Talk:Naruto Uzumaki

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Naruto Uzumaki article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
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.
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 2008-01-14. The result of the discussion was keep.
Archive
Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3
Archive 4 Archive 5


Contents

[edit] Merchandising

[1] and [2] are only ones I found about that. Im not sure what kind of merchandising we need to put.Tintor2 (talk) 9:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Would it be a good idea to add information about the in-plot origin of Naruto's name? Specifically, that it came from the main character of a novel that Jiraya was writing. Because Naruto's parents liked the name they used it for their Child's name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pookythemagicalbear (talk • contribs) 13:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure. That's notable enough. I s'pose that can go in character history, or something like that. IceUnshattered (talk) 01:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Age in part 2 now confirmed.

By Madara Uchiha, in chapter 399, by saying that the Kyuubi attacked 16 years ago. Is this adequate, and if not, why? Sasuke9031 (talk) 18:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Not very specific, maybe we could add "16 (approx.)". As far as I heard we need something more specific such as those databooks.--Tintor2 (talk) 18:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Okie dokie. Just thought I'd run it by you guys before I did anything. Sasuke9031 (talk) 22:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Dude, the author states that 16 years had already past since the ninetails attack,when the ninetails had attacked the village naruto, and all the other 7 genins were just born, not even a full years old yet, prior to part 2, they all were 13 by the end, in begining of part 2, the author states that 2 half years had past after part 1, meaning they were all 15 years and a half old, In chapter 399, madara just states that its been since 16 years after the attack of the ninetails fox, meaning it now a full 3 years that has past! meaning that in the start of part 2, all the rookie genin were 15 years and a half old, and now they are all 16 years old. How can the manga chapter be uncredibale source if the guy who made naruto wrote the chapter, how dense can you all be not to figure such a thing out! the manga chapter is reilable because its canon and plus the author wrote the statement, what the author says and write for the story is credible. if you want to put 16 years as approx then thats fine but dont act so dense about it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.110.42.22 (talk) 18:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Dude, don't ignore things people tell you because you don't like it. You've been blocked before for doing that. Until the manga or some other piece of Naruto media specifically (note the emphasis) says that Naruto/Sasuke/Sakura/Gaara/Shikamaru are 16 years old, a Part II age will not be added. Using chapter 399 (or the much earlier 386) as a source is fine for forum discussions, but it does not suffice for Wikipedia. ~SnapperTo 18:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


To be clear on the ages, we would have to know the birthdays of the charecters, and the current date when madar said that. but it changes days constantly. without consent from kishimoto, we can not ive the exact ages of all charecters. end of disscussion. -Tobi4242 (talk) 15:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Itachi Gave Naruto Some of his Power

In chapter 403 Itachi makes Naruto swallow one of his crows and then tells him he gave him some of his power. What do you think of this? 142.26.133.248 (talk) 15:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

i also am a little bewildered by this, but should be included into the article. -Tobi4242 (talk) 15:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

i hope naruto gets the sharingan or better yet the mangekyo if possible.72.27.120.91 (talk) 00:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naruto: Part I?

Could we make this link "Part I" instead of writing Naruto: Part I. The manga never uses that title.Tintor2 (talk) 01:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I have some vague memories of a discussion about this, but darned if I can remember on which of the Naruto pages it was at the moment. Collectonian (talk) 01:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I also think this has been discussed before and the changes were made to make common readers understand it, but with a link its easier since we are not creating titles.Tintor2 (talk) 01:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Found the archive. Never did we come to a conclusion did we? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Not fully, but it looks like the leanings were toward just using Part I, no italics, and with the first mention probably clarifying what Part 1 is. Collectonian (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
What do the others use? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The main and the volume list both use Part 1 and Part 2, without the "Naruto: " part. Collectonian (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
So, shall we make the change?Tintor2 (talk) 15:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
It was never supposed to be "Naruto: Part I". I think that was User:Sesshomaru's weird change that had made a while ago. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 18:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
So, can we make the change?--Tintor2 (talk) 23:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Yep. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 23:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
If that is how the other articles have it, then it must be the correct way. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
"Part I" or Part I?Tintor2 (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The first instance could be linked. The rest should be just Part I, Part II, etc. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I ll make that in every article.--Tintor2 (talk) 23:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I think I finished with the main characters.--Tintor2 (talk) 23:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Unindent, and if you need some help on the minor villain and character lists I'd be glad to help. StardustDragon 00:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GAN

The articles about Sakura Haruno, Sasuke Uchiha & Kakashi Hatake are all good articles, and after reviewing the article for about a month, I find that it reads just like them. Therefore, I feel that this article meets the Good Article Criteria just as the former do, and deserves to be elevated to such. Busboy (talk) 16:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Reception section is garbage right now, the other media section needs work, and the lead needs sprucing up as well. You know, you can make a note here that you want to bring this to GA status and ask others to help you in bringing it up to par, but nominating an article you've never worked on is plain rude. I'd recommend you withdraw the nomination, as it shouldn't pass as it stands. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Never mind. As the nomination was never even transcluded at WP:GAN, I've removed the notice at the top of the page. Please don't nominate it again. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I have to say that I thoroughly[sic] disagree with you. I wont nominate it again for the sake of peace, but do mention exactly what the problems are. P.S., I HAVE worked on it. Please don't make such crass statements without first assessing thier validity, its just plain rude. Busboy (talk) 21:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

You have edited it twice. Use this tool. I hardly consider that having worked on the article when other people have dozens or even hundreds of edits to the article. And I've already mentioned what the problems are, and why drive-by nominations are plain rude. The impetus falls on you to inform the people who consistently edit the article that you want to nominate it, not the other way around. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 23:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Sorry for the trouble. busboy (talk) 01:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Im just throwing this out, but busboy... u got owned. -Tobi4242 (talk) 15:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Ouch, man. Busboy (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)