Talk:Akatsuki (Naruto)/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Madara a Member

Since Itachi said Madara made Akatsuki, wouldn't that mean he is a member? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 01:43, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Madara is Tobi. He was hiding behind the scenes then probably decided to 'join' to keep a closer eye on things. Wikiuser6 (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Tobi is Madara!

it doesn't take a genius to figure this one out. Itachi said that there are only 3 uchiha left, him, Sasuke, and Madara. and Tobi has a sharingon, and he is always refering to himself as Madara, and even Pain has addressed him as Madara. its obvious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 03:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

good for you, now... what are you going to do with that information? ~Hyung-Qing Hong

That makes sense. i agree with the top guy. wat the heck is the second guy talking about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 04:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

We still don't know how he's still alive (my theory is possession), and Itachi has confirmed that Madara is alive and helped him kill the clan. (I think the second guy figured that there's no point id dicussing it if it's so deeply based in fact, and he should just edit the article, but I don't think it's the right time to do that yet). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.20 (talk) 20:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Woops, I guess I didn't make myself clear enough then! Thanks for the explainations! And... uh, I'm a girl.~Hyung-Qing Hong

in the new chapter, itachi said that madara is only a shell of what he once was, meaning he has become weak. Tobi wants to use the Tailed Beasts to make his sharringgon as strong as it was before. Madara is said to be immortal, and Tobi is seen to be able to survive huge explosions (deidara), a Resengan (Naruto), and a attack from Sasuke's sword, and still live. it all adds up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 01:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually I have a feeling tobi is Obito, he's only used his right eye and he has the same english letters in his name (plus if you take out the last o its tibo backwards), He just refers to himself as marada. and gets away with it because he uses the Mangekou sharingan. -Freedomnow 6 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedomnow6 (talk • contribs) 23:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Tobi Uchiha

Since Tobi does have the Sharringon, it should be safe to say that he is a Uchiha clan member. so shouldn't his name be Tobi Uchiha? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 06:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't really prove anything, as Kakashi has the Sharingan and he is not an Uchiha. --Naruto Tron 21:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Tobi is an Uchiha. His full name is Madara Uchiha.-Sharingan1679 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.145.124 (talk) 21:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

wat are u guys's thoughts on the whole tobi-obito theory? from wat i think, i think tobi is actually obito because tobi doesn't have his left eye. and obito lost his left eye to kakashi. i've heard other theories but the tobi-obito one makes more sense to me.--Bloody rock princess (talk) 18:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Although is a good theory, this is still original research.Tintor2 (talk) 18:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

My friend and I think that Tobi might be Uchiha Madara's spirit inhabiting Uchiha Obito's body, but we can't say anything in the article that hasn't been confirmed. The theory may be easily proven false, we're just waiting for the mask to come off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.46 (talk) 03:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Obito died as a 13 year old boy. Unless dead bodies can grow into adults I don't think this theory is valid. Besides, how would Madara introduce himself? If he looks like Obito (without the mask) that's a big problem. Wikiuser6 (talk) 12:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

ummmm....pein....

We should put up that one of the bodies is dead.....'twas in the latest chapter, proven...--71.173.174.12 (talk) 04:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Pein has also proven that being killed doesn't work for long unless all his bodies are dead. So technically he's captured and incapacitated. Should Pein ever get his hands on the body again, then he will be able to revive and use it.

Akatsuki Members File Photo's

Please excuse me if this has already been asked or questioned, but isn't it better to include one small picture of each member, positioned next to their texts? I think this was done long way before but don't know exactly why they were erased.

From what I remember they were removed because they caused the page to have too many non free images on the page. --70.48.172.140 (talk) 00:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

~Kudou (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Pains Ring

I suggest that we edit the last sentence of the Pain character section to:

"Jiraya notes that the first body Pain appeared in (third from the right) is that of Yahiko. Of the six bodies, none resemble the former Nagato and Yahikos body seems to be the only one carrying an Akatsuki ring."

At least three of the other bodies is not carrying a ring. I have looked through all chapters with the "new bodies", here is were they are shown not wearing a ring: Fat Pain (first from the right): ch 377, p10. Diedara Pain (first from the left): ch 377, p16. Long Hair Pain (second from the right): ch 377, p15 (right hand) and ch 378, p16 (left hand).

This is an noteworthy feature in Pains appearance. It supports Pain being an alias for all six bodies. Finally, it suggests that of the six bodies, Yahikos is the most important.

The ring list in the Wardrope section also needs an edit: "Right thumb: 零 rei, "zero"; worn by Pain." should be changed to "Right thumb: 零 rei, "zero"; worn by Pain (Yahikos Body)." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.181.50.40 (talk) 01:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

None of those examples are clear cases of a ring-less hand; either part of the hand is obscured by something, or only one of the hands is visible. You also need to consider the possibility that Kishimoto and his assistants simply forgot to add the ring. Find something more definitive or wait for it to be brought up in a future chapter. ~SnapperTo 03:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Some of those were clear examples of ringless hands. I would really like a second opinion on this matter.

Sure I agree he could have forget to add the ring in maybe one or two images, but there is no possibility Kishimoto would forget to add the ring in 10 consecutive chapters (at least it should be regarded as highly unlikely for Kishimto & co to forget such a thing). Additionaly when Yahikos body reappered in chapter 379, the ring was clearly shown.

Furthermore the right thumb is really the only finger needed to confirm the body not to be an Akutsuki ringbearer (since this is were Pain wears his Akatsuki ring). Here are five examples of Pain not wearing a ring on his right thumb:

Diedara Pain: both chapter 379 page 2 and chapter 378, page 17.
Long haired Pain: chapter 377, page 15.
Fat Pain: Chapter 377, page 10 and page 13.

Yahikos body has been the only body shown wearing a ring. Until there is an image showing one of the other bodies wearing a ring, multiple rings should be regarded as pure speculation. If you like you could refrase the sentance to something like: "Yahikos body is the only one shown wearing an Akatsuki ring" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.135.93 (talk) 18:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, all right. Since there's nothing on the thumb I've pointed it out. If you find something more definitive (clear view of all ten fingers in same panel [though I imagine that would be rather obvious to everyone if it occurred]), please let us know. ~SnapperTo 22:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I will.

Just asking here since you talked about Nagato I wanted to know where the hell it says Nagato is Pain in the manga because that was just a speculation by Jiraiya about who he was and he then thought it was Yahiko when he saw him so why is it written in the article that Nagato is Pain if there's nothing to confirm it and as I recall when we were discussing the whole tobi being obito thing we have to have a strong source that says explicitely that for in that case Nagato is Pain before we can write it in the article (last time checked the rules for editing on wikipedia that was mandatory but if someones can prove me I'm wrong than plz do so otherwise I would advise to change the article) 70.81.129.221 (talk) 04:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)UnKnOwNShInObIdA

Where in the article does it say that Pain = Nagato? Nagato is detailed in Pain's section yes, but nowhere does it say they are the same person. ~SnapperTo 04:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Name inconsistency

In the article both 'Pein' and 'Pain' are being used. Please make up your mind and make the appropriate edits. The article doesnt look good now. Survival705 (talk) 14:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

At the time you posted this comment, the article only referred to him as Pain. It still only refers to him as Pain. –Gunslinger47 19:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Pain may soon outgrow this article...

Or, at least, his individual section. It's becoming pretty apparant that, due to being six characters in one, there will probably be a lot more to talk about with him than with other members. He's already at three paragraphs, and adding in additional details, such as the origins of his other individual bodies (a few of their villages can now be confirmed), or their various combat styles, abilities, and techniques, may inflate his section a lot. While I don't think anything needs to be done yet, it may be prudent to start brainstorming for a solution now. I was thinking a seperate section in this article, or a unique article for the Six Paths of Pain might work, while the Yahiko body wearing the ring remains in the article, but with so much about the character intentionally confusing and mysterious, who knows? WtW-Suzaku (talk) 06:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Pain will not get an article until there is conception/reception information on him. If length becomes an issue in this article, we'll simply shorten his entry. ~SnapperTo 18:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Ouch. "Information can't be forced into the proper Wikipedia format? Then it's not important anyway." That being said, I don't think Pain has overgrown his paragraphs just yet. Seems to me that none of the Akatsuki are likely to ever get their own article, though, after the Itachi debate. Feebas factor (talk) 19:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes that does seem to be the standard now.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 21:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Pain/Pein getting his own main article...

Due to the events of this latest Arc, Pain/Pein deserves to have a main article for him, so what is known about him can be expanded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperSaiyaMan (talk • contribs) 16:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Soon Pain may outgrow his article, but for now, let's stick with WP:CRYSTAL and WP:FICT and keep him here. Sasuke9031 (talk) 18:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

References

Hey all, I just saw theres an incorrect ref on the page. [38] Naruto manga chapter 365, page 11 in the context of "The Rinnegan, first possessed by the founder of the ninja world and characterized by a number of concentric circles around the pupil, gives the wielder access to all six types of elemental chakra.[38]". It should be chapter 375, page 11. DarkPegasus (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

If that's so, then feel free to make the changes yourself. Be bold in your editing. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 16:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

A nice sentiment, but DarkPegasus would be unable to comply. His account isn't old enough. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

By the way, i was reading Chakra page and reliazed that paragraph says there are 5 type of elemental chakra(earth,fire,water,wind,lightning) but as DarkPegasus wrote above, in the manga page, it is written that "six types of elemental chakra". What is the sixth one? fotte (talk) 10:25 , 13 December 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 08:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Most likely Yin-Yang, since Jiraiya literally says "Six types of chakra nature manipulation" and Yin-Yang is called a type of chakra nature manipulation by Yamato. JadziaLover (talk) 17:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

What would the "Shadow" Element/Chakra Shikimaru has fall under then?

We don't have verification on that. We have confirmation that it is a type of elemental chakra since it works with the chakra trench knives. Current speculation labels it potentially as the "dark chakra" mentioned by Yamato. –Gunslinger47 16:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Kakashi told Naruto it would be too complicated for him and would only confuse him more. I personally think it's mostly Fire element, but until it is further explained in either the manga or an official sourcebook then it is undetermined. What chapter does Yamato ever mention "dark chakra"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.149 (talk) 23:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Yamato doesn't mention "dark chakra" he mentioned "Yin-Yang chakra," or more specifically, "Yin-Yang chakra nature manipulation". This "Yin-Yang chakra" is apparently the source for things like medical jutsu, genjutsu, Chouji's Baika no Jutsu and Shikamaru's Kagemane no Jutsu, since Yamato advises Kakashi to wait with explaining "Yin-Yang chakra" after Naruto asked about how these jutsu work. JadziaLover (talk) 01:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

"Current" and "Former" Members

I suggest these headings be murged. When the series concludes and Akatsuki is both disbanded and all dead, everyone will wind up being a former member and the headings will bge obsolete anyway. It's part of the in universe reference that the header of teh article is talking about. I suggest a single list of "Memebers" consisting of all known characters to wear one of the ten rings and a cloak (Kabuto and Yura being those not in that category). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.17 (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but while I heartily agree, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Sasuke9031 (talk) 06:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Even so, contextually, Deidara is a current member durring the Rescue Gaara Arc. The arc still exists, and thus Deidara is not a former member, just a member. I understand that it's speculation to say "Akatsuki will disband or be destroyed by the end of the series" but we're not saying that in the article, all we'd be saying is "these are the known members of Akatsuki from the beginning of the series to the end of the series", it breaks no rules I know of, and it not in the 'in universe' style of continuity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.17 (talk) 05:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Well i suppose if you feel that strongly that it does not violate any policy here on Wikipedia then feel free to be bold. Sasuke9031 (talk) 02:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

But try not to be a smart ass about it, I dont apreciate that very much.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 21:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Exactly how was that being a smart ass?--TheUltimate3 (talk) 22:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Man, that Deidara-is-still-alive-in-the-anime was a really bad argument, you know. Wikipedia holds with the most recent information, does it not? The anime is behind the manga, in the manga Deidei has gone to the place beyond, thus he's a former member... According to the stick-to-the-anime logic, we shouldn't update this page until the Americanized Naruto anime gets to this point, which, IMO, would just be stupid. 81.228.148.16 (talk) 18:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

That's not what I was saying. What I was saying was that Deidara was alive and a member at some point in the series, so he (in our universe) is still a member. Orochimaru... maybe he could be classified as a "former member" because he does not exist among their ranks at any point that he appears in the manga (except a flashback). You can't look at it from their world when you use 'current' and 'former', you have to look at it from ours, in which all the members are still members and don't exist as anything else. If you feel it necesary, feel free to add a short paragraph explaining the current roser changes in the manga, but I don't think it's needed if each member's entry mentions the circumstances around their death. Wikipedia may use the most recent information, but I think that it also has rules for works of fiction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.17 (talk) 20:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

What was wrong with having all the members in the list, but having a "current status" sub-listing for each of them? - Pottski. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pottski (talk • contribs) 01:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Original Research?

Kakuzu's article states that he integrates various organs, not only hearts... That has never been stated in the manga and Kakuzu never expressed any interest in any other organs but hearts. 81.228.148.16 (talk) 18:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. I'm sure he could take other organs if he wanted to, but he specifically refers to hearts in my copies of the various chapters. ~SnapperTo 18:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Tobi\Madara

In the most recent manga, Pain himself stated Tobi was Madara, and we will never have to bring up the conflict again! HOORAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -Tobi4242 (talk) 23:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. If he calls himself "Madara" and the other central Akatsuki call him "Madara" then he's Madara. I'd like to remind everyone that calling him "Madara" doesn't mean that we're saying he's the same Madara who engaged in combat with the First Hokage, just that that name he accepts at this point is "Madara" (so to be safe, don't add the Uchiha surname). For those who would like to contest that "Tobi" is just as accepted, I'd like you remind you that as of now, only the non-central Akatsuki members are referring to him as such, and he hasn't called himself "Tobi" out of their presence. I'll go ahead and be bold, please revert and explain your objections if you have them. AnimeNikkaJamal (talk) 02:13, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree, now that Pain has addressed Tobi as Madara, his name should be changed to Madara. Tobi could be just a code name. it already sounds like a weird name. i mean, everyone has japaness names, and his name is Tobi, it doesn't fit in. So i think it is a code name.

Tobi is a japanese name, a pun on tobitobi, like Obito. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.149 (talk) 22:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Yamato is also a code, but we use it anyway instead of Tenzo. For now Tobi is more official than Madara.Tintor2 (talk) 18:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to dissapoint you, but there's the possibility that Tobi isn't and is only lying to gain Pain's fear and loyalty. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 21:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

There shouldn't really be a problem for Wikipedia though. Every article I've seen simply states the indisputable fact--"Tobi refers to himself as Madara."—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 22:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)\

Good point. Also, even if was lying we would not be able to add that at this point because base on the infomation at hand it would be a clear case of original research. --67.70.30.145 (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Kisame's age

It was "150 in part I" and "31 in part II" since only the first one had a source, I used common sense to correct it, hope there's no error. --XClaudiox (talk) 19:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, nevermind, vandal's work, undoing some edits. --XClaudiox (talk) 19:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Itachi Dead?

in the preview of the next naruto chapter, it shows itachi dead. if it is true, then we should put him under former members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 06:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Its a preview, it means nothing.

That spoiler is fake. It appeared near Monday or Tuesday and the chapter comes out in Japan on Wednesday. People say it was made last week by Chinese fans.Tintor2 (talk) 10:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Itachi is still pretty talkative for a dead man. As with Jiraiya, there is no pressing need to sign his death certificate ASAP. We'll wait for his death to be WP:V. –Gunslinger47 19:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I mistook. .Tintor2 (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Second official databook confirms Itachi as dead? Looks like verifiability to me. Sasuke9031 (talk) 02:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

yea he is dead--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 03:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

who said he was dead yet, who knows it can be another genjustsu/illusion a stop jumping into conclusions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.233.242 (talk) 07:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

He died twice and the first one was a genjutsu, what's to say the second one wasn't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayssummerdays (talk • contribs) 18:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't doubt that he's dead, but like with Jiraiya we need to be certain. If Sasuke is asking him a question, then that confirms that Sasuke knows he is still alive, thus able to answer said question. 70.138.167.143 (talk) 21:36, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you don't ask a dead man a question. That's just stupid. And who knows? It could be a clone. Jazz Band Member (talk) 12:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

yeah itachi killed an entire clan i don't think that Kishimoto would have him killed that easly.Darthwin (talk) 16:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Chapter [385] says the entire fight so far has been genjutsu on both sides. Itachi survives. As a side, Madara helped Itachi kill his clan. –Gunslinger47 04:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

yes itachi is alive, and i think you mean 385--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 07:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, 385. Corrected, thanks. –Gunslinger47 22:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

has anyone realized this

after getting blown up by deidara, tobi/madara is talking to pain...like he teleported —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.35.58.130 (talk) 22:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it was that far, especially for a ninja, to have run. If he was still in Hi no Kuni, then Rain is an adjasent country, and is much smaller than Kaze no Kuni. Also, Tobi/Madara is probably really fast, even for a ninja. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.15 (talk) 16:01, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

headband

In the article it is said that members scratch their headband to show that they no longer have allegiance to their village. What about Pein? He is still with his village. 60.50.72.237 (talk) 03:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

He is loyal to his Amegakure. He destroyed the original. ~SnapperTo 03:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

It could also be A)to gain the trust of other Akatsuki; or B) a mistake by Kishimoto. Either way, it isn't worth worrying about. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 21:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Notability/Relevance

I have added this tag to the article, as this article at present does not establish the real-world notability of the subject, as per WP:FICTION and WP:NOT. While I've no doubt that this organisation is notable inside of the Naruto universe, I'm not so sure that it's notable in our universe. If someone can add references to establish this real-world notability, it would be very much appreciated. Lankiveil (talk) 03:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC).

OK, look at all the real world context that was put in since the tag. It was warranted then, but it is obsolete. Don't get mad at Snap because he saw what I am seeing and decided to be bold and remove a now obsolete tag. Sasuke9031 (talk) 03:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I'm missing it; could you point me to where it is? My particular concern is that there are no secondary sources, everything in the rather extensive reflist is decidedly primary. I apologise if my edit summary came across as crotchety or rude to anybody, I certainly did not intend it in that way. Lankiveil (talk) 05:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC).

Example: Itachi is a popular character in the series, normally ranking in the Top Ten of the Shonen Jump popularity polls. However, in the latest poll he ranked 11th.

Similar entries can be found in Deidara's and Sasori's sections. While this is probably mostly fan-based information, apparently, according to WP policy (I'm going to have to do some research as to whether this is actually part of a policy or I'm just confused) that is real world context and probably comes from a secondary source. Sasuke9031 (talk) 06:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that's definitely a step in the right direction then. I do question whether Masashi Kishimoto, as the creator of the series, is an acceptably independent source to be considered reliable, but we'll leave that aside for now. Do you have any more real-world examples of how Akatsuki (as opposed to the individual members of this organisation) are notable outside of the Naruto continuity?

I'd also suggest you to peruse Wikipedia:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information, particularly the part that states that articles on fictional subjects "should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot". Lankiveil (talk) 07:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC).

This article's subject honestly doesn't have much real-world significance, but why don't you go put this tag on the lists of character articles, the setting article, the individual character articles and the Jutsu article too instead of just picking this one out randomly. These villains are one of the most notable subjects in the series and obviously deserve article, so please don't go all willy-nilly with deletionist propaganda. - The Norse (talk) 21:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

But those article already have out-of-universe info. The problem of Akatsuki is that is relatively new compared to all the other things in the series. Examples of info we need are creation and reception. I looked in a lot of sites but I didnt find anything.Tintor2 (talk) 21:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

The only articles who have unsourced outofuniverse or dont even have are Neji Hyuga and Rock Lee that are planned to be merged.Tintor2 (talk) 21:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

When do you think the admins will go away and pick on some other article's bones?Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 22:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Probably never. Jazz Band Member (talk) 12:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Zetsu from Kusa

I read somewhere once that Zetsu's from Kusagakure, is this true? Scorpio777 (talk) 20:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Scorpio666

It's a fan theory. And no, it isn't. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 21:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Minor info?

Is it important saying in what ring does the member wear it? Still it hasnt be proved that the ring position is important. It would be like saying in what part of the body the ninja uses his headband.

Other thing is that the info of the ring is repeated saying the member and the main ring info. I will be bold.Tintor2 (talk) 0:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The characters have stressed a high value and importance to the rings. As of yet it is unknown as to why, but it might have to do with the Biju sealing ritual (as they all stand on the same finger they wear teh ring on). Deidara expressed more concern for his ring than the arm attatched to it after it was blown off, and Tobi assumed he could join just because he found Sasori's ring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.15 (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

character

what does the character on the chair that itachi is siting on read? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.255.50.36 (talk) 00:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks like kitsune (狐). –Gunslinger47 04:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Orochimarus ring

Stupid question: The article says the ring is "formerly worn" by Orochimaru. Now since the ring is still on what is technically his arm, wouldn't that count as him still wearing it? Lastbetrayal (talk) 04:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, never thought of that. I guess it's because it's not on his current body. Jazz Band Member (talk) 12:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Maby we could mention something about it in the article... -Tobi4242 (talk) 00:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

"Itachis death"

As it just happened in the last issue, and towards the end at that, the actual death hasn't been confirmed, as Itachi is a master of illusions. I deleted the line signifying his death, and suggest it is left that way until actually confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.132.72 (talk) 17:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, you can use an edit summary to explain your actions rather than posting here, if you'd like. See Help:Edit summary if you're interested. –Gunslinger47 19:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

also dead people dont talk...much--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 23:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Well there's that whole "night of the living dead" thing, but that's another story. lol Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 20:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

lol--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 00:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Current/former members

Guys.. I've been thinking, why do we separate the Akatsuki members into current and former members? When the Naruto story ends, Pein and his remaining gang will get killed/captured(eventually, duh). So when that happens, you want to put all of them into former members? Doesnt sound right to me. I have little knowledge about wikipedia but I think this article should not be presented as the events unfolds. So I think we should remove the current/former thingy and just explain how they died for each member. Survival705 (talk) 04:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Right now it's a good way to keep things organized. If everyone is killed, we will obviously put it together, and say all of the members are dead. Jazz Band Member (talk) 12:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

But the thing is i see no reason to separate them. It does not making any sense because as of now the fate of the remaining members are unknown. The fact that we state 'current members' means we are telling a story rather than writing an article. Survival705 (talk) 15:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Guys, remember, wikipedia not a crystal ball. -Tobi4242 (talk) 00:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

All the more reason the current/former stuff should be dropped. Alright, so we do not know whether the members will eventually get killed, but if we keep transfering members from the current ones to former members it will get very weird and not very encyclopedic. Again I'm suggesting just drop it and simply explain if they were eventually killed. Survival705 (talk) 03:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia's crystal ball rules detail predicting our future. Besides, not saying both current and former is not violating any rules. It is not unreasonable to think that they will all die eventually even if that may eventually be proven to not be the case, but we don't have to say or even apply that thought. Characters like Hidan in particular have no history outside of Akatsuki thus are never former members in our world because they only ever existed as an Akatsuki member. If someone asked you "who's the immortal Akatsuki guy?" You'd probably reply "Hidan", even though he is incapasitated in the most recent chapters. And the same conversation can go the opposite way. Nearly the same goes for Deidara, Sasori, Kakuzu, Konan, Pein, and Zetsu. Orochimaru also exists as the Snake Sannin, while Kisame also holds his own place among the seven mist swordsmen, and Itachi is the Uchiha traitor and Sasuke's brother above all else. Point is, if people want to know what's going on right now in teh manga, they read it. If they want information on Akatsuki that is organised and most of the time acurate, they come here. That means no speculation, the character's known history, their abilities, maybe the Biju they were assigned to capture (if known), their ring, and lastly how they died (if aplicable). They are all still Akatsuki members, even if they are dead in the current manga chapter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.15 (talk) 15:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

He is right. -Tobi4242 (talk) 00:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

It seems that you guys still dont get it. I think just forget about it. You guys just cant see and understand the problem. No wonder this article is a target for a lot of deletionists Survival705 (talk) 04:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Six Paths of Pain (Pain Rikudou)

Why has this been removed? Pain refers to his six selves as the "Pain Rikudou", and they are also referred to as the "Pain Rikudou" in the narration on one of the frontispieces. It's pretty significant to the character, as it ties in with the Samsara and various aspects of Buddhism that are present in Pain's character. I'm gonna add it back unless someone has a viable reason not to include it. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I suggest this link as source, if you need one... --Xander89 (talk) 12:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

what is a fair use rationale

just curious because it seems like a bunch of bullshit if you ask me. Because every picture i upload on to this stupid website gets deleted and its startin to piss me off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roxas255 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Relax. There is no reason to be angry. Your images will be deleted to our liking. Wikipedia is mighty. —Preceding unsigned —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.88.154.1 (talk) 03:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

You can't upload or use copyrighted images on Wikipedia unless there is a valid fair use for them appended to the image. This is so that Wikipedia doesn't get sued into oblivion, and it's non-negotiable. If you've questions, I suggest you try out the Wikipedia:Image copyright help desk. Lankiveil (talk) 03:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC).

So pretty much take the screenshot yourself and you should be fine. I think.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 17:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, no, because a screenshot of a copyrighted (read: almost all) TV show/movie is still copyrighted. --Pentasyllabic (talk) 19:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Scratch that, go to a site with premission to use a screen shot then ask them premission to use it, and you should be fine. I think.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 02:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The Rin'Negan

This article states that the Rin'negan lets Pein control all six types of elemental ckakra, firstly this isn't necessarily true as here may be another reason for this and secondly, this would lead readers to believe that this is the underlying basis behind the Rin'negans powers or that it is the only use of them, there are others such as the super weapon jutsu Pein plans to create —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayssummerdays (talk • contribs) 22:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

As you have no basis in fact for that, while the claim itself is firmly rooted in the text, what does your speculation have to do with the article? — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 01:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The claim is not rooted deep in the text. Jiraiya comments that the Rin'negan:

-Is the greatest of the Sandou (legendary three eye techniques)

-That They were possesed by the Rikoudou Sennin, who was given them by God, and whose skills and knowledge "Gave birth to the shinobi world"

-That they would be able to save or destroy the world when the time came.

All of this happened on chapter 373, pages two, three and 375 page 11.

While it states he learned all six chakra types, it also states that he learned Jiraiya's other jutsus which were obviously non-elemental. so that statement is wrong and needs to be removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayssummerdays (talk • contribs) 21:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Your facts are flawed: the Rinnegan were called (not "are") a tool of god that could (not "will") save or destroy the world. Furthermore, Jiraiya states that the Rinnegan allowed Nagato to master every technique taught to him, but does not elaborate on what those techniques were. What the article said was correct, but I've reworded it to reflect the ambiguity that's in the chapter. ~SnapperTo 21:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, who knows how long ago that was? Everything Jiraiya knows was hearsay, which is hardly acountable for much since he said 'I didn't even think they really existed' and his really old frog summons shared that same thought. Who knows how much of it is rooted in fact and how much if an exagerated fabrication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.35 (talk) 00:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

What happened to consensus? Paeinful 2008?

OK, so what, now that it's 2008 you guys think you can get away with Pein instead of Pain? NO!!! Snap or someone who has a script, help. Sasuke9031 (talk) 23:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought it was kind of weird that when we finally decide to use "Pain" (which I thought was the popular Romanization?) an IP decides to go militant about "Pein".—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 23:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks like someone with a script needs to fix this and then we need to request semi-protection. Sasuke9031 (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to change it back. If someone wants to use Pein they can try to establish a new consensus. --67.71.77.153 (talk) 23:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Sasuke9031 (talk) 23:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

So it's pain, right? SuperGodzilla 2090 23:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes we use Pain. We should ask for protection tag. Just check the history of the article. But now I need you to go to Naruto Uzumaki because sby is thinking of deleting the article.Tintor2 (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

That AFD is already over. --67.68.153.14 (talk) 02:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok but I keep with the idea of a protection tag.Tintor2 (talk) 12:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Better do it soon because alot of people are calling him Pein instead of Pain. SuperGodzilla 2090 23:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no idea how to do it.Tintor2 (talk) 21:52, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Can anybody else? Supergodzilla^20|90 03:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe protetion functions are restricted to admins. Sasuke9031 (talk) 04:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Yea, you have to request Protection or Semi-Protection of a page by an admin. Use WP:RFPP to make your request. --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 16:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

It is done... Sasuke9031 (talk) 16:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Major Akatsuki members

I personally think that the big ones like Itachi should have their own pictuer.Ultimaterasengan (talk) 01:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Itachi is visable in the group picture. The only one that needs a picture is Sasori.Lastbetrayal (talk) 04:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Well unless the back of Konan's head has suddenly become her face, she needs a picture too. Kakuzu's appearance is pretty obscure and hard to visualize in that group photo as well but nothing compared to Konan or Pain but Pain has a picture now.

Good point--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 07:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Tobi/Madara Uchiha

After the latest chapter it seems obvious to me that we should merge the info of these two together. It's been pretty much stated that they are the same person in every way possible.--66.229.89.202 (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Combining the two entries is inevitable, but people are likely to complain in the meantime (OMG, he iz whering mask. He Obito!). To avoid unwanted hassle, it would probably be best to keep them separate until such time that a clear link between the two (ie. why/when Madara became Tobi) is made. Until then, the current division makes it simpler to differentiate between Madara as Madara and Madara as Tobi. ~SnapperTo 19:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually in the new chapter Itachi mentions something about Akatsuki hiding Madara's face.Although I could be wrong though, because the translation I got ahold of was kinda crappy.Lastbetrayal (talk) 18:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Ya, it probaly was. -Tobi4242 (talk) 22:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

pein vs pain

why use pain when pein is the direct romanization?--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 09:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Consensus decided. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

what a load of dickheads the 'a' is all original research we should use the direct romanization on his name 'pein' --Blue-EyesGold Dragon 11:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Where were you when we had this discussion last year? This was decided by consensus. See Talk:Akatsuki (Naruto)/Archive 13#Paeinful, 2007 --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 18:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The 'a' is common sense, so we switched to it. There will always be dissenters on both sides of the fence. Fortunately this side has a lot less than the other. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 04:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and here on wikipedia, consensus is more important than credibility and fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.158.133 (talk) 19:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

and drive by whinging is more important than considered debate. look blue eyes, u can always rekindle the debate w/ the ppl u describe as "dickheads." i'm sure that description will make them more amenable to ur position. --Wongba (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Credibility and fact? Yeah, the whining of those who pretend to know so much about Japanese but actually understand nothing of its context and culture are so important. Take a class in Eastern Culture or something, or just shut up. Pain's situation is basically like if there was a character named "Kuraisuto" who always talked about suffering wounds to save others, and that he was the child of the gods. It's painfully obvious (yes, I went there) if you know even a little about the culture, that he's talking about the buddhist concept.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 21:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Dickheads, so the direct translation is pein but you use pain because you think pein sucks as a name?--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 01:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The correct translation is pein. And consensus is not more important than fact. What if there was a consensus to change the answer of 2+2? This is an encyclopedia. It is supposed to be accurate. And Blue eyes, please try to be a little more civil. Earthbendingmaster 01:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

You know, shot in the dark, but…before we decided to use "Pain," people were calling us idiots because we were insisting on using "Pein." Then we use "Pain" and people complain again.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I didnt post that, but i agree with it O_o --Blue-EyesGold Dragon 01:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I meant the correct romanization is Pein. Earthbendingmaster 17:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

...you're saying that the correct translation is "pein", even though that's a word not even possible in the japanese language, and that he constantly refers to an analogy similar to the "Six Paths of Pain"?

And yes, the correct romanization is "Pein", but no one is arguing with that - we're arguing about the correct translation. At least Maito Gai was a possible name in the Japanese langauge - pein isn't. It just isn't.

"Fact, not consensus" - fine, if you can show that it's fact. WtW-Suzaka did a damn good job of getting rid of any shred of doubt that the name is meant to be "Pain". Your argument basically amounts to hurling insults and demanding that we agree with you.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 18:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Who are you referring to. Me? I have mot insulted anyone. And are you a Japanese major? Earthbendingmaster 19:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

i think he was talking about me, thing is, i have been out of town for 5 weeks on a cruise O_o Blue-EyesGold Dragon 23:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Minor, actually, and I have been studying it outside of classes for several years (actual studying, not just watching Japanese cartoons). And Blue Eyes, you have several post from earlier today, so don't try pull some bullshit about you not having been posting for five weeks. And Bender, insults aren't just limited to calling names. The "2+2" thing is nearly as much of an insult as the "dickheads" and "consensus more important than fact" comment (the one I was actually replying to).Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 02:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

i have a brother, 1 computer, and never sign out = OMFG -_- i will ask Blue-EyesGold Dragon 12:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

and Blue Eyes, you have several post from earlier today, so don't try pull some bullshit about you not having been posting for five weeks. remember to be civil or you will get a warning--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 12:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

If it was truly your brother posting, then I apologize for calling BS on you, but you in no way made that clear until now, and all the comments from your account in this discussion are from at most seven days ago. So whoever the hell I was talking to was clearly here the whole time, and bringing the cruise bit into this discussion makes, well, no damn sense at all. As for keeping it civil - again if it was your brother, then fine, but otherwise my calling BS was perfectly warranted, and you should be the one to take your own advice.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 06:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Guys, guys, guys... we cannot forget that the consensus was in favor of a. I share no love of the a myself, but consensus did in fact lean toward that particular outcome. Since Wikipedia is built on consensus, should we not honor that? I know concensus can in fact alter, but for now, let's just stick to the decision, stop the personal attacks, and everything will be OK, OK? Sasuke9031 (talk) 09:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

even if pein is the direct translation, he will be called pain in the dub so lets just call him pain. and as for the cruise thing, i was on a cruise for 4 weeks (5 weeks if you count the time i was away) and it was the worst holiday ever, i found out i get sea sick Blue-EyesGold Dragon 14:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Tobi

In the most recent manga,It is said that Madara/Tobi formed akatsuki and was also behind the ninetailed fox attack on konahoa in the beinning of the series. It also explains most of his past. This should all be metioned in the tobi section, bacause he is madara. P.S. we should change the header of that same section from "tobi" to Tobi/Madara uchiha, knocking off of the idea of merging. -Tobi4242 (talk) 22:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

if we put tobi/madara it will mess up the links —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue eyes gold dragon (talk • contribs) 23:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

tobi should be changed to Madara Uchiha as it is now clear that Tobi is Madara--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 01:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget about the first part. forget about the headingpart.-Tobi4242 (talk) 01:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Akatsuki Leader

The article on tobi implies that he is the leader in stead of pien. Is this correct, false or did I reed it wrong? Sakumo (talk) 01:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

well i see it as madara created akatsuki, pein is the leader, but then madara orders pein around, its a bit hard to know--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 02:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Think of Pein as a figurehead, and Madara as the puppetmaster.Lastbetrayal (talk) 17:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

New English VAs

After watching the dub just now on CN, I've recognized Tobi's voice as Quinton Flynn (I assumed it was Tobi cause only his right eye was visible), and Pain is voiced by Dave Wittenburg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.97.162 (talk) 03:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Flynn was Deidara. Tobi don't appear until part two. But we should probably get confirmation on who's who before putting down the names of the new VAs.Lastbetrayal (talk) 03:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

It was pretty obvious it was those two, but there's nothing to suggest those will be the final voices. I guess we could add it in with an (Episode 135) side mark like with Skip as Itachi. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 03:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, but we still need confirmation.Lastbetrayal (talk) 03:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

There's usually never a need for confirmation. People who are good at picking out voices are usually all that's needed. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 03:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I figured we'd need confirmation. I did first assume Flynn was Deidara, but I only saw one eye visible, the right eye, and thought it as Tobi. Oh well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.97.162 (talk) 03:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

He was upsidedown. I know it was their voices, they voice some of my favorite characters so trust me, I know. But even so wouldn't saying it without confirmation be original research?Lastbetrayal (talk) 03:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Not really. I mean, I already added Zetsu's voices based both on how they sounded and the names that were in the credits for ep 134. And yeah, Quinton Flynn's name was in the credits for 135. That's basically all that's really needed for confirmation I think. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 03:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm thinking it's probably best to go ahead and add their names with the (Episode 135) by it since it'll definitely cut back on the amount of other edits and reverts that are bound to come later. Anyone still object? Again, there's no real need for "confirmation" either since that usually doesn't come. Take Kisame for example. No one's officially stated Kirk Thornton is his voice actor, but we know it anyway based on what he sounds like and his name in the credits. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 03:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Article in need of new image.

Ok, seriously, like others have mentioned previously, the image at the top of the Akasuki page is a joke. We can only see Konan from the back, as well as Pain but he has his own pic in his description. August 2007 each member had their own picture, and you think Big Man confirmed that they were under fair use rationale? We either give every member their own pic or change the one at the top of the article using any one of the dozens of accurate fan artwork of the Akatsuki grouped together. We're giving clear consenus and the wiki is mightly. I'm sorry, I know Wikipedia is not a democracy, but giving clear consenus is about the same trick, so have at it. 67.140.56.159 (talk) 03:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)-King Hooks

We can't use fan art unless the artists agrees to license it under GPL or another compatible free license. –Gunslinger47 03:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I saw one piece of fanwork that was accurate and had every member of Akatsuki in it(Orochimaru included). They all looked like idiots but they were all there crystal clear. I could try to get permission to use it if a concensus were to be reached.Lastbetrayal (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Fanart is probably not the best thing to use.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 03:44, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the problem is most fanart looks like crap. It's best to just stick with the original source. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 03:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

True, but we still need something better than the spread we currently have. Lastbetrayal (talk) 03:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Well then. Who shall start the consensus? 67.140.56.159 (talk) 03:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)-King Hooks

I think it would be best to wait until a proposed replacement picture is found because I belive the problem is more would be whether the new picture is apporpiate than an issuse of people not wating to remove the old picture. --70.48.172.149 (talk) 22:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Individual pictures for each Akatsuki member

we need to have a individual picture for each member. they don't have their own page so that is the only way to show who is who. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nichomas (talk • contribs) 19:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

No, they are all(Minus Sasori) shown in the picture at the top of the article. The picture sucks balls, but they are there.Lastbetrayal (talk) 20:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

but can people that don't know who is who know what deidara looks like. they could thnk deidara is kisame or any other member Nichomas (talk) 20:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)nichomasNichomas (talk)`

Well, then it's their own fault, because the picture's caption lists the members from left to right.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 20:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The caption below the picture describes who's who. The only one who has no picture is Sasori. So you might be able to get away with an individual picture for him. Lastbetrayal (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

also you can't see konan but every time i add a picture of her that has all the right info it is taken off Nichomas (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)nichomasNichomas (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Well can't someone tell the big wigs over at Wikipedia to include a pic of Konan and Sasori? -King Hooks 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Who said Sasori couldn't have one? He isn't depicted anywhere. He is probablty the only one who needs an image. Lastbetrayal (talk) 21:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

i checked back on the page and Sasori and Konans picture have been reoved and so has my warning not to remove themNichomas (talk) 21:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NFC#Non-free image use in list articles. If someone needs to know what Sasori looks like they can use Google. ~SnapperTo 21:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

^Then what is the point of Wikipedia? Is Wikipedia no longer an information source? Are you honestly saying that we need to advertise Google as a secondary source of information when the article should be the only one? Spare me this mockery you call Wikipedia.

Can someone please file a complaint and start a consenus so we can add the images, they were all included in the article for well over a year and only up until August 2007 did the admins decided to go merge crazy and get rid of all the images. Why do some characters such as those of the Konoha 9 and villans such as Orochimaru and Kabuto still have their images? How are they under fair use while none of the Akatsuki are? Several have predicted that even by summer's end, all the Naruto pages will be condensed to a single article, consisting of one paragraph and have and anime related stub at the bottom of the page. Start the consensus. -King Hooks 27 January 2008 (UTC)

It's no use. The admins have been cracking down like the CIA, citing multiple of their Rules pages, which are really annoying, and too technical, to read. I don't know what the reasons are, maybe fear of "potential" lawsuits, or maybe they're thinking of selling out, or maybe just trying to be like a real encylopedia. Which is a stupid idea. Condensed info and minimal pictures =/= better in any way. But one thing is for sure. Many articles on wiki are no longer by the people, for the people. It's made by the elite, who think that a "Consensus" means one or two admins voting, and another admin aggreeing with them. And that's not an exaggeration. 27 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.97.162 (talk)

Wikipedia, what a sham. Saying that members can use Google for images is the equivilant of a grocery store not carrying apples, and justifying that by saying that if someone wants an apple, they can go pick one off a tree. -King Hooks 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I added all the pics and they are satyingNichomas (talk) 23:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Your name will be synonomous with hero, Nichomas. -King Hooks 27 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk)

Nichomas if you see this please stop reposting the pictures.Lastbetrayal (talk) 00:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

And just like that, they're gone.

Ok, the images Nichomas put up are officially gone, after checking the contributes, guess who deleted them? None other than The Artist Formerly Known As Whocares, treason! I thought he was a supporter of the article's pre-August version, images included, and what does he do? deletes everything by day's end. How the might have fallen. Nichomas! Please, restore your latest revision. -King Hooks

I hate having to be rude, but are you an idiot? You do realize that the pictures were removed so that wikipedia won't be sued into bankruptcy?

WE DO NOT FUCKING OWN THOSE PICTURES, AND WE HAVE NO PERMISSION TO USE THEM - even minimally is barely small enough to escape copyright infringement. If you go picture happy, we will have to delete the article to keep from being sued. It's fine to edit before reading the guidelines, but if you're going to start being a stubborn, negligent ass, you need to stop and actually read the reasoning behind the guidelines you think are "so stupid".Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 00:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

See, that's just ridiculous. You actually think that some random TV Tokyo agent or someone will be browsing the page, see a picture, and their first thought will be to make a lawsuit? Wiki sure is paranoid. People aren't just out looking for an excuse to sue you, especially for something so pitifully small as using a picture. Besides, people use tons of pictures they don't own on many different websites, message boards, etc. What makes wiki any different? 28 January 2008 (UTC)

All i have to say is that i tried to put them back up but every time they are removed. This is sad how stupid people can be. Basically wikipedia could be sued for every page. So I am sorry to say i won't be adding any of those images to the page. Its all Thanks to Not even Mr. Lister'sNichomas (talk) 00:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

So that's it man, you're just going to give up? Keep adding the images. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Compwhizii (talk • contribs) 00:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I changed my mind and i did add the images again. Problem is I am usually busy. So they may come and go. Hopefully they will stay there and not EVER be removedNichomas (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

All the images are likely to be deleted eventually anyway due to the poorly filled out free use template. Such as crediting "self-made" as the source. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 01:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Some of them i did makeNichomas (talk) 01:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC) I re-added them back :)Nichomas (talk) 01:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

All Wikipedians are mighty, but Nichomas, you are the most mighty Wikipedian of them all. Good job. -King Hooks

My God, you're an idiot. Both of you. Whether we will likely get caught or not (and we probably will, since these articles are near the top of the "most-viewed" list for wikipedia), it's still against the law. If either of you revert this again, you will be reported to the admins, and you will almost certainly be banned for this purposely disruptive behavior.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 02:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Again, the point about "self-made" is that you did not make the characters - it is blatant plagiarism and copyright infringement.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 02:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

at least add sasori--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 11:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't revert the page, rat-ass, I'm not a member. Explain to me though, if this is such a big concern, how come the images were there for well over a year without many arguments? Only recently did the admins get all crazy over fair use rationale. Besides, Nichomas used fanart for some of the pics, which, last time I checked are under fair use. -King Hooks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk) 11:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

You can use fanart, but you need the permission of whoever drew the pictures. The fair use for the pictures originally said that a friend drew them and he got permission, then they were deleted and ten minutes later they were back with him claiming ownership. And with the drastically different drawing style of the three fanmade pictures it is obvious that he drew one or none of them. And the image of Yura is directly from the manga! It's just colored!Lastbetrayal (talk) 15:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Keep it civil, people. --Pentasyllabic (talk) 17:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Nowhere in the fair-use guidelines does it mention that "fanart is acceptable".

What is acceptable are cover art, corporate logas, and currency for identification, promotional material, screen shots, and visual art for critical commentary. If fanart fell into any of these, it would be visual art, and the article is not written to be discussing the art techniques and style of Kishimoto's drawing - it is discussing fictional characters. There are multiple guidelines on images that lean against having these images here - one is that we should not use a non-free image if the information it emparts can be given in words (which all of these can).

Furthermore, "someone just giving you permission" does not allow a picture to be on wikipedia - unless the creator is fully willing to let anyone claim the picture as their own work or property, it is not allowed on wiki. That's the entire point of the fair-use rationale deal. This is according to the Foundation.

According to fan art: "Display and distribution of fan art that would be considered a derivative work would be unlawful."

Since wiki explicitly explains that it must be stricter about copyright laws than even the US court system, its pretty clear that fanart is not allowed. I went through this discussion earlier with the editors who were working with those image guidelines, and they made it clear that fanart of copyrighted subjects is not allowed. If you could maybe take a picture of a promtional Akatsuki costume parade, or something - something that would correctly represent the character, but be a free-use picture, we could probably add that. But derivative fanart and scans straight from the manga are almost explicitly said to be unacceptable.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 18:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Too tired to argue that much, just going to post quotes.

From fan art "Generally small excerpts from larger works that have no financial impact on the original and that are done for non commercial purposes could be considered a fair use (depending on a number of circumstances). American courts also typically grant broad protection to parody and some fan art may fall into this category. This is a legal gray area, which is not related, and legality can often not be determined until after litigation has concluded."

From Derivative Work "A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”." -Too tired too fully understand that, but from what I(kinda-See "too tired") understand "derivative work" would consist of more than a stand-alone picture.

Also not many people who create fanart claim the characters within as their own property. Almost all of the ones I have seen do say "Characters are property of _____" or "Copyright of _____"

...Think I forgot something. I'll get a better rebuttal after a nap. Lastbetrayal (talk) 18:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

And that means you might get away with it in American Courts - however, the Foundation has continuously stated that the rules are stricter for wiki than for america.

I'm not arguing that the fanart isn't a derivative work - however, they are definitely not parody, and there's still the problem of the "number of circumstances" and whether these images can be called "accurate representations". And again, the article says they could be fair-use; not that they are free-use. Thus, we still run into the "multiple images" problem with fair-use images. Put simply, almost every image guideline goes against allowing all those images to be here.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 19:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I, for one, hope you realize how ridiculous that sounds. The "Foundation?" Why not just rename it the Matrix? Of all the places to make stricter than the US court system, the Internet? It's rather embarassing, how wiki has lost every sense of the word freedom, and gained every sense of the word paranoia. 28 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.99.169.251 (talk)

....the Wikimedia Foundation is the name of the corporation that owns Wikipedia. It's their webpage - they just let us edit here. Are you honestly trying to argue that people should let visitors break the law on webpages they own? Are you that out of touch with any sense of reality?

As for paranoia - these have been the rules since the beginning. If there's been a crackdown, it's because the Foundation has gotten tired of getting involved in legal issues just because some idiot decided that he wanted to post scans of the entire manga in order to "help the reader". If you can make an argument of how the image is needed to help the readers, I'm all for that - but if it the subject can be described in one sentence, than the image is just there for people to download or whatnot.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 03:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

How is using any random image on this site different than using an avatar or signature or banner you didn't make on a message board, or using a pic on another website, when said avi/sig/banner comes from an image of an anime NOT owned by you? If your "reality" is all this red tape crap, then I'd be proud to be out of touch with it. The fact that this Foundation wants rules stricter than the highest court in this land is just shameful. This is the Internet. The reality I see on this site, it's bull. And, what legal actions? Certainly, if there had been so many legal issues as to warrant a crackdown, it would have been some sort of big news story. And while it may be more desirable to avoid suits on major pages, honestly, you think the people who own Naruto care so much as to make a fuss over pictures posted on this site, when they're also posted (illegally) everywhere else?

And don't exaggerate. I have never once seen entire scans of a manga posted here, and if they have been, people did an admirable job of getting rid of it so fast. Editors seem to think they are the only ones who want accurate information. They don't realize they're not alone in fixing idiotic vandalism. Plus, just because something can be described in one sentence, doesn't mean the agents here should go out of there way to make it so. 28 January 2008 (UTC)

This is not the Internet. This is Wikipedia, a project where all content must conform to the GPL. WP:NONFREE content must therefor have strict limitations. If you want more copyrighted pictures, I'm sure there's some place on the Internet that can accommodate. –Gunslinger47 05:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Technically, it's just as illegal on a message board - but every time someone thinks "hey, maybe we shouldn't be encouraging outright theft", the rest of the chorus chimes in "oh no, you're oppressing our freedoms! You're just like Hitler!"

Manga scans - pages have been posted before (not here, I never said here), for little reason than to be eye-candy. They are immediately reverted by the multitude of editors who watch these pages for changes and revert such vandalisms.

Legal issues - well, you've already proved that you're out of touch with not only the real world, but even reality on the Internet, so I wouldn't expect you to have heard of them, but the Wikimedia foundation has had plenty of legal troubles - not many of them are about images, I'll grant you, but the point is still there. This isn't exactly the law, but it should point you to what kind of issues the Foundation has to deal withNot even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 06:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't want all the images to be there. I want one image that doesn't suck(like the one we currently have) and actually does a good job of showing the members(All of them preferably(Which is why I proposed a piece of fanart)). And they don't have to be parody. They have to be non-commercial(You are right though, we do not know the circumstances). As for "accurate representations", well finding that in and of itself is technically original research, but all you would need are eyes.

Again I think I forgot something. Lastbetrayal (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know...from what I can find, and my own opinion, it seems that fanart would falsely imply that this is how the character is supposed to look (when it's a stylized and personal interpretation), and would lend itself to edit wars over who gets to have their design there. Furthermore, the image guidelines seem to point to images only being allowed when they are the subject of the article or section - if we had a "fanart of Akatsuki" section, it should be acceptable, but otherwise...it looks extremely iffy. "Parody" - parody is the most broadly protected, though, and these images are not that. "Accurate representations" - the nature of fanart is to be the fans personal interpretation of the character - its very, very unlikely that they could be considered truly "accurate".Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 19:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I see where you're comin' from. Personally I'd rather go for something official, but as far as I know(and trust me I looked) aside from what we have no such thing exists. I just want something better than the image we already have, cause it really sucks in so very many ways.

As usual, I think I forgot something. Lastbetrayal (talk) 20:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

deidara's age

I am about 75% sure that Deidara is 19 years old in case you wanted to add his age. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaydux (talk • contribs) 03:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

you have to be 100% sure to add it--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 11:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

VG Cats?!

• Why is this VG Cats junk here. It's not notable nor adds to the article in any way. It's just one of many webcomics that have parodied Naruto before. The references should be removed. JuJube (talk) 18:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It's falls under the relevant information category, it stays. -VGCatsfan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk) 20:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Care to explain that with something resembling policy? From what I see you and your cronies have a serious WP:OWN problem. JuJube (talk) 09:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Tobi's identity

Tobi's section reads: "...he reffers to himself as Madara Uchiha". I don't know if I read the manga wrong but he said he owns Madara's power. His section should read likewise. And we now know it is possible to tranfer the mangekyo sharingan eyes among clansmen (this gives us a hint on how Tobi came up with the power and why Madara is weak). Tobi and Madara and the eyes are all separate entities (as Itachi says "Madara and his eyes"); Itachi says he hides behind akatsuki not Tobi until we get all this straighten up we should separate Madara from Tobi, any person who know nothing about naruto and reads this will asume that madara and tobi are the same. Bvazq (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

They are the same person, man. Lastbetrayal (talk) 19:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC) Have you not been reading the manga, he said quite clearly that he is madara--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 04:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Let's Strike An Ageement.

Ok, I'm willing to keep the image we have up top as long as we add a pic of Konan by her description. I see that someone added a Sasori pic, being that he's not even in the top spread at all, but Konan is clearly not visible by any means whatsoever. That pic was made before Konan was introduced and I'd say Kishimoto would not be happy about one of his characters not being properly represented. -King Hooks 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, if a pic of Konan isn't added by week's end, I'll go to the admins for the articles deletetion and Wikipedia will be charged with sexism. 28 January 2008 (UTC)

You don't get how Wikipedia works do you? This article has been nominated for deletion two or three times. Notice how its still here? While admins can cause almost unending trouble for the article, deletion still goes up to concensus.

And how can you sue for sexism? Konan ain't real. Nor is her not having an individual picture about gender. Pain didn't even get a picture until we learned he had six different bodies. Threatening to go to a higher authority if you don't get your way, how childish. Lastbetrayal (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

...why would we need a picture of her anyway? The sum import of the picture would be "Konan is a young woman with blue hair in a bun". There, I described it in words, thus, according to the guidelines, no pic is needed.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 21:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Same could be done for Sasori(Picture removed, written description added).Lastbetrayal (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Then do it, add that. Or there will be charges of sexism. So either add a pic or there's gonna be a flamewar. -King Hooks

'Kay. In fact, I think we could probably remove all the pictures except the depiction of the statue and possibly Pain's six bodies - the only information really added by the main pic can be described in text, and thus, there is no justification for having the image at the top. Thank you for once again dragging this subject to the natural conclusion of deleting nearly all the pictures.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 00:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Realistically speaking, the image of the statue could be removed as its main purpose (finger location) is described in-text. Of course, removing that would cause King IP to shout claims of appendagism... ~SnapperTo 00:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't we just bring this guy up on the incidents board? There must be like 3 reasons for him to be banned by now. Lastbetrayal (talk) 00:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Lastbetrayal your username really suits you, as you have betrayed the trust of several who thought you supported each member of having an image.

Furthermore, I don't know if any of you were around at the time, but I was the one who brought about the change in Konan's bio. Orginally, it said she did Pein bidding, I felt that this was a sexist gender role assigning comment, and I must say it did indeed piss me off greatly. I talked to the big wigs over at Wikipedia as well as called in an admin who was a feminist and she agreed that the wiki and the admins behind the Akatsuki page should be charged with sexism. We got suport and now the "Konan does Pein's bidding" remark is removed.

So I'll be happy to let you all now that this page was put up for speedy deletion unless;

1. Konan gets her own pic as the one at the top of the page is unacceptable.

2. Pein will do Konan's bidding from now on.

Like I said, we already had a little chat about this over at KonanFan and the agreed, so if you don't meet those two requirements up above, KonanFan will charge sexism. -King Hooks

Gotta say, this is very funny. I wanted individual pictures for each member? I said that Sasori might be able to have an image because of his absense in the spread and lack of physical description other than "young looking". And do you even read the manga? Konan and every other member of Akatsuki(minus Tobi) are Pain's subordinates. And when did you talk to any admins in wikipedia? Your contibution page shows no activity outside of this talk page other than vandalising mine. And once again no lawyer in the country would take your case because Konan is a fictional character. So I end with this statement: Request Denied Lastbetrayal (talk) 00:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

If Konan was real she'd be hella pissed. -TheBigDinkle(talk) 00:61, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Listen here, pal, Do you notice that my username contains the word king? That means I'm in charge. -King Hooks

Buuut she's not real. And your attempt at sock-puppetry fails.Lastbetrayal (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, tell me why you think Konan should not have a pic of her own. -King Hooks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk) 01:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Why should she? She isn't hard to describe. Lastbetrayal (talk) 01:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

She isn't described at all in her description. -King Hooks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk) 01:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Nichomas actually seemed to believe what he was saying, even though he was wrong, but I honestly can't think anything but that this King Hooks guy is a hoax. I say we just start ignoring him ("Don't feed the trolls"), and eventually it will turn out that some other editor was playing a "game" with us.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 01:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought that myself. So yeah, lets ignore him and hope he goes away. Lastbetrayal (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe Sasori needs his own image, but not anyone else. Everyone else except Orochimaru is in the picture at the beginning. Since Orochimaru has his own image on his article, Sasori is the only one who needs his own image. Maybe Konan could have her own as she is not shown very good in the top picture, but I am staying out of that. Note:Pain/Pein needs own image as he has six bodies, and of course, he already has one. Earthbendingmaster 02:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Try making a topic proposing a picture for Sasori wait awile then see what the concensus about it is. Lastbetrayal (talk) 02:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Look, I am being completely serious when I say Konan needs her own pic, if you add one for Sasori then I will do everything in my power to get Konan her own pic, I'll register, and after a while I'll be able to edit the article myself. It really does come off as sexist. You can only see her from the back, Pein as his own image, Orochimaru has his own image in his article and if Sasori gets his own than every member will be partially visible except Konan who we can only see from the back because it was before she was introduced. Whoever wrote this article obviously does not respect Konan, as every other member is glorified while Konan is portrayed as nothing more than Pein's henchwoman. She is so much more than that.

Watch me press register. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk) 02:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The problem is, however, that the guidelines do not allow the reasoning of "every character needs an image", even if the images were free - it's "images are allowed if absolutely necessary to explain the subject".Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 03:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Sasori image

I am suggesting Sasori has his own image, as he is the only one that is not displayed, even partially. Please put Support or Oppose and a reason below. Thanks everyone. Earthbendingmaster 02:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Support Per my comments above. Earthbendingmaster 02:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Support he is not in the spread--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 04:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Read Wikipedia:NFC#Non-free image use in list articles. Not every character needs to be or is recommended to be illustrated via a fair use image. If Sasori had a larger role in the story an image might be warranted. Since he does not, a separate image is not needed. ~SnapperTo 04:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose - there is no solid reason why he needs a picture. In fact, if a picture of Sasori was warranted, it would be his original form, which is quite hard to describe - the pic posted by EBM imparts no info beyond "looks like a young man, has red hair".Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 06:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• comment - http://www.framinghamartguild.com/Man-with-red-hair-22.jpg at least i know what he looks like now.

Yep, that looks pretty accurate to me - we got the part about not having eight arms, not having giant venus flytrap petals coming out of his neck, and not having shark skin or being a giant snake.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 07:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

thank god--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 08:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose You all know my stance on this issue. If Sasori has his own image than Konan deserves one too. The only person who has an image is Pein and that's because he's a complex character and second in command. Why should Sasori, the first Akatsuki member defeated and who was only in the series for a short while get his own pic? Seriously he's not really significant enough to have his own pic. -King Hooks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk) 11:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment- Every Akatsuki member is shown, at least partially, except Sasori. Earthbendingmaster 15:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Support Look. Sasori is the only member that isn't shown. And BTW Hooks, Konan is shown at least partially, so please stop complaining and let's work together to get things done here, cool? Sasuke9031 (talk) 16:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

This discussion is fun because pretty much no matter what is decided, the set-in-stone guidelines remain the same:

1. ...(As a quick test, ask yourself: "Can this image be replaced by a different one that has the same effect, or adequately conveyed by text without using a picture at all?" If the answer is yes, the image probably does not meet this criterion.)
2. ...
3. (a) Minimal usage. As few non-free content uses as possible are included in each article and in Wikipedia as a whole. Multiple items are not used if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary.
4. Previous publication. Non-free content must have been published outside Wikipedia. {in regards to why fanart is unacceptable)
5. ...
6. ...
7. ...
8. Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
9. ...
10. Image description page. The image or media description page contains the following:...

I ask you again - what information is this image uniquely imparting beyond "looks young, red head of hair"?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 17:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose per reasons given by Snapper. Lastbetrayal (talk) 21:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose If people want to know want they look like, then they can read the Manga or see the Anime. Just showing the picture is just a spoiler. Supergodzilla^20|90 00:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Whether or not its a spoiler is of no consequence. Lastbetrayal (talk) 00:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose per reasons by SnapperTo. σмgнgσмg 00:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose per Snapper2, not bad man. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion closed, no Sasori picture, thanks everyone. Earthbendingmaster 01:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Konan Image

I am suggesting Konan has her own image, as she is poorly portrayed in the top image spread. Also, I suggest that Pain does Konan's bidding from now on. Please put Support or Oppose and a reason below. Thanks everyone. -King Hooks 02:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. Please stop disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Sasuke9031 (talk) 22:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. She's represented adequately. Additionally, the argument for her notability is quite slim. Woman with blue hair, no eyebrows, a paper flower in her hair and an Akatsuki robe. What necessary information could only a picture add? If you want pictures for all characters, see Wikia:Naruto:Konan. –Gunslinger47 23:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose As comment in the Sasori Image. Supergodzilla^20|90 00:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose Per comment by SnapperTo in the previous section. σмgнgσмg 00:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

funny thing about this is, all you people that are opposing now are the same people that were pissed off when we removed the pictures--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 01:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose per all reasons stated above. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

^ Blue-Eyes Gold Dragon's comment; truer words were never written. -King Hooks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.56.159 (talk) 01:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

thank you--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 03:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

image

can someone tell me why we need Akatsukihand.jpg ? *cough*redundant*cough* --Blue-EyesGold Dragon 03:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

If you can describe it in words only, detailing the info the pic imparts (the odd design, the position, the size, and how the members perch on it), then by all means, remove the image. But the image needs to be replaced with equivalent info if removed.

Also, it was reverted because it was obvious you were "cutting off the nose to spite the face".Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont know what that means, but i didnt remove it in spite, i saw a rule and removed it, but i dont think anyone would write a fully detailed part of the hands thing >_< --Blue-EyesGold Dragon 09:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Then I apologize for accusing you of WP:Point. If you want, it should be acceptable to delete the image and replace it with a written description.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 21:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

dont worry about it, it would be WAY to much trouble--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 04:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, So About the Akatsuki Images...

Yeah. Well, the cover for volume 41 is released and seems legit, on Leafninja. All members, including Sasori and excluding Orochimaru, are on it. So, er, once a higher quality image comes out, should we use that instead? DarkRyan75 (talk) 20:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Where is it located exactly? The link I meant. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. http://www.leafninja.com This is the site which has it. DarkRyan75 (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

If it proves legit, a cropped version of it should be acceptable to replace the one at the top.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 00:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Now Kakuzu and Hidan are only visible from the back. Oh the debate shall never end. -King Hooks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.136.172 (talk) 02:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It's the same problem with Zetsu and Orochimaru (I think). Neither of the two images fully show all members, so it's a matter of which shows more characters. ~SnapperTo 02:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, perhaps if we put in both images on the page, that would solve the problem. Though, I don't know a lot about these picture rules on Wiki. DarkRyan75 (talk) 03:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Using both would solve the problem, but because of various guidelines I wouldn't count on it happening. Lastbetrayal (talk) 03:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It shows Orochimaru and Sasori, and even the characters with their backs turned are much clearer than the image we have now. If people really want to make a fuss about only getting to see characters from the back, we can delete all the images and try to merely describe the characters using text.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 04:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Or, we could use the new picture because Orochimaru has a picture in his own article, Zetsu already has a description, Hidan could be easily described, and Kakuzu... well he's pretty much in the same boat as now what with his face in the current spread not visible. Lastbetrayal (talk) 04:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I was suggesting using the new picture.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 04:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I suggest we just keep it as it already is. In the one we already have, only Pain, Konan, and Kakuzu can't be seen, and Sasori isn't in it. Pain has a group image, so that leaves three. Kakuzu wears a mask, so make it two. Konan is simple enough: blue hair with origami flower in it. Sasori is our only problem now. As for the new one, several characters are not pictured nicely, so we'll have more problems that we already do. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 21:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course if we put them both up, everyone will be visible. -King Hooks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.136.172 (talk) 02:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I think we can safely ignore this guy, no offense, so i agree with Artist on this one. I think it would just be easier on everyone if we kept the original. Sasuke9031 (talk) 05:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Sasuke9031 provides nothing to the discussion. It is uneffective -King Hooks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.61.49 (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, what part of an agreement with a respected user provides nothing? It is you who does this. Because of people like you, the Jiraiya page is semi-protected. Again, I support Artist. That will be all. Sasuke9031 (talk) 03:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, just ignore him. He either has no understanding of logic and the guidelines, or he's a troll.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 03:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, er. That cover is out in high quality now on LeafNinja.com. Just letting you know. DarkRyan75 (talk) 07:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

revert?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Akatsuki_%28Naruto%29&curid=1589591&diff=190358928&oldid=190252162 --The Last Uchiha 10:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Lastbetrayal (talk) 18:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Orochimaru's death

should be added into it:

After two and a half years of training Sasuke, Orochimaru's current body begins to fail him, and he is forced to begin the body transfer on Sasuke. Sasuke, however, is unwilling to give him the chance and attacks a bedridden Orochimaru. Forced into a corner, Orochimaru reveals his true form and begins the transfer process, though Sasuke, like Itachi years earlier, is able to use his Sharingan to stop it. Setting himself apart from his brother, Sasuke also uses his Sharingan to take control of the dimension within Orochimaru, completely turning the process against him. When later asked by Kabuto about Orochimaru's fate, Sasuke explains that he has taken over Orochimaru, and retained possession of his body. After absorbing Orochimaru, Sasuke is able to heal at a faster rate, an ability he attributes to Orochimaru's white snake form.

While Orochimaru is considered dead in the eyes of the Naruto world, Kabuto has integrated what remained of Orochimaru into his body in an attempt to make himself into an entity even stronger than Orochimaru. The remains, however, seem to have some degree of consciousness, as they have since begun to slowly take control of his body. —Preceding unsigned comment added by P159864 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC) Whatever was left of him in Sasuke got sealed away by itachi.. He is officially dead.

That's in the main article already, isn't it? No sense adding it here when you can see it over there. Sasuke9031 (talk) 05:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

merging!!!!

I have a question, why do you guys merge everything!?!? Do you guys get finned ever time you dont merge something. People like rock lee, itachi, shikamaru,negi, hinata. I mean why. If you say they are not doing much in the story right now so the can be meged, the merge naruto, sakura, and kakashi! They are barely doing anything now. plz unmerge all those people.--Naruto Beier (talk) 04:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Articles are merged because they fail to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for fiction, not because of any so-called "importance" to the storyline. Standards have to be maintained. If suitable real-world notability is found for these characters, then they can have individual articles. Until then, they remain merged Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 04:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Besides, if I am reading the arbcom thing right, unmerging is in direct violation of the temporary injunction as placed in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2. To unmerge would result in a block, which is something I'm not keen on. Sasuke9031 (talk) 04:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No Black Fire?

Amateratsu doesn't deserve to be listed under Itachi? I mean, it is the second and last jutsu that comes equipped with his Mangekyou... T3H_CH0Z3N_0N3 (talk) 06:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

yeah its only the strongest nijutsu--The Last Uchiha 07:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Lets wait to next chapter for a better description of amaterasu.Tintor2 (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Its not the last ability alotted by the mangekyou sharingan. It appears that there is one more ability called susanoo. The only thing is that it is not activated from the eyes but rather from the users nose. It still seems as though it is only possible to use with the ms. Also from the origins of the word it is clear that this ability has something to do with storms or tempest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.22.77 (talk) 07:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I sure want your time machine >_> we have always known that the MS had at least 3 different moves --The Last Uchiha 11:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Who is Pain's JP seiyu?

I mean, Dave Wittenburg is listed for just one English episode, so why isn't the Japanese VA there? 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It because the japanese anime hasn't released the voice actor name and simply anonymous right now24.17.233.242 (talk) 00:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, he hasn't been credited in any of the episodes he's appeared in. Same for Hidan and Kakuzu when they got speaking roles. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 04:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Ref: ch 392 - Tobi or Uchiha madara

On Ch 392's Title page, it put him down as Uchiha Madara instead of Tobi. Should we do the same, too?George Leung (talk) 05:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering it is his real identity, I would agree with that...(hopefully this means the Obito=Tobi people will bug us less, too...)—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 06:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd say it's about time to stop trying to act like their different people. Kishimoto directly said this time that they are the same person. There's no more if or buts. 66.229.89.202 (talk) 07:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I say we should change tobi to Uchiha Madara as it has been directly stated it is his real identity--The Last Uchiha 09:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Tobi is Madara's alias so the name is still relevant. Uchiha Madara with Tobi in brackets should suffice. Wikiuser6 (talk) 10:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

and now the cover of Naruto 392 just confirmed it even more--The Last Uchiha 22:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Small point but if we do use that name it should be listed a Madara Uchiha since it was established long ago that the names from this series should be lited it western order (given name then family name). --76.71.209.177 (talk) 19:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I know, but i use Uchiha Madara. but if we changed tobi it would be Madara Uchiha--The Last Uchiha 08:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

And for some reason nobody's done that bracket thing that was suggested or something like Madara Uchiha/Tobi? Even after all the proof we've gotten, especially after the cover to c. 392, as the first guy here mentioned. 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well we're about to find out whose behind the mask of Tobi's so the question of who Tobi is should soon be resolved. I'm not saying it's Obito and I'm not say that it's Madara. But hopefully the next chapeter will resolve our curiosity. And is it me or did it look like Tobi had an eye patch going across towards his left eye. Then again it could have been his eyebrow. but I doubt it. (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaMakDaddy (talk • contribs)

Zetsu

In addition to the fact that Zetsu's black and half sides appear to differ in certain opinions, recent chapters works as evidence that they differ in knowledge, too, with the black side often filling in with information for the white side... Just something I thought should be noticed. 81.224.28.233 (talk) 15:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

yes, i agree with you... the black side seems to have a knowledge regarding things that others don't normally know... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.146.147 (talk) 01:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Susanoo

There is a statue of Susanoo outside konha temple in manga 314. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.47.88.22 (talk) 16:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I demand immediate cleanup.

On the Itachi section there's OR I'd like to point out, namely: His final and strongest (whether Susanoo's power exceeds the other ones' is debatable.) ability, Susanoo (須佐能乎, Susanoo?), acquired only after mastering Tsukuyomi and Amaterasu, (pure speculation) creates a massive ethereal warrior that will fight on Itachi's behalf, and otherwise shields him from all attacks. Each ability is progressively more taxing for Itachi to use, such that after performing Susanoo he starts coughing up blood. (we do not know yet if that was because of Susanoo, or previously inflicted damage. Although I'm leaning towards the Susanoo-is-guilty explanation, I'd rather be safe and exclude possibly true information, than sorry and include straight-out incorrect one.)

Another thing worth pointing out is the fact that we currently have no information about Pain actually being the same person as Nagato. The fact that they have similar doctrines and philosophies does stand true, but it was also pointed out, even by Jiraiya himself, that none of the bodies is Nagato's. If erasing the information about Nagato being Pain is out of the question then it should at lest be mentioned that Nagato's real body has yet to make an appearance.

I'd also like to point out the fact that the first part of Tobi's section, the one dealing with his and Deidara's relationship, is written in presens instead of imperfect, this should be changed.

I suppose that's all I can come up with for the time being. Since I'm not the type to edit wiki-articles, I'll leave that up to you guys. Bye! 217.208.26.188 (talk) 14:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• "after mastering Tsukuyomi and Amaterasu" - I don't remember which translation I read that in, so I removed it.
• "His final and strongest" - I believe Zetsu says it's his strongest on a few occasions.
• "after performing Susanoo he starts coughing up blood" - Zetsu suggests this, and we've no reason to doubt him.
• "Pain = Nagato" - The article doesn't say they're the same person; though both are listed under the same heading, the only connection made between the two is that they both have the Rinnegan.
• "Imperfect tense" - Fiction is always written in present tense. Deidara being dead doesn't change the rules. ~SnapperTo 17:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, Zetsu never states that Susasnoo is the strongest technique, but he does state that the Totsuka no tsurugi combined with the Yata no kagami renders Itachi invincible. Basically, you say poe-tay-toe, I say po-tah-toe... I'm not quite sure, but the newest chapter seems to suggest otherwise (it shows a flashback image of when Itachi got hit with the fuuma blade, suggesting that it may have something to do with that), however until a translated version is released I'll keep my answer on speculative hold... The first possessor of the Rinnegan that Jiraiya met was Nagato (長門, Nagato?), who, like Yahiko and Konan, was left orphaned by one of Amegakure's many wars. Once meeting the three, Jiraiya looked after them and taught them basic jutsu before leaving to continue his exploration of the world. Sometime after this, Nagato began to believe that his childhood sufferings had enlightened him, and started to view himself as a god destined to teach the world the meaninglessness of fighting. If this part doesn't imply/suggest/state that Pein = Nagato, then hardly nothing ever will. 217.208.24.163 (talk) 00:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Everything in your quote is true of Nagato. The following line, "It is unknown what happened after this, but the Pain entity soon appeared in Amegakure" should make clear the ambiguity of whether or not they are the same character. I was very careful to avoid saying Nagato = Pain when writing that section, but perhaps you can think of a better way to organize it? Entirely removing Nagato from the section would be the obvious solution, but it's simpler for the time being to keep them together. Thoughts? ~SnapperTo 03:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That is true... Do you think we could reach some kind of compromiss then? This part: Sometime after this, Nagato began to believe that his childhood sufferings had enlightened him, and started to view himself as a god destined to teach the world the meaninglessness of fighting. IS after all speculative in nature. If Nagato and Pein are one and the same it's obviously true, but if they're NOT it's actually speculation and OR... So, at the very best, do you think we could, if not remove that part on grounds of being speculative, at least change it to leave it a little more ambigious? 81.228.148.26 (talk) 10:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Since it is at the very least true of Pain, I moved it to the Pain portion of the paragraph. Is that better? ~SnapperTo 18:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Umm, what part did you move, I honestly can't see the change? (Did someone change it back?) 81.228.148.26 (talk) 19:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, wait! I see it now! Sorry... Yes, I'm completely content. Thanks, Snapper2. ^^ 81.228.148.26 (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Orochimaru Article

Some white snakes escaped from Orochimaru's body when Itachi sealed him, so he may still be able to come back through them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.112.148 (talk) 18:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Since Orochimaru was able to come back to life through Sasuke, then it's evident that he could do the same through Kabuto. Even though Itachi summon (a skeletor version of Gigantor) than that should really have it's own article. -PeanutButterMonger —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.88.158.78 (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

If I read what you wrote right, the it should come to your attention that Orochimaru already has an article. Lastbetrayal (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Uh... could you right that a little more clearly? Anyhow, Orochimaru's soul resided in Sasuke. Kabuto got a little bit of his corpse. I doubt that Orochimaru will completely resurrect himself from that. Kabuto may be destroyed, or he may not, but whatever is created from this will probably only be a shadow of Orochimaru's power, though maybe with some trace memories left over, if he absorbed any gray matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.140.194 (talk) 13:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Madara on Manga Character Section

In the Character section of Volume 41, Tobi is again there with the rest of the cast. However, unlike volume 40, which reffered him as Tobi, he is instead called Madara. Since he's called Madara in the character section of the manga, do you guys think we should refer Tobi as Madara on his section now? Or should we wait a bit longer? 66.220.242.162 (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC) fantasyleader

the editing on this article is stubborn and stunted as usual. no wonder akatsuki_(naruto) will never reach ga class again. reversion trigger-happiness destroys articles a lot. AnimeNikkaJamal (talk) 04:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Making completely pointless posts isn't much better.
I think I've already commented on this issue, since it's been raised before.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 04:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Tobi named Uchiha Madara in the character section isn't considered proof? Someone kindly posted the page and it seems pretty conclusive to me.

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/4316/madaramh7.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiuser6 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Tobi is what everyone in akatsuki (except for Pain and Konan during there meetings) call him so i think the artacle should stay that way.

Oruchimaru former member

(3-23-08) I think that there should be a change because Oruchimaru is actualy a former Akatsuki member. Remember that the Akatsuki are after him and that Oruchimaru wants Naruto and his friends to kill as many members as they can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Studmuffin60 (talk • contribs) 05:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

But it was never stated officially that he's dead. We're only going on Zetsu's word, and he's not close enough to tell. Jazz Band Member (talk) 12:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

That's ridiculous. We SEE the corpse-not breathing, moving, the eyes and mouth open- and Zetsu says he's dead...Zetsu is a spy who's job it is to make sure of this stuff and he's been observing the fight long enough. When Zetsu says Itachi is dead and we SEE the corpse, that's confirmation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.42.105 (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

how do you see that hes not breathing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.29.35 (talk) 21:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Because in every other single shot of someone lying on the ground in this manga there are sounds or words to indicate breathing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.42.105 (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

if you read the story, youd know that seeing a body and someone saying hes dead doesnt make someone dead. Heck, didnt itachi die 2 or 3 times during the battle with sasuke? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.165.41 (talk) 22:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, by your logic, sasuke is also dead, since we see him lying right next to itachi, lifeless and not breathing. Zetsu says itachi passed out and then says "you don't think itachis dead" which is a question, not a conformation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.165.41 (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

How does one pass out with their eyes open? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Red13utterfly (talk • contribs) 12:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

i dont know how you can die with your eyes open but heck, if haku can die with his eyes open then i guess itachi can also! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.89.192 (talk) 06:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

With all evidence we have right now, it can be concluded Itachi is, in fact, dead. If he turns out to still be alive, like Deidara in the Rescue Gaara arc, then it will be confirmed LATER, which counts under crystal ball. Until it can be 100% confirmed Itachi is alive, then he counts as a dead person. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

lol. Thats using the whole "guilty until proven innocent" logic. He never should have been put under dead until it can be 100% confirmed that he's dead. since we put him there without confirmation, that's crystal ball. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.165.41 (talk) 16:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It's logic. By the way, the translation is 'Itachi's dead?!' and then shows Itachi's a corpse. Got it? Not moving or breathing. Zetsu says Sasuke is passed out, 'Sasuke won' and cries out that Itachi is dead. Deal with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.39.46 (talk) 17:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally, i dislike itachi, it's not about me dealing with it. Zetsu says "you don't think(page change) Itachi's Dead?!" That certainly isnt a confirmation. Yes, we see him laying there, however zetsu says he passed out. We also see sasuke laying there next to him, with no indication that he's breathing. All im saying is that to say that he's dead is using a crystal ball, it has not been confirmed even remotely.72.78.253.225 (talk) 23:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Again, absurd. Zetsu doesn't say he passed out, he says he collapsed and then says "Itachi's Dead...." And we SEE THE BODY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.39.46 (talk) 23:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The page right before "itachis dead" starts off with zetsu saying "itachi passed out", and when he says "itachi's dead" it is most likely in the form of a question since it's preceeded with "you don't think". You, sir, are an idiot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.155.80 (talk) 19:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

First Zetsu's one half says 'Itachi passed out...?' He takes a closer look: half 1: N-no way.. Half 2: You...don't think... Half 1: Itachi's dead?! Followed by a view of the corpse. Thank you, go away now.

Itachi is 100% percent dead. It has just been revealed by a confirmed and translated spoiler script for chapter 395.

跳びの横にゼツが出てくる！ Zetsu appears right beside Tobi.

跳び［どうだった？] Tobi: Well?

ゼツ［終わったよ。] Zetsu: It's over.

佐倉［何あれ？] Sakura: Who's that?

ゼツ［刺すけの勝ち！ｲﾀﾁｪは死亡。] Zetsu:Sasuke won. Itachi died.

Kishi sucks.--Tommyss (talk) 08:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Please reread that chapter because no where does Zetsu say Itachi passed out. He said "that...Itachi isn't dead. Chapter 394 page 3 and 4. Now I can't say Itachi is dead or if it was the real Itachi as Zetsu stated that "that" Itachi implying that it may not be the real guy. Also Itachi never said Sasuke passed out. Sasuke just fell. But by the way he lays there he seems dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.159.245.20 (talk) 12:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong, sorry. He yells 'Itachi's dead?!" and that's it. Want the picture of it or will you be quiet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.46.122 (talk) 15:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to be mean about what I said. but I gave you the page so you can look it up. if not it's the the last panel of page 3 and the full panel of Itachi's face page for. However in Chapter 395 it has been comformed by Zetsu to Tobi that he's dead. Just has Tobi said he predicted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.159.245.20 (talk) 12:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to tell when Tobi is serious or not. Dreadwins (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

A translation of the script for chapter 397 states that not only is Itachi alive, but Nagato might not be a Path of Pain.

BOTH Tobi and Zetsu say that Itachi is dead and all 5 remaining members see the corpse... I know you can't beleve it, I personally was rooting for Itachi, and want to rip sasukes head off, but it's the truth. we are down to 5: Pain, Konan, Zetsu, Tobi, and Kisame.

Info. and Plot Info

Could we make seperate paragraphs for the Info on the character and the events in the plot for the character please. It's very difficult sometimes to find the full plot (The character has). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.249.135 (talk) 22:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Tobi's space,time ninjutsu

in the latest chapter, Tobi is shown to be able to use space/time ninjutsu. and kakashi even said it was even better then the Fourth's. i think we should put that in Tobi's info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 16:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

itachi dead

shouldn't itachi be put on the former members list now —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.216.112.137 (talk) 22:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Since we do not know whether or not he's really dead, or if Sasuke will spare him at the last second and go for the true instigator of the clan's death, Madara, we cannot say that. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and should not be treated as such. Sasuke9031 (talk) 23:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Until the real chapter that shows his death (not a spoiler) comes out can we call him dead --Rofur (talk) 02:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't assume he died, that is speculating. Wait until the chapter comes out. σмgнgσмg^(talk) 10:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I read the untranslated version of the chapter on saiyanisland; looks like he really is dead. If so, then there isn't any harm in waiting only another day for translated chapters to come out. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 14:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Itachi is a former member. If I remember correctly, you guys put deidara on the former members list right when chapter 363 came out, which was mostly less than 1 chapter after he blew himself up. In addition, deidara actually blew himself up before, and no one brough that up to protest against his death. What's special about Itachi? TobiSamoht (talk) 15:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it had more to do with the circumstances of Deidra's death that Itachi being special. A person has a much better chance of surviving if the collapsed from battle than if they exploded. In short Deidra's death was much less questioanable. --76.69.168.148 (talk) 03:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think he died, just maybe collapsed from overuse of the sharingan. March 27 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangekyosharingan14 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering as mentioned several times that Zetsu stated that he was dead that seems hightly unlikely. I think that Zetsu would have noticed the difference between Itachi being dead and simply out cold. --76.71.210.45 (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

In chapter 396, Madara/Tobi tells Zetsu they "need to get Itachi's corpse", so that's pretty much confirming he's dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.26.133.248 (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kisame's partner

Will Kisame get a partner in the net chapter, or should that partnership info be changed to None, formerly Itachi Uchiha? Sasuke9031 (talk) 00:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

They didn't specify Itachi's death as of Ch. 394 (Sasuke's Victory) so it goes to say that he should remain an active member of Akatsuki until it is said "Itachi is dead" or something along those lines. Narchy (talk) 02:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Zetsu's cries out in shock "Itachi's dead?!" And we cut to an image of Itachi's lifeless body...he's not moving, not breathing, his mouth and eyes are open, and to top it off, it starts pouring rain-if he ain't dead yet, he's drowning alright. Zetsu outright confirms it, though...and given that we see Itachi's unmoving, non breathing corpse...it's confirmed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.35.92 (talk) 02:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

yes itachi is dead--The Last Uchiha 02:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

He's dead, fanboys, deal with it. JuJube (talk) 11:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

and if it turns out he isnt we can just change it anyway--The Last Uchiha 13:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

itach is dead ppl. i know its hard for his fangirls but hey, dont complain to me. try telling mashi kishimoto that after he already published it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.89.192 (talk) 06:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Chapter 396 has been released. Tobi has Sasuke, so maybe Sasuke will take his brother's place in Akatsuki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.26.133.248 (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Recall

My bad he is under former. It looked like it because under it it said former agents. By the way What is the differecnt between an agent and member —Preceding unsigned comment added by Studmuffin60 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

An agent works for the Akatsuki, while a member is in the Akatsuki. Jazz Band Member (talk) 15:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

why does it matter orochimaru's dead —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.115.245 (talk) 20:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Pein/Pain

Does somebody have a link or something to show these "discussions" where it was decided that Pain would be the spelling? Gune (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

See the little archive box in the top right corner? They're in there. Specifically, see Talk:Akatsuki (Naruto)/Archive 13#Pein or Pain?. Have a nice day. --erachima formerly tjstrf 00:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Also Talk:Akatsuki (Naruto)/Archive 13#Paeinful, 2007 also covers this. --76.71.211.225 (talk) 22:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It would be obiusly be pain because mishi would'nt wanted the usa or europe to be offended be pein eg penis i know its dumb but pain is much more cooler..

Itachi's Death

For right now, I think the part about Itachi having died should be removed. He collapsed and certainly looks close to death, but until it's absolutely confirmed, it's just speculation. 24.131.8.253 (talk) 13:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Itachi is dead as of chapter 393. Wiki360 (talk) 07:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Please update the Akatsuki article since Uchiha Itachi deceased in chapter 393 (http://read.mangashare.com/Naruto/chapter-393/page001.html).

I still cannot understand why Itachi lost to his younger and definitely still weaker brother ... Kishi starts pissing me off. Tommyss (talk) 10:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

It was never explicitly said that Itachi is dead. He simply collapsed. Until we get a more definitive confirmation, I say we just add a mention about him collapsing before he could take the eyes.60.52.123.220 (talk) 10:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Itachi isnt dead, he just past out--The Last Uchiha 10:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Usually when you fall on the ground after being unable to grab something and start bleeding from every orifice on your face, you're done. Except for Bleach. Nobody dies in Bleach. 76.7.238.234 (talk) 18:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Most characters in Bleach are already dead. Dying twice is probably difficult. Just ask Son Goku! ~SnapperTo 18:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

As often as people on Wikipedia argue about speculation, I'd think this wouldn't be any different. Until the next chapter rolls around and Sasuke/Zetsu/God himself confirms that Itachi is done for, he should remain in the active roster. 24.131.8.253 (talk) 21:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't call Sasuke "definitely weaker" than Itachi. Sasuke is still standing. Itachi is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.140.194 (talk) 13:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, because Tobi killed him. Sasuke is so much weaker than Itachi that it's incomparable. Remember how Itachi was clearly weakened since the fight started?

It was never explicitly said that Itachi is dead. He simply collapsed. Until we get a more definitive confirmation, I say we just add a mention about him collapsing before he could take the eyes.60.52.123.220 (talk) 10:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC) I AGREE WITH THIS 100 % —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.56.108 (talk) 21:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. If Itachi was dead, they probably would have said so. Jazz Band Member (talk) 11:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Just to point it out, but if you read the little words that look narrator-ish on the page where Itachi collapses, the words being used strongly suggest Itachi is dead. This doesn't count as absolute proof, though. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 17:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The recent chapter pretty clearly says Itachi is dead...recent spoiler pics of 394 confirm it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.213.237 (talk) 12:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

in the version that I read it just said that he was paralyzed and spoilers don't count they can be misleading so it shouldn't be said he is dead--71.218.196.182 (talk) 02:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The chapter is now out...Zetsu says Itachi is dead, and we're shown his corpse very clearly...lying there, not breathing, moving, and the eyes are even open. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.35.92 (talk) 22:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok so Itachi is dead just like I said he was last week Wiki360 (talk) 03:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Although I think it too soon to list him as such, it seems it’s been decided to list Itachi as dead. In that case, shouldn’t there be a (Deceased) description next to his age in the article?--Halls452 (talk) 23:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Although I disagree with Itachi being dead (how can you tell if a picture of a character is breathing or not?) his page needs to be cleaned up. His age for Part II was deleted when deceased was put in. Also, cant this argument simply be solved by writing (Assumed Deceased)... it would basically solve both parties' claims. 24.184.73.244 (talk) 02:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Dreadwins (talk) 17:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC) I agree, Itachi being dead is just a speculation for now.

How is it speculation? His partner cleary stated that he was dead when he say the body and he later told Tobi the same thing in the next chapter. --76.69.164.193 (talk) 22:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Dreadwins (talk) 09:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC) Yeah but neither of them are doctors :P - but to be more serious,. "Also, cant this argument simply be solved by writing (Assumed Deceased)... it would basically solve both parties' claims." seems like a good idea for now.

Well Itachi has been called a corpse by Madara who was standing right next to Itachi. So he's really dead... Dreadwins (talk) 13:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Madara created Akatsuki - reference?

At the top of the article, it says Madara created Akatsuki and references "Page 5 of Volume 17, Chapter 143." Two problems: 1) Chapter 143 is in Volume 16, not 17. 2) There is nothing on that page that says anything about Madara Uchiha. I don't recall seeing anything about Madara creating Akatsuki. If he did, there needs to be a real reference.Jdlordhelmet (talk) 22:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Chapter 386, page 14. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see it there either, but now I do see it on page 11 of chapter 386.Jdlordhelmet (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Tobi did create the akatsuki or he is the current leader —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.115.245 (talk) 20:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

No because know one would know he is the Leader in Secret Sasori was so rude to him he would'nt of been if he knew. Perry.H —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.118.96 (talk) 19:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Add deceased to the dead members

We should put that they are deceased by the names of the Akatsuki that ARE dead. It saves people the trouble of having to read there info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.76.123 (talk) 00:35, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Spelling and Grammar

The page is semi-protected, so I can't fix any spelling or grammar mistakes I find, so I thought I'd start a section in the talk page for errors, which hopefully someone else can fix for me.

The section on Tobi uses the word "hace", which does not exist; in context, it seems clear that the author meant "face".

The article on Deidara contains "was as", which is invalid grammar. My best guess for what it's supposed to say is "was working as". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.28.100 (talk) 08:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)