Talk:Naruto/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Kakashi Gaiden: Episodes 191 - 193

Can anyone confirm this?

All I can say is this: the title of Episode 191 has been revealed and it doesn't sound like Kakashi Gaiden. SpionKop 03:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Doubt it. Plus Im betting that Kakashi Gaiden will be an Hour Long episode for a few reasons. We havent had one since New years and we are due for one comming up. Kakashi Gaiden isnt that long of an arc and it will probably span a whole 2 episodes.

I guess its not, We have just past that episode --Guille2015 03:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

From what i heard, kakashi gaiden satrts on november.-- NaruSasuSaku 10:49, 28 July 2006

I've checked out other Naruto forum sites. There are three theories that surfaced:

• 2nd part of Naruto is said to start 2007, beginning with Kakashi gaiden.
• Kakashi Gaiden may start with Episode 200 or 201, leading to Naruto 2.
• This did not came from the fansites and I'm not sure which filler episode was that, but the editor of the fansub who put in the English subtitles flashed after the opening song, that there will be 60 more filler episodes. I think it was on one of the Bikochuu bug episodes.

Like I said, these are just theories... speculation may be the more appropriate term. --Francis820 06:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

There are now unconfirmed reports from various Naruto fan sites that Naruto 2 may be starting next month. Reports say that the fillers will end at episode 199, which is the episode scheduled for the last week of August (then they'll do some re-runs...just kidding). Naruto 2 will start with episode 200-204, Kakashi gaiden, then the main story will start at episode 205. Francis820 02:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've heard tell of such things. Wait until we get some confirmation, though. Don't want to have a Tinny Tim incident ("You've raised my hopes and dashed them quite spectacularly, sir. Bravo!"). – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 02:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I had guessed and heard tht it would be the next season after this one meaning episode 203+. Since 202 is the end of season two, plus if you look at the name of 201, 202 episode they are probally not about kakashi gaiden. I'm guess the next seeasons tarts in october/november.

Sai

As of chapter 310, it is quite obvious that Sai is not an enemy. He should be removed from the "Enemies" section of the menu. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.234.217.131 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with this. I think he has been able to sufficiently prove that he is loyal to Konoha right now, after the he was given the "Uzumaki Naruto lecture/battle to change one's mind." --GhostStalker 04:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think anything has ever been obvious on Naruto, especially when your referring to those on again off again good guys like Sai or Kabuto I think for characters like that we should just have a neutral section until we're sure that they are on the side of the good guys or on the side of the bad guys. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mjprotege (talk • contribs) 16:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Censorship reaction

In the section: "Censorship reaction", the following phrase: " The original curse seal resembled a swastika, while the edited version was an "X". " can be misunderstood because it assumes that the Original Japanese version of the Anime has the Swastika. The Manga Has the swastika simble, but the Anime removed this even in Japan for fear of negative critical response because of the erroneous association of the simble with the nazi swastika. Also, there needs some reference too. --Guille2015 04:46, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

The paragraph about the censorship on the UK channel Jetix is a little wrong, as Sexy Jutsu does appear in the show on this channel, but edited. It appeared in the episode shown on Sunday 23rd July.

The link to the One Piece article section re: censorship is no longer valid. Suggest either removing the link or finding another example of a censored Anime in the U.S. --SFTheWanderer 16:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

FYI, the symbol that resembles a swastika is an ancient symbol of Buddha, representing his footsteps.

--perfectblue 11:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The text says that the Sexy Jutsu and Harem Jutsu were removed form the UK version. They might have been cropped or airbrushed at bit, but these scenes were still in some episodes.

--perfectblue 11:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The old Naruto and Talk:Naruto pages?

Naruto used to be a disambig page, and there was a discussion page associated with it. Are the contents of these pages archived anywhere? The current disambig page was created relatively recently (11 April 2006). IIRC in the discussion, there was a vote then as to whether "Naruto (manga)" should have been moved to "Naruto", which was overwhelmingly opposed by vote count. —Tokek 13:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Alcoholism

"Many elements that were expected to be edited out of the broadcast version were left intact, including references to alcoholism....."

I as recall from the original, there was no alcohol where the series is now for the US (in the 30s). 04:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC) Alexzero77

The Sake label on Tazuna's bottle was edited, along with the redness on his face, but he was still drinking Sake. They didn't change the drink itself.

The Wretched

Oh yeah, lol, perhaps you should add that there. 20:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC) Alexzero77

whats kish's comments on filler?

everyone keeps on talking and claiming the fillers have nothing to do with naruto 2, and i just wanna know kishimoto's view on the fillers because isn't he the writer??

From what I've seen, such comments are merely unhappy fans who don't like the anime filler. Sadly, their opinions have wormed their way into every single anime-based detail. With the way this series is being run, it's a safe asumption that what happens in the filler arcs will be respected by the manga since they're minor details at best (for example, who cares if Mizuki came back, since he's a minor character). – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 14:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Generally an author has the final say, or atleast some say in their work. So most likely the filler is approved for use and as the article states, it would be a bad thing for the anime series to go past the story that the manga has established. But the filler is often trite, with even more forced bursts of action. Their will be very minor stories that have nothing to do with anything and then a battle scene, which is usually quickly over before it began. Another problem with the filler is that it was slated to end weeks ago(actually I believe its been months now), but has continued. Even a new techinique for them to explore (and exploit) would be nice, but instead we get stories that don't give any history or depth to the characters involved and don't progress the story at all. If these filler episodes had been better spaced. A block of filler then the original story then more filler, we wouldn't have the current problems which we have now. That problem being the show getting stale effectively making it jump the shark. Zanduar 21:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

They were probably waiting for the third movie to come out before delving into Part II; at least, one would hope that's the case. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Or maybe, Japanese fans still want to see more of Naruto as what he currently is and the makers of the anime are capitalizing on this point. Like when an artist has a high selling album currently out in the market, he wouldn't immediately release a new one even if there's already material for it. --Beef noodles 00:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Translator

This has nothing to do with anything specifically involving Naruto, but what does Wikipedia use to translate Japanese Text into English characters. I've been looking for a translator, but it only translates English Text into Japanese Characters, and vise versa. I'm looking for one that'll translate into Japanese, but with English characters. Anyone?

The Wretched

[1] is a preety nice one (though sometimes inaccurate); but i don't think wikipedia has tools for translation. It's Probably user's going back and forth. --Bud0011 22:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I use Jim Breen's WWWJDIC. --Pentasyllabic 00:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Assessment

I have changed the article's assessment to B-class: ilacks substantial criticism, and doesn't seemingly discuss the manga in detail, thus failing the "fairly complete" as requirement of the assessment scheme. There is a discussion about it on the Anime and Manga Wikiproject, please also see nominations for A-class.--Monocrat 14:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Much had been discussed on how to improve the Naruto article, and one of the major criticisms was that the main page was too long. Therfore, substantial portions regarding plot, characters, arc stories, chapter lists, ... have been moved to separate pages. With 300+ manga chapters published, adding the necessary detrail about the manga story could take up considerably more room. I am not familiar with class standards, so my question to you is: do you think it is better to have an incredibly long plot section in the main page, and then have the main page critisized for being too long, or would you rather have a small plot summary with a link to relevant pages? --Byakuren 03:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

A-class would branch out to other related articles. Sorry to say, but aside from the main article (which has its faults), a lot of the sub-articles are really poorly formatted. Case in point: all the move lists. That double-indenting scheme is simply strange. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 03:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Three answers:

1. 1. It's very hard to include "substantial criticism" of a creative work and still satisfy WP:NOR. If there's a body of verifiable Naruto criticism out there, I suppose that someone could start a Naruto criticism sub-page. (Also, I don't see "substantial critism" as a necessary element as I read the assessment criteria.
   2. With that said, I don't think anyone but the assessment committee should be giving out A-ratings. Can you submit the page for assessment committee review.
   3. With that said, I think the Naruto page deserves S-class, not A-class.  ;)

TheronJ 20:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

B class sounds fair, something a bit lower might have been better :D (130.113.226.6 14:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC))

"Many"

Just letting everyone know that I've toned down the usage of "many" in the Censorship section to just one use, and either deleted the others, or replaced with things such as "a number of" and things like that since the sub-page listed that as one of the issues. Hope it's right.

The Wretched

You also seem to want to tone down the correct "Chūnin" for the wrong "Cuunin". Please stop it. Danny Lilithborne 04:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. My mistake. See, I dunno how to put that line above the u.

The Wretched

You should at least know to use an h. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Did I forget the h? Another mistake by me. My bad.

The Wretched

Characters - Naruto/Sakura Romance Spoilers

Removed the following:

Naruto's romantic interest lies in Haruno Sakura. In the first part of the series, Sakura rejected Naruto frequently, or scolded him whenever he did something that did not please her. While Naruto has a crush on Sakura, Sakura (as with most other girls of the academy) is deeply infatuated with Uchiha Sasuke. She later shows a change in attitude towards Sasuke, and recognizes him as a good friend and a strong comrade as her love matures. However, Sakura's feelings for Naruto slowly begin to change for the better, and Sakura becomes gentler and kinder with Naruto. Recent manga chapters show that Sakura seems to be developing stronger feelings toward Naruto as well, and she regards him as a trusted friend. Hyūga Hinata of Kurenai's Team 8 has been comically smitten with Naruto since the start of the series; always blushing or fainting in his presence and fainting once again when she sees him after a two-and-a-half year absence. Naruto, however, is completely oblivious to her obvious affection.

I removed the above paragraph due to the spoilers. An FA-level article should avoid having unmarked spoilers. A friend of mine is not following the manga and stated that he felt the above revealed too much information about the series. Since this is the main article for Naruto we should try to avoid having spoiler information wherever possible.

It might be nice to include a note or two about the Naruto/Sakura romance since it is included from the very beginning of the series, but including post-timeskip information without tags is a little much. Trim and rephrase? - Meersan 05:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I could agree with that. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 05:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Why not move the End Spoiler in the end of Plot Overview to the end of Characters?

The Wretched

Because they're sectioned separately. There are two separate tags. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

That's why it says "Article or section". But, if it really can't be done, then leave the one in Plot Summary, and make one for Characters.

The Wretched

Actually, there's already one there. So...what's up?

The Wretched

You should have just said there were no spoilers. The tags are gone. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

what??

what happened to the list of naruto story arcs and episodes??

Moved. Check the navigation box at the bottom. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 19:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Kish and Naruto anime

isn't it the kish's descision? what are his view on the filler episodes? Masashi Kishimoto DESCISION! WRITERS DESCISION ! CREATOR OF NARUTO AND MANGA DESCISION!

i just want to know the creator of naruto's view on the filler episodes instead of his fans.

Moving articles

Since this is a multiple page problem, I'm just issuing a blanket statement here. Please do not move pages by simply copy/pasting the content into the name you want to use. I just went through the Clash of Ninja articles restoring the original pages. If you can't move a page to the correct name, ask an administrator to help. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 03:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Ages

I noticed that the ages of most characters are listed according to the first data book. In most cases however, the character is a year older according to the second data book (dead characters seem to be the only exceptions). Because of this, the "add 3 to part I age to determine part II age" process could be giving the wrong information. So, should I go through the character pages and fix these ages to reflect the second data book, or should I just leave it alone? --Snapper2 23:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Second will be considered more factually accurate than the first. Better yet, stick with the Part II values since they're the most recent. This Part I/II switching gets confusing. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 23:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Should I put "X in Part II" since all other information (height and weight in particular) is according to part I? --Snapper2 23:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 14:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Since Geg reverted most of the pages, maybe I should just change the part I ages to reflect the second data book? Part II ages could be fixed whenever an actual source is released. --Snapper2 22:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

He's fixing it. I pointed him here. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 22:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The pre time-skip ages of all the characters are known from the data books. However, in the character pages, the post time-skip ages are listed. I think this presents a problem, in that the time-skip is not a round number of years, but "approximately" two and a half years from the end of Naruto: Part I. This means that the age number might change by just 2 years for some charaters post-timeskip, and by 3 years for others, depending on their birtdate and the date at which Naruto I ends. (Unless someone can cite a source on the post time-skip ages, in which case I'll gladly stand corrected.)

Why not list the canonical age according to either data book, rather than the dubiously calculated post time-skip age? I suggest we revert to pre time-skip age, or at the very least, list both figures. --Byakuren 01:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

An anonymous user has gone around reverting the ages. So, I'm gonna go ahead and do this: Since both two different ages are listed for part one, that's what I'll do. For example, Naruto will be "12-13 in Part I" and "15 in Part II". The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Question: At what point in the manga is Akamaru's age mentioned? The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I could've sworn they showed Kiba's and Akamaru's backstory during the Sasuke Retrieval arc, and from the age at which Kiba got Akamaru, comeone might've calculated Akamaru's age. BUT I can't seem to find it in the manga, so it might be they just showed it on the anime... Can anyone confirm? --Byakuren 19:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

B-Class

So...what's up? I thought it deserved at least GA-Class. Unless it's just rated this 'cause of the Anime Wikiproject, which I imagine is going through the anime articles and figuring them out and will restore a better rating when everything gets better... The Wretched 01:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Absolutly not there are so many fan speculation. This article barely deservs a B rank at this moment. Until the manga is done we cant make an accurate article that deservs an A Koopo 14:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

In addition to that, an individual go only assess an article as B or lower. To get a GA status, the article must undergo a perry review (same as FA status, A-class just needs a quick concensus on the talk page). --Miss Ethereal 15:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Shinigami (Bleach) made GA status recently without the manga being finished yet, so it's not necessarily a requirement. You just need to make sure all your data is verified and your vandalism, POV, and speculation are reverted. --tjstrf 21:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Part 2 anime starts to surface

Ok, now finally we starts to see some accual evidence the fillers are ending. About a weak ago the title for episode 197 was posted on animenewsnetwork: "It's Kakashi-sensei's birthday!" (カカシ先生の誕生日だってばよ！, Kakashi-sensei no tanjōbi dattebayo!)

In the Gaiden if you remember it was Kakashi's birthday. However the episode title information have been wrong before so none really believed it was accually true.

Now resently the trailer was released for Naruto movie nr 3:

• http://naruto.com/j/

In the trailer you can see the following:

• http://img467.imageshack.us/img467/1272/ending1dr.jpg
• [white text]
• Series biggest scale gift in history,
• [red text]
• final chapter of part 1.

The movie will hit the theaters sometime in August, about the time when episode 197 airs Koopo 14:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

That episode title is fake. -The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:54, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Why do you say the episode title is a fake? It is posted on ANN... -- Byakuren 00:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

ANN is not a reliable source. This is the only reliable source for episode titles: http://cal.syoboi.jp/tid/210/subtitle. Besides, that Kakashi's birthday title was also "released" with a title for episode 196, which has since been proven to be fake. -The Splendiferous Gegiford 00:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, fair enough. BTW, the gifts in Kakashi Gaiden are because Kakashi is turning jōnin, not because it's his B-day... just in case!!! -- Byakuren 01:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Kakashi isn't a sensei yet when he become jounin, so the name "It's Kakashi-sensei birthday" implies it happened during his time with Naruto.

It could also begin some sort of "remembering" from Kakashi. Like everyone congratulates him (Naruto and co)and at the end (or in some point) he begins to think of the past, thus giving path to the Gaiden. Just my two-cents.

Assuming that may be true, I guess it will just mark the end of Part 1 of the anime and then we'll have to watch reruns of the whole series before part 2 surfaces. I'm guessing that the creators of the anime would just let the manga finish at least up to the point where (hopefully) Naruto and his team manages to rescue Sasuke before Orochimaru takes over him... and if the anime catches up to the manga again, we can perhaps sit back, relax and enjoy some filler episodes. I mean, after all the drama, it would be a nice change of pace. --Beef noodles 18:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The name for 197 is now 木の葉の11人全員集合 --> "The Konoha 11 All Assemble" --Guille2015 04:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Small Change

In the section about the uncut box set, the dub is actually recorded unedited and then cut later, not the other way around.--75.7.149.4 21:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Info from Dattebayo article

The Dattebayo article is likely going to be deleted, so here is the info from that article:

From the Japanese plain copula 「だ」 ("da"), which translates as all non-past forms of the verb "to be" except location phrases such as "there is" (which would be better translated as 「いる」 "iru" for animate objects and 「ある」 "aru" for inanimate) and 「〜ってばよ」 ("-ttebayo"), a colloquial verb ending that makes the speaker sound uncultured, brusque, and trying to seem tougher than they really are.

"Dattebayo" is most associated with Naruto from the anime/manga of the same name. In the English translation of the anime (and in the video games), "dattebayo" is rendered as "believe it!" despite not having any semantic meaning.

According to the fansub group "Dattebayo"'s website (4th answer on their FAQ) the word means nothing and is used at the end of a sentence by Naruto (main character of the anime of the same name).

Included it in this article as you will. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 21:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

If anything, It goes in the Uzumaki Naruto article, not here. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, include it there as you will. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 07:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Done, for whatever usefullness it may hold. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 07:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I've seen 「ってば」 most often used by children who are trying to get others' attention, especially that of their parents (who are usually ignoring them for a reason -- e.g. Kaa-san tteba! "Moooom!!"). 「ったら」 is a related form. Secondarily, it's something that can be added to emphasize what's already been said, often to stress that the speaker is repeating him/herself and may be annoyed at having to do so. From this standpoint (as an attention-getting device and to add emphasis), one could probably infer that Naruto uses it all the time in order to have people notice him, and take what he's saying seriously (not that they actually do). --Julian Grybowski 22:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I rememeber reading a interview online when someone asked the meaning of Naruto's "dattebayo" habit, and Kishimoto saying: "That isn't really modeled on anything either. When I thought of childlike speech, "dattebayo" instantly came to mind. It's like it's become a part ofNaruto, and even now it brings out his "mischievousness".". Observation 13:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

Er so why was the trivia I added removed? There has been no reason given and I can't fathom why.

Because it was either speculative nonsense (Naruto's father) or appalingly obvious (biju). – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 20:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Tasks for improving the article

• Add references (Artbooks, Guides, Manga chapters, Jump etc.)
• Clean up Allover

- Malomeat 19:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Spoilers Tags Are Wrong

The spoilers tags do not come in early enough. I don't want to spoil the series for myself any more than I just have done, so I won't help. You cannot identify story arc's by name if the name is going to ruin it for the reader. Please be hot on this; it's very easy to ruin it for the reader.  ;) --CalPaterson 00:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you're overreacting about this. Two little words barely spoil the plot. Sasuke Retrieval: retrieve him from what? Rescue Gaara: fairly self-explanitory, but from what? And so on, and so forth. There's no spoiler material at any point before the first spoiler warning, aside from small scenes noted in the editing section. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 02:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You're right. Nevermind what I said. --CalPaterson 15:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

cussing

iin the north amercan version they only use the words sucks and pervert they edited out cuss words including hell at least in the north american version not sure about the canadian version —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.34.154.247 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

well then you didn't look hard enough. in one episode kakashi says to orochimaru "what snake pit in hell did you crawl from." or something like that. (Tirkaro 02:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC))

Translation

In the English section, should we talk about the translation? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ryu Ematsu (talk • contribs) 05:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The strongest language I have seen (so far) is Kiba saying "Bull"

Please sign your comments. Also, I ｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗ'd at Kiba's swearing. --Alexie 03:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

English Episodes

Shouldn't there be some indication of where the current english episodes are? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.229.231.215 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Requested Character Page Move Notification

All single character Naruto character pages have had formal move requests made. As pointed out in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga#Naruto_character_article_titles, the current names for articles about Naruto characters are inconsistent with the names used for other anime characters (Naruto characters use Japanese order for names, while most other anime characters have their name in Western order), as well not following the naming guidelines in WP:MOS-JA.

DO NOT COMMENT HERE. Please participate in the centralized discussion at Talk:Uzumaki Naruto --Kunzite 02:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Requested change

The TV series is going to be broadcasted from autumn this year on RTL2 in Germany. I am a really bad editor of wiki sites so could someone do that? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.55.251.177 (talk • contribs) --Al1976 11:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Al1976 11:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

databook

Where can you find the databook on the internet anyone know any sites 69.218.235.178 06:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Name changes?

When was any of this agreed upon? The reason the names are written as "Uzumaki Naruto", "Uchiha Sasuke", etc. are because that's how they're ordered in the English manga. Since the manga came before the anime, it's considered more official to use. This is why the whole "Change Maito Gai to Might Guy" decision was made. Why are we suddenly changing it to the English anime ordering?

edit: Nevermind, found it. Still, that's retarded. The Splendiferous Gegiford 16:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll try and fix all these names later. Apparently whoever did this did it covered a wide amount of pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 38.116.207.101 (talk • contribs) .

Try reading Talk:Naruto Uzumaki#Requested move 2 to understand why we did it first. There was a well-debated decision to put it in Western order, please don't change it back. –NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 18:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Probably some dude obsessed with the English dubbing of stuff. Or a missenlightened youth who doesn't even know that anime comes from Japan yet. That, or it could be one of the guys who are editing all the articles to get rid of Japanese Names and crap (i.e. SomeGuy, Geg, ect. (No offense)). I disagree with all. But, what can you do? 67.172.141.198 21:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Or perhaps someone who realizes that we are on an ENGLISH Wikipedia. Danny Lilithborne 22:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

But, like Geg said, the manga came before the anime and even in the ENGLISH manga they use Uchiha Sasuke and not Sasuke Uchiha. I say that we should use the original japanese orderings and leave it at that. Sasuke-kun27 22:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, the English manga is wrong. But that's neither here nor there at the moment, since there was already a big debate about this. You should have weighed in on that debate; too late now. Danny Lilithborne 22:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I assure you that I am neither obsessed with the English dub; nor am I a misenlightened youth that doesn't know the origins of anime. I also gone out of my way to properly add kana names to anime articles. You do know that for 150 years, the Ministery of Culture said that, when romanized, Japanese names should be presented in Western order? It's the reason that Wikipedia adopted the rule that "western order" rule because it is standard for Japanese-language names in most reference books--that's what wikipedia is supposed to be. --Kunzite 03:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

What happened to the main page?

Okay as a reference to the above topic, I was going to change all the names back, but when I went back to the main page, part of the article was missing and all of it was in a table...

Fixed. I reverted the article back to a previous version. Some edits may have been lost but rather than going back and figuring out what broke, it was just easier to revert it. --Miss Ethereal 17:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The UK DVD Subtitles Information?

Can anyone find out about that stuff about the UK DVD subtitles? Because the DVD ain't out until the 21st, and it's still the 20th today, so unless someone has a screencap or some proof of information about the lousy subtitles, I do not believe it. Someone please reply to this.

RedEyesMetal 15:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I can confirm that most of this is true; I review animé for dvdoutsider.co.uk and so have access to the preview discs of this series. "Sensei" is indeed replaced by "Mr", "ramen" by simply "noodles", and the "jutsu" are referred to as "Art of [jutsu]". Certain things have changed from dialogue; for example, in the first episode where Naruto first uses his Sexy Jutsu in front of the class, he says "Haha, that's my Sexy Jutsu!" - but the subtitles have him saying "Haha, I call this the Art of Eros!". I can't substantiate the "Pot Noodle" claims as I haven't watched that far into it yet. CNash 16:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I can conferm too (My geting it off of Play.com broke street date) and have pictures to back up said claims, http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?p=2258338#post2258338 (Fair warning, refrences to Jetix having thier balls removed within).

In addtion, CNash, you can find the "Pod Noodle" thing in ep 3, when Naruto is talking about his pastimes. I wouln't call it Lowsey as such, more another way of saying it, realy. I meen, Art of X isn't a great crime to earth, is it? (and incidently, if your talking a bout the dub, it's "Haha, gotcha! That's my Sexy Jutsu!")--Conan-san 17:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I thank you both for answering my question. I've noticed on Manga Entertainment's site, that Naruto 'Unleased' Volume 2 is going to be renamed 'Naruto Uncut' Volume 2 instead. I wonder why? Oh well, we'll wait to find out. RedEyesMetal 20:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Given Naruto 'Unleased' Vol 1:1 was called Naruto Uncut up untill abuot a month or so away from Street Date (incidently, whilst it's not wiki worthy, I did note that the sudden change from "Uncut" to "Unleased" Caused a lot of people to panic, feeling that it was jus' the Toonami Edit on the disk) expect a simmilar renaming of Volume 1:2.--Conan-san 20:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

In addtion, I totaly missed this one from EP 3 also, "Naruto! Don't give Sasuke Evils!" (Evils is a pritty brittish conentaion of "The evil eye" or "Dirty look"). It's just before the kiss (http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/e.htm) --Conan-san 21:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I would remove this as an example of British slang. "The evil eye" and "dirty look" are much more common in Britain than "evils", and the slag dictionary sights this as coming from Little Britian. While Little Britain has spawned a lot of phrases into general use, I wouldn't say (again IMO) that this is one of them. I've never heard anyone say it. When I was watching the series, I thought that this was part of the orginal American subtitling. 80.175.180.53 19:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC) Ad

This is off topic, but someone should mention Naruto in the "In TV Series" part of the ninja article. It's not mentioned anywhere here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.121.59.46 (talk • contribs) .

You can edit the article and add that. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Forget it, I didn't notice that link of "ninjas in popular culture' there.

Umm... >___>

Whilst I may be out numbered on this opinion here I'm going to bring it up anyway. If this was already disscussed sorry for bringing it up again. For all articles concerning Naruto in any way, or most anime/ manga, I would like to request that we switch the character's names back to the origonal Japanese. I feel that 4Kids' work on localization was very poor for this anime, and a few others. While localization is not bad in itsself the butchering of names and other such words is bad. As I don't wish to cause a huge uproar, feel free to deny me this option, but I don't think you'd like it very much if the Japanese suddenly decided to call everyone name John Smith, Smith John because it fit them better, and they found it too troublesome to learn abit of another culture to keep the origonal product more culturally (and in this case more grammatically) correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.246.153.117 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia policy states we go with what's published. Whatever's published, we just repeat. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{blah • Snakes on a Plane}} 02:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Ummm... VIZ dubs Naruto, not 4Kids. And VIZ also translated the manga. Get your facts straight, please. I find the idea that we should use INCORRECT grammar because it's correct in another language laughable. Apples and oranges. Danny Lilithborne 02:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussion has passed on this issue. It's the English wikipedia, so we use the GN_SN style of name-ordering. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 02:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

What Someguy said. We already debated this issue nearly three weeks ago. Both Wikipedia's Manual of Style and WP:ANIME's guidelines say to use Western order, and that's what we're going with. Which medium fans think is "canonical" or what they think of the quality of a translation does not matter. –NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 02:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Well put. Besides, the order in which a given name and a surname are used is not a matter of canon or quality, but a matter of region. In the region we encompass here, GN comes before SN. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 03:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Huh... the only thing I couldn't make a good defensive argument against, my information being wrong. I suppose that I got overly hasty and blamed 4Kids, as they were the ones that started it. You are however correct, that Viz liscened Naruto, which apparently has no conection to 4Kids Productions. I'm sorry for dragging out an old topic, and if the Wiki gods have declared that we are to use western naming on the English Wiki server, so be it. Again, sorry to trouble everyone and I'll not make any more fuss about the naming used on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.246.153.117 (talk • contribs)

Um, okay. And the decision is not made by "wiki-gods", but by consensus. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{blah • Snakes on a Plane}} 01:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Who's to say that wiki- gods can't be ideas? But it is good to have things like that, else all the information would probly change on a daily basis. Again sorry for my older(?) views. I won't bother you all with it anymore.

Yamato in the Main Characters

If we have Sai why don't we have Yamato listed in the main character in the template? Judging from what he did in Grass Arc and what is doing now he deserves it. Discuss.Cuttyflam 07:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Differences between Naruto versions in Canada and the US

Are they any major differences. --Al1976 16:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

External Links

Under Wikipedia policy links to unofficial non-notable websites such as fansites or forums should be avoided. Please remember that Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links. Any links not approved by consensus on this page will be deleted on sight. Thanks,  Netsnipe  ►  10:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Move to Naruto (manga and anime)

I'd like to see this moved to Naruto (manga and anime) and have Naruto (disambiguation) moved into its place. Certainly a case can be made that the manga/anime is more famous worldwide, but I think a few arguments can be made against that. Namely, Naruto is very much a notable place name (think Niagara), enough to justify a disambiguation page. Also, the manga and anime is a recent and current pop phenomenon, so the scope of its popularity is very much transient. Lastly, the argument that more people are likely to come here for the series than for anything else is true, but that speaks more to the type of people that come to the Wikipedia than to the importance/significance of the subject itself, and I don't think we should target the Wikipedia to an Internet-savvy audience even if that is most of its audience (one reason, among others, is that the Wikipedia has pretensions of appealing to a broader audience, particularly for educational purposes, and I think we should support that cause). Even if this is strongly opposed, I'm curious to see how people feel about this at this stage. Jun-Dai 04:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• Self-support (just to get the ball rolling) Jun-Dai 04:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support but you're not likely to get what you want, because there was a vote on this before. :( Danny Lilithborne 04:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support. As popular as the series is, I agree with Jun-Dai's argument. Geographic places have some inherent notability, so "Naruto" should point to the disambiguation page. –NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 04:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. 1) Naruto is the name of three different places according to disambig, not a one of which is any larger than a stub. Obviously, it's not as notable as suggested. 2) If anything, the title should be alphabetical (anime and manga), though that's a moot point, really. 3) Wikipedia does tend to give priority to the most common subject to be searched. when searching Naruto here, people will likely want the fiction, not the place. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:26, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

  Comment (1) Why do you feel that the articles being stubs proves the non-notability of the topic? (2) I have no problem with that (though I could just as easily agree with chronological order) Jun-Dai

  Comment, I said they were less notable, not non-notable. Any existing place is inherently notable, since it exists, but my specific concern is its notability in comparison to this series. Simply put, is any one of these places notable beyond their simple existence? Are they famous in some way? The example you note, Niagra, has a ridiculous amount of entires. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose. Naruto is by far the largest entry of that title, so primary disambiguation is unnecessary. Also, Naruto (manga) would be a better title if one had to be chosen, as the manga is the original, and that seems to be standard. e.g. Bleach (manga), Berserk (manga). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tjstrf (talk • contribs) .
• Oppose The manga/anime is by FAR the most common usage, and primary disambiguation seems gratuatus. RN 04:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment It used to be like what you said... somewhere along the way this article got moved to Naruto because it was said that it was the most prominent of the meanings. You should encourage discussions, not votes. ~MDD4696 05:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Erm, apologies in advance but I don't know if you are referring to my comment (indenting seems you are referring to the nomination). Anyway, to explain further, there doesn't really seem to be an argument here that the usage of any of the others is more prominant then this article, only that it is transient - which remains to be seen. There are some notability arguments, but these really should not factor in to page moves... RN 05:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

    There is indeed no one here arguing that that the other topics are more prominent than this one, but my points were by no means limited to its transience. There are, however, articles of pretty significant prominence (such as Naruto, Tokushima). It's hard to come up with a good comparison, but consider that huge international pop icons such as Madonna, Titanic, Gladiator, Oasis. I guess if you can imagine a band or TV show or movie, etc., of decent international popularity having the name Albany or Hudson River or something, it would be tough to give them the main pages Albany or Hudson River in light of the other uses. Jun-Dai 06:09, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

    I can't imagine giving a movie Hudson River the primary page Hudson River in the English wikipedia, but in the Japanese, French, or German wikipedias I can very much imagine it. The number of people who would be looking up "Hudson River" as a river, as opposed to as a movie, would be quite miniscule, and even they would probably be looking up the river to learn about the inspiration behind the movie title. (Which is what I'm sure the majority of us are doing when we look up the Uzumaki Whirlpool) --tjstrf 07:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

NarutoFan in Growth and popularity section

I believe that the Growth and popularity section should mention a specific fansite. NarutoFan is unquestioningly the most popular and most visited Naruto fansite. User:Someguy0830 cut out the reference because that site contains illegal material.

Wikipedia articles are about what is, and as editors it is not our place to remove valid information just because we don't like it. Wikipedia has articles on all sorts of illegal things, from child pornography to drug trafficking. NarutoFan is one of the oldest and most popular fansites, and if any site is mentioned, that should be it.

So, should we mention a site at all? Without a specific site mentioned, the sentence doesn't really contain any useful information. "Some of the first and most popular sites targeted at English speaking audiences were established shortly after the first English manga volume was released in August 2003." Can anyone provide a valid reason for not including a specific site? Worries about favoritism/advertising/content on the site are irrelevant. ~MDD4696 18:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

There's plenty of sites, so we could be accused of favoritism no matter what we put. While NarutoFan is undoubtably the largest, it's not necessarily the best example. We have the one example, and it's more than enough to illustrate the point. Now, if we could find a fansite that is just a fansite, not a distributor, that'd be great. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 18:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Copyright policy has been used previously to delete similar links in various articles, so it would be best to not link to any copyright violating fansites if we can avoid it. Also, NarutoFan is considered immoral even within piracy groups for selling fan translations, and indeed has at least one site founded simply out of opposition to it. --tjstrf 20:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

a fansite that is just a fansite

LeafNinja would probably fit this description. Lots of info, plus they're pretty strict about not mentioning how to get scanlations/fansubs. –NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 21:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

But are they notable enough to merit inclusion at all? --tjstrf 21:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems to be. I'd prefer them mentioned above the others, given Neo's comments. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:26, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's not like we're not creating an article on the site or anything. We're just using them as an example of Naruto fansites, and they seem to be the biggest one that doesn't carry or promote fan translations. –NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 00:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)