Talk:Ichigo Kurosaki

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
死神 This article is supported by the Bleach work group.

Contents

[edit] Getsuga Tenshou

doesn't the phrase Getsuga(月牙) just mean "Crescent?" And therefore Getsuga Tenshou should be correctly translated as "Crescent Sky-Piercer?" 75.0.187.241 00:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thats the literal translation, what is meant is the moon sky-piercing fang. Crescent is the synonym for moon. See, the shape of Gesuga Tenshou is like a crescent moon.--Hanaichi 03:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

We should correct the thing about the description of Hollow Ichigo/bankai usage of Getsuga Tenshou...in the anime the hollow version and the real ichigo both admit that the black/red getsuga tenshou is hollow ichigos move, and that ichigo can use it even without going into bankai, he even uses the blue one against grimmjow while in bankai. --Licourtrix (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

All original research. Just because he uses the blue one against Grimmjow in bankai, which he never does, does not mean he can go the other way. He uses the black/red one whenever he is in bankai. Always. StardustDragon 23:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Improvement

So... now we've reached the improvement stage. So then, besides removing plot, what suggestions are there? And yes, anime articles can survive without plot, look at the Naruto articles, especially Naruto Uzumaki. His is a well-written character article, and by-far the best anime character article. He even has a chance of making FA-Class if the out-of-universe tone is removed, is made a little less crufty, out-of-universe info is added, and more references are added. None of the Bleach articles, besides the series itself, will ever get past B-Class at this point, especially with Godzilla-sized plot articles like Ichigo's. So plot must be removed if Bleach is to be taken seriously. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think Naruto is really any better written than this page as far as the real content and informativeness goes, it's just arranged differently.
Putting that aside for a second though, there actually is a significant amount of improvement that can be done with respect to Bleach's out of universe content now, because the series has been running on US TV long enough (and the recent DVD releases) that a number of English language reviews now exist. In other words, critical reception sections all around, especially in the main article (which could then even have a shot at FA), and in the List of Bleach Agent of the Shinigami arc episodes (which needs them to maintain its FL status). --tjstrf talk 19:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

personally i think we need to remove some of the spoilers, i mean i was reading it the other day er today an i noticed that it told me a lot about what happens in the anime. I mean im not entirely caught up in bleach and some thing here ruined it for me XP

so i think we should more be basing it on the character, not saying then in chapter 15 he bla bla bla Xxem0kittyxx (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't no if this is the right section, but has anyone noticed how (before Orihime came along with her powers) despite being the son of a doctor he dosen't treat Rukia's injuries (Gigia related) for example, in episode five wen those leaches exploded she was CLEARLY injured, there was blood running down her face and everything, the fact that in episodes 2-15 She does occasionally get injured, but then she has no sighn of injury or treatment later really bugs me! I no she didn't go to Urahara because (even if he could use Kido) it has been pointed out in the early Bleach episodes that he is a pervert, he even suggested looking over one of her injuries (or something very simaler that would cause the removal of her clothes) and she very poilitly but very harshly said "No! That's quite alright thank you!!" note that he was grinning from ear to ear, I'm putting this under Ichigo because it is his fault! I have never seen him treat her, or even mention it! And I no that he wouldn't let his goofball dad touch her with a ten foot poll! Much less treat her or see her in that condition! It annoys me to no end! Even though they were no were near as close then as they are now, treating her injuries is justifiable, an if she got upset with the idea he could merely explain how shy he is, (although most injuries that she sustained at that point in the series were on her arms and legs, occasianly her face or head too) in short, Ichigo should make a public announcement during one of the preveiws on exactly HOW those inguries just disapeared! Or better yet show us! -CaptinAsagi —Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptinAsagi (talk • contribs) 19:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Remove spoilers!? No way! I love spoilers! I have to rey on watching subtitled episodes on youtube because they aren't putting out the English dubbed version for a wile, I need these spoilers!! By the way, wen do they update here? -CaptinAsagi —Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptinAsagi (talk • contribs) 19:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hollow Ichigo's name..

According to what's written here:

Chapter 220 depicts it as a mirror writing of Ichigo's name...

So, if its written as Kurosaki Ichigo in the original manga, backwards would be: Ogihci Ikasoruk. Now, I added this before, and it got rejected. Why? Isn't that cover page a good enough source? I've seen many call him "Shirosaki" since H.Ichigo is white, now can someone help me out on this please?RedEyesMetal 19:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Ichigo's hollow doesn't have a name. He even said it himself.--Time2shyne 23:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
In addition to what Time2shyne said, even if we used chapter 220's example, it's not even Ogichi Ikasoruk, it's just mirrored text. The mirrored version of 'bxd' is not 'dxb', it's 'bxd'. I wanted to give an example which would produce gibberish, as it does in the case of Ichigo Kurosaki, but haven't found the characters. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 23:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
In most of the Bleach games, the kanji is written the same as Ichigos', but usually has a different outline like red or black I think.--Hanaichi 12:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
A little tidbit I've noticed in Heat the Soul 4: Hollow Ichigo's name is written with the same exact kanji as Ichigo's and in the same exact order, though the kanji themselves are flipped (as well as being inverted in colour). // DecaimientoPoético 14:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Quote H. Ichigo: "I ain't got a name!" Discussion over. 70.138.167.143 (talk) 04:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC) Hollow Ichigo also said that HE IS Zangetsu.--Licourtrix (talk) 19:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Hollow Ichigo absorbing Zangetsu into himself is completely different from being named Zangetsu.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 20:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
When, precisely, did Hichigo claim he'd absorbed Zangetsu's spirit? 71.230.221.73 (talk) 04:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Chapter 218. Though I don't think "absorb" is the best choice of words. ~SnapperTo 04:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps "replace?" 207.80.142.5 (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Theme Song Removal?

Why was Tite Kubo's inspirational Theme Song for Ichigo (News from the Front by Bad Religion) removed from the page, while other theme songs, namely Rukia's Wing-Stock by Ashley MacIsaac, left on their respective pages? Arukan Harless 20:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ichigo's bankai's chain

Ok on bleach forums people have been making all these weird theories on why Ichigo's chain on his bankai disappears when he dons his hollow mask. I strongly think this isn't true. But I wonder if this speculation has any merit with you guys. Noman953 19:00, 13 September 2007

Any theories or claims of such a nature are original research and not suitable for inclusion into Wikipedia. Now, if a reliable, verifiable, third party source were to comment on such speculation, then it could be included. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 00:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not true. Check Chapter 281, particularly pages 10 and 13. You can clearly see that the chain remains even with his hollow mask on. Kyouraku-taichou 23:22, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Doesnt he swing it by the chain while in hollow form before attacking Grimmjow ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.131.138.130 (talk) 19:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yep, and on many occasions after that as well. Hollow Ichigo invented the swinging of Zangetsu by the chain and tassel; it would make sense that Ichigo uses it more with his mask on. StardustDragon 01:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Birthday

The birthday on this page is listed as July 15th, a translated version of the same Manga page I saw listed his birthday as July 7th, which one is correct? --Stux 17:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

July 15 is correct. That translation somehow mistook 15 for a 7. ~SnapperTo 18:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
That's what I kinda figured (but was hoping for the opposite ), especially since the Japanese version of the page also lists 15. Thank you very much for the screenshot of the original Japanese page! I was trying to figure out how I could take a look at one of those. Again, thank you! --Stux 17:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ichigo's taste in food

According to the manga, Ichigo does like chocolate but the spicy food he likes specifically is karashi mentaiko (the marinated fully ripe mass of pollock, spicy). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rukia-sama (talk • contribs) 05:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] better Bankai picture

The picture we have right now is a manga one we should change it. The one in the 19th voulme page 89, first panel is good, very good. If some disagree then I think we should get the anime version of the current one. Ultimaterasengan 00:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Graffitti cleanup oddity

Someone had scrawled some curses on top of the "character outline" section. I went to go clean that up, but the offending words were not in the editable text box. I went back to see if someone had already edited. They had not, yet the offending words didn't show up in the editable version of the page. I saved the seemingly editable page as was, and it over-wrote the existing page, restoring the page.

I just thought I'd mention this because it seems like odd behavior. Liquid entropy 04:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

ClueBot beat you to the punch.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 04:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Character bios

I think it should mention more about them: Ichigo, 174 cm, 61kg, blood type AO, High scool student, substitute soul reaper. while im at it, Rukia: 144cm, 33kg, soul reaper. Orimime: 157cm, 45kg, blood type BO, high school student. Chad: 197cm, 112kg, blood type AO, high school student, Uryu: 171cm, 55kg, blood type AB, High school student, quincy. Kon: 27cm, 182g, modified soul. just adding the heights and weights and occupation and if i can, blood type. Uzumaki Dude 04:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

We don't really need to include trivial in-universe details. They're irrelevant to the article as a whole, and have no real significance on the character. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 05:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
The information was included in the past, but has since been omitted. Frankly, I think it's somewhat useful and interesting, but due to the recurring vandalism related to it, and the difficulty to verify (not everyone has access to all the character bio pages, plus the RAW often differs from scanlations), we're probably better off without this. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 06:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
It would be nice to see some details. Replacing "another vizard" with "Shinji Hirako" for example. It's not a big deal, but it is a biography. I honestly liked the longer synopsis, though improvements could have been made.Baiseru 04:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Avoiding specific details for characters or things that otherwise have no impact on what is being summarized is simpler for people unfamiliar with the topic; they aren't being overloaded with more than they need to know about a topic they are just finding out about. ~SnapperTo 20:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shinigami

I haven't watched Bleach for very long, but I thought they were called Soul Reapers not Shinigami as the first paragraph suggests. I thought Shinigami was the name for creatures like Ryuk in Death Note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.65.164.167 (talk) 06:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

A shinigami is any death deity. It's not just in Death Note.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 17:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Shinigami means Death God in Japanese, the Vis translation is Soul Reaper.Ultimaterasengan (talk) 21:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

That's also the translation Tite Kubo gave instead of Death God. He wanted it to translate to Soul Reaper. --Cronodude360 (talk) 21:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bankai

Hey, I added the anime version of Bankai. Please don't delete it, there is nothing wrong with it, and it looks basically like the manga one.Ultimaterasengan (talk) 01:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, what is the issue exactly of using an anime picture? I mean, wouldn't that be better than the manga one? --Cronodude360 (talk) 03:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Its a whole issue of fair use crap. i dont expect my picture of pesche to stay around for a while either. though if he gets deleted ill just screenshot a group one of Nel/Bawabawa and the other two. whos names confuse me too much to type individually :) --74.131.138.130 (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some approval

Does anyone, aside from Hanaichi (talk · contribs) and RattleMan (talk · contribs), object if I place these headers to this article (and other Bleach-related ones)? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Considering that conception and development information is one of the key sources of real world information for fictional characters, they should be placed. If there isn't enough information in that regard, then that's a big indicator that the character probably shouldn't have an article. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 02:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
It's not that I absolutely object to them, but adding the tags and headings without information in the sector makes the article looks odd. Now, if there were information in there, I wouldn't mind tags to be placed. If perhaps the work group can find and add the information plus citations, then go ahead and put the tags. Putting tags to expand a section where there is nothing in that section is odd.--Hanaichi 02:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it that strange? A "reception" header was added to Sand Land by Snapper2 a while back. I've been following this method ever since. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
It's a fairly common practice. At WP:VG, it is often used for fictional characters. In any case, if this article is ever going to try to jump up the assessment chart, then conception or development information is utterly vital. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 03:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Well okay, add them, and find information. Overall, the only character that has real world information is Orihime. I know everyone else is busy doing other stuff, but perhaps there are several sites that offer such information which could be put over here.--Hanaichi 03:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Could someone else try adding the sections? I'm at my 3RR limit. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
And I'm trying to figure out where we find sources for these things. I just did a search on Google but it ain't helping much because most of the sites appear to have ripped it off from wiki. Is there an actual poll in Japanese only or something? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hollow Ichigo

I'm not suggesting that this would be added to the article, but I was thinking that is Ichigo's hollow form an example of a Vasto Lorde? It's small, somewhat humanlike and possesses high-level hollow powers such as the instant regeneration ability and cero blasts of considerable strenght. Adding this to the article is afaik against policy, since it's original research, but it does match the description of a VL as far as I know, too. --Petrim (talk) 22:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Speculation. Likely true, both from what we've seen and because he's the protagonist, but speculation nonetheless. --erachima formerly tjstrf 00:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

We could say that Hollow Ichigo fits the description of a VL. that's not speculation, because he DOES fit the description. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muramasa itachi (talk • contribs) 23:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Since when has Ichigo devoured thousands of hollows? — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Also, Ichigo's inner hollow doesn't represent what Ichigo actually looks like as a hollow. During his Vizard training, he became less and less human-like as much of his hollow took over. King Zeal (talk) 12:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Right, but we're talking about Hollow Ichigo's form, not Ichigo's. It's safe to say the lizard-like thing we saw during vizard training is Hollow Ichigo's true hollow form, but whether or not it's a Vasto Lorde is still up for debate. As for Penguin's comment, Ichigo didn't consume any hollows, but God knows what Hollow Ichigo's done. StardustDragon 01:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Who voices Ichigo's hollow?

So who does it? Morita himself, or someone else? (Just out of curiousity: James chen0 (talk) 21:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC))

I dunno about Morita, but Bosch does the Hollow in any case.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
It's the character's voice done with computer distortion...its been mentioned before...RedEyesMetal (talk) 14:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] vizard?

wouldnt ichigo's use of his hallow powers, knowingly or unknowingly make him a Vizard? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.185.104 (talk) 07:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, which is touched upon in the article a couple of times. ~SnapperTo 19:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ichigo Gonzales (¡Arriba!)

In lieu of an ongoing "Bankai Breakz Bones?" debate in the page history, I looked up Ichigo's first fight with Grimmjow (chapters 211 and 212). The only mention of his speed is that it increases after using bankai. Unless the anime adds something else to buy time, I'm not seeing any indication that's he's slowing down. ~SnapperTo 22:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

He's harping on page 13 of chapter 212, where Grimmjow points out Ichigo's GT firing limit and how it hurts him. It says nothing about bones or the bankai itself. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
It says something of "body," not necessarily bones, but close enough. Ichigo never had a GT firing limit as far as I know, or it at least hadn't been mentioned at that point and wasn't touched on at all after that. I don't know what else you can attribute that to. StardustDragon 03:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
"You can only fire that two or three more times." That's what you call a limit. Ichigo was in pain trying to suppress his hollow, which was obvious to Grimmjow. He does not get slower, he is not overtly injured. Grimmjow only had visual clues to pick up on. He could not know that Ichigo's bones were broken. Same as Byakuya didn't, the inner hollow is the one who said it. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Ichigo suppressing the inner hollow never did physical harm to him (in itself, it DID cause him to get his ass whooped a few times). The battle didn't go on, and indeed ended right with that GT firing, so we don't know if his speed decreased or not. I fail to see why "bones" need to be explicitly mentioned, isn't "body" close enough? If Grimmjow pointing out that the technique hurts his body isn't enough to prove this, what is? StardustDragon 03:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
No, it is not, because Grimmjow cannot tell for sure. Grimmjow only knows what he sees, which is Ichigo grabbing his eye and kneeling. That is what looks like injury. Furthermore, and this is the point you're completely failing to understand, Grimmjow was not talking about Ichigo's bankai, he was talking about the getsuga tensho. Understand that these two things are different. The getsuga tensho never injured Ichigo until this point, and it is what Grimmjow is commenting on. In closing, you will never be able to argue your point from the singular use of the word "body" in relation to the getsuga tensho. Nothing is mentioned of Ichigo's bankai in and of itself, so to claim that Grimmjow's line must somehow equate to a topic he never makes mention of is original research. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
This is gonna be a really messy list. Sorry in advance.
  • We've already established in his article that Grimmjow has a knack for finding weak spots; it's likely this carries over to here.
  • The getsuga tensho was so harmful to Ichigo in bankai. It was never harmful in shikai; Ichigo fired it a sh*tload in his fight with Byakuya without showing any visible stress.
  • You still haven't answered: How else do you wish to interpret the word "body?" Is he saying the getsuga tensho hurts Ichigo's skin and gives him a rash? Or perhaps it causes his hair to fall out? Not seeing that.
  • Wouldn't it be original research to arbitrarily claim that the word "body" is referring to any of the above things rather than the obvious answer?
  • See point number 3.
  • See point number 5.
SD on a school IP, out. 207.80.142.5 (talk) 14:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
All original rewsearch. You are still harping on the word "body" with zero proof. Get this straight: you cannot prove he meant bones, ever. End of story. He doesn't say bones, he doesn't say bankai, he doesn't mention speed. These three things add up to you wasting your time. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 14:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
How exactly is it original research to point out specific, established facts? The points I gave you are all taken straight from the manga; I have made up none of it. Point #1 is mentioned in Grimmjow's article, so it's not original research. Also, you can drop the condescending, sarcastic tone; it's getting on my nerves. Might I direct you to WP:COOL?
Read point number 3 and answer the question, by the way. I don't need you to repeat 'original research,' I want you to offer an explanation to what "body" could possibly be referring to other than "bones." Capisce?
Now, what if we added in the following blip: "This drawback has not been mentioned since its introduction and is assumed to have been overcome, although a similar effect is carried with the Getsuga Tenshou in Bankai through most of the Arrancar arc while Ichigo attempts to suppress his inner hollow. 207.80.142.5 (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
No, we're not adding that, because it, just like your previous argument, is original research. Ichigo's body wasn't harmed, it only looked like it because his hollow was rising. Grimmjow picks up on this and comments on it. That is the extent of the scene's meaning. There is no evidence for bone-breaking or bodily harm of any kind, and there is no amount of rationalization on your part that will change that fact. Let it go. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 20:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
How can you assume that Grimmjow was referring to the hollow taking over? The evidence for bodily harm is Grimmjow's own words and past experience. The hollow was taking over, yes; this point cannot be disputed. However, the hollow taking over in and of itself has never done any bodily harm to Ichigo, and Grimmjow's not stupid enough to think otherwise. Why would Grimmjow use the term "body" if the technique didn't hurt his body, or appear to? The hollow taking over is irrelevant; Ichigo simply grasped at his eye (211, p18), nothing more. I'd call WP:OBVIOUS in here as well, but I haven't read that in a while and don't know if it'd apply. StardustDragon 20:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
It wouldn't because Grimmjow does not specify any sort of harm. He only notes that it is harmful, and he says so because Ichigo is having trouble moving. I repeat, there is no evidence that it causes harm. There is only Grimmjow's one comment which you are bending over backward to twist out of context. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 20:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
So if we're in agreement that it causes Ichigo some form of harm, why not put that in with the GT firing limit? StardustDragon 17:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Read what I said again. The harm it causes is already specified, loud and clear. It causes his hollow to surface, nothing more. Three shots would have caused it to fully surface, and Grimmjow picked up on that, ignorant of what it meant or not. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 21:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
And what right do we have to assume Grimmjow was wrong on this one thing, when we already concede in his article that he has a feral cunning and is able to pick up on an opponent's weakness easily? "It causes his hollow to surface AND does him bodily harm, or at least according to Grimmjow." Try something to that effect on for size. I'm not twisting the word "body" out of context, don't even bother saying that again. I'm simply trying to have us recognize that "body" does not mean "inner hollow surfacing," it means "body." StardustDragon 01:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Will you let it go already? Your inability to grasp the context of the scene is beyond annoying. Ichigo fires the attack, his hollow surfaces, he comments on the firing limit, and Grimmjow makes a less-informed comment about the same thing. There's nothing else to it. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with Penguin. For one thing, during the fight with Byakuya, Getsuga Tensho had nothing to do with causing Ichigo harm. Ichigo didn't use a single one during the entire fight until his hollow surfaced, but by then, his body was already past its limit. Secondly, Grimmjow never specifically states why Ichigo couldn't use the attack more than three times. Doing so for him is blatant original research. So, as far as I see it, nothing else should be inferred from Grimmjow's statement. King Zeal (talk) 12:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
You didn't even respond that time, you just summarized the scene. As for Zeal's post, I didn't say why Ichigo can't use the attack more than three additional times, I only wish to recognize what Grimmjow commented to be another effect of using it. I think we can all guess what would have happened if he had used it three times, but I'm not focusing on what would happen if he bypassed that limit, rather, what happens immediately after he used it. The fight with Byakuya is obsolete; he didn't use Getsuga Tensho at all until Hollow Ichigo is out, and Hollow Ichigo doesn't seem to recognize any form of bodily harm being dealt to him, I believe this is covered in his section of the article. To summarize what I'm trying to get across to you, Penguin, you're guilty of original research by stating that Grimmjow was referring to the hollow surfacing and only the hollow surfacing. What right do you have to assume he was wrong about this point? If he can see a form of bodily harm being caused by the getsuga tensho, then we have evidence of bodily harm being caused by the getsuga tensho. C'est fin.207.80.142.5 (talk) 14:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
First, I'll admit that I was wrong about one thing: according to the translation, Grimmjow does indeed say that Getsuga Tensho hurts Ichigo. However, he does not say that this has anything to do with Ichigo's bankai. So, comparing this statement to Byakuya's comments about the drawbacks of Ichigo's bankai are null. However, I do now advocate adding a blurb to the article about that, but only for that specific instance. There's no evidence that it's harmful to Ichigo every time he uses it, but we know that this was the case during the fight with Grimmjow specifically. King Zeal (talk) 15:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
For the record, Penguin was the one referencing the Byakuya fight, not me. What I'm trying to pound through Penguin's mind now is that the Getsuga harms Ichigo physically, at least in this instance. StardustDragon 22:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Unindent, and what I keep trying to tell you is that there is no proof to that effect. There is one word, one time, by one person who isn't Ichigo commenting about some vague harm when it is obvious that his hollow is what is being commented on. It's original research to say it actually harms him, because there is no proof to that effect. You're just harping on "body" to the exclusion of the context of the scene. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The word is the only evidence we have. One piece of evidence trumps no piece of evidence unless you're introducing your own "original research." Context of the scene is irrelevant. I know his hollow is surfacing. And in addition to that, if Grimmjow is to be trusted, it ADDITIONALLY harms his body. Evidence trumps your rationalizations. It's "obvious?" No. It's far from that; you're claiming he's referring to the hollow which is original research oh my god. Period. You even admitted that the GT harms Ichigo; to quote you: "The getsuga tensho never injured Ichigo until this point, and it is what Grimmjow is commenting on." I can only assume that you're playing the devil's advocate because you find it fun. Let it go, and let the three words be added to the article. StardustDragon 23:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
One word is irrelevant, and context is the only thing that is important. You're desperately trying to inflate the importance of the word body so your argument doesn't fall apart. Ichigo never says anything about it hurting him. The only comment he makes is about the hollow. Ichigo is a more reliable source than Grimmjow, who had no other reference point by which to judge Ichigo's behavior. You cannot prove harm, and Grimmjow's one word does not prove harm. The three words aren't getting added because they're wrong. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Repeating myself because you're not even responding anymore, you're just calling out the same, tired phrase "you're stretching one word out of context, blah blah." I know his hollow is surfacing. And in addition to that, if Grimmjow is to be trusted, it ADDITIONALLY harms his body. Evidence trumps your rationalizations. It's "obvious?" No. It's far from that; you're claiming he's referring to the hollow which is original research oh my god. Period. You even admitted that the GT harms Ichigo; to quote you: "The getsuga tensho never injured Ichigo until this point, and it is what Grimmjow is commenting on."StardustDragon 23:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
And I will repeat myself because you refuse to listen: this mindless tirade about one word being an entire novel about Ichigo's condition is stupid. If you would bother to actually read the entire couple of chapters, you would easily see that they're referring to the same thing. Instead, you choose to ignore the obvious and debate at length about one word in one panel. Find something else to support your opinion or give it up. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Evidence trumps your rationalizations. The word "body" is more evidence than what you have: nothing but a bunch of original research. Just because you inferred that it meant the hollow was taking over does not mean that this is the extent of the scene's meaning. The word "body" is the word "body." I am not making a novel about it, I am simply trying to pound its meaning through your skull. Read it, define it, understand it: it all adds up to you wasting your time and refusing to give in to a point that is clearly valid. You're as much at fault as I am for making a debate about this; you're the one that refuses to accept that you were wrong. Checkmate, dude. StardustDragon 23:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, you are making a novel about it. You are taking one word by Grimmjow and expanding it to say that Ichigo might as well be dying or some equally nonsensical rationalization. Ichgio makes no mention of bodily harm. He is a more reliable source. Grimmjow is neither part of Ichigo nor aware of Ichigo's infirmities. He is an outside and uniformed observer, which his comment reflects. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm done replying at this point, because this nonsense has to stop. My patience is gone and neither you nor I are going to change our opinins on this matter. If you want to continue discussion, find something else to support your point, because the single use of the word body, which is neither mentioned by Ichigo himself or any other character, will never be an acceptable source. It will ojnly be you twisting one scene out of context to satisfy this ridiculous obsession. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
When did I say "might as well be dying" or any of that? Ichigo makes no mention of bodily harm, but he doesn't deny its presence, and thus that point isn't valid. "Body" means "bodily harm," which is hardly a novel. Unless Ichigo specifically says that he did not recieve bodily harm, you're grasping at straws. Stop acting like your opinion is superior to mine; if you look at the facts, my theory is supported by evidence and yours is not. Your inability to accept defeat annoys me, quite frankly, and someone else voiced his agreement with mentioning "bodily harm." I'm changing it and that's that, if you want to make an edit war out of it be my guest.StardustDragon 00:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
When Grimmjow says that he has a firing limit, he's referring the Ichigo using the BLACK Getsuga Tenshou, a power that is inherently rooted into his inner hollow. He has a limited amount of uses before his hollow's influence became too strong and he donned the mask involuntarily. That is the extent of the harm. It does not harm him physically. By harm, Grimmjow meant something of the lines of "inconvenience". And the reason his bankai caused him "harm" during his fight with Byakuya was because of his inexperience in wielding it; it no longer inconveniences him by the time he's fighting the arrancar. This argument is retarded. --165.236.69.139 (talk) 22:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


You're pretty late, we already resolved to mention just that under the BLACK Getsuga Tenshou. Also, I don't see how you can define Grimmjow's use of words as "inconvenience" arbitrarily. See the change we put into the article, then stop bringing up age-old issues. 207.80.142.5 (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

If four days is age-old to you, and also cannot see how I define my speech, then I suggest you restart school at the Freshman level of high school. Good day.--76.25.254.31 (talk) 02:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
BODILY HARM = INCONVENIENCE AMIRITE. It's age-old if it's already been resolved. Bye! StardustDragon 16:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
wow sry 4 tryng 2 help. Douchebag. Get out of the basement. By the way, I speak Japanese, faghag, so I would know exactly what Grimmjow is saying BECAUSE I CAN READ IN THE LANGUAGE IT WAS WRITTEN IN. YOU HAVE NOTHING ON ME, LITTLE SCANLATION READER. HAHA AMIRITE? --76.25.254.31 (talk) 20:24, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Enough yelling now. Muramasa, it's not over just because I gave up trying to fight you. You're the one who decided to edit war to get your way, which I wasn't willing to put up with. Ergo, it isn't resolved. You just annoyed the other side into submission. 76.25.254.31, post a translation for us of the exact Japanese, preferably with the kanji, instead of taking up a shouting match. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 20:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't shouting, just trolling to annoy him. I will put up an accurate translation as soon as I get my hands on a hard copy of the manga chapter. It shouldn't take too long. --76.25.254.31 (talk) 20:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Well either way, hard facts speak louder than trolling, so thank you for your efforts. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 21:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some improvements regarding the hollow powers section

Just wondering if we should add a bit regarding Ichigo's mask's cosmetic changes that occur when he dons the mask during his final fight with Grimmjow. Also, I think the picture depicting his mask should be changed as there are better ones out there now that include his black eyes. Also, one last thing, should something be added to inform readers of the animal-like noise that accompany his attacks when he's wearing the mask in the anime? None of the things are pressing matters, just though it would be more informative for people browsing the article. --165.236.69.139 (talk) 22:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I think getting a better picture is a great idea - make sure that you put in the right licensing stuff, though, or else it'll be tagged for speedy deletion. Were there cosmetic changes in the manga? I never noticed. I think the changes in the mask and noise aren't notable, though. I think we should leave those out. Might want to wait for others' opinions, though. Love, IceUnshattered (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)