Talk:Naruto/Archive 7

message: I'm just wondering, I forget if we ever saw Gai Sensei use ninjutsu? If not, is it possible he can't use any either? 70.55.60.173 02:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Guy can use summoning jutsu.  See Ninkame. –Gunslinger47 02:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can Rock Lee do so, too?Zxyggrhyn 03:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In Shippūden he's capable of walking on water, which is good to see.  We still see no nin- or genjutsu from him, however.  –Gunslinger47 04:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An achievement, it is for Lee then! Hurray! Zxyggrhyn 03:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

text: An additional note, Guy uses Genjutsu Kai in chapter 114. –Gunslinger47 18:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just playing Devil's Advocate, cancelling a genjutsu is just disrupting chakra flow in your body, so it's not a jutsu per se that falls into the the nin/tai/genjutsu categories.  Theoretically Lee should be able to do that too, just like how he can walk on water.  So as far as we know, the only Nin/Genjutsu Guy can perform is summoning Ninkame. -- Seraphchoir 13:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even a simple front kick is a jutsu.  Taijutsu to be precise.  The Genjutsu Kai technique/method/skill might not fit into the three primary categories, but it is a jutsu by definition, nevertheless. –Gunslinger47 21:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You got me there, heh. -- Seraphchoir 14:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Gai Sensei

message: Participate in the discussion here. --Sandtiger 23:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to merge separate articles 

message: I really think that there should be more information on the developement and history of the show and about the US broadcast.70.115.174.134 18:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and add it in. Be Bold!— Sandtiger 18:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too Little 

message: The naming is just bullshit! I know that the english version uses the wrong naming system but WTF why does wiki to do it too Naruto Uzumaki what kind of crap is that!!! its Uzumaki Naruto ffs. And Guy is just LOL its gai for gods sake not guy!  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.71.111.210 (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who said it was "Gai"? Dattebayo does not own Naruto, so their translations are not official. The guidebook however, which is the #1 canonical source of all things Naruto, says Might Guy. You lose. — Sandtiger 12:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Specifically, The Splendiferous Gegiford provided this .  Case closed.  -- Seraphchoir 17:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Regarding the name orderings, please see Talk:Naruto Uzumaki/Archive 1#Requested move 2.  Here we painstakeningly go the extra mile and reconfirm the use of WP:MOS-JA for Naruto articles. –Gunslinger47 18:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed that link for you. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 18:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But haven't you heard?  Kishimoto and the databook are wrong! ^_^ JuJube 19:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also considering no legitmate reason not to follow the WP:MOS-JA  have been presented and that this is consistant with several other anime articles we can safely ignore this claim. Also does it appear that this only seems to happen here. For example I have not seen on Wikipedia Bleach fans demand that we use Kuchiki Rukia Digimon savers fans demand that we use Daimon Masaru or Sailor Moon fans demand we use Tsukino Usagi etc. --67.68.155.33 03:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: I want to know the reason to put VIZ Media, one of the publishers of translated versions, on 'Publisher' section. Should not we treat as a 'Other publishers'? Moreover, 'Jump comic' is mere name of comic of Shueisha. Why should we treat it as the name of the publisher?
I want to write same thing about 'Network' section. Should not we put Cartoon Network, one of the networks of translated version, on 'Other networks'? And, Animax is mere cable-network re-broadcasts in Japan. I think it should not be treated at the same level as TV Tokyo, the main network.
I corrected these because I had thought these were strange. However I don't know why but those corrections have been reverted... I think these are due to mere misunderstanding and should be corrected. Thanks, --Morio 01:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The main sections are for the pertinent companies in both source and relevant translation languages. Other is for the trivial ones. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think your opinion has two problems. Publisher/Network are not chosen by such a standard in other articles, ex. Dragon Ball, One Piece, Fullmetal Alchemist. And, I think the idea should be arrogant that we can decide the companys which are pertinents or which are trivials..., and that English publisher, one of the publishers of translated versions, has the right to be put on same place as the original publisher. I understand editers who want to put the English publisher like the original publisher because here is English version. But we can't forget the translated versions' publishers (of this work) are not contributing to the creation of the work and they are different from the original publisher, Shueisha, also in the position on the copyrights. Therefore, I think it is difficult to maintain a present description by the reason that you wrote. --Morio 04:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be clearer then. The ones we have listed now are those most pertinent to those reading the English Wikipedia. It's bad practice to hide the information that people are most likely to check one. Other languages are trivial because they aren't English, thus not the first thing people will look for. Now, as to your concern that the field be used only for the original, there is no reason to. The box can stand to have more than one, and it by no means disingenuous to list more than the original, as the infobox only exists to outline facts in a streamlined manner. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 04:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  about Publisher and Network

message: Has anyone ever considered making a WikiProject: Naruto, or something of the sort? Naruto does have a crapload of pages to maintain. Granted, it's nowhere near as much as Pokemon's project has to handle, but it's still a lot. There seems to be a lot to clean up, especially:
* Plot stuff: The Plot of Naruto and Plot of Naruto: Shippūden pages (especially that second one) are excessively detailed. At most, I've seen four paragraphs written on a single chapter. I know for a fact that people are using those pages as a substitute for the manga; frankly, I do it, and I've been keeping up with my manga-reading friends, sometimes even pointing out details that they had missed. Granted, the completed Episode List should resolve this to some degree, but that's not catching up to Part II's current status any time soon. Some form of decision has to be made about this.
* Character pages: There is little content about the characters themselves on the character pages. Instead, plot events are regurgitated onto any character page whose subject appears in the scene. Instead, a character's pages should really focus more on the character's personality, abilities, and background, with only the most important plot events involving the character noted.
* Technique pages: I'm all for a technique list; Naruto-related articles have expanded enough for us to pass off the technique lists as the cherry to go with the sundae. However, I and some other users (see Talk:Cursed Seal jutsu) feel that 9 pages on techniques are a bit excessive. None of us really want to see the articles vanish, but at the same time... With a WikiProject, it might be easier to come to a consensus on what to do with those.
* Naming conventions: This happens at an abnormal rate on Naruto-related articles, which is bizzarre because Naruto's characters' names have all gone through translation relatively unchanged and their techniques are often close to direct translations. Still, maintaining Western order, Might Guys, Spiraling Spheres, and single-"u" Hyugas is required far too often.
I don't know if this is the proper place to bring it up, but... yeah. Has anyone considered it? You Can't See Me! 04:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll reiterate what I said. See WP:BLEACH. There's no reason there can't be a WP:NARUTO. Sephiroth BCR 05:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea to me. There seems to be enough people active in the Naruto articles to create a project.  Scratch that, are there really enough people to create a separate project? — Sandtiger 06:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Unless you're assuming that it will be a one man project, then no - I'm relatively certain that there would be more than enough interested parties. Sephiroth BCR 06:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok then, go for it. A lot of effort goes into answering questions on Gai/Guy, Rasengan/Spiraling sphere, why are the episodes merged, etc. and reverting edits of those unfamiliar with the conventions used here. It would be great to have a central FAQ that explains all these things.— Sandtiger 02:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm in, hit me on my talk with a link so I can vote it in. Quatreryukami 02:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY.  We can solve things without resporting to staw polls.  –Gunslinger47 02:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like Wikiproject Naruto has already been created before then deleted. Perhaps instead of a wikiproject that will only be useful for editors, we can just set up Portal:Naruto which will be useful to both editors and readers. — Sandtiger 15:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Or we could just create a task force within WP:ANIME, as the Bleach group has done. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 18:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Based on the deletion log, it seems that WP:NARUTO was deleted because  it was an abandoned project, not because it was deemed inappropriate or unworthy. I suppose it's still a valid possibility. I'll leave the decision to someone else, though. You Can't See Me! 06:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started work on Portal:Naruto. The idea is to list all the naruto-related articles on a single page, so that you can just click on related changes without having every naruto page on your watchlist. Hopefully this will also motivate more people to get involved in editing. There's still a lot missing so feel free to edit the page. — Sandtiger 18:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maintaining Naruto-related articles 

message: Would anyone be interested in making a trivia section on the main article? I've been learning japanese and getting confused by the term "datte baiyo" at the end of Naruto's sentences. I finally looked online for a translation and it turns out that it is very difficult to explain. I've heard people say it means something like an informal "ya know?" but I can't be sure of it. I also wonder if it is the representative of the english translated line of his saying "Believe it!" all the time, because the japanese with subtitles versions that I've been watching don't seem to have him saying "Believe it!" at all, but that could just be something that changed in the seasons and I didn't notice it. I don't think that every little detail should go on the article, but I feel that if someone could find out a good short explanation of the word and it's translation I think it would be a significant trivial fact worth mentioning. Plenty of forums are asking about it online anyway. Youngidealist 20:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Naruto Uzumaki. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 20:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It's , by the way. –Gunslinger47 22:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Datte Baiyo! 

message: http://comics.ign.com/articles/783/783778p1.html
In summary, "VIZ Media will offer three new volumes of NARUTO per-month from September through December 2007".  "The new publishing schedule will carry the series up to Volume 27".  This confirms earlier specualation. –Gunslinger47 22:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naruto Blitz Begins This Fall 

message: The Plot of Naruto page has become obsolete now that the anime is finished with that part of the story and the episodes are listed by arc and have summaries. One example is  List of Naruto episodes (Seasons 1-2) the List of Naruto story arcs. List of Naruto episodes should change to link to these pages instead of the way it is now. We don't need that long list of episodes when everything is now sorted nicely on different pages. I think the Plot of Naruto page should be kept here or on another talk page for a few months so that it can be integrated into the episode summaries if need be. Malignant Manor 23:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that simple, I'm afraid. Deleting it outright won't happen, not until it's sufficiently integrated. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We already have a small summary via List of Naruto story arcs and a large one via List of Naruto episodes (Seasons 1-2). We don't need a medium summary page too. Like I said earlier we can keep a copy on the talk page to help streamline the anime episode summaries. Malignant Manor 23:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, it's a much larger page and a much bigger holdout. Reasoning a deletion is much harder at the moment, especially since the series is still running through in translation. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really expect any major changes to the dub that would impact the storyline. We don't need to change the plot summary into a Dub vs Sub differences listing. There really aren't any changes to the plot from manga to anime either. We already have the filler arcs listed as anime only on the List of Naruto story arcs page. That page links to the anime episodes instead of the plot summary page anyway making the Plot of Naruto page basically useless. Having an extra page would mean more changes anyway if there are translation diferences.
Edit- What about the deletion of the main episode list on the Naruto episode page and just keeping the links for the separate season?Malignant Manor 23:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: That I can assure you won't happen. That needs to exist, both as a concise listing and as a disambiguation page. Plus, it's also where DVD info goes. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 00:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion of [[Plot of Naruto]]

message: 
The new portal can serve both as a gateway and as a project page where we can discuss general improvements to all the Naruto articles. I've linked all the Naruto-related articles I can find but if I missed some then please add them to the page. I've also added NeoChaosX's FAQ on the Guy/Gai fiasco.— Sandtiger 01:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portal:Naruto]] ready 

message: A new noticeboard, Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard, has been created. - Peregrine Fisher 18:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This noticeboard has been deleted per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard. Please disregard the above post. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard]]