Talk:List of Bleach characters

Archives
September 2005 — May 2007 May 2007 — July 2007 July 2007 - September 2007

Improvements

Okay, since the merging stopped, we should now focus on cleaning up the articles, most notably the oversized plot summaries. I plan to rewrite Ichigo's summary in my sandbox, as it is tooo long. I suggest not more than 8 paragraphs for each plot section, give or take one or two paragraphs. It should be about 1 - 2 paragraphs per each arc, like the beginning can be 1, Soul Society (2 arcs) can be 3, Bount arc about 2, Arrancar arc 1, and Hueco Mundo should be 2. Thats 9 in total, and I'm talking about LONG paragraphs. --Hanaichi 09:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Hartebeest 22:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Characters should not receive plot summaries. They need a description of their overall role that is no longer than three paragraphs. This is to go along with WP:NOT#PLOT. TTN 22:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

But then we'll need a summary for Bleach characters, it was removed cuz of character's synopsis section, maybe we should rewrite them. Hartebeest 23:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

No respond? Oh well then I'll just go ahead and delete. Hartebeest 23:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Why is everyone identifying my edits as vandalism? Do I have to tell everyone that I'm going to delete the Synopsis section before I make a move? Maybe I do, but I'll tell you only if you reverted it:(. Hartebeest 23:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Because you're blanking whole sections without edit summaries, and it's not the solution. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

If you are going to remove plot summaries from articles because they're too long, it would be nice if you replaced them with highly condensed versions of the same material. Simply removing 50% of an article is not the right way to do things. ~SnapperTo 02:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I suggest using a test page first, Hartebeest, and ask people to look at the summary you do there. IF its okay, then we only replace the plot summaries in the articles. That way, you will notice people won't revert you. We usually wait a few days for respond, not 1 hour.--Hanaichi 09:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm back. Sorry to disappoint you, but under WP:FICT, only major characters can have articles unless there is enough information (including out-of-universe) for them to have articles, and local majority can't defeat a large majority elsewhere, and majorites on policies count more than local majorites. Kira, Nnoitora, and Grantz simply aren't notable, and no one has yet to state a real reason to keep them other than a failed WP:FICT. I will give you a chance for Grantz, however, to make a reason to keep him, but Kira and Nnoitora should just be merged. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 21:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Artist, WP:CON is a policy which overrules guidelines like WP:FICT, which, to add to that, is unstable at the moment and under revision. If there is clear consensus against your deletions, the articles will stay. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 22:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

@Hanachi: A test page? Do you mean the sandbox? @Artist: When I removed the Synopsis section for Noitra, the article's only 3 kilobytes long, making it nothing more than a stub. But still we should wait, cuz Noitra's gonna release soon, he doesn't stand a chance against Nell without releasing. Hartebeest 23:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup, the sandbox, user space, whatever you call it. I have also redid the Bleach character list template in my sandbox, when Aizen gets transited, and it looks fine. Artist, yes we know what is under WP:FICT, but they are notable, even though they look stubby. Nnoitra is going to release soon like Hartebeest say, or Nell will kill him, so there will be something to add to his zanpakuto section. Grantz, is SO similar to Mayuri that I don't know what to do with him.--Hanaichi 07:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I would just like to point out that is is not wise to use "will release SOON" or "Nell WILL kill..." as a reason. The whole not a crystal ball comes to mind. Just wanted to poin that out.--TheUltimate3 10:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It's certainly true that we are making making stuff up, but that's what will most likely happen. We cannot just delete the ENTIRE plot summary, just condense it a little.--Hanaichi 11:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm beginning to notice alot of the shortenings are two paragraphs or more. Really, however, the only ones that should are the eight we list as "main" (including Aizen, since he's a major plot builder), and the ones who barely miss the title of "main" (Only Hitsugaya and Byakuya so far do). All the others can be put in one paragraph. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 00:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, atleast there are shortenings of paragraphs. But when you squished the ENTIRE plot summary into a one paragraph, it becomes very confusing. Reading orientation and sequence of events are important when explaining such things, and the reader probably won't get what we are trying to say in a paragraph.--Hanaichi 09:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Kira, Shinji, Isshin, and Nnoitora

It seems no one on the Bleach Task Force is against merging those four to the end, so I've brought the matter directly to WP:FICT to be discussed. Send any opinions there should you find a reason to keep them. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 23:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead and merge Kira, and Isshin if no one objects, but don't merge Nnoitra just yet, wait for him to release and see if he had enough relevancy. Shinji? Hell No!!! Hartebeest 14:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

And if you want, merge Ulquiorra, his article is a stub withought the synopsis section. Hartebeest 14:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Shortening the plot seems to be causing some damage. Ulquiorra, Yumichika, Rangiku, and a few others have been lowered drastically and won't reach their same level again. Others simply aren't notable. I suggest we have another grand discussion about the characters once the plot is shortened for all articles and we discuss whether Ichigo should have plot or not. Until then, let's just wait to discuss them, except the ones already proposed. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 15:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

We are not merging anybody until a clear consensus is reached. You can't just be rash and say "Go ahead, merge Kira" and expect people to do nothing. That'll will start edit wars, so why not we go over to WP:FICT and discuss these matters.--Hanaichi 08:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Just about all merges cause arguments. Take into consideration, too, that a large number of the people who say "Keep them, they can be improved" to one that can be merged won't try in any way to improve that article (not that you're one, Hanaichi, you regularily contribute to the Bleach articles). Some of them like Shinji and Kira have no further hope of any improvement, while others who can aren't recieving any attention by the editors (Kon and Hitsugaya, for example). Simply put it, as I said in WP:FICT, we should only spend our time with the ones that can be improved from their current version, while ones that are already stubs and can't be improved any more, like Shinji and Kira, aren't worth our time. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you on Kira, he did not get any screen time since the Bounts, and might not make an appearance 'till Winter War, so I think it's okay to merge him now that Hinamori's merged. But I think we need to discuss about Shinji. Hartebeest 23:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Let's just have a majority vote (and by that I mean majority vote with guidelines or policies that lead to why it should be kept or merged, not just saying "I like/hate it" or something else rediculous) and get it over with. All those in favor of such say so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk • contribs) 15:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Do not merge - We already reached a consensus during our long long long argument in Too many articles topic. We will merge Nnoitra once his run is finished though.--Hanaichi 09:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we should

Restore the article for Nell. I know we're trying to have as less articles as possible, but I think Nell will get enough relevancy and we should make an article for her when she releases or causes further plot development. EDIT: The article is deleted with no better reason than "not enough relevancy", and her article is almost 8 kilo long, compared the 4 kilo long article of Nnoitra. I'm going to restore it, if you wish to merge it for any reason, please post here or my talk page first Hartebeest 04:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Her article looks to be 5.5 kbs long, not 8. And as you might be aware, Nnoitra will be merged whenever he is inevitably killed. They're both in the same boat, I'd say. ~SnapperTo 04:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Hartebeest, you need to figure out that discussion comes first. You don't make a thread then automatically do what you suggest. You wait for responses. I've remerged it after cleaning it up, there's not enough yet to bother. Same for Nnoitra for that matter, but he can stick around since he's established. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 05:39, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

@Someguy0830, I'm not a genius at english, so please explain what you mean by "established". @Snapper 2, it's 5.5 kilo cuz I shortened the synopsis, it's still longer than Nnoitra's 4. Hartebeest 22:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Been around longer. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Answer my question. Hartebeest 03:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I did. "Been around longer", that's what it means. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 04:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Lol. Okay so we won't redo Nel's article unless something makes it go to beyond 8 kb or something. --Hanaichi 09:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh LOL I thought you told me to be around longer (calling me a newb), didn't saw the past tense. Hartebeest 14:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Something you should all reconsider

A large number of you think that many of the character articles, like Soifon, are beyond merging, but it's quite the contrast. Look at my sandbox, where I described her entire article within three paragraphs. I urge you to rethink just who can and cannot be merged, as I could easily do the same with Yumichika, Matsumoto, and several other ones you also decided were definite keeps. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 17:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The three paragraphs that you wrote are fairly large and even by themselves would be enough for a separate article. Not to mention the synopsis and omake appearances, and you have a decent-sized article. Even on the Wikipedia-I mailing list (not sure if you read it), many users have expressed concerns over the abuse of WP:N and WP:FICT. Perhaps you should reconsider how these guidelines apply to the Bleach pages. Another thing I haven't thought of before, is what Jimmy Wales said once, that verifiability is the main criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia, not notability, which should always come later. Lastly, the List of Bleach characters page itself is 41 kilobytes long, which is long enough, and should be split if possible. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not telling you to merge them without any choice, Ynhockey, only that you should reconsider just who should and shouldn't be kept. Yes, I am well aware that there are many cases of policy/guideline (sometimes not even either) abuse throughout Wikipedia, but any site with so many rules will eventually have them abused (I believe there was this one Zelda fansite that made dozens of crazy rules, such as "you're banned if you call Ganon (the main antagonist of the video game series) "Gannon", the original translation), though I am not for any abuse of policies just to bring Wikipedia under your dictatorship. I also know that the Bleach multiple-character lists are very long, though considering how Bleach has an extensive cast, this is not suprising. Something that might help with this is removing the completely 100% unnotable characters (Chad's two friends, for example), like Naruto did, and that saved them a large amount of space, and making a few other multiple-characters lists articles, like one for all the captains. Simply put it, sahoving everybody that is part of the same race into a single, crammed article is not the way to go, so why not make sub-pages to make some space and allow you to go slightly more in-depth? As for the other case, notability is already on shaky ground, and verifiablility is always a must for any encyclopedia, so what Wales says makes perfect sense. Do not forget, however, notability, despite all its ocntroversy, is still high on the list of must-have's. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Keigo & Kojima.JPG

Image:Keigo & Kojima.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 10:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Darn, why is it that my fair use rationale are never valid? Oh well.--Hanaichi 11:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Deleting picture of tatsuki+classmates

after somebody added the tatsuki image, i wondered if that grouppicture of her didn't become unnecessary, because the classmates of inoue and tatsuki are like very very minor characters, and since tatsuki has her own picture now, what's the point in having a picture of her, plus a grouppicture of her including very minor characters? well of course inoue is in that picture as well but since she also has her own picture, the grouppicture has lost its purpose i think. so i've thought about removing the grouppicture, but I wanted to ask her first, since i can remember an editwar going on about that picture :). Should it be deleted? Twsl 14:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Well the classmate photo is there as to make sure nobody readds the Chizuru Honshu image. I vote for cropping the image (like cropping Tatsuki and Orihime out, maybe get a better view of Chizuru and Michiru) and keeping it for viewing purposes.--Hanaichi 14:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I see. But, are Chizuru and Michiru really important enough to keep for viewing purposes? I mean, the total screentime of those characters can't be more than 5 mins i think. We can't even say that they're important characters in the lives of the main characters. For me, having a picture of them is the same as having a picture of Ganju's henchmen, but that's just my opinion, don't be offended :) Twsl 14:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

This page has a very large number of characters listed, and as such it would be better to have a group image showing multiple characters than an image showing only one of many. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 22:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I decided to be bold and replace Tatsuki's picture with the whole group picture. σмgнgσмg 06:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed something...

In the cases of many characters, within their own article (or merged location) they are refered to by either their first or last name, sometimes both. In other articles mentioning them, the other name of the character is often used instead. This is confusing to the reader. The same thing went on in the MÄR articles. I suggest we have a large discussion and decide whether we use last names or first names. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree, such things should be standardized. --Eruhildo 01:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

How about now?

Now that Nell is gonna release, shouldn't she get an article? Hartebeest 02:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Bleh, lets just wait until she releases.--Hanaichi 03:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Give her the frickin' page already! I've already put enough work into it and we'll know the name of her zanpakutou by next weekend any how. Her release command is utae, express. We don't even know what ol' meloncholly's sword's name is so why wait?! --Suiren

Unless you want the page to look like Nnoitra and get merged by everyone else, stop whinning. --Hanaichi 04:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Just be patient. If there is suffice information then it will be time to create a new article for Nell. Otherwise, what is the point of having a stub-like article that will unfortunately get merged back into the main article anyway? σмgнgσмg 13:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Let's just get this over with

Let's just get the merges over with, alright? Say keep if you want to keep it, merge if you don't want to. Also, state reasons for each of them, and I mean beside those on Argument to avoid in deletion discussion, What Wikipedia is not, and other "reasons not to use" pages. Nnoitora is a special case, as it was decided a while ago to keep him until his role is over. A few weeks from now let's do Nel as well.

NOTE: Below is like a ballot. Add your vote to each so people know how many yes's and no's there are!

• Ichigo Kurosaki
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Orihime Inoue
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Uryu Ishida
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Yasutora Sado
  • votes keep
  • votes merge
• Soifon
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Gin Ichimaru
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Izuru Kira
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Hanataro Yamada
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Sosuke Aizen
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Byakuya Kuchiki
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Renji Abarai
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Kaname Tosen
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Toshiro Hitsugaya
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Rangiku Matsumoto
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Kenpachi Zaraki
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Ikkaku Madarame
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Yumichika Ayasegawa
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Mayuri Kurotsuchi
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Jushiro Ukitake
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Kaien Shiba
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Rukia Kuchiki
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Kisuke Urahara
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Yoruichi Shihouin
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Isshin Kurosaki
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Ulquiorra Schiffer
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Grimmjow Jeagerjaques
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Szayel Aporro Grantz
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Kon (Bleach)
  • 1 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge
• Shinji Hirako
  • 0 votes keep
  • 1 votes merge
• Jin Kariya
  • 0 votes keep
  • 0 votes merge

For keep: All eight Wikipedia lists as main, including Aizen, I say keep because they are main. Hitsugaya, Byakuya, Ichimaru, Zaraki, Yoruichi, and Ikkaku are major characters, have extensive zanpakuto information, and a few have out-of-universe info, namely Hitsugaya. Kon has out-of-universe information with the Radio-Kon-Baby and such. Mayuri, Ukitake, and Grimmjow I say yes to because I feel that the first has too much information for a merge, the second plays a major backround role, and the third plays a role right now. Tosen because there's no where to put him. I won't vote for Kariya until the plot is shortened, and because I'm not an expert on the Bount.

For merge: Kira, Shinji, Rangiku, Matsumoto, and Grantz are stubs and can be merged with ease. Isshin hasn't really done anything at all yet. Soifon's article is rather repetitive and cna be shortened greatly. Kaien is pretty short. Ulqiorra has yet to have enough information for me to say yes until I see him release his zanpakuto. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 22:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I thought we all discussed this that there would be no more merging..I'm going to say no for each one because I believe the format we have right now is absolutely perfect. And Grantz is hardly a stub, more of his back story I can see is coming soon, and his freakish zanpakuto may have more abilities then before. Kaien should be left alone because he a key character for Rukia's history. And Mayuri and Ukkitake have a lot of screen time (even though Mayuri's backstory hasn't been revealed, but Ukkitake's has) and Grimmjow is now Ichigos nemesis, now almost half-dead. I'm not even going to mention Kira or Matsumoto. I've said what I wanted to say, and now about Nell's status. How long have we seen her? 50-60+chapters? After we know the Zanpakuto, we should give her an article THIS week. Oh, why the bloody hell would you vote 'yes' Aizen to be merged? He's the major antagonist for christ's sakes!

Oh, and will people stop saying "merge Noitora and Grantz after their run is over!" Jesus, they've been barely introduced and will play a future role! It's crazy saying: "Oh, Ichigo's gotten a cool new super power, he'll kill Noitora and we'll merge him cuz we know he's going to die!" It's just speculation. Why don't people actually sit back and enjoy the manga, not predict deaths which they know aren't gonna happen..Oh, and if anyone's noticed, Szayel's article is bigger then Noitora's... There's my two cents. No more Merging, if you please. RedEyesMetal 09:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

It was only judged to temporarily stop the merging. And merges are needed, especially for the stubby articles like Shinji, Kira, and Matsumoto. I only brought this up so we could get it over with over who does or doesn't have articles. The Bleach task force has gotten to close to the idea of having a large number of character articles, several of which are stubs or easily mergeable. And I said "Yes" for keep and "No" for merge, Mr.Doesn't-Read-All-Of-My-Comments. ^_^

Seriously, this has gotten out of hand. I rather get the merging arguments over with, as right now the only article that seems to be a majority vote for yes right now is Kira (see above discussions before replying), yet far more than him are stubs or don't satisfy WP:FICT (techniqually only Orihime does for having out-of-universe info). Eventually the Bleach task force will have to realize quantity isn't quality, and merges will happen in the future, whether it be in two seconds or months from now. To answer your final question, that is what fan sites arefor. Wikipedia states facts. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 06:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Bleh, seriously, I have enough of this. I suppose Nel would get her article soon, if somebody could prove that her article won't be a stub like Kira or Nnoitra. =.= Anyway, as for merging, I vouch for merging Yumichika, Kira and Rangiku, seeing as their articles are REALLY stubs after the shortening of plot. However, I want to keep the Soifon, Ukitake, Mayuri and Kaien articles as they are important. --Hanaichi 09:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

To much merging left and right, I think that Rangiku and Yumichika should get to keep their own page seeing as how the have more info and background story then even some of the captains, Kira's can be merged. As far as Arrancar goes both Grimmjow and Ulquiorra should both keep their page seeing as how the have had the more interaction and shown more of theyr nature as opposed to the rest rest of the Arrancar (Nell excluded she should also have her own page). Bount wise Kariya should keep his page beeing as how he played a key role during that arc and enough info on him was gather, same for Shinji. As far as Ishin he's page should be converted to instead of beign about him, it beign about the whole Kurasaki family excluding Ichigo. Also Their should not even be a discussion on Characters such as Ichigo, Orihime, Sado, Uryu, Rukia, Renji, Kon and Urahara they are the main and have enough info to back them up. WhiteStrike 09:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Some of you failed to notice this, but you're supposed to edit the little list I made at the top so we can keep track easier on the merges and keeps. As most here say Kira should get merged, I'll do that. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 16:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

If you guys don't want to start merging some of the smaller characters, I'll probably just go ahead and throw some random AfDs out there. I'll probably start with the minor Espada, Shinji, and Isshin. TTN 17:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.JPG

Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.JPG

Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Fox816 03:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.JPG

Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 13:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.JPG

Image:ClassmatesofOrihime.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 13:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

There is something wrong with this bot =.= Fixed and removed the tag there. --Hanaichi 13:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)