don't think that the magic objects should be a part of this article. It would be nice to have a general title which we could then use to discuss the peculiarities of magic itself in the Gargoyles universe, too. -- Supermorff 11:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, I've done it now. Anyone is free to discuss name changes at the new page's talk page. -- Supermorff 18:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Image:Tomandkatherine.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 09:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:Ishimura Clan.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 22:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Guatemclan1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 23:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Several of the articles on the principal characters have been suggested for merger. I think this is contrary to the way practice at Wikipedia seems to be developing--the principal characters should have separate articles. It would, however, be a good idea to improve them. At the very least, sources to where the descriptive information is taken from the appearances in the work is necessary. 01:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC) DGG ( talk)
What's missing is a note of Alexander Xanatos. Also, I believe there should be an entry for Puck's illusion of the future from Goliath's perspective, including an adult Alexander.
Newwjakk ( talk) 23:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Working on that, but first I figure that I should source the existing material first. Antiyonder ( talk) 01:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Merge Proposal and / or
Redirect.
Please do not modify it.
The result of the request for the Proposed Merger of Gargoyle universe character articles into this talk page's article was:
I come with this proposal to merge all individual articles into this list. This is primarily because none of the characters, including the main ones, have managed to prove notability outside the Gargoyles series. With this, I mean that none of them have received deep coverage by reliable secondary sources, discussing the characters independently from the series itself. Also, none of them have impact in popular culture nor have become cultural icons like Darth Vader, Homer Simpson or Mickey Mouse. -- LoЯd ۞pεth 19:09, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Given the added info provided by the comic book, I think The Illuminati would merit their own page at this point. The mutates page was taken down for being a minor, but I think a page dedicated to the entire Labyrinth Clan (Clones and Mutates) might work out better.
I support a merger since there is a lack of independent third person information to assert notability. Dwanyewest ( talk) 15:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Strongly Against. I simply don't see how merging this article will be of any logical help nor would I support a deletion, for that matter, if it comes up. I say leave well enough alone and I don't see a reason to merge. 18-Till-I-Die ( talk) 21:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Against. -- DrBat ( talk) 03:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Support. I can't see these characters being independently notable. I suggest that each article be considered on a case-by-case basis, and that if no proof of notability be found we go ahead with the merge. — Mr. Stradivarius ( drop me a line) 07:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
David Xanatos and Goliath (Gargoyles) I now agree shouldn't be merged as they now have good sources. Dwanyewest ( talk) 18:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Macbeth has [1] and [2] for example, as well as some merchandise. Manhattan Clan has lots of merch. I rewrote just Goliath and Demona, but it's still incomplete. -- 194.145.185.229 ( talk) 15:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Please do not modify it.
A copy of this template can be found here.
Manhattan Clan, Hunter (Gargoyles), Pack (Gargoyles), Macbeth (Gargoyles), Oberon's children should be merged to this page any thoughts? Dwanyewest ( talk) 20:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)