Talk:Bleach (manga)/Archive 3

message: In anime episode 62, Aizen escapes saying that he's going to take the throne of heaven, as he goes to a different place--which implies to me that heaven is not the same thing as Soul Society, contrary to what these articles say.  (And it is 'ten' in Japanese.) Ken Arromdee 06:49, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I interpreted it as a metaphor, as he's planning on gaining so much power as to become godlike, and heaven of course would be where a god would live.  But yeah, maybe its an actual place, we need more info in order to say it for sure, but maybe it deserves mention, I'm not sure. --Anaraug 07:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Define heavan? Bleach Mythology has four planes of existance. The living world and Soul society where souls sling shot back and fourth for all eternity die in one world and are reborn in the other souls may be created in either (based on shinigami and others in SS ageing but many others claming never to age in SS). The hollow world which seems to be the space between the worlds and Hell where no soul may leave. Therefore its fair to say the closest thing to a western idea of heavan (Where the good souls go) Is Soul society Rukia and Ichigo both refer to soul society as heavan but Rukia says its like heavan. Hinting that the human idea doesnt exist but SS is close (SS is 60-80% better than earth or somthing like that i think without checking of course). I think its metaphorical, he is saying he will attain ultimate power. (Of course even hollow/shinigami hybrids like Vizard and Ichigo have limits as well)--Seth Turner 20:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I think the problem that we all are running into is that soul society does not represent the view of heaven which many people in Western society envision. I agree with Anaraug, I think that when Aizen says he will take the throne of heaven, he means that he wants to become godlike. There are many who believe that there is a god who rules over us all... perhaps this is Aizen's goal: to become powerful enough to rule over not only soul society, but all worlds where souls exists. Bleach Babe 01:16, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He was speaking in metaphor. There is no Bleach heaven that we know of, and we should not mention it in the articles unless it is explicitly stated as being real in the manga. (Did anyone else notice that Aizen's speech was quite like Lucifer's Biblical monologue, in which he says he will surpass the most high God?) --Tjstrf 00:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure that's either from Dante or Milton (can't remember which), not the Bible.  I didn't notice it at the time -- haven't read anything like that in ages. --Anaraug 02:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, it's in the Bible, from Isaiah 14. Milton's famous devil monologue had more to do with the devil as a victim of circumstances (he made him an anti-hero), and Dante's most referenced quote is probably "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here." 
You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God... ...I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High." Isaiah 14:13-14, NIV. 
The question now is, should we mention the parallel or not?--tjstrf 05:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heaven 

message: There is now a new archive, due to growing page size. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 12:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Brilliant as always! =D Bleach Babe 01:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive

message: If there's a section about something that doesn't exist in the manga, shouldn't the article be renamed to Bleach (anime and manga)"?
:Someone suggested Bleach (series). However, we're going to wait a few more days to reach a clear consensus whether to use Bleach (something) or simply BLEACH. After that we may use Bleach (series), an idea which I personally support. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 13:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to be over, so has anything been decided now? Ken Arromdee 15:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said somewhere below, if we don't have an consensus, we should probably stick with what the rest of Wikipedia seems to be doing.  That is, using the (manga) disambiguated pages to discuss both the manga canon and the derivative anime.  This is not necessarily a bad thing.  The term "manga" is roughly similar to the English word "cartoon".  Referring to animation using either term is technically allowable and not entirely incorrect. –Gunslinger47 21:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bount (anime only) 

message: Really, this has got to stop. Users are trying to create articles on minor characters which don't need to have articles. A great example is D-Roy, and now Rupi (Bleach). Especially in D-Roy's case, there is absolutely no more potential information that can be added. I have already AfD'd it, but the result was no consensus (none of the Bleach regulars seemed to vote there too). We should discuss it here and reach a clear consensus. My proposal is:
*Merge all current arrancar articles (and delete them) except Grimmjow and Ulquiorra into Arrancar assaults on the human world.
*This article will have two sections: first assault (Ulquiorra/Yammy), second assault, and third assault.
*It will have a short description of each arrancar with all the info we know, but not spread as thinly as now.
*This can turn into a fairly long and conprehensive article on a Bleach fictional event which includes several character bios, rather than have a million articles which will, even if the information is spread very thinly like it is now, have almost no useful information.
*If support to this idea is given, make a mass-nom and cite this discussion.
-- Ynhockey (Talk) 09:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Minor characters should be described on the character page.  Minor arrancar characters should be described in its arrancar subsection.  Regarding D-Roy, everything we know about him can fit easily into a single, well-phrased paragraph.  That said, they did do a good job detailing the D-Roy page, considering how undetailed the character is. –Gunslinger47 21:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Rupi at least deserves his own page, as he is leading the newest attack on Karakura. I agree with the removal of the lesser arrancar that died in the attack led by Grimmjow. --GhostStalker 01:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I kinda agree with Gunslinger. I'm not really sure if making a new article on the arrancar assaults is a good idea. It would probably be redundant anyway, since it would be on all of the character pages and whatnot. But I do agree that all of these characters pages need to STOP. The Characters in Bleach series page (Big Page) is meant for minor characters, and we should delete all of the character pages for minor characters and fold everything back into the Big Page. Not sure if Rupi deserves a page. I think we should hold off for a few more chapters until we can see a significance. For all we know, she could be killed in the next chapter. Other than what Gunslinger has brought up, I agree with Ynhockey. Hobbeslover talk/contribs 20:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S.: Wanderweiss needs to go though, on the account that he has done nothing. At all. Period. Hobbeslover talk/contribs 20:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Character articles

message: Is there a consensus on what the official spellings of the arrancar are? I thought the correct spelling of the 10th Espada was Yami, and so I made those changes whenever I saw them, but now Im hearing that his name's official spelling is Yammy? Also, I noticed someone changed the spelling of the 6th Espada from Rupi to Luppi. Anyone got a source for these "official" spellings?
--GhostStalker 18:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yammy is the official spelling, see cover of chapter 231. Also Luppi is supposedly the spelling uses on the cover of 233, although I haven't been able to get the chapter yet. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 19:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK thanks for mentioning the Yammy bit, I never really noticed that before because I dont really pay attention to the cover pages all that much. I'll make a mental note of that from now on. --GhostStalker 19:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

text: They're official by author fiat. Of course, we're only doing this with the actual names, not things like "The man of black robe". --tjstrf 03:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Spellings? 

message: Could someone please do a table that shows which manga chapters are adapted into which anime episodes? This seems to be a service that no-one provides at present. Bleachportal.net says it has this on their site, but I can't find it. Thanks in advance. --Jamdav86 20:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I don't mind doing this for you personally (if you ask me), this is probably not information fit for Wikipedia. Maybe other users will disagree however. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 20:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I have produced a copy in Microsoft Excel; if you want it, I can probably save it as a different format, if you specify, and emailing is probably easiest. (This goes for anyone else who wants a copy also, just ask. (This is all my own work, using the subtitled anime and raw manga). Setokaiba✌≝ 14:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison table 

message: Should it be Secret Mobile Unit or Covert Ops Corps? The latter has been used so far, but it's mostly just a random nice-sounding phrase invented by scanlators to give onmitsukidō a real-life feel. Secret Mobile Unit doesn't sound that awkward either (although it somewhat does). How about Secret Mobile Corps? -- Ynhockey (Talk) 08:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  * Response. 動 is indeed read as どう. Dō is also read as どう. Dou and dō are exactly the same. For what it's worth, the term "onmitsu" was used in the Edo period to refer to samurai who acted as spies (lit., according to my Japanese-Japanese dictionary, "deeply studied the comings and goings") under the control of the shogun. "Kidou" refers to people and weapons invested in quickly responding to a situation. These both give an implication of "the secret service," which would be a good representation of their role in Bleach. --Anon in Japan, [who now has an account. Dekimasu 05:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Onmitsukidō (隠密機動)

message: Just thought I'd mention it here, but I'm going to be working on the episodes page for a while... cleaning it up, wiping it's bottom, yelling at it for being disfunctional... all that good stuff! :) -- Makaio 22:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Episodes

message: The article doesn't make much mention of just how heavy the spanish influence is in naming the evil characters, especially the most powerful of them(the Arrancar, and the Menos Grande hollows..)  In fact, out of all the mangas I've seen/read, this one has had the most non-japanese references...  Curious, does anyone know if the heavy spanish influence shows up in the japanese version as well?--Vercalos 07:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would assume it carries in the japanese version as well. Though when you say there is no other anime more foreign-influenced, you definitely forget Fate/Stay Night. --tjstrf 23:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Personally I'm just not sure what section to put such information it. But I do agree that it should be included. Possibly under the hollow and Bount sections. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 02:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the Japanese version too. Foreign names in Bleach are usually listed in kanji, but these kanji given furigana, and this is where you see the Spanish words. The most interesting thing is that the arrancar sometimes speak katakana-over-katakana; while the basic text might say "lucky" in transliterated English, it's given Spanish furigana. Strange and fun. Dekimasu 11:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish references... 

message: Let's finish this.
Order of appearance (Ichigo-Rukia-Inoue-Chad-Ishida)
# Leaves more leeway for new characters to become important in the future, and order of appearance can never change. Dekimasu 10:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote

message: Ichinose Maki (not even properly named). Does anyone think it deserves to stay? -- Ynhockey (Talk) 10:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think he's important enough. Could we posit that individual characters don't become notable unless they appear in the manga - the actual writings of Kubo? On the other hand, that would exclude a lot of the referenced content from the Bleach databook. Dekimasu 11:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We should not make a double standard unless there is a good reason to.  The canon and filler should both be held to the same standards for inclusion. –Gunslinger47 02:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's going to make things a lot harder to explain overall, considering the number of plot holes in the fillers. Not that that means it shouldn't be done. Is he notable, then? Dekimasu 02:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

text: He certainly can't be considered more important than Kariya, who doesn't have his own page. If he is being given special treatment because he's a Shinigami, he is certainly not more important than, say, Maki Maki. Dekimasu 02:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can think of a few profiles where nothing is going on. At least Ichinose has a little depth, unlike... oh say, Chojiro, or Omaeda... just to name a few. Sure it's a vanity article... but it seems fairly well written (just glanced at it), and besides not having the proper title it looks ok. -- Makaio 11:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: If you nominate, I'll vote. By the way, could that picture be bigger? Dekimasu 09:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Another vanity article

message: The main page uses a few Japanese terms (Kubo's name, Karakura town, etc.), but other terms for which kanji could easily be provided (Shinigami, character names, etc.) are not included. Shouldn't this be somehow systematic? Would you like them to be added? Dekimasu 11:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't really thought about that. Now that I do, I think we should remove all the kanji from the main article. The only Japanese letters that should remain are the spelling of Bleach (ブリーチ) and 魂葬 (konsō) because there's no main Plus article (and by the way, shouldn't be, one existed before and was deleted). -- Ynhockey (Talk) 20:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, let's remove Karakura, which serves no purpose. Inga no kusari is also written out in the Plus section. Is "Chain of Fate" the official translation in the English version? It's not a very good explanation of the term. Inga usually means "cause and effect," and can also mean "karma" when used in a religious context. Thus the Japanese term implies "reaping what you sow," which is quite different from "fate." If that's the official translation, I suppose it can stay and inga no kusari can go. Dekimasu 01:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Re: reference removal. It was once again a standardization choice. I'm confused as to why the name of the town, which is mentioned many times, needs a citation. Soul Society doesn't have a reference to page 96 of the databook, and so on throughout the article. I guessed that the person who added the reference was sourcing the kanji, rather than the name of the town. It's a choice which would probably make sense to people reading the English version of the manga. Dekimasu 10:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reference refers to the lesser-known fact that Karakura Town isn't actually an independent town, but a neighborhood in Tokyo. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 10:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All right, then. Technically the parts of West Tokyo that Karakura Town is supposed to be in are made up of independent cities with true city status. It is an independent town. But anyway, I see your point in referencing the Tokyo location. This is also mentioned in the manga, though - for example, when the arrancar are detected by the 12th Division. My fault for misunderstanding. Dekimasu 11:18, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spotty placement of kanji

message: Some people have been editing the genre box in the template to include things like comedy and fantasy. While I agree that Bleach isn't comedy, I think there needs to be another tag besides the shōnen and action tags. In his last revert Ynhockey implied that the shōnen tag encompasses the fantasy aspect of Bleach, but I don't believe that's really the case. Many popular shōnen comics have no supernatural elements at all (things like Initial D, GTO, Bebop High School, etc.). Those that do have fantasy elements (say, Kenshin) often have a fantasy tag in their genre boxes. Those manga that are most similar to Bleach (the "Shinigami genre") at least have something to note that they aren't realistic. For example, Death Note is listed as "supernatural," and YūYū Hakusho is listed as "paranormal." If "fantasy" carries too much of a Princess Bride-style connotation, couldn't one of these be included? Dekimasu 04:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't mind 'supernatural' or 'paranormal'. Although I think there should be some kind of standard for tagging anime series like this. It doesn't help if 3 similar series are listed as fantasy, supernatural and paranormal, respectively. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 09:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Paranormal ("outside normal sensory channels;" "beyond the range of normal experience or scientific explanation") seems to be a better fit than supernatural, which can imply divinity, but this is only the case when "death god" is used as in Bleach, with no real implication of divinity. If there seems to be any support behind the idea, let's wrestle the "Shinigami genre" (inc. Full Moon) into the same genre listing - one or the other - to be consistent. Dekimasu 09:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone really pay attention to the genre listing anyway? -- Makaio 11:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, people kept changing it. Dekimasu 12:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, well nevermind. I never really paid attention to the info bar anyway. -- Makaio 04:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre discussion

message: I believe the date given (January 5, 2002) to be inaccurate. The Japanese page lists the start of Bleach as 2001, and the cover of my Japanese Shonen Jump (cover date September 4, 2006) has a headline on chapter 239 reading roughly "Celebrating the fifth anniversary of Bleach serialization." I'm changing it to "2001" per the Japanese page until it can be verified. Dekimasu 12:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on Anime News Network, it's January 5, 2002.  --Silver Edge 22:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Quote: "BLEACH © 2001 by Tite Kubo/SHUEISHA Inc."  –Gunslinger47 22:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Jan. 5 was probably the beginning of the anime series. --tjstrf 22:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll make a guess too. I think someone at ANN probably counted back the number of weeks and calculated a date rather than seeing if it was actually published every week at the beginning of its run. Dekimasu 01:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

text: October 5, 2004 is the original anime start date.  --Silver Edge 22:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bah, a pity it couldn't be that simple. Well, in that case either they or the Shounen Jump has the date wrong. It says Bleach 5 year anniversary on the cover page. And I'm inclined to trust the Jump over ANN. --tjstrf 22:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Per this site, Bleach publication began in 2001 in the 36th issue of Shonen Jump. I haven't been able to figure out what date that puts it at, but it's certainly August/September. Dekimasu 01:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Several Japanese sites list the release date as August 6, 2001. It's probably the real release date, but not the real cover date. The cover date on this week's Shonen Jump (No.38) is Septebmer 4th, but the title page tells me to be sure to get No.39 when it comes out on... August 28th. Either way, the correct date will be in August of 2001. Changing the page now. Dekimasu 03:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Original Run" date

message: I'd like to work a bit on the lead of the article, reversing the order of info and making it look a bit more like the one for One Piece (which reads very smoothly and gets information across quickly). I think the spoiler tag also needs to be moved down the page a bit. Anyone looking for encyclopedic information on Bleach will want to see at least a minor plot summary - at least as much as is written in the blurb on the back of the first volume. Any objections? Dekimasu 02:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I object to the idea that we should emulate the One Piece section. I mean, I love the series, it has nothing to do with that, but have you seen how horrendously cluttered their character articles are? Also, upon looking at it, One Piece's intro has virtually nothing to say about the plot, though it does contain more useful real life information than ours does. Go ahead and rewrite the intro if you feel it will benefit. --tjstrf 02:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The lack of non-spoiler information in this article has bothered me for some time now.  I believe we should have only what we need to under the spoilers tag.  How is the page useful to someone who hasn't seen the series yet? –Gunslinger47 20:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any reason not to start by moving the spoiler tag down to the races section of the article? Anything above that is either a broad overview or is revealed in the first tankobon/episode. Dekimasu 15:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It has more to do with who we want this article intended for... As far as I'm concern, we should just get rid of the spoiler tag from anything that's before 1/4 of the storyline (the first five book, or the first 50 chapters).  Finestela 16:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I submit that explaining the fictional setting is not spoiler material.  People are coming to this page for information.  They won't be offended if they find it.  –Gunslinger47 02:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Lead

message: While the system proposed by Yn above had worked well for a while, I do think it is time to make the citation in line with the rest of Wiki.
One issue I have is the way the "official databook" is called.  They are not called the official databook, but the official character book.  Not to mention there are actually two books, the official character book "SOULs" and the official animation book "VIBEs".
If we're going to start citing sources extensively, we'll need to start citing correctly, and clean it up accordingly.  Also, inclusion of ISBN for books should also be considered.  Finestela 11:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: After your comment on my user talk page, I have also thought of changing this. I will do so today. On a side note, I think we only have one citation of VIBEs. The reason is probably that none of the frequent editors (such as Tjstrf and myself) have a copy of VIBEs online or otherwise. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 13:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe I'm not a frequent editor yet. Anyway, I have the Japanese versions. Ask me if you need something in particular. Dekimasu 13:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We need The entire Animation Book VIBEs ;) as well as the pages in SOULs not covered in the RAW released on the internet. However, if you don't have a scanner or don't want to scan everything (hell, I wouldn't), maybe you can quickly skim through the books and tell us about any interesting discoveries you make. When the SOULs RAW was released, I made tons of changes to the articles to reflect new information discovered there. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 13:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference Citation 

message: I've added the publisher for the Traditional Chinese version of the manga.  Here's the publishing page for Vol. 23
*Vol. 23 publishing info
Finestela 14:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign Publishers 

message: Correct me if I'm wrong, but why are there an increase in number of modifications which links dates in this article? Links are to provide additional "useful" information for the readers, not just for the sake of linking, aren't they?
In the case of this article, I fail to see the purpose linking "september 1" and "2006". It's not that someone looking for information on Bleach would want to know more about what else happened on the same day the total chapters reached 241.
I move to delete all Wiki links for dates on the main article except for maybe birthdays (if any).
-- Finestela 02:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. When I first added dates for the airing of the dub of Bleach, I put no date links. Next time I check back almost every date has been linked. I don't know who did it or why they did it and I frankly don't care but I agree that links are there to help not to be something trivially linked for the sake of linking. Anyone who wants to go through the trouble can go ahead and do it.Gdo01 03:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dates are linked for the purpose of allowing readers' date preferences to work. Read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)  and/or Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)  --Silver Edge 03:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the clarification. Gdo01 03:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Got it, I will start following this guideline as well. -- Finestela 04:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Link for dates 

message: "When fans heard the announcement of Viz Media licensing the BLEACH anime, they feared the voice acting will be the same fate as other Dubbed anime's. However, it became the opposite as the voices were well done as the show premiered, receiving praise from fans and anime reviewers."
Aside needing a rewrite for poor writing style, I think that this line might not be NPOV.  I would think "However, the voices received praise from fans and anime reviewers alike as as the show premiered." would be better, but I don't want to change it because I don't think it's even verifiable to begin with.  Do sources for this exist at all?
--Anaraug 04:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately the only way this can be truly proven is to look through all the anime forums and review sites and see how many positive reviews there are compared to negative reviews. I don't think any source will do this kind of work and officially state that it was generally positive. I guess we could link to a few positive reviews but I don't know of any anime review sites.Gdo01 04:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I can't think of any way of making it verifiable, but if anyone can, that'd be nice.  I'd definitely rather keep it included, but I'm still going to edit it to make it more NPOV. --Anaraug 05:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe add a note saying that this particular translation is still in production, so information regarding it may change as new facts arise?--Vercalos 07:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it isn't really a question of if the information is going to change, more of if it exists at all right now.  I went and looked through the history, and that line was added by an anon, so I doubt we should expect him/her to come back and give us a source.  Google gave me nothing but forum posts.  Technically, according to WP:V, we can't just look at a bunch of forum posts that say "the dub is good" and then go put "many fans say that the dub is good" in the article.  Some "reliable source" would have to do that for us, then we go cite that source.  I would think that something like AnimeNewsNetwork would be reliable enough for us, but I can't even find anything like that.  I think if we can't find anything in the next few days we should delete it.  --Anaraug 09:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it should definitely be taken out and the sections should be put back together. It's not at all encyclopedic as it stands. Dekimasu 10:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think the source (even though it's sometimes listed as an encyclopedia) is pretty far from NPOV, and the first sentence would still have to go. Dekimasu 09:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, the first sentence is about as unverifiable as they come. --Anaraug 15:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd forgotten about that... yeah we really don't have too much info on the dub so far at all.  I'm leaning twords deletion... --Anaraug 15:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voice acting -- NPOV/Verifiable? 

message: Now that the revert wars from the American release have died down a bit, I wanted to bring up an idea on the page flow. I think the page would benefit from having fewer subheadings in this kind of fashion, resulting in a smaller table of contents and a more legible page. It's also the format that "good article"-classified pages use. Something similar could be done to the races section. Just a basic mockup now. Thoughts? (mockup refactored by poster as unnecessary. changes can be seen on the main page) Dekimasu 08:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Finished quite a bit of work on this section (not here, on the main page). I'm happy with how it's going. Maybe it would benefit from a picture of, say, Soul Society? Races is a bit harder to refashion without the headings because some of the sections are a bit long. Comments welcome. Jump in because I don't want it to seem like I'm claiming the page. Dekimasu 10:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I have an idea. It's been bothering me for a while anyway that there are no summaries of the main character pages, only links. There should be a blurb for each of the main characters just as there is a blurb for each of the character types and each of the locations. If there were ~5 sentences on Ichigo and each of the other main characters, the picture would fit perfectly next to his character summary. The characters are already summarized on many of the pages in other languages (the Spanish ones look really appropriate... if only I spoke Spanish). I could run one of them through babelfish and clean them up, I suppose. The page as it stands is under 20KB so making the page too long isn't an issue. Dekimasu 09:11, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought of that myself, but I think it would be easier to simply remove the image of Ichigo. It's sort of out of place anyway. Placing one or two sentence character summaries for them would be a good idea, if you could come up with something that succinct. --tjstrf 09:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I hate babelfish after all. Here's a sample of the translation. "Rukia Kuchiki: Rukia is one of the co-protagonists of the series. Sometimes it can be fries and other times it can get to risk his own life to save to somebody. It was sent to the Earth to face hollow and is from here that is developed the history of Bleach. They enchant the rabbits to him and it draws them whenever it has the opportunity. His brother is Byakuya Kuchiki and he unites a great bow to him to him." Still, would something this length be too long? Dekimasu 09:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Never use babel fish. I speak a decent amount of spanish so I'll work on translating it now. Malevious 13:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Ichigo is the protagonist of the series. he has a very (somthing) and cold personality and somthing somthing social. in contrast to this, he is very protective of his family and friends who he would put his life on the line for without thinking. since he was little, he posessed the capacity to see spirits which makes him have a life out of the ordinary." Thats the best i could get some words i think are slang so i dunno what the mean, i think pasota means passonate or something but im not sure. Malevious 14:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Headings

message: I think the main Bleach category should be renamed to :Category:Bleach (manga) to match this article. Also because typing (manga/anime) is annoying. Any objections? Please reply at Category talk:Bleach (manga/anime) to avoid fragmenting the discussion. --tjstrf 21:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've suggested a similar name change for standardization at Talk:Characters in Bleach series, related to the Characters in Bleach series and Hollows in Bleach series pages. Please take a look at that as well. Dekimasu 02:07, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category name change?