Talk:List of Naruto: Shippūden episodes

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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Naruto Portal

Contents

[edit] Protection

This page is protected from anons for whatever reason (vandals? fake episode names?), so would someone please fix the "stronger then" which should be "stronger than" in the Episode 28 description? Because I can't. As far as I'm concerned, you can remove this comment afterwards, too.

72.1.186.174 17:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Titles

How accurate has the website from where the titles were retrieved generally been in the past? Can we assume that these are definitely the correct titles? Kakashi Gaiden does not seem to be involved in any way. Retlor 21:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Always accurate. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
So we can assume that there will be no animated KG for the time being then? Retlor 21:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
For the time being, yeah. They may end up animating it eventually, but we don't really know. The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It could be possible, that they could be releasing it as special or include it in the movie. Verde830 17:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

That would be the most logical answer. That or an OVA. Yagikaru 14:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Gaara Dies! Is the incorrect title for episode 17. In reality it is Gaara's Death! The proof of this can be seen at the end of episode 16. It is written out in both Japanese and English at the end of the next episode preview. - UnknownToaster 14:00, 07 June 2007 (UTC)

I hope you realize that was Dattebayo's translation. It wasn't there in the non-fansubbed version. "Dies" is a more accurate translation. The Splendiferous Gegiford 23:52, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Complainin' on TV.com not enough for you, UnknownToaster? Got to complain here, too? — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:57, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nihongo vs Nihongo-title

Thought this was the best place to start it, as Shippuden begins a new article. I'm oppsoed to using the nihongo-title template, prefering the more universalized and standardized Nihongo template. Nihongo-title seems to be almost a poor copy, resulting in the same features with a less than efficient lay out. Floria L 01:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No episode on march 8th?

Is there no episode on the 8th? Retlor 02:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

(I'm from it.wiki) from now there'll be probably only an episode every two weeks.. :( fortunately, there'll be also a two-episode special 29th march ;)

--82.88.213.144 17:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

There's no episode on the 8th or the 22nd. The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Theres a 1 hour special on the 29th, after that its 2 weeks until the next 1 hour special.You Are Ooglay 02:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Next episode

It's already been confirmed that the next episode of Naruto is a 1 hour special entitled "Art is a Blast!" to air March 29, 2007. Episode 5 "As the Kazekage" has already been leaked and subtitled via Dattebayo Fansubs and has confirmed the next episode/air dat.

That isn't the real title; it's just the title of the special. The episode titles for 6 and 7 haven't been released yet. The Splendiferous Gegiford 02:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Episode titles

What is the source for the titles for episodes 6 and 7? As of now neither are on the given website.Retlor 08:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

TV Tokyo's website, http://www.tv-tokyo.co.jp/anime/naruto/ The Splendiferous Gegiford 14:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Episode 6/7 dates

The episode preview for the one-hour special said March 22 at 7:27 PM, not the 29th. graphitesmoothie (talk | contributions) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Scratch that. graphitesmoothie (talk | contributions) 08:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
how did u put a line thru it? just curious  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.88.154 (talk) 04:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Couple of changes needed

The float over text on episode one indicates that Tsunade is the kazekage, she is the hokage. Also, the page is still semi-protected (hence I can't make the hokage change myself), however we seem to have lost the semi-protected template. Celain 19:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC) == Tsunade is Godaime which translate is "go" 5 "damine" ruler, lord, hokage the fifth hokage

[edit] Episode 8 title?

April 12, カカシ班出動！NARUTO疾風伝スペシャル, Kakashi group move! ???? http://cal.syoboi.jp/tid/1106/time

--66.50.91.166 00:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's the title of the episode 8-9 special, not the actual episode. The Splendiferous Gegiford 01:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Episodes 8 and 9 will also be a one-hour special? Are you sure? Moonwalkerwiz 07:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image selection guidelines

I think we should decide on some general guidelines for selecting episode images. Here is my proposition:

  1. If possible, an image should be selected if they can also be used to replace pre-existing manga scans. For example, in the coming episode, we are likely going to to Sakura use poison extraction jutsu so a good candidate for an episode image would replace Image:(Poison Extraction Technique).PNG.
  2. If nothing new is seen in the episode, screenshots should be selected to depict the most significant plot events.

The general idea is to promote reuse of images. Having an image only used in this article and the corresponding episode's article should be avoided whenever possible. –Gunslinger47 18:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, also. PNG and GIF should be avoided unless the uploader knows what they're doing. Used inappropriately, the file sizes of lossless formats can quickly get out of control. –Gunslinger47 19:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
As a concrete example, I've replaced Image:Naruto Shippūden Ep 2 Naruto and Sakura vs Kakashi.png with Image:Gaara2.JPG. Gaara2.JPG is from episode 2 and is already being used under Gaara to demonstrate his new appearance. Deleting Naruto....Kakashi.png will save Wikipedia 378 KB.
Before I continue making similar changes, does anyone object? –Gunslinger47 20:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Not at all. Just don't go haywire with it =p Sephiroth BCR 07:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to merge separate articles

Participate in the discussion here. --Sandtiger 23:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Obvious mistake

Episode 6 summary contains the phrase "leaves him open to a sudden attack sudden attack". This is obviously a typo and should be corrected. I don't have the rights to edit this page (not registered and don't care to). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.89.167.118 (talk) 22:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

I fixed it for you. Sometimes obvious mistakes aren't so obvious. We apologize. By the way registration takes 5 seconds, and all you need is a login name. You don't even need an email address.— Sandtiger 00:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
You can still edit articles as an unregistered user, unless your afraid to reveal your IP address, that is. --Putmalk 20:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
This page is currently semi-protected. –Gunslinger47 22:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why were the images removed?

What happened to all of the images on the page?
-Sinthesis- 20:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

It was decided that images used on lists just to make them pretty could not qualify for fair-use under the Wikipedia:Non-free content policies. It's sad because the list was really looking nice. I suppose I understand the reason they had to go, however. –Gunslinger47 21:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, come on. Who the hell thought it was a good idea to remove all the images??? Seriously, keep the images as they were, now this article looks horrible. --Putmalk 21:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello everyone

I'm not sure if this was a prank (despite the article is protected) to remove the images or if it was a decision from the admins.

If so let us know, to be honest I liked images posted before, they did depict the main plot of the episode in my opinion.

Peace.

--~~SGTEdwards~~

I also agree that the images were useful for finding the articles at a glance. In an episode sceenshot can remind me exactly what happened in the episode. The consensus on Wikipedia, for the moment, appears to be that this isn't adequate justification according to Wikipedia:Non-free content guidelines. –Gunslinger47 22:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
This latest bout of copyright paranoia is making me lose interest in wikipedia. The list of episodes was already a concession to prevent the creation of a separate article for each episode. Now they want to take out all the images completely? We're already using the minimum of 1 image per episode. How is this different from having 200+ separate articles with 1 image each? — Sandtiger 10:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
This new policy of no images sucks! Once again, who's idea was it to take down the images? This make no sense. DAMNIT! Put those pictures back at once. I'd say it's vandalism to take them down. Just imagine how much trouble went into uploading them! --Putmalk 22:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Whatever you say is irrelevant. If policy is decided, then policy is followed. If you want to change the policy, then attempt to do it through discussion, not that you would have much success in that regard. Sephiroth BCR 22:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I believe the current mindset is that if something isn't important enough to get its own article, it isn't important enough to need it own fair use image. ~SnapperTo 23:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Understanding Image upload/removal [Wikipedia:Non-free content]

Hello again everyone

I still don’t understand well the reason that the images do not qualify on the article, as Gunslinger47 stated they not fallow Wikipedia:Non-free content. As I read the Wikipedia:Non-free content, uploading a lower resolution (copyrighted) TV screenshot image is allowed, wich a (352x240 pixel) Jpeg/PNG image should qualify on the episode list.

Correct me if I’m wrong.

Peace

--SGTEdwards ~~Thursday, May 3 2007, 5:11 GMT-8~~



Hello once again everyone.

I haven’t got a clear answer on the episode screenshot issue, nor on my (Understanding Image upload/removal [Wikipedia:Non-free content]) that I posted.

Now this only leaves me this question: Will there be any screenshot in the article?

I also have the episodes, I will be more than happy set it on the article (fallowing the [Wikipedia:Non-free content] specifications), but then again, I wont upload them if I don’t get green light by the Admins.

Please let me know about this issue.

Peace.

--SGTEdwards~~ Tuesday, May 8, 4:00 pm GMT-8 ~~

No. Can't have them. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

From the Wikipedia:Non-free content page,

under Examples of Acceptable Use of images: Film and television screen shots: For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television.

and under Examples of Unacceptable Use: 9. An image found on the Internet where the original source is unknown or not verifiable.

It would seem that a. there isn't enough critical commentary / discussion of the shippuuden episodes, and b. were the images being attributed to Dattebayo? or TVTokyo? Who "owns" them?

Wikipedia is probably not interested in getting itself embroiled in the quagmire of Dattebayo's copyright status and whether the images are liscensed.

Cpflames 21:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC) Cpflames -- Tuesday, June 5, 2007, 3:00 pm GMT-8 ~~

[edit] Arcs

Is it necessary to label the first two episodes as Reintroduction Arc? eZio 20:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I think just Reintroduction is better. graphitesmoothie (talk | contributions) 23:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] revisit on comment reguarding shippuden plot

I earlier on gave advice concerning what to do with shippuden plot page and labeling each arc and I have to say that the details on it should have been kept but separated. I think that intergrating the episode details and with the main plot was not a wise method because of the gap between episodes and manga. I don't think this will cause confusion but could you take the old info and revise it or make a separate page for the details of the manga. I'm simply that the page that was deleted should have been simply divided but everything still there.

July 08, 2007

[edit] More Feedback

  • Holy smokes, I can't believe the Plot page is gone. Clearly it kept getting vandalized and I'll take a long shot and say that's one reason why it got support to be blown away. So much for providing good value to the stateside non-japenese reading Naruto fans. It's certainly too late to support the comment on June 25 that makes the point 'Deleting so many months of work is a plain waste.' Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_June_24#Plot_of_Naruto
    • For those who say spoilers are bad, take a look at it like; watching porn and getting laid in real-life. It's two totally different things. The plot summaries are porn, generally in the end they just make you want to go make nice with your significant other.

69.242.184.178 07:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not Wikipedia's place to offer a (pornographic?) substitute for reading the source material. Including plot details indiscriminately violates our policies and infringes upon copyright. WP:NOT#PLOT. The amount of work that went into the article is irrelevant to a deletion debate. It's harsh, but true.
As for my advice to Naruto fans who don't read the scanlations, but come here wanting to read indepth summaries of the scanlations... Read the scanlations. It's not hard. Your eyes get used to the right-to-left motion rather easily. –Gunslinger47 17:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I was devastated when i saw it was gone. If there's anyway to get around the copyright thing, I voulunter to write a new one. ... how do i sart an article? 88.110.40.110 17:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


Me again... would writing a battle summary violate copyright? 88.110.40.110 17:39, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] naruto shippuden manga

hi.. ive been following the naruto shippuden manga summaries here in the wikipedia. However, I can't seem to find them anymore. Were they deleted? Im not sure if this will be read or be deleted. Thanks.

This is reason why those were deleted. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Plot_of_Naruto:_Shippūden_(2nd_nomination) Pahajoki 07:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another Method

Is there another way to do or modify the plot/arc description since this is a rediculous way to keep it,I know restoring it back to the way it was is unexceptable to many others, but there has got to be another way to put this together. Is there anyone who has the time and creative ability to add or make a new arc area? If not a new area but try to modify the current one.

[edit] Episode 24 Summary

I believe the end summary of episode 24 contains some speculation and not fact. "Somehow immune to the effects of the poison, Sakura destroys his puppet with a single punch at the last second." It is not clear if Sakura is actually hit by the attack and poisoned, she could have easily cut herself to make it appear like she was hit with the metal spikes to aid in the deception. We will not know this until Episode 25.


The poison dosen't take effect imidiatly. Kankuro was able to fight for a few minutes after being poisoned. Anyway, 25 is out and we see she was immune to the effects of the poison because of her antidote. 88.110.40.110 17:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Episode 25 Summary

This should really be edited for style: "Sasori is still attacking with his Flamethrowers. While Sakura and Chiyo are still behind the rocks he switches to his water hoses and sprays at them causing them to have to fight and defend and dodge rocks and Sasori's attacks. Then with 15 seconds left till the antidote wears,off Sasori attacks Sakura with the metal spikes and goes to attack Chiyo but Sakura keeps pulling on the slack till there is none left and then pulls him to her and punches him,breaking him into pieces. All of a sudden Sasori reforms himself together and Chiyo pulls out her elite 10 puppets while Sasori pulls out his elite 100. Chiyo tells Sakura not to fight but Sakura says that she should know her personality and that Sakura fights to win but after she finally beats Sasori. Sasori's heart goes into another puppet which then goes behind Chiyo and attacks but Sakura gets back to get in the way of his attack and gets stabbed in the abdominal area with a sword covered in his poison. "

suggest: "Naruto and Kakashi continue to pursue Deidara while Sakura and Chiyo continue the battle with Sasori. Sakura manages to shatter Sasori's puppet body, but he reforms. Chiyo summons the "10 puppets of Chikamatsu". Sasori, remarking on Chiyo's ability to control so many puppets, summons a puppet army and the final battle commences. Sakura and Chiyo defeat Sasori but, under cover of the battle, Sasori has transferred himself to another puppet and attacks Chiyo from behind. Sakura intercedes, taking the sword thrust meant for Chiyo."

- Y —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.246.175.87 (talk) 16:29, August 25, 2007 (UTC) - Signing with new alias

Now Really, why would someone want to write all that down and spoil people? Come on now. The way it was summerize on Wikipedia is just perfect: not much spoilers, not much details, and not so much words to read about. . . Which can be such a pain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShippudenMaster1992 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Season 2

there was no source, or discussion of the split, so i changed it back. if you can provide a source for it to prove it, then you can make that splitRauJ16 14:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

New season usually changes at start of October. It should be also noted that unlike Naruto, Naruto Shippuuden is released by arcs, not by seasons (stages). I think it was based by guess since season is usually thought to be 26 episodes, which is not correct Pahajoki 16:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Take a look at how all the other articles are done. The Splendiferous Gegiford 17:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
That doesn't still count as a source for naruto shippuuden season 2 start date, besides even Naruto seasons are wrong.

集英社「週刊少年ジャンプ」誌で連載中の看板コミックのアニメ化「NARUTO-ナルト-」が5th ステージ突入、DVD第1巻リリース!! 第180話「秘術 孔雀妙法の代償」、第181話「星影 葬り去られた真実」、第182話「再会残された時間」、第183話「星は輝きを増して」の4話収録。 4th STAGE総集編DVD「スーパーダイジェスト3」付き豪華2枚組!!

from http://www.neowing.co.jp/detailview.html?KEY=ANSB-1870

which translates as

First DVD release from the fifth season of hit anime series "NARUTO" includes episodes 180 through 183. Also includes a bonus a DVD with a condenced digest version of season 4.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Naruto_episodes lists it as Seaason 8 and starting at 183.

If it's officially released by arcs how you are to provide source? I have no problem being it like this as long as it's correct. I have also no time to correct Narutos season which isn't correct. Seasons are not strictly around 26. As there is no need to since in Japan series airs mostly without any larger breaks.

Also officially Shippuuden continues numbering from Naruto Pahajoki 18:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Everything on Wiki is based on precedence. If you change it here you'd have to go through and change it on all the other Naruto episode list articles. It's done the same way on all of those, so there's no reason for this one to be any different. Production companies typically list their seasons in increments of 26 episodes, even if there's no break or special event taking place at that 26th episode. Also, that DVD text says "Stage" which is simply what they call the DVD releases. 12 volumes, one year for each Stage. It has nothing to do with seasons. Here's a full DVD guide if you want to see more [1] The Splendiferous Gegiford 18:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia should not contain information that is unsourced or incorrect. There is no officials seasons in Naruto because it is running without breaks whole year. I'm still for splitting shippuuden by arcs because it's the way it's OFFICIALLY RELEASED. Is there need to add "seasons" if it's something that page editors have decided? Pahajoki 19:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Why does Geg keep spliting the season, he should bring it to the talk page, that way we can end this edit war before it escalates. RauJ16 21:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
If you want to change it so that it doesn't split every 26 episodes you should bring it up on the main Naruto talk page. Leaving this page like this makes the articles inconsistent. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Why should it be brought up there, it does not concern that article, it concerns this one. and just because it wil make the articles inconsistent does not qualify the edit, however an official, or reliable source that season one finished, does. RauJ16 21:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Because it doesn't just concern this article, but all the Naruto episode list articles. A broad subject should be brought up in a broader, more all-inclusive area. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
This does not concern the other Naruto episode list, only this one. RauJ16 21:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Besides that, if you look on the individual Naruto episode lists by season, the episodes are divided up by arc. And using your own reasoning, this means that all the Naruto episode lists should be made to conform with all other anime episode lists, which should be made to conform with all television show episode lists. It's pretty obvious that this wouldn't work. --Dinoguy1000 Talk 06:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
maybe we should divide both pages by arc, that would make finding the episode you want easier. 71.206.136.69 18:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English release for the Naruto Shippuden movie

Considering that at the current rate, it will be several years before the English version of Naruto will end (and thus the English version of Naruto Shippuden will begin), and the release of the movie will almost certainly not occur until after that time, is it really necessary to have an "English release date" column for the movie? Some ongoing series don't even have this column for seasons that haven't started airing yet (see e.g. List of Blood+ episodes#Third_Quarter-Season_2006_2ndQ), so why should it be there for a movie from a series whose start is still several years off? --Dinoguy1000 Talk 06:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this would make sense, however, i think its more for conformity, i think that the other Naruto movies have the English section. and there is some debate as to whether it will be two years or seven months befoer we get to shippuden, because i think that the large sat of fillers wont be aired as part of the regular show. 71.206.136.69 18:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you want to get into conformity, then the English column should either be removed from the movie section to conform with the series section, or it should be added to the series section to conform with the movie section. I think that's actually the main reason I brought this up in the first place. Also, you wouldn't happen to have a link for the debate you mentioned, would you? --Dinoguy1000 Talk 16:59, 5 September(UTC)
no, im sorry, i dont remember the site, but i think that it should be removed, simply because it'll match the style for the page, so if its still there, i personally dont mind you removing it, if someone else does, you will see it in the reverts. Rau J16 18:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, someone else beat me to the punch. The column has been gone for a few days now. --Dinoguy1000 Talk 21:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Raven:well i know it will take a while for the movie and episodes to come but what i want them to do is to get to the main point.i was watching naruto episodes and they were just missions after missions.....and the naruto episodes should not be 200 episodes because sasuke is gone and they should do something else instead of trying t0o tell us what is the point of each episode.in the first episodes they were telling the life of naruto.then thats when i started to hate the show with sasuke's life ending episodes.so just read the manga or watch the episodes somewhere else like google because after sasuke leaves the village there is nothing else but boring naruto missions episodes. 3/10/08

[edit] Page protection

This page seems to be pretty popular with anonymous vandals. Looking at the top post on this talk page, it used to be protected against anonymous edits, so when and why was that protection lifted, and would anyone object to reinstating it for now? --Dinoguy1000 Talk 16:59, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Well? Any thoughts at all? --Dinoguy1000 Talk 18:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm all for it; otherwise, each summary becomes an edit war....Yonagi (talk) 21:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I went ahead and posted it on WP:RPP awhile back, and it was semi-protected for a few weeks; since the protection was lifted, anon vandalism and bad good-faith edits haven't been nearly so numerous (IMHO). --Dinoguy1000 Talk 20:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)I have pure information that Naruto Shippuuden movie is released in english subs in April. so it is possible that it would come out on the internet in about a few weeks

[edit] The name of episode 31 is wrong....

Its suppose to be called "The Next Generation" and not "The New Inheritor". And if you think Im making this up, check this link out: http://saiyanisland.com/naruto/?n=1/AirDatesShippuuden or even http://youtube.com/watch?v=wdZXMS5JWqw on 1:54. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.111.84.151 (talk) 01:12, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

DB's the ones who got it wrong. The Splendiferous Gegiford 02:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Episode Titles

Why dont we use Dattebayo, when was it decided that they were wrong? and since we do not use them, who or what do we use? Rau J16 06:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

the title from the episodes O_o--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 10:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, haha, but where do we get the translations. Rau J16 04:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I just said it, The title from the episodes--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 05:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
The raw's have translations on them? Rau J16 05:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
No. It's translation. Pahajoki (talk) 10:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm confused O.o nvm. Rau J16 11:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

In case you didn't notice, he was talking about the title on each of the Episode which has been translated . . . Just thought you should know. ShippudenMaster1992 (talk) 01:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

i think they were doing it to me on purpose, where exactly does the translation for the episode title come from. Rau J16 04:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
no we wernt >_< its just hard to say, it comes from the episode and is translated to english--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 05:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
So you do not yank your hair out in frustration, I will clarify. DB is not the only group in the world that can read and translate Japanese. There are Wikipedia editors who can do it, too. This is where the titles come from. They are no more incorrect than DB's, insofar as I understand it, just an alternate take on the meaning of the words used. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 05:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, ok, see thats all you had to say. Rau J16 09:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

We tried explaining that to you, but guess he's a better explainer. . . ShippudenMaster1992 (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Corresponding manga chapters

i was wondering if we could add Corresponding manga chapters to each episode like ichigo 100%? Arttic00 (talk) 01:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's necassary Pahajoki (talk) 12:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] appearing on Cartoon Network??

are the Shippūden episodes gonna appear on Cartoon Network? If they are,when are they gonna appear? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.22.90 (talk) 03:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

wikipedia is not a forum--The Last Uchiha 03:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Not for several months, at least – CN still has to work through the last 80 or so episodes of Naruto. And The Last Uchiha, please don't bite the newcomers. —Dinoguy1000 18:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
i didnt give the dude a warning did i? i was just stating a rule--The Last Uchiha 09:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
“ This page in a nutshell: Do not be hostile toward newcomers. Remember to assume good faith first and approach them in a polite manner. ”
 
You were not wrong in the rule you stated, it was how you stated it – to put it bluntly, you sounded rude and condescending, even if that was not your intent. —Dinoguy1000 20:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
im sorry i didnt mean to come off so badly, i was trying to say it in a nice way--The Last Uchiha 21:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Episodes

Someone keeps adding random episodes to the Sasuke and Sai arc. There is no episode called nightmare as such and there wont be any more damn episodes on the sasuke and sai arc. Besides, Its the Hidan and Kakuzu arc next anyway. Jeesus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.242.121 (talk) 21:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that, too. Even though the episode entitled "Nightmare" is under the Hidan and Kakuzu arc now, there is still no episode labeled that on either the ANN or the Japanese episode list page. Akatsuki.sousui (talk) 21:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

No one just has updated ANN or Japanese wikipedia? Title came from WebTheTelevision Pahajoki (talk) 20:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Filler

This upcoming season is going to be a filler, so the name should be changed from "Hidan & Kakuzu Arc" to "Current Arc." Flaming Mustang (talk) 17:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any proof? Rau's Speak Page 23:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
The new opening introduces five new characters that didn't appear in the manga, and Hidan and Kakuzu are only shown in a single Akatsuki group shot. However, they're mixing the filler in with the original story, specifically Naruto's training. I'd guess these new characters, which appear to be priests from some other ninja village (Moonlight, or something?), are probably to provide further exposition for Asuma and/or Hidan and Kakuzu. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 12:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. I was about to ask that. Are these characters somehow related to second shippuden movie or they are just mixing a filler arc within the original arc? --Fotte (talk) 13:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't think they're related to the second movie; as far as the filler, it's been added to make the story more interesting (if you read the manga, you know that Naruto's training gets very boring after 30 chapters). Hidan & Kakuzu will most likely not be featured for many episodes to come, and if they do appear it will be minor. That's why I suggested the section be changed to 'Current Arc,' because it seems this story won't reflect on Hidan/Kakuzu. Flaming Mustang (talk) 20:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Why the Heck is there filler anyway?--71.123.249.135 (talk) 13:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Pocket

Often, anime shows have filler episodes to allow the manga-ka to put some distance between the manga and the anime. This can be quite important for long-running series like Naruto and Bleach, since adopting a manga to anime format moves much faster than writing the manga in the first place. —Dinoguy1000 15:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

But why would they do that now since the Japanese Manga is almost done? --71.123.249.135 (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Pocket

Where has it been said that the manga is almost done? I'm confused as much as anyone as to why they're adding filler and skipping around the arc, but I don't know where it's been said that the series is almost finished.Akatsuki.sousui (talk) 09:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
dear god, more fillers -.- just keep it like it is for now--The Last Uchiha 10:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
There is no source that it is almost done, it just feels that way because of all of the plot threads coming to a close. And it seems like they are just padding out the arc with filler, but not a filler arc. Rau's Speak Page 21:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
You can't have filler in a manga, although you can have padding. Everything happens for a reason...well, except for Mizu and Gouzu, they didn't really serve a purpose except to make Gato mad...but that's neither here nor there. In comparison, I see Bleach ending before Naruto, but I feel that they'll last at least until next year.Akatsuki.sousui (talk) 17:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, the second episode in this "Current Arc" is out and it's sticking to the manga, but this upcoming "Squirm" episode is definitely NOT manga, and IS filler. So it seems like they're mixing manga and filler at the same time, ("watering it down", if you will,) to extend the arc, OR trying to make the whole "Naruto Training arc" more interesting. Probably both. In any case, this should be added somewhere after the next episode airs, just to be sure. Spehizle (talk) 04:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there a possibility that Hidan and Kakuzu showing up in " New Enemy"?

They didn't. --Goobergunch|? 04:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The person who made the terrain in episodes 58-60... is that a man or woman?(Remember Haku? She-male) Fatin '08! (talk) 04:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The one who drew it was a woman, the one who summoned it was a man. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 05:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. It was scaring me, 'cause it looked like a woman, but sounded like a man. Fatin '08! (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seasons And Page Move

Where did that decision come from. Rau's Speak Page 21:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind. Rau's Speak Page 21:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] naruto+clones = naruto?

ok, this is a somewhat philosophical point, but ppl are reverting some text distinguishing naruto from his clones. i contend that naruto+clones != naruto because as soon as he creates a clone, their experiences diverge until the clone is dispersed. hypothetically, if naruto were to create a clone that he never dispersed, it would technically be a twin b/c their experiences would never reintegrate and they could live completely different lives until death. the text which is getting reverted specifically deals with divergence of experience and its eventual reintegration. i think the text should reflect that a clone's experience is different from naruto's own experience as long as the clone is active and that the clone isn't naruto. i won't revert anything as i don't know what ppl think about this issue, but i did want to put my thoughts out here. --Wongba (talk) 22:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That is a very interesting theory. And the difference should be noted, but no more than that. Anything else is OR. Rau's Speak Page 02:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
if u agree w/ me, take a look at my last revert to the article and see if u agree w/ the old wording vs the new one. and yeah, i wouldn't put any of this in the text. i just feel there's a difference. --Wongba (talk) 06:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I think a mixture of the two should be placed. Kakashi never suggested that Naruto send a clone, he came up with that nugget on his own. And continual mention of the clone fact gets irritating to read. In all respects at that time and place the clone is still Naruto, not much difference between the clone and the real one yet. Rau's Speak Page 10:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I was the second person to revert that, and at the time, I was only following the lead of the first revert. I'm not actually opinionated on the issue, and could go either way with it. —Dinoguy1000 16:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] names of the episodes

hi =) i've a question: from which site do you get the names of the currently japanese episodes? i need the name of this site for the german naruto-fanwiki. thank you for answers ^^ 84.135.181.105 (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The names are taken from the links in the references section. The English names are just translations done by the Japanese-capable among us. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
So wait, those names are no more official than the ones Dattebayo uses? Rau's Speak Page 00:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
No, they're just translations. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Then I don't see why whenever DB's are added they are removed under the pretense of being "wrong". Rau's Speak Page 00:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
The ones being used are more accurate translations. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
According to who? Rau's Speak Page 00:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Geg does some, Pahajoki others, they seem pretty competent to me. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
What does Dattebayo mean? I've tried to look it up on webistes, such as Denshi Jisho, but I cannot seem to figure that out. Fatin '08! (talk) 02:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List by arcs or seasons

Shouldn't it be listed by Arcs instead of seasons? Mussav (talk) 03:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Nope. See this discussion on the Naruto talk page for some explanation. —Dinoguy1000 23:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Aha Okay, Thanks for the info... so is the same thing goes with Bleach and One Piece? Mussav (talk) 00:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
One Piece, yes. Bleach, however, has official arcs, so they're staying. —Dinoguy1000 16:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Naruto Shippuuden has official names for arcs too. Pahajoki (talk) 11:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh, really? Okay, I din't know that. In that case, it would probably be smart to add a reference concerning that (unless there already is one, and I'm too lazy to look ^_^;; ). —Dinoguy1000 20:25, 8 June 2008 (UTC)