Talk:Jiraiya (Naruto)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jiraiya (Naruto) article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2
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.
Archive
Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2


Contents

[edit] Please Stop Fighting everyone!!!

Judging by this article's history, the "Jiraya-is-dead/Not-he-is-not" argument is now out of control. If this continues, the article may be declared semi-protected (locked) by the Registered users of this site, or may be deleted all together by the Wikipedia server. 216.68.184.22 (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

no,we are going by the rules, his death has not been confirmed so it cant be added. and why dont you make an account?--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 19:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
To be fair, his living hasn't been confirmed either. All we have is a very symbolic "death" scene. Hewinsj (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry that you think that this was directed at just you Blue-Eyes. In truth there are three sides to the arguement so I'm directing it at them as well. (And, yes, that includes the "angry 132.------" contributor well.) I'm will be registering for an account soon so please calm down. As for you "132.----," I ask that you please also calm down and just wait about 2-10 chapters down the road when the manga comes back to this part of the plot before putting he's dead. To continue with the route your going will just result in the Jiraya article getting locked.216.68.184.22 (talk) 20:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Never mind. The article is (finally) now semi-protected. (Thank you Jmlk17.) 216.68.184.22 (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
at last, and yes its true that him being alive hasn't been confirmed but he hasnt been confirmed dead so its just best to leave it as "which pain notes to be his death" type thing--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 21:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I requested semi-protection, which was approved, so this dispute can be settled. Making sure everyone knows, cheers. Earthbendingmaster 17:55, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, at least it slowed them down, but unfortunately some of them decided to get accounts and are ignoring all reason and logic on how wiki confirms the facts. I hope the manga (or the publishers) confirms this soon.--Halls452 (talk) 00:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Fortunately for us, Halls, I already put a stop to one of them using the "So you want to beat Snap" card. I don't think that he was the only one though, but we will see. Sasuke9031 (talk) 01:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Time difference between part 1 and part 2 confirmed and verified.

Since I am not going to get myself blocked for edit warring, I just thought I'd point out that Tintor2's recent edits make no sense and clash with the time difference between part 1 and part 2. He claims that the age difference is unsourced, but in fact, going by the already verified timeskip, that makes no sense. Please use common sense people. Sasuke9031 (talk) 04:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Why do you think the users deleted the part 2 ages of Naruto, Sakura, Sasuke and Kakashi? Who knows what month is in part 2? Tintor2 (talk) 09:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I know that. However, instead of putting the characters in an ageless Matrix-like timeloop, wouldn't it make more sense to try to fide some sources? Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

We are not saying they are ageless. That source may come with the next databook.Tintor2 (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I know that, but the way that you put this, it seems like they are. Isn't there some sort of "source pending" function that would basically say what Calculus says about getting to destinations? Sasuke9031 (talk) 00:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I have never heard of that. Ask that to another user like User:Sephiroth BCR or User talk:Snapper2.Tintor2 (talk) 21:43, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it would be better if we just show the ages if all the Naruto characters were at the beginning of part I.

  • Example: Age: 12 (at the beginning)

This seems to be what everyone else has decided to do with manga/anime/cartoon/comic characters for right now anyway. What do you think?--Halls452 (talk) 01:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that we are trying to get this resolved in a way that everyone will be happy and we will not hae a problem once the semi-protection expires. Sasuke9031 (talk) 02:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Well if the argument for getting rid of the ages of the characters in "Part II" is that we can't confirm the month it started, then the same can be said about aging them during "Part I." So it would be better to just show the age the characters were when they first appeared.

BTW, if you do reinsert the ages for "Part II characters, here's a (possible) update: I've read somewhere that Naruto's "graduation class" from "Part I" had aged 15-16 in the current chapters ("Part II") in Japan. This would mean Jiraiya age in the second part is/was 53-54.--Halls452 (talk) 03:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Well then find it and use it as the source. Sasuke9031 (talk) 03:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Found it (though it maybe a stretch). In Chapter 386 (Page 11) Itachi says that the Nine-Tailed-Fox attack happened "16 years ago." And the first chapters of "Part II" (Chp. 245-250 onward) states that Naruto, Sakura, etc. were age 15 and that 2 1/2 years have passed. Also, Oro trying to get Sasuke's body was suppose to happen exactly three years from the end of "Part I"; and that happened several chapters back.--Halls452 (talk) 03:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
You need a source saying something along the lines of "Naruto is 16 years old in Part II". Without that it shouldn't be added. Obviously you can do the math or look at the timeline to figure out how old each character is, but that's not good enough for a fictional topic. ~SnapperTo 04:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Did you not read this: And the first chapters of "Part II" (Chp. 245-250 onward) states that Naruto, Sakura, etc. were age 15? Sasuke9031 (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Skimming through the relevant chapters turns nothing up. Which one should I be specifically looking at? ~SnapperTo 05:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
It says the very first chapters in Part II. I think that would be a good place to start. Sasuke9031 (talk) 05:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I've checked and it appears that although there are plenty of evidence in the chapters we can't use any of it. We'll have to wait for a Naruto Databook (about Part II) to be published and just use evidence from that. This also means that rather than use "2 1/2 years later", it may be better to use "a few years later" instead on articles concerning the Naruto manga.--Halls452 (talk) 19:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Creation information

Some time ago I added a bit of an early of Jiraiya but it was a bit improvised since I dont know japanese. Can somebody who knows japanese read [1] and check if there is more info to add more? Tintor2 (talk) 21:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Plot Overview

The plot overview section is kinda disproportionate. Jiraiya did more than just fight Pain. -unsigned

[edit] Jiraiya Killed...

One of the Pain copies before he died so he was killed by 5 bodies not 6 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.250.64.17 (talk) 21:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, don't just talk about it! Put it in, then add a REFERENCE to the manga (or else it may be challenged and removed.) IceUnshattered (talk) 20:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Pain's bodies can revive each other, as shown when Jiraiya impaled three of them with giant kunai only to have to fight them again alongside the other three. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.26.133.248 (talk) 16:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)