Jump to content

Talk:List of Naruto characters: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
IdLoveOne (talk | contribs)
Pictures: new section
Line 80: Line 80:


:::They weren't merged because they were "minor", they were merged because there isn't enough conception/reception information on them to keep their articles. If you're interested, the [[wikia:Naruto|''Naruto'' wikia]] has all of the individual articles in their former glory. '''''~[[User:Snapper2|Snapper]][[User talk:Snapper2|T]][[Special:Contributions/Snapper2|o]]''''' 19:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
:::They weren't merged because they were "minor", they were merged because there isn't enough conception/reception information on them to keep their articles. If you're interested, the [[wikia:Naruto|''Naruto'' wikia]] has all of the individual articles in their former glory. '''''~[[User:Snapper2|Snapper]][[User talk:Snapper2|T]][[Special:Contributions/Snapper2|o]]''''' 19:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

== Pictures ==

I think this article could do with more pictures, maybe a picture of each team next to the team heading, i think this would be a worthy addition to the article, it would certainly make it more informative for people who don't know very much about Naruto, which is often touted as the raison d'etre of the page?[[Special:Contributions/82.69.83.28|82.69.83.28]] ([[User talk:82.69.83.28|talk]]) 00:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:10, 26 August 2008

Featured listList of Naruto characters is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 15, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
August 2, 2008Featured list candidatePromoted
Did You KnowA fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 3, 2008.
Current status: Featured list
WikiProject iconAnime and manga FL‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
FLThis article has been rated as FL-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

MANY missing characters

I couldnt help but notice that there are so many links of character names to this page, but upon being directed to the page, I find that they are nowhere to be seen. People like, among many many others, Ebisu, Gamabunta, Pakkun, Anko, Baki, are given links in the episodes section, which point people here, but have absolutely no mention whatsoever. The same goes for the antagonists page. Among others, the soung genin in the chunin exam are absent, although they are linked to there as well. Why is this? and there are no filler characters either, or even any material that appears only in the anime, and not even the word manga is used. The articles seem to only be talking about the manga, although this is not stated, and picture from the anime are even used. Why is this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.69.48 (talk) 01:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To put it simply, pretty much all characters missing are meaningless characters that need no mention. We only need to mention the big characters, and that's it. The reason there are still links, however, is because when we deleted the information, we forgot to remove the links to these characters. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If the links bother you that much, no one is stopping you from removing them yourself, just be sure that you don't inadvertently remove functioning links as well. —Dinoguy1000 18:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well im not really all that involved in wikipedia, and to be quite honest I dont have the time to go through all those episodes. Maybe we could leave the links, but link them to Naruto Wikia instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.69.48 (talk) 02:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, as a general rule, links to external websites (even Wikia) are not placed in prose, and in any case, linking to the Naruto Wikia has been discussed and rejected more than once on the Naruto talk page. —Dinoguy1000 17:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Danzo: In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Naruto:_Shippuden_episodes, Danzo is linked to this page and mentioned for Episodes 32, 34, 35, 43, 44, 53, 59, 60, 63 and 64. I think he's important enough to be mentioned in the "List of Naruto characters". 84.148.252.167 (talk) 22:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shizune, the Toads, etc

I'm not exactly sure what I should be discussing here. Shizune is a major recurring character, almost always being in the same scenes where Tsunade is present along with appearing in various fighting games and etc. The Toads, like Gamabunta and Gamakichi have been long-time recurring characters and more recently the elder toads have become a fairly important part of the story. Those I've mentioned so far have had more screen-time and plot related to them than Tenten, Shino, Iruka and other minor recurring characters of the series. Then there's the matter of the completely unmentioned major arc-specific filler characters; according to Collectonian at least, "filler" is a term that violates WP:NPOV and such things should be treated with equal weight as canon material. I honestly don't think it was a very wise decision to condense a cast of characters relating to such an incredibly long series to two main articles. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more partial to Shizune, but let's not add anything unless it's sourced completely and written well (considering the article is at WP:FLC). The toads are weapons at best - they're not essential for understanding of the plot and anything major they do is in relation to the major characters and can be included in their articles. There's nothing against filler characters. Filler characters are simply so minor that they don't need to be included. There's no filler arc character that transcends one-arc status that needs to be included. sephiroth bcr (converse) 20:29, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can see where you're coming from in regards to this article what with the FLC, sourcing and etc, but I don't see why a reasonably sized list of minor characters can't exist as long as it's sourced and well-written. Like the toads, several characters on this current list have little notability and very infrequent plot relevence and could also just be condensed down to passing mentions in other sections. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 20:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The majority of the minor characters (Shino, Tenten, etc.) are on the list because the rest of their team is, and for the sake of completion, they're included. As for the minor character list, I simply don't think there is enough content to justify it. After you get past the toads and a couple Konoha ninja, there's not a whole lot. At that point, you start to include random characters just to fill up the list, and it becomes a dumping ground for every other character in the series, which is what we don't want and is undue weight. More or less, that was what the old minor character list was, and why it was merged. I'm open on the issue, but I'm pretty sure all the characters that needed to be merged from the minor character list were merged. sephiroth bcr (converse) 20:56, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A section on toads might be appropriate if it was actually about toads as a whole. The few attempts that have been made in the past have been a list of every toad introduced in the series in prose format, with little indication of how Naruto toads are any different from real toads. If it was about the species rather than each individual character (as no one toad is recurring enough), a case could be made that the section is just as warranted as one on Konohamaru, Iruka, or Shizune (whose inclusion I have no qualms with). ~SnapperTo 21:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lumping the toads together as a singular character entry is indeed the best course of action should they be included here and was what I was thinking to do. Looking further into it, a minor characters article isn't particularly needed and would probably just lead to a bunch of unneeded entries, I was just thinking that it would be nifty. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 23:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rock Lee's Page

I really don't think Lee should get his own page. He is not that large a character in the series, and all the stuff mentioned on his page could easily fit into the main character's page. There are some people, like Neji, who are shown just as much, if not more, and have MUCH more to be written about that don't have a page. I think that if you are going to make a page, you should make a page for all those other characters. It's only fair, and, it makes more sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.251.197 (talk) 23:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not a given character recieves his or her own article is determined just as much by the amount of sourceable real-world info on that character as by how much of the series focuses on that character, if not more. If Rock Lee has his own article whereas Neji and others don't, it just means there's enough real-world info on Lee to support an independant article, whereas there is not for Neji et al. —Dinoguy1000 16:52, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hyuga? Not Hyuuga?

I'm pretty sure that in the animes it is Hyuuga... and I'm 100% sure it's Hyuuga in games... correct please 87.205.209.176 (talk) 17:44, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, its not. Viz translated manga use Hyuga. So that's what we use. Besides, where are you getting your anime translations from anyway? Fansubs? Those really don't count. --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 18:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Hyūga" maybe. --IdLoveOne (talk) 03:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Might Guy

Confused...the punishments Guy sets for himself for failure DO make him stronger...it's a way of training Lots42 (talk) 14:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd change the confusing sentence I mentioned but it has a reference and just increases the confusion. Oh well. Lots42 (talk) 14:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging

Why have all these sections been merged? I understand that they are considered 'minor' characters, but in a series this large, there are no real 'minor' characters. There is too much that needs to be said about these characters to be shoved into one paragraph, particularly if one is loking for their birthdays, like I was. 24.115.71.110 (talk) 16:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birthdays don't need to be said, because they add nothing to the character. ~SnapperTo 18:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And there most definitely are minor characters in Naruto - what about Tsunade (Imari's mother, back from the Land of Mist arc)? Or most of the students in the academy with Naruto at the very beginning of the series? And pretty much *all* of the characters introduced in the anime filler episodes are minor. —Dinoguy1000 18:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Birthdays may add nothing to the character, but there are other important facts. I'm not saying that Inari's mother needs her own article, but as for the rookie nine, Gai's team, The Sand ninja, and Tsunade (Who is the Godaime, not Inari's mother) contribute too much to the plot to be considered 'minor.' Many of them even have their own arcs! In articles such as Neji's old one, there were several sections, each consisting of two or more paragraphs of relevant information. How did you condense that into one tiny paragraph? There is too much to be said about these characters, ESPECIALLY the Hyuugas. 71.181.164.42 (talk) 19:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They weren't merged because they were "minor", they were merged because there isn't enough conception/reception information on them to keep their articles. If you're interested, the Naruto wikia has all of the individual articles in their former glory. ~SnapperTo 19:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I think this article could do with more pictures, maybe a picture of each team next to the team heading, i think this would be a worthy addition to the article, it would certainly make it more informative for people who don't know very much about Naruto, which is often touted as the raison d'etre of the page?82.69.83.28 (talk) 00:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]