Talk:Sartorius (Yu-Gi-Oh! GX)

Episode 62

Why is there no mention of the Reaper of Souls appearing diagonally in this episode?

• That was a dub decision, and isn't the proper reading. It was in upright position in the Japanese version. -Benten

Picture

Okay, the top image is Sartorius under the Surge of Light's power. The other is a picture of Sartorius when he's been freed from the light's power. It's more than a change of expression, it's a change of character. It's like deleting an image of Yami Yugi from Yugi Mutou's page because they look similar. The two images are of two different versions of Sartorius BESIDES his expression, ergo, they are different. Drake

The image doesn't illustrate anything. In one image he's scowling, and in another he's smiling. If there aren't any differences in appearance, you don't need two images to show them. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The appearnce of the eyes gives it away. I don't understand we never had this problem until User: Interrobamf came around (Bobabobabo 21:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC))

Yes, clearly it is I who is the problem; clearly not you with your lack of restraint. Get over yourself. Regardless, the "appearnce of the eyes" is easily attributed to the fact that facial expression involves eyes. It's called scowling. Interrobamf 21:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

http://s86.photobucket.com/albums/k89/EvilBakura/GX%20104/ (Bobabobabo 21:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC))

A bunch of images. And? Interrobamf 21:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Look at the Saiou images

We're not discussing those images. Interrobamf 21:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

No you can compare the images of Saiou on page http://s86.photobucket.com/albums/k89/EvilBakura/GX%20104/?start=20 and the images on http://s86.photobucket.com/albums/k89/EvilBakura/GX%20104/?start=40 and http://s86.photobucket.com/albums/k89/EvilBakura/GX%20104/?start=60

The current version (thanks, Bobabobabo) makes the difference clear, so I have no great objection. (There's probably still a few too many images here, though, but if I got into this, I'd be getting into all of the Yu-Gi-Oh character pages, and then I'd...ugh. Too many headaches.) - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:38, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay. And? Sartorius going loco? As already represented by this image? We're not comparing loco Sartty with happy Sartty. We're comparing this to this, which share no differences besides zoomness and a facial expression. Interrobamf 21:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

No this image Image:Saiou evil GX.jpg the one you keep reverting from the page. (Bobabobabo 21:48, 10 October 2006 (UTC))

I personally feel that the current image of Saiou above the "good" version does not provide a good-enough view of Saiou to understand the difference. What if we replace it with the current Image ofSaiou in his profile, restore the main image to what it used to be, and keep the "good" Saiou's image? That way the main image is more or less neutral, and the later pictures demonstrate the two aspects of his personality while neither truly resembles the main image? Drake

How about we don't use three images to illustrate what two images suffices to cover? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• I'm taking it upon myself to solve this problem. First of all, I've reverted the infobox pic back to its original version, as that presents Sartorius' neutral appearance (and also addresses an important part of his character's development, which is how his good side pleads with Aster and Jaden for help in saving him from his destiny, while his evil side is dishonestly asking for their cooperation in the universe's destruction - I feel this best demonstrates his character). In this way, the infobox image is also not redundant to the one of Light further down. Then we have the two personalities themselves. Thus: Infobox = Neutral (how we see him for most of the season), Light (evil), and Good-Hearted.

Edit: I will justify further my choice, since I originally posted the infobox image, since there might be confusion as to how his character exactly works due to its complexity. The first image is of Sartorius' evil personality without the Light of Ruin acting through it (Sartorius' dual personality was created so that it could carry out its divine plan). The second is of the Light of Ruin acting through Sartorius' evil personality, and the last of what he appeared prior to and after being its avatar. Therefore this is not a matter of facial expression; he actually has three distinct appearances (but only two personalities).

--Benten 04:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

As I see it, there are only two distinct appearances, here. There's a slight difference in expression and pose between evil Satorius w/o LoR and good Satorius, but it's not enough that we need three images. I'm iffy about two. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

• Although I sorta disagree that there are only two distinct appearances (but that's just me, 'cause there's also the fact that neutral evil has paler skin due to his "dye the universe white" plan), I still think the first image is the best demonstrating his character, so I honestly think that should be the one in his profile. I'll admit though, that I've also been iffy about the last pic of him from the start. I didn't think it was really necessary given that there's already one in a better context on Aster's page (the two of them alongside Bloo-D, which has a more important ring to Aster's story rather than Jaden's). Thus I will remove it, and inform Bobabobabo about it. I hope we can therefore put this all behind us. --Benten 05:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Mentioning New Info

When should I introduce Sartorius' prominence in season three? Even though he is not in season three, excluding the flashback episode, his prediction back in season two still has some importance. QuagmireBlahBlahBlah 01:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• What prediction is that? JuJube 01:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Sartorius predicted the ruin of the Academy and indeed foresaw the alternate world. But I think we should see how it plays out and if he makes another appearance before we note this.Drake Clawfang 01:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)