Talk:List of Bleach characters/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Too many articles!

I'm surprissed no one else has commented upon this, but there are WAY too many articles for the Bleach characters. I mean, are the lietenants for the 1st, 2nd, and 4th company really notable enough to have an article? We have DEFINETLY got to lower the amount of articles for Bleach.

They have articles because otherwise we have a rather absurd arrangement in which all members of a set but three are given independent pages. If those pages are to be merged, it will need to be with a new Shinigami in Bleach or Soul Society residents in Bleach list, not this one. --tjstrf talk 22:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
But aren't fictional character articles supposed to be made for characters who play large roles in their series? I fail to see how lietenants 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 fit under that, along with several other characters. Whether or not we have to make a seperate page for Soul Society residents or not matters little to the fact that they play very little a role to the series. User:Artist Formerly Known As Whocares
Hence the possible merge target I suggested above. (Also note that several of those lieutenants had roles in the filler.) --tjstrf talk 00:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Too many articles? What, is there a quota we're in danger of breaking? Jezebel Parks 00:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm,ever checked the Naruto characters?Although if you removed the vice captains,you'll be left with an inconsistent patern,like 1st division captain,2nd division captain,3rd division captain,3rd division lieutenent,4th captain,5th captain,5th lieutenent,6th captain,6th lieutenent,7th captain,so on and so on.--Hanaichi 09:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I think the point being made is that there are articles for minor characters that are not worth noting. Just because there won't be a pattern that's no reason to hang onto pointless articles. Antisora 14:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
You are probably the first person to get it at all, Antisora. Hooray! There are many other characters that have done far more that the 1st, 2nd, and 4th captains and don't have articles (Grand Fisher and the Urahara Shoten workers, for example) If you're giving them articles so that the patern on the Bleach Charatcers Template isn't ruined, instead you could just provide links to where they will be merged. For example, several articles in Naruto have recently been deleted, but instead of removing them from the template, there is a link on the template that goes to their merged location. User:Artist Formerly Known As Whocares
We understand you, we simply think you're wrong. As for your suggestion regarding the template, that would simply combine the worst of both worlds by maintaining clutter while losing information and readability. --tjstrf talk 20:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Whether or not you think I'm wrong is irelevant, there is one single rule here that could get some of the more minor articles deleted: Wikipedia:FICT User:Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 17:47 (Eastern Standard Time), 2 July 2007
I think you mean WP:FICT. Wikipedia:FICT goes to some broken link on an off-site wiki I've never heard of. And yes, I'm acquainted with that policy. --tjstrf talk 21:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I could have sworn it was WIKI. Anyway, I ask, are the 1st, 2nd, and 4th lietenants really notable under FICT? The only thing they did (besides omake) was fight Ichigo, and that battle was short and only to prove entirely Ichigo was now at captain level. A large number of characters have done alot more than those three have (Grand Fisher, Zangetsu, Ururu, for example) and don't have articles, so why should those three. Because they are lietenants? Then if so, we might as well begin to give every character in Bleach an article. User:Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:11 (Eastern Standard Time), 2 July 2007

Moved to left
WP:FICT clearly states that if there is enough relevant encyclopedic information about a certain character, that character can have a separate article. I'm not saying that 100% of our decisions about which articles to keep and which to delete were correct (although we went by way of consensus, which is the accepted way to resolve this on Wikipedia), but about your specific examples, we indeed have a lot of relevant encyclopedic info on lieutenants/captains just by virtue of their position than about some other characters. There are more reasons for keeping certain articles and deleting others - feel free to check previous AfDs on some of the Bleach articles. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 22:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

That said, we might wish to re-evaluate some of them anyway. The cast has expanded in the meantime since we wrote those pages, and we decided the privaron espada didn't deserve their own articles, and some of the leiutenants are less important than they are. But hey, the world is not ending this afternoon, so we can work all that out in due time. --tjstrf talk 22:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
You do have a point with waiting, but don't wait too long, that is what happened in One Piece, and they waited until a mere two months before they were supposed to be finished to start deleting character articles, which happened very quickly. This actually led to alot of arguing. User:Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:00 (Eastern Standard Time), 2 July 2007

People are doing a great job with Naruto articles, merging articles like Hinata and Kakuzu 'cause they don't have that much relevance (even being popular, strong, whatever).
Unfortunatly, here in Bleach we are still trying to keep as much articles we can! We keep all this lieutenent just because we think it's cool if all of them have articles.
I suggest:

  • Keep
    • Ichigo
    • Orihime
    • Uryuu
    • Sado
    • Soifon
    • Gin
    • Kira
    • Aizen
    • Hinamori
    • Byakuya
    • Renji
    • Tosen
    • Hitsugaya
    • Rangiku
    • Kenpachi
    • Rukia
    • Urahara
    • Yoruichi
    • Kariya
    • Shinji
    • Ulquiorra
    • Grimmjow
    • Kon
  • Merge
    • Tatsuki
    • Keigo
    • Yamamoto
    • Chojiro
    • Oomaeda
    • Unohana
    • Isane
    • Komamura
    • Iba
    • Shunsui (We all love him and Ukitake, but they are not that relevant so far)
    • Nanao
    • Hisagi
    • Yachiru
    • Nemu
    • Ukitake
    • Kaien
    • Luppi (before, I wanted Luppi to have one, but if we do all of this, he should lose his article as well)
    • Aaroniero
    • Noitora
    • Wonderwice
    • Ganju
    • Ryuken
  • I don't know
    • Hanataro
    • Ikkaku
    • Yumichika
    • Mayuri (for some reason, I feel he really deserves one. But when I try to find the reason, I can't :/)
    • Isshin
    • Koga (I would say merge, but I didn't saw the whole Bount arc, so I don't know his role on the last episodes)
    • Szayel Aporro
    • Yammy

If some characters will have a major role later, THAN we make articles. We can't do articles now and hope they will worth the job. - Access Timeco 16:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised to hear that coming from you Access, when you were the chief supporter of keeping articles like Shaolong Qufang, Hiyori Sarugaki, etc. Mostly I disagree with your current standpoint though. Maybe a few completely NN characters like Nemu Kurotsuchi and Chōjirō Sasakibe can be deleted, but that would break our article-per-major-rank convention, and therefore some additional articles, a great example being Luppi, would have to be deleted. There are also a few characters who will almost definitely play other important roles, such as Tatsuki, Keigo and Wonderwice Margera, therefore it doesn't hurt to wait with any possible merger/deletion. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 18:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
There definitely needs to be a cut down on the number of articles (this is the last of the big shonens to start doing this). That seems to be good for an initial merger. You should stick the "I don't know" ones into the merge ones as well. TTN 18:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
As I said, even if a merger is to take place (and I strongly oppose it), the list Access Timeco presented is not perfect and there's a lot of discussion to be made. For example, Tatsuki and Keigo are already fairly important characters, and their roles are expected to expand in the near future. There's also enough information (i.e. no good reason to delete) to keep Yamamoto, Ukitake and Shunsui. All of the ones in "I don't know" probably deserve an article, except maybe Yammy and Szayel Aporro. Koga Gō is possibly more important than Kariya, and Shinji/Ulquiorra/Grimmjow are new and haven't done that much yet, so if you don't allow for potential growth, they're in the same league as Tatsuki and Keigo, and Wonderwice. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 19:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, yeah, the whole point is to discuss it. I doubt he intends for that to be the final one. I'm fine with it, but you certainly don't need to be. As Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball, we shouldn't base anything on the possibility of characters becoming important. Plus, it takes only a couple of clicks to bring an article back, so it would have the same result as just leaving it. TTN 19:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you could simply do what we did at the Naruto one. Make an article simply for the Captains and there lieutenents. Those without refs or not alot of info can be moved there, along with the info in there little info boxes? Just a suggestion. Now about the image problem....could still use some help.TheUltimate3 15:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I strongly oppose the merge because I think that there is potential growth for some characters, like Keigo or Tatsuki because of the event that happened after Ichigo left for Hueco Mundo. Additionally, Ukitake, Shunsui and Yama-jii articles have very good information like how they became captains and demonstrating the power of the General. Perhaps we could do 2 list, one with the captains and one with the lietenents. The captains with little information, like Komamura or Retsu can be there, but there would be links to articles for captains which have sufficient information, like Yama-jii or Ukitake. Same goes for the lietenents. Yoruichi, Isshin and Urahara can be just links to their articles because they don't exactly fall in those articles.--Hanaichi 01:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, well, I suggest....
Keep:Ichigo, Orihime, Uryu, Chad, Urahara, Renji, Rukia, Ichimaru, Aizen, Tosen, Hitsugaya, Byakuya, Ulquiorra, Jeagerjaques, Momo, Matsumoto, Shinji, Ganju, Hanataro, Ikkaku, Kenpachi, Mayuri, Soifon, Kon, Yoruichi, Kariya, and Kenpachi
Merge:Yamamoto, Sasakibe, Omaeda, Kotetsu, Iba, Ise, Hisagi, Nemu, Isshin (where to put him is the problem), Koga Go, Luppi, Yammi, Noitora, Margera, Grantz, and Ryuken
The rest are debatable, as they play knida important roles but not important enough. Also, I suggest instead we start this by seeing which articles need to be downright merged completely before we decide who needs to keep their. For example, leitenants 1 2 and 4 are stub articles in reality. We should also do the captains last, as, due to them being THE captains of the Soul Society, it would be very hard judging the more minor ones, such as Unohana and Yamamoto. User:Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 14:29 (Eastern Standard Time), 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Somebody mentioned everybody in access timeco's 'dont know'-list should be merged as well. I strongly disagree with Ikkaku being there. He has got enough relevant information to have his own page. So my vote goes to mister 'Known As Whocares'-list for now.
Ikkaku and Yumichika deserve and article, so does Hanataro(He did alot in fillers).
And also, alot of you might disagree with me here, but this is true: The Bleach character articles suck. Badly. Honestly, for a major manga series like Bleach, the articles are very disappointing. Probably the most well-written of the articles is actually Kisuke Urahara. Most of the Bleach character articles are either largely oversized plot articles (especially the main characters) or stubby-articles kept for a reason that completely disagrees with every major Wikipedia policy (the majority of the lieutenants and captains). Only with major reform will they meet up with Wikipedia's Anime and Manga project standards or the examples made by other well-written anime character articles. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Are we ready to start merging some yet? We should start off with a few vice captains, and the Espada that haven't done way too much. TTN 19:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Just merge any article that is stubby (vice captains 1; 2; 4; and 7) right now, regardless of whatever policy the Bleach task force has made up, as those articles are just terrible. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 00:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Why not wait for more opinions?FYI policies are there for a reason.--Hanaichi 02:19, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
This discussion was started over a month ago. I think there's been more than enough opportunity for people to weigh in their opinions. ~SnapperTo 03:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
If anything, I think the Gotei 13 should have one article, to make it easier (I think I said this before...laptop don't got a search so I'm not sure) you know you go down the list starting from 1st Squad down, listing the captain, his/her zanpaktou, the Vice-Captain, his/her zanpaktou, move on to the next Squad. If the character has an actual article, you direct to that article. The images of the Zanpaktous could be linked or something (something like the way the people at the Claymore (manga) articles did with the characters Awakened images) to keep down the clutter. Sound good? TheUltimate3 03:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Why not we merge the stub articles to their appropriate section? Like for the 1st,2nd,4th vice captain can be merged into List_of_Bleach_shinigami and the template link can redirect to their sections? I see it as a much more organized way. Then same thing for Espada or arrancar, I dunno whether to merge Luppi or not seeing as he has quite a bit of information, but won't be playing any major role. Maybe there should be a List of Espada in Bleach article and we can put all the Espada there?Ps, I created a test page for it, check User:Hanaichi/ShinigamiTest--Hanaichi 03:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
We should just merge every article that is stubby, every article reliant on plot to exist, and the ones for non-notable characters. So far, the only Shinigami articles that meet that are the Gin, Aizen, Ichigo, Mayuri, and Karaki. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 23:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
No, I think Kyoraku, Ukitake, Isshin, Urahara, Yoruichi are pretty much important, along with few other characters, such as Ishida, Chado, Orihime, Rukia, Renji. Funny that you think they are non-notable, seeing as they are major characters to the series and have taken part in major battles. You can't just merge the articles which YOU think are stubby and relies on information of the plots.--Hanaichi 03:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Urahara and Yoruichi removed all ties with the Soul Society, they aren't shinigami anymore, though I'm fine with keeping them. Ukitake, Kyoraku, and Isshin could easily be merged, and are far from notable. Ukitake has only been in one battle in the manga, and it had little screentime while the other battles were taking place. Kyoraku has no role besides being just another captain. Isshin hasn't done anything at all besides be there and kill Grand Fisher, despite whatever future importance will appear. The truth is there are no good Bleach character articles, they are either stubs or long, oversized plot articles that are just an excuse to allow fans to know what's going on. Sure, a short plot summary that describes what they have done for the series that's only a paragraph, two for the main and major characters, would be appropriate, but a large number of the pages are mostly plot, especially the main charatcers. None of the character articles will ever make GA-Class at this point if we continue as it is. But to give you an idea of what I'm thinking about doing to help the articles, this is what I've come up with on merge and keep:

Definite Merge
Can easily be merge
Large potential, but needs major work
Definite Keep, though work is needed

This descirbes it well enough. The ones under "Definite merge" deserve to be there. Their articles at this point as complete failures and are either stubs, completely reliant on plot, or simply unnotable characters that have anything they can find listed. "Can easily be merged" should be merged too, but I rather have other opinions beforehand. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 14:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, I agree with definite merge, as example in my test page here. However, your can easily merge is a little problem, I think we should keep Momo and Izuru, as you know they are fairly important as they show up more so then other liuetenents *points to Hisagi and Iba*. I firmly believe Kyoraku and Ukitake should stay, they are major and one of the first shinigami to become captains. Maybe should be listed under a section called "Secondary characters". Isshin, Shinji, Ulquiorra should have their own articles. They are major back up support characters.So I say:
Definite Merge
Decide which to merge
Work needed
Definite Keep, though work is needed

I am curious however, why do want Zaraki to have his article when he barely played as much as Shunshui or Jushiro?--Hanaichi 03:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I was planning on trying to do this in waves or whatever, but let's just merge all besides the main, main characters. Those are the only ones with any potential of actually recieving any sort of real world coverage, which is required in order to exist. TTN 11:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
You can't just keep articles for real-world info. Only a few characters in ANY anime have out of universe information important enough to mention, so merging every article without out-of-universe info won't cut it. And Kenpachi had his article survive without overly sized plot once, he can do it again; and he is far from equal to Shunsui, who is just another captain in reality, and Ukitake, although I might let up on him if you bring him up to standards. Just being one of the first captains does not make them notable, and Shunsui, who has only fought Chad and break the Sokyoku, is only barely a notable character, not a major character like Hitsugaya or Ichimaru. And also, Wikipedia isn't for plot. They only allow short plot summaries that describe what their role is for their series. Bleach is FAR from short. As I've said alot of times (which you ignored just as much), the Bleach articles NEED to cut down on plot and concentrate on personality, which you barely mention at all. As such, neither Momo, Shinji, Izuru, Ganju, Kon, Ulquiorra, or many other articles would survive like they are, which is why I put them under "Can easily be merged". The only arrancar we should keep at this point is Grimmjow, the rest don't just cut keep yet. All seven main characters should be kept for that reason, Aizen since he's the main villian, Hitsugaya because his article is already better than the rest of the captains, Kenpachi because he can survive without plot, and Yoruichi because her plot sections is small and can be worked around easily. Ichimaru, Byakuya, Soifon, Tosen, and alot of other articles that can survive need much work. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 17:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Anything that cannot follow WP:FICT (this was updated recently, so make sure that you reread it) and WP:WAF (and thusly cannot follow WP:N and WP:V) needs to be merged or deleted. Not too many characters may be able to match them, but that is a reason for character lists anyways. TTN 17:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
My main concern of the two at this point is FICT, as, because only very notable characters should get articles, deciding which is notable and not-notable comes first, then making them well-written articles. As such, our main priority should be deciding who is or isn't a notable character first, then make them as well written as possible, and if they can't, a merge should be discussed. The main characters, Hitsugaya, and the Soul Society traitors are the only ones who can't be questioned as non-notable, so there is no question about keeping them, although work IS needed. Ichigo's personality section, for example, is a disgrace in comparision to Naruto Uzumaki's, the main character of Naruto, and concentrates on plot and abilities rather than the character itself. Alot of articles about major and important characters, although they can survive, need alot of work, like Mayuri and Soifon. A character like Yamamoto or Tatsuki can be merged elsewhere and lose no important information, while stub articles like Iba or Chojiro should just be merged without question. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually, being notable in the series only helps the possibility of real world information, which is the only deciding factor in the decision of keeping the article. It could easily be possible for Makizō Aramaki to have an article over the main characters if there was somehow enough content on him. The only ones that have any real possibility are Ichigo, Orihime, Ishida, Chad, Rukia, Renji, Hitsugaya, and Aizen at this point. It would also be possible to kick Ishida, Chad and Aizen off of that list too. TTN 19:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
True, both do influence the other, but overall, notability comes first, but if no out-of-universe can be added, a merge can be advisable unless that character has too much information to merge. So far, NONE of the articles come into that exception, not even Ichigo. Work NEEDS to be done: plot has to be shortened to a paragraph that describes what their roles has done for the series, (Ichigo is an excpetion, as being the main character doesn't need one) development needs to be added, personality needs to be expanded, out-of-universe perspective needs to be put in the articles, and the non-notable articles have to be merged. As it currently is, no Bleach character article will reach GA-Class, not Ichigo, Hitsugaya, Urahara, Orihime, Uryu, Chad, Aizen, Renji, Rukia, or anyone else, although only a few of them could possibly do so if well-worked. Only Ichigo can reach A-Class right now if the proper work is done, while none of them will ever reach FA-Class at this point of the series, though in the future it is possible. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Notability on this site is only proven with real world information from non-trivial sources. That is all. I mean, during the normal process, we work in the way that you're describing, but it is completely wrong. If it comes down to merging any of the larger articles, we just cut them down as far as possible. We don't actually have to give more than the basic details on zanpakutōs and that kind of stuff in the case of these articles. The general cleanup stuff belongs in another discussion. At this point, we just need to decide which ones have any possibility of ever having enough real world information to hold an article. TTN 19:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
This discussion is getting long enough. Long term speaking however, I think our Definite Keep list works. You are right to say, that our articles are based more on the plot though. Because this is a continuing series, information is updated almost every week. My standpoint now however, seems to think we might as well merge most of the captains and lieutenents anyway. Artist, please don't insult the articles too much, because if you haven't noticed, the editors did alot of work to make sure it is at this state, and not some horrible article elsewhere.--Hanaichi 03:08, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not trying to insult thye ones who made the articles, but it is true that they need ALOT of work before any of them could reach GA-Class, the main parts being shortening or removing plot and expanding on personality. I'm willing to go by Hanaichi's list for now, but unless any improvement can be made to those articles, then a merge will be discussed about them. Also, I just merged Chojiro, Omaeda, Isane, and Iba. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 13:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as almsot 1/2 the information was gone from the previous pages of those characters, I just added alot of infomation plus their pictures. Should we continue to merge Nanao, Hisagi and Nemu?--Hanaichi 13:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Stop!

While most agreed that some articles would need to be merged (like Chōjirō Sasakibe), the merging is getting out of hand. TTN now merged Izuru Kira, an important character with numerous appearances, who even takes part in the Bount filler arc, into List of Bleach shinigami. What's more, a consensus was never reached at the discussion on what exactly to merge, and the only revised proposals were made by User:Artist Formerly Known As Whocares, who isn't even active on Bleach-related pages. This problem needs to be fixed ASAP and the mass-merging has to be stopped until a concensus is reached on each and every character.

The above comment will appear on Talk:Bleach (manga) and Talk:List of Bleach characters. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 09:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

My proposal

With the wild mass-mergers, I am proposing which articles to merge and to delete. Please keep in mind that anime fillers, especially the Bount arc, are as important as the manga, and also omakes and end-episode specials play a role (if a certain character appears in many of them). Here is the proposal:

Definite keep:
Ichigo Kurosaki - Rukia Kuchiki - Orihime Inoue - Uryū Ishida - Yautora Sado - Kisuke Urahara - Yoruichi Shihouin - Gin Ichimaru - Izuru Kira - Hanatarō Yamada - Sōsuke Aizen - Momo Hinamori - Byakuya Kuchiki - Renji Abarai - Shunsui Kyōraku - Kaname Tōsen - Tōshirō Hitsugaya - Rangiku Matsumoto - Kenpachi Zaraki - Ikkaku Madarame - Yumichika Ayasegawa - Mayuri Kurotsuchi - Jūshirō Ukitake - Ganju Shiba - Ulquiorra - Grimmjow Jeagerjaques - Jin Kariya - Koga Gō

Grey area: (this means keep unless good reason to delete is found)
Isshin Kurosaki - Tatsuki Arisawa - Keigo Asano - Don Kanonji - Shigekuni Yamamoto-Genryūsai - Soifon - Retsu Unohana - Sajin Komamura - Nanao Ise - Shūhei Hisagi - Yachiru Kusajishi - Kaien Shiba-Aaroniero Arleri

Definite merge:
Ryūken Ishida - Chōjirō Sasakibe - Marechiyo Ōmaeda - Isane Kotetsu - Tetsuzaemon Iba - Nemu Kurotsuchi - Luppi - Wonderwice Margera - Nnoitra - Yammy

Sorry if I forgot any characters who have/had an article (probably have). Basically I was appalled that Izuru's article was merged and don't think we should hurry up and merge half our articles - it serves no purpose. The goal, in my opinion, should be to avoid articles where a small bit of information is spread across several paragraphs (i.e. Nemu Kurotsuchi), but if we have enough info and the character appeared enough times in the series, the article should be kept. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 09:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

1) I agree with you. (Your first point. Not the proposal. Didn't read that yet) 2) I still prefered my idea with having a page for each Squad so we could have a decent amount of info on each member who happened to be on them. 3) No one owns an article. If Artist wants to contribute to a discussion he can. 4) Any type of Mass Merging should be nipped in the bud until a consesus is reached. 5) If you must, Be Bold. ^_^TheUltimate3 09:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I agree the merger is getting out of hand. I never wanted to merge Izuru for one. I also agree to your list Ynhockey. Should we now unmerge Izuru Kira?--Hanaichi 09:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I never thought to imply that a non-regular member like WhoCares can't participate in the discussion. I was merely commenting on how one opinion cannot be considered consensus, how some users are acting without consensus, and how regular users seem to have little time to make their own proposals and comments, which is too bad. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 11:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Go for it! Follow your dreams you can reach your goal. (Beef Cake! Beef Cake! South Park.../walksawaysad TheUltimate3 11:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh well I already unmerged the Izuru Kira article, although something about it seems off.--Hanaichi 11:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
As I said above, you need to think about notability as defined by WP:FICT over your own interpretations on which characters are notable. We don't split articles to have more fictional information. They are split because they have either sources provided and its getting too long, or it is just plain obvious. Please don't argue this point. It is completely set at this time, and I doubt it will change anytime soon.
This requires all besides main, main characters to be merged. You may not like it, but Wikia or a completely separate Bleach Wiki are better places for this information. That way, everything can be expanded upon. All characters, even the most minor, can have articles. It just works out better for the fans (i.e. yourselves) and people that just want to read up on every detail of the series instead of an encyclopedic overview (which is what this site is for). TTN 11:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I believe Kira is part of the secondary important characters. Why not we merge the REALLY REALLY stub articles. However, to this point I believe that Shigekuni Yamamoto-Genryūsai, Retsu Uohanna, and Sajin just need to be merged because they really are stubs. Kira, Momo and Hanataro should be kept because they do play somewhat a major role. So why not we merge Ryuken now?--Hanaichi 12:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Secondary characters also need to be merged unless there is some case for improvement. Given the uneasiness of even the main characters' case, I doubt there is one for him. You also shouldn't count retelling the plot as information. Take that away, and most of the character can be merged anyways. But, the problem is that there is no real world information for them, so that is pretty much it. They need to be merged, they easily fit, and it works out. TTN 12:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I am going to whore this idea until something comes out of it. The middle ground, Squad Articles. Short Articled Characters aren't reduced to pure stubs, but they don't have their own articles. Everyone wins!TheUltimate3 12:21, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Single squads have even less real world information, and they would be exactly the same as the sections on the larger list. They need to be covered under the largest possible topic. They probably cannot exist in the main article, so character lists are good enough, and they have a chance for real world info. TTN 12:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Despite WP:FICT, according to which there probably shouldn't be an article on Yasutora Sado, Renji Abarai and other such major characters, it has been standard practice on Wikipedia to split articles and lists which get too long, if possible. Ours is a classic case, where if you were to even include a fraction of the available information on many characters inside a list like List of Bleach shinigami, you'd quickly get a huge poorly-organized list. Some characters deserve their own articles if every Simpsons episode can have one (according to Jimmy Wales) even though we don't have any real-world information on any character, even Ichigo, in case anyone hasn't noticed. What remains is only to decide which characters are important enough. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 12:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

That is the wrong procedure, and just because it has been done in the past, it doesn't mean that it is OK. That is one of the reasons that I have come into this. They were split incorrectly, so now they need to be fixed. As out of universe information is the key, the amount of in-universe information is only cut down if it is too long. If we need to cut stuff to fit them, it doesn't really matter, as it doesn't affect our overview of the series. That is why we will only place the basic info to understand the shinigami on the List of Bleach shinigami. The Simpsons articles without real world information are also going under a slow merge process, so that is a moot point. TTN 12:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

This discussion gets longer and longer. Oh well. I suggest that we merge the "stub" articles like Shigekuni and Uohana and keep major Secondary characters like Momo, Kira and etc. If we merge practically all of the articles of the shinigami excluding main characters, the entire character list will just look bleh. People like reading information on the major secondary characters to find out more background information, and I believe with that we should not merge your so called "articles minus synopsis".--Hanaichi 12:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

People come here to read a lot of stuff, but that doesn't mean that we ignore our content guidelines to please them. We give a general overview of the series that only extends to the characters if they have something to bring to the table. The fan content goes to a anime wiki or a Bleach wiki, as it is a much better place for it. Personally, I frequent a Mario wiki because I find it fun to read up on minor things like cameos and trivia, but I don't think that I need to be able to read it here. This is not arguable at all, and it needs to be done. TTN 12:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
TTN, please stop taking the moral (or whatever) high ground and pretend you are all-knowledgeable on Wikipedia policy issues. In fact, WP:FICT is just a guideline, while WP:IAR is a policy, and a great example of how it can be used is here. Even WP:FICT itself, in the intro template, links to WP:UCS, which you should probably read and understand. But perhaps the most relevant to this discussion is What "ignore all rules" means, which clearly summarizes my point of view. Namely, points 2 and 3. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 15:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
We have a set verifiability policy, which goes along with WP:N, which is the parent of WP:FICT. Unless you want to ignore policy (IAR isn't used with opinions, by the way), you have no reason to ignore the guideline. TTN 15:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
And with points two and three of IAR, this is the way this site works. Fans have a problem with it, but there isn't much we can do about it. TTN 15:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
WP:V has nothing to do with this because none of the information is out-of-universe and in-universe citations are good for in-universe information. Therefore, if WP:V is the only policy we go by, then all the articles should be kept, including extremely minor characters. About WP:N, it is too general and this is why WP:FICT was made. However, the point you don't seem to understand is that WP:CON is one of the most important policies on Wikipedia and in conjunction with WP:IAR overrules guidelines like WP:FICT, which are just that, guidelines. Common sense should also be a top value which you seem to ignore. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 15:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Again, they support each other (along with WP:RS), so if you ignore one, you're going to have to ignore all of them. Consensus has nothing to do with numbers (You could always get more people and I could always get more people), but rather a general understanding based upon the fundamentals of this site. IAR is only used in conjunction with things like WP:BLP violations and very rare cases. We don't use it to ignore guidelines that we don't agree with, which is just silly to do. TTN 20:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Well a Bleach wiki would be nice, but some (I.E. Me) don't have the time nor knowledge of how to make a Wikia. That being said, I also don't want to see the images of all the Shikai and Bankais getting deleted. Is there a way we can save those?TheUltimate3 13:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone else notice how f-ed up all these rules and guidelines are. They bassically say follow this rule, but at the same time says its a free-for-all.TheUltimate3 15:21, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Here is a good place to start. After creating it, you can probably transwiki the older versions of the articles over. I doubt the images can be used under the non-free criteria. TTN 13:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I have no doubt that images can be used (Most of the wikia's I visit use alot of the images found here and across the interweb) It won't cost money would it? Cause that would suck? I mean that would really such. ANd I'm asking because the Oblivion Mod Wiki got deleted I think because they weren't paying for it.TheUltimate3 13:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you were talking about here. Yeah, they can be added over there. It doesn't cost money. You just have to show an interest in it, and make sure that it doesn't die off (that is usually grounds for deletion). TTN 13:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Good...Good...need to find a link to teh Bleach wikiproject (Does Bleach even have one? They must have) Yes this little revelation could fix...everything.TheUltimate3 13:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous characters like Hisagi and Kira get to keep their articles while characters with so much more importance in the Naruto and One Piece sections get merged? Its not fair to keep all these Bleach articles when almost the entirety of Naruto has been merged, most who have far more importance to the series than half the Bleach characters with articles.Crazydom 04:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No, you're not! If I had enough skills in English, I would merge Szayel Aporro, Nnoitra, Hisagi, Tatsuki, Isshin, Ryuuken and, mainly, KEIGO right now. But I don't have :(
Actually, I would merge almost everyone! Keeping only Ichigo, Rukia, Orihime, Renji, Ishida, Sado, Byakuya, Hitsugaya, Aizen, Gin, Tousen, Grimmjow, Ulquiorra, Ganjuu, Hanatarou, Urahara, Yoruichi, Kenpachi and Shinji. And that is a lot already!!! Naruto and One Piece have like... 10 "individual character" articles and in Bleach we have one for each character that is popular enough. - Access Timeco 02:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I really wish I could get on sooner and stop the unmerge. I'm new to Wikipedia, so that explains my unactiveness for whoever said that, and I spent most of my time on the Naruto articles half my time here. And in the end someone like Kira or Shinji isn't as notable as you make him out to be, he is no more important than Kiba Inuzuka was to Naruto. Their only importance, however, was in plot, and get no development in the series like someone like Soifon for this series or Neji Hyuga for Naruto, and thus are only a regular character, not important, major, or main. And he hasn't done anything in reality besides follow Gin around, and that matters more to Gin and Aizen than Kira. And what will happen once the articles get reformed to be non-plot and about the actual character rather than his/her actions, and his article becomes no better than Nemu's is? He'll end up back on the merge. In the end, only those in the keep lists Hanaichi or someone (I'm sorry for not remembering who) listed earlier will be kept and mabye Kon, while the rest get merged somewhere. When I came he I didn't mean "merge a few lieutenants and pat youself on the back", I meant to seriously increase the quality of the Bleach articles, in both the text and the articles themselves. But I'll let you decide, should we follow the standards of Wikipedia with these articles, or should we care more about simply making articles and throwing quality out the window?
I have merged the worst of the articles, I will wait until you decide on my question before I think about the rest. Also, just a suggestion, I suggest we merge the "Quincy" and "Vizard" sections on this page to the articles about their race, where the info would be more useful. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 20:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
New articles merged: Koga Go, Keigo Asano, and Jin Kariya. Hartebeest 23:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I think we should merge Kaien Shiba, Yachiru Kusajishi, Sajin Komamura, and Retsu Unohana next, then we can think about merging Szayel Aporro Grantz, Nnoitra, Ganju Shiba, Jūshirō Ukitake, Mayuri Kurotsuchi, Shunsui Kyōraku, Kaname Tōsen, Momo Hinamori, Tatsuki Arisawa, and Isshin Kurosaki. Hartebeest 23:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
There is just no reason to merge Kaien or Yachiru. Retsu and Sajin yes, because they are literally stubs. However Artist, Naruto and Bleach are totally 2 different stories. You can't compare one character from Bleach to another in Naruto. Shinji, yes he is notable being a central vizard. Kira, one of the major vice captains who has played a significant role. We should wait until Szayel and Nnoitras' run finishes first, then merge them. Its a much easier way to do a summary of what they did.--Hanaichi 01:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Whoa whoa, whats with all the merging?

I just noticed, the Vizard and the Bounts section just got merged. I know its being bold and all, but I didn't think an agreement was made to do it like that. Alot of information seems to be lost as well. The List of Bleach characters page is there for a reason. Why move everything to another page? And why merge Shinji? He is quite an important character currently. For the time being, I will unmerge him.--Hanaichi 01:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Hanaichi, I thank you. YnHockey, I agree with your list, but I'm annoyed that we have to have this merging. I know Wiki has its standards, but I think too much merging is a bad idea. I was thinking a few days ago about this kind of layout:

Protagonists:

  • Ichigo
  • Rukia
  • Chad
  • Orihime
  • Uryuu
  • Renji

Antagonists:

  • Aizen
  • Gin
  • Tosen
  • Ulquirroa
  • Grimmjow

Shinigami:

  • Insert Shinigami list here.

Others:

  • Insert Others here.

Let me know what anyone thinks of this. RedEyesMetal 08:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Problem is, English dub hasn't reached that far to say Aizen is the antagonist. I say once they reveal him, we go for your format.--Hanaichi 10:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I have just unmerged Kariya. The reason for this is just plainly, Kariya is the main Bount, was very central to the arc at that time, and there is no reason for deleting him. Sure, Koga Go can be merged because he isn't exactly very central, but we should keep Kariya.--Hanaichi 12:22, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Why do you think we shouldn't merge Kaien and Yachiru, they're all SS arc only characters, even though Aaroniero took shape of Kaien in HM arc, they're still seperate characters, aren't they? Hartebeest 15:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm not comparing the two as series, which I agree are very different, I'm comparing characters in them. Both Kira and Kiba are little different, as neither get go very in depth, have no true development (like Soifon's development after losing to Yoruichi), and their main importance is in plot. Moving the Vizard and Bount were my idea, as it would improve the articles greatly if the members were added, otherwise they'd be regular start-class articles. And Kaien and Yachiru merged would be a bad idea right now. Also, the English series has already released volume 20, where Aizen is revealed as a villian and Gin and Tosen follow him, and in a few days over a month volume 21 will be released and Bleach will be in Shonen Jump manga, starting after the Soul Society arc. It just isn't spoilers anymore.
And let's be honest here, merging someone like Kira or Shinji, who only play an important role in one arc, wouldn't be a bad idea, as we should try to concentrate on those who make appearances in several arcs (Toshiro, for example) and have too much information to merge (namely those well over 15,000 bytes). One Piece and Naruto, two major manga series even longer than Bleach, don't have half the number of character articles Bleach has, and they only give them to those who have been continuously important throughout the series and have enough information, and they don't have overly-long plot sections (Sasuke Uchiha and Kakashi Hatake, two main characters, for example). The Bleach articles need to follow their examples in this subject. In the end, Kira or Shinji are only one-arc characters that do nothing major besides one specific thing (in order, following Gin Ichimaru as a lackey and training Ichigo), and fall out to major characters like Hitsugaya or Aizen, who do have enough outside-of-plot information and play the major roles. We should try limiting the number of articles to no more than twenty, as only that many can truly be called major in any major manga series. For Bleach, that would be those listed here. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 20:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
New Article Merged: Retsu Unohana. I agree with Artist Formerly Known As Whocares, we should only keep Main and Major characters.

EDIT: What about Isshin then? Hartebeest 15:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

WAIT! English anime hasn't revealed Aizen yet, but the manga will be soon. More people watch the anime than the manga. The approximate date of revealing Aizen is around December. Do not merge Isshin yet, he might have a significant role to play soon and by the way, its a big spoiler to put him in a shinigami article. Might I remind you Artist, you aren't exactly a major contributor to Bleach articles, nor are you Hartebeest, and its best to reach a widely accepted agreement first. We should not merge Kariya, although he is a one arc guy, he is the main antagonist of that arc. Its important to have his information. Same as Shinji, he is not exactly one arc, but he is the main vizard. When you merged it last, half the information was gone. Artist, you are still comparing. Firstly, Naruto has about 150 characters counted here. Bleach has Gotei 13 X 2= 26 captains and vices, + 5 seated officers revealed, + 3 ex shinigami (Urahara, Isshin and Yoruichi) + our 5 protanganist, thats around 39 characters in total. Fine, add the karakura students, bounts, quincy and vizards, that still doesn't add up to 150 characters like in Naruto. What I'm saying is, don't compare Naruto to Bleach, the significance of characters there and here are totally different. We shouldn't be so rash. What I'm worried about is the quality lost when people start merging articles. I will work out a list later, on whats to be kept. If we agree on that list, we do that, but no more merging until this is sorted out. Unfortunetly, alot of people are busy in real life and have other things better to do then edit wikipedia. We aren't working to a deadline.--Hanaichi 03:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
We scrap out the Karakura high students, and replace with main characters. However, since english manga and anime will soon(not very soon though) will reveal Aizen as a traitor, I think this format works.

As promise, my list:

Main Characters:

  • Ichigo
  • Rukia
  • Chad
  • Orihime
  • Uryuu
  • Renji

Major Shinigami:

  • Byakuya Kuchiki
  • Toshiro Hitsugaya
  • Rangiku Matsumoto
  • Kenpachi Zaraki
  • Ikkaku Madarame
  • Yumichika Ayasegawa
  • Mayuri Kurotsuchi(Its difficult to merge him, so much content)

Other Shinigami(Difficult to merge, due to content):

  • Soifon
  • Shunsui Kyoraku
  • Jushiro Ukitake
  • Yachiru Kusajishi
  • Izuru Kira
  • Momo Hinamori
  • Hanataro Yamada
  • Kaien Shiba

Others:

  • Jin Kariya
  • Shinji Hirako
  • Yoruichi Shihouin
  • Kisuke Urahara
  • Isshin(Debatable)

Antagonist:

  • Sosuke Aizen
  • Gin Ichimaru
  • Kaname Tosen
  • Ulquiorra Schiffer
  • Grimmjow

Unsure:

  • Nnoitra(Keep until his part gets finished)
  • Szayel(Well, keep him until his part gets written off)
  • Ganju(one off arc, didn't do much except annoy)
  • Kon(comic relief, doesn't do much either)

Either way, I think it seems reasonable.--Hanaichi 06:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent plan of action, but like you said, we have to wait until December to move Aizen to the Antagonists. RedEyesMetal 10:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Aizen was already introduced in the anime, whether as a villian or not. Wikipedia's goal is simply to inform using all information possible, and Aizen's betrayal falls under that. This is also what spoiler warnings are for. And if by half the information you meant the unneedingly long plot, then there would have been no point in keeping him. Plot should be limited to one paragraph, two for the main characters, instead of overly-long plot articles. In reality the articles are little more than one of the many ways fans can know what's going on in the Japanese series, which is not what Wikipedia is for. Only the main/major characters and Kon can be kept, Kon because you can says alot of out-of-universe information about him and about his Radio-Kon-Baby and anime extras. Shinji, regardless of being the main Vizard, is nothing more than a one-arc character, and excluding the oversized plot, which should be only one paragraph, his article is a stub. We should try to AVOID oversized plot and concentrate on the characters themselves, like their abilities or personality. The twenty I listed are the only ones that can be considered main or major (except Kon), and those are the articles we should concentrate on improving, not one-arc characters like Shinji, Kira, Ukitake, and Ganju that won't make it. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 21:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah but Kira did alot in Shinigami cup and fillers, we shoudn't merge him, but Ganji and Ukitake, yes. Also, should we unmerge Aaroniero cuz it will be a huge spoiler (the same reason you don't want me to merge Kaien and Isshin)?

Hartebeest 00:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know about the entire AVOID oversized plot summary. Fine, we keep Kon since he has importance because of his Radio Kon Bleach. Take away Kon's synopsis, and his article is literally a stub. Go ahead and merge Ganju, he is a one arc off character, played minor role in the Bount arc. We should keep Kariya, for the entire purpose of background story and Bount arc information. I still think that Shinji should be kept. We have already merged alot. We haven't even discussed Yumichika yet. Take away his synopsis, and you are definetely left with a stub. The twenty you listed seem to be major/main characters. Kenpachi, although you might think he is a VERY important character, seem to be playing minor or none at all at the current events. Yachiru, literally could be merged. Atleast the Bleach (manga) article is GA, thats a start. So, Artist, you basically say," Merge everyone, except the 20 I have on my list". We shall not unmerge Aaroniero, seeing as people who don't read up to date chapters or watch current episodes won't know anything about arrancar, Espada, or Hueco Mundo. Kaein, no reason to merge him, nor Isshin. Artist, seeing as you aren't a regular contributor to Bleach anyway, as you haven't signed up here, most likely havent read the aims of our taskforce. It says," aims to organize, expand, clean up, and guide Bleach-related articles." Some people are busy in real life, so why not instead, we concentrate on the cleaning up, and then the merge. Seeing as most of our articles lack third party sources, the discussion being here, our articles could be deleted anyway. --Hanaichi 02:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
PS: Another reason not to unmerge Aaroniero Hartebeest. Why unmerge him when its literally a stub? Isn't your aim to merge other articles which are more important then Aaroniero, like Kaien and Isshin?--Hanaichi 02:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Well it's you guys who said not to merge Kaien and Isshin cuz of the spoiler, and then I agreed with that, I don't see that being a problem. Hartebeest 02:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Shinji, Momo, Isshin, and Kira are on the same level of notability and have just as much information as Ganju, Komamura, Ryuken, and Yachiru, don't let your personal opinion cloud that. Nnoitora and Grantz could just as easily be merged as Iba and Hisagi. Yumichika's main role is following around Ikkaku. In the end all of the twenty I listed (except Kon) are the only major and main characters in Bleach. Kon has information left out from the article, and I'd like to see what his article would be like non-plot and with the unmentioned info before I decide. And for your information, I actually prefer doing something before joining a task force. I was about to, but the whole Durin situation threw me off. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 16:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Personal opinion? Fine, maybe Kira and Momo are on the standards of Yachiru and Ganju, however, Komamura and Ryuken are totally way below that. Thats why we merged them. Shinji and Isshin are basically on the same level, we should keep them. Let Nnoitra and Szayel finish their part first, then merge them. I never opposed to not merging them. Hisagi and Iba was already merged, I agree to that. Just because Yumichika's main role is to follow Ikkaku doesn't make him a main character. I haven't even started on Hanataro. He is a one off arc character, like Ganju, but played a minor role in the Bounto arc and is basically comic relief. In the end, we should start cleaning up the protagonist first, and allow that to reach GA level, instead of recklessly merging all the characters you deem "minor and not notable".--Hanaichi 02:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Think there won't be any merging for a long time, not a bad thing though. Hartebeest 18:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Hanataro is a common star in filler episodes, and thus we can assume to see more of him soon, so let's try improving his article before deciding. To repeat what I said in a shorter fashion, Kira and Momo are just as merge-able as the others merged thusfar, with Isshin and Shinji being no different. And also, I ment Isshin is as notable as Ryuken and Komamura are, not Momo, Kira, and Shinji. I used bad wording. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 20:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Isshin might be an important character in later story, but now (like Artist just said) it's as mergeable as Ganju. Also d'you think Sasakibe have the potential to be a major character? Hartebeest 00:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I suggest merges for Kira, Momo, Shinji, Isshin, Ukitake, and Shunsui, as they either do very little and can be merged just as easily as the others so far. I do suggest Isshin get merged to the characters page for spoiler reasons, however. Once he does more as a Shinnigami, then we could put him on that page. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 21:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Kira, Momo, and Shunsui, yes, but Ukitake's article's over 10 kilobytes, I'm still trying to figure out howcome his article's so long. Hartebeest 01:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Don't merge Shinji, Ukitake and Shunsui yet, and not Isshin. Fine, its okay to merge Kira and Momo like you did. And while we are at it, someone go find group images of the characters.--Hanaichi 09:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I won't do Ukitake, I decided to wait until the stub ones (Isshin and Shinji, for example) are merged before I say anything on him. Shunsui hasn't done crap besides follow Ukitake around, and Shinji's is just as stubby as Momo's and Kira's. Isshin isn't notable at all. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I have unmerged Isshin for the time being, but the vizard page just looks WEIRD now with Shinji's article there. Don't just make useless and reckless mergers. Maybe because you just have free time, unlike some people who have to do work. I shall unmerge Shinji again, Shunshui you can merge. However, I suggest this: why not clean up the articles, or is merging just an easy way out? If you could find group images, most notably with the shinigami captains and liuetenents, go do that so we can trash the pictures. --Hanaichi 09:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

A) Besides the endings, no group images exist. I don't even know how to load images, anyway. B) Shinji and Isshin's articles won't ever get any better that stub-level (what they are now), unlike ones like Ichigo or Hitsugaya. I will, however, work on improving the articles now by your request. Ones that still can't go beyond stub will get merged, however. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 12:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

So be it. I think there are images, Komamura and Iba are hard to find though. Shunsui and Nanao, no problem, look at the fight with Chad. Chojiro and Shigekuni, look at the Sokyoku thing. Its easy to load images. Just click the upload file on the left, choose "its from somewhere else". Upload the picture, don't bother about fair use rationale, tell me the link, like Image:Rantao.jpg, and I'll fix everything.--Hanaichi 12:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that's enough

Seriously, the merging should stop now. We've done enough. We do too much, we won't even have articles at all. What we've got now, is alright and I believe its perfect. RedEyesMetal 17:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I did an preview of a new table if anyone wants to have a look:

[1]

The reason why I added Nell is cuz I have a feeling Nell will be important in the next few chapters.RedEyesMetal 18:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Just to remind you all, we're going to be improving articles now, starting with the main characters apparently. Kira, Momo, and the others merged have no hope of ever getting past stub-class, EVER. And they can be described in three average-sized paragraphs. Any character that can be like that shouldn't have articles at all. Also, can we please merge Nnoitora? There's no way of improving that article at all, or noticibly changing it, and it is Bleach's wosrt. I've also made a merge attempt in my sandbox. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I think it was generally agreed in the Talk:List of Bleach hollows that we keep Szayel and Nniotra's articles until they finish their fight. RedEyes, the table looks good, just a couple of things wrong a bit. Theres little or no hope at all that Nel gets an article, unless the section about her looks extremely long, which it isn't.--Hanaichi 01:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Why're you guys so convinced that Szayel won't get enough relevancy to have an article EVER, hes article is 9.5 kilobytes, that's longer than Kaien (8.5), Tousen (9), Shinji (8), Isshin (8.5)'s article, who you're so determined to keep, I think we could all improve their article (Szayel included) so we wont have to merge them, Noitora's article is not much more than a stub, so I wont protest if you delete it, but Szayel, NO! Also, why do you think Nell would 'never' get enough relevancy to have an article? I know we dont have to write an article for her now, but you cant predict the future, can you? Hartebeest 23:41, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, we can't predict the future, but I view Szayel as a temporary thing, much like Luppi when he was introduced. I think the main reason why Szayel has alot of information is because of the comparison to Mayuri and that his release has been revealed. Currently there isn't enough info for Nell to warrant her own article, because if she does get her own article it will probably look like a stub.--Hanaichi 04:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Article name and the Manual of Style

Per WP:MOSNAME, shouldn't the name of this article (since it's a list of characters) be List of Bleach characters to fit Wikipedia's Manual of Style? Similarly, these articles be moved as well:

If nobody's got a problem with this, I'll probably move these article (and probably put in a request for this page at WP:RM, since List of Bleach characters is already a redirect). NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 00:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Since there isn't any response, I've moved the last three articles and am about to put up a request to move this page on WP:RM. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 02:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
They should all have gone to List of X in Y, which is unfortunate considering the hundreds of redirects to be fixed. This should be List of characters in Bleach, just like there is List of characters in Naruto. A lot of work. Anyone? Dekimasuよ! 15:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
List of Y X is how the Manual of Style dictates title styles should be. Besides, these are shorter titles to type. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 06:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Hate to break it to you after the work you obviously put in to fix all those redirects, but the new names are all wrong.
According to the definition on Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists), a stand-alone list is a page that contains primarily a list, usually of links to articles in a particular subject area (slightly paraphrased for grammar).
Character articles only take on the "List of" naming convention when they are solely a list, and do not contain large amounts of non-list content. Since the Bleach character "lists" are all quite heavy on descriptive content, they should use a "Characters in X" convention.
Also the new names are all really bad grammatically, and except for the shinigami there are no non-Bleach versions of the character type. Any objection to me moving them all back? --tjstrf talk 19:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The numerous changes I made

I just made alot of changes, sorry if it disturbs you, but I have reasons to change them:

  • I added some minor characters that we missed, like Karin's friends
  • I moved some characters formerly under the "Other Characters" section into "Other Sould Society dwellers" and "Other material world dwellers", because some of them are in Soul Society right now and some of them are dead (or I don't know where they are), so that's why I moved it.

Fair bit of warning: All the Bleach articles are most likely open for deletion.

For lack of third party sources, everything here, in the Naruto section, and probably all over the place is open for deletion. Maybe we ticked off the admins to much so that they care now, maybe not who knows. Just giving you all the fair warnning and try to find a way to save all the info. Thats it, good day.--TheUltimate3 16:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page New wikia, a start and a place to move the info to if Wikipedia cracks down.--TheUltimate3 17:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
So what exactly are we expected to do? Write about influences, popular culture, and designs, then completely forget about the characters themselves? // DecaimientoPoético 00:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
That my friend, is up to you and the other Bleach editors. I was just giving you fair warning that "lack of third party sources" seems to be a tactic for deleting articles.--TheUltimate3 00:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
To be honest, that is what we should be doing. If we had done that, then they would all be GAs right now. See Batman. It's a very well written FA that treats its subject in a very out-of-universe voice. If we did that for all the Bleach character articles (although I believe it would have been already done if the information was available) then there would be no problems in retaining them or in passing them onto GA status. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 00:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

So it looks like you guys decided to merge them all or something? I guess that works, though the part of my brain that likes articles to be readably short is going to hate it. --tjstrf talk 00:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Sort of. That's the ongoing debate. The Naruto related articles recently experienced a merging bit - see List of major Konoha teams, and the tighter WP:FICT ruling resulting in an Afd for List of Akatsuki members here. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 01:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

New filler characters?

Can anyone add the information about the characters unique to recent fillers? I wanna do it myself, but I can't remember their name, so can you? Hartebeest 23:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

List of Bleach The Arrancar arc episodes mentions a guy named Patros or something, is that who you meant? Sorry, I've been so busy I've barely been able to read the manga, much less keep up with filler plot. --tjstrf talk 08:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
I could do it, but I'll be out of town until Monday. If it's not done by then, I'll do it. --Eruhildo 15:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
No, Patros is already there, and so is his lil buddies, by filler characters I mean the kids (think it's Shouta and Yui) from ep. 128 - 131, the boy Shinji (I know he has the same name as Hirako, but yeah) in the Kendo episode, the cake baker in 134, the lil girl in 135, and Shintaro, I know that's a lot, but thanks. Hartebeest 23:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Why include such excessively minor characters? The various depositories of Bleach characters are already littered with subjects you could never hope to care about or know where in the series they appear. For example: Harunobu Ogidō. Who? Does he actually do anything, or is he a background character Kubo decided to give a name to? What chapter does he even appear in? Unless they are relevant to the story there is no need to stuff them in somewhere. ~SnapperTo 00:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
But I don't think you should call Shouta a minor character, a 4 episode character, FOUR Episodes!! That's as much as Grand Fisher! Hartebeest 00:39, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree - most of the filler characters are very minor and don't need to be listed here, but Shouta did play a big role in the fillers. I think he should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eruhildo (talk • contribs) 05:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Gonna add them myself if nobody does it. Hartebeest 00:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


Merge proposals, faulty or not?

I have run into a problem with merge tags being placed for characters that have been deemed appropriate per WP:N, WP:FICT and several other policies by User:Sephiroth BCR on this discussion and this discussion. Instead of being blocked for edit warring, I thought I'd bring it to the community as a whole per WP:CCC. Please discuss. Sasuke9031 (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? Which characters and is the problem with people removing the tags or merging them? -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
This one and This one. Apparently User:Shrine Maiden has templated them for not enough screen time, and I have explained that screen time does not demonstrate notability alone, and directed them to WP:N, but if the merges do go through, they should be for the right reasons, like no longer passing WP:N and WP:FICT, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasuke9031 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
It's not about "not enough screentime". They are obviously not main characters and although Bleach fanboys love them, ask anyone about "Kenpachi Zaraki" and they'll say "WHO?" Shrine Maiden (talk) 20:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Shrine Maiden, see my note below and please review the relevant policies. Being main characters is also not a sign of notability. Some very notable characters in some series have been supporting characters (Q from Star Trek: The Next Generation for example, who only appears in a handful of episodes). That said, as I've noted below, your are within your rights to request a new discussion on merging these articles, however please make sure to properly tag them with the correct target name and to include the appropriate corresponding tag on the list page. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Correct. Merging should be done after being sure they can't meet WP:N and WP:FICT (and I usually add WP:PLOT and WP:WAF for those who dispute FICT). Now, that said, if she has tagged it for a merge, as it isn't vandalism or blatantly silly, it must now go through a discussion to reach consensus. She is basically challenging the February discussion, and as the articles haven't yet been cleaned up like some of the others, I can see the fairness in her questioning it. That being the case, I've created a merge discussion below for each one. A merge from multiple tag also needs to be added to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach with the appropriate discussion link here, and the merge tags fixed in both articles to point to the actual list. (actually three articles now, from the look of it) -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Not only what mentioned above, Kisuke Urahara, Kaname Tōsen, Gin Ichimaru all need to be merged. Well, silly shonen anime like Naruto and Bleach often have better chances to go to mainstream US TV and have unusually large kid fanbase, so if you are so worked up over it, keep them, I will withdraw to watch my stuff like Lucky Star. = ) Shrine Maiden (talk) 20:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Well those I can understand and would have tagged 'em and bagged 'em myself if not for having been beaten to the punch. Sasuke9031 (talk) 20:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) While you are within your rights to question the notability, coming at it from a standpoint like that and referring to it as "silly shonen anime" makes it appear that you are not viewing the articles totally from a neutral standpoint based on Wikipedia guidelines, but from your own viewing preferences. Please make sure your merge suggests are grounded in the former, and not the latter. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, because Bleach and Naruto and other shonen stuffs went to America and got some anime reviews, being mentioned in one review does not automatically make one character become "notable" in my opinion. If you say one character is important in the plot and so on, why are all Claymore character jammed in one nasty page? Maybe I am not viewing the articles from a neutral standpoints, Bleach fanboys also certainly not. Shrine Maiden (talk) 20:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Again, you are not speaking neutrally, and are bordering on incivility. Please remember to WP:AGF, as many of these pages were created before today's current standards exist. Many series have slowly been undergoing merge discussions, but there have been delays and it is a time consuming process, particularly for a series as large as Bleach. The series itself, as well as Naruto has been the subject of multiple reviews, news articles, and have been mentioned in multiple books, so please don't discount them as unimportant simply because you dislike shonen works. As per the above discussions, these articles were looked at neutrally by the majority of the editors, and continue to do so. That doesn't mean everything will get fixed overnight, however. I myself have been working on the merge of the individual character articles of Tokyo Mew Mew, and it has taken several months with one left to do. All of the editors working on these Bleach character articles are highly experienced editors who want to do a good job, not just shove everything on a single page to make yet another unsourced, ugly list. Instead, they work to merge articles in as decently written prose with the majority of sources in place, so that in the end we will end up with something like List of Naruto characters, which is a featured list. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
This proposal seems somewhat pointy, born out of this discussion; if Tekken characters aren't notable enough to have their own individual articles, then neither are characters from "unremarkable" anime. That said, these articles do have too much plot stuff, and continue to need parring down. That does not mean they do not have the necessary out-of-universe information, as most of these articles have some semblance of a reception section. Sephiroth BCR has indicated that they have the potential to reach GA status, and I'm inclined to agree with him given his success rate in such matters. ~SnapperTo 20:54, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I still don't understand why shonen characters' "techniques" and "ability" and "signature attacks" need to be comprehensively written down in Wikipedia. Surely that's help humanity alot >_> Shrine Maiden (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
The articles need cleaning up, but again, that has nothing to do with notability. If, as Snapper has noted, you are starting this discussion soley because of the Tekken Fighters discussion (and the rather disturbing one you started on Talk:Tekken regarding "deletion of articles", I am going to ask that you stop at this point and not add anymore articles to the discussion list. As it is, you have reawakened the early discussion and it will continue, but if you continue, it will appear that you are being disruptive to make a point, rather than actually having legitimate concern. As for the articles "helping humanity," if that was the criteria for articles, entire TV series and film articles would be gone, along with the great bulk of the encyclopedia. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 21:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
No, that's some big accusations. I added 2 merge tags to 2 Bleach characters articles because I see they are not main characters and are not "notable" in any way (save Bleach fanboys). Other articles had been tagged since March and no one cares. If I am trying to be disruptive, I should have placed those tags on all Bleach characters, but I did not place merge tag on Ichigo or Orihime because they are obviously main characters and deserve their own articles given that this anime has a large fanbase, but other deathgod guys don't deserve it just because Bleach fanboys love them. Tekken characters just turned my attention to this and I see they are the same. Make legitimate points to prove that those characters are notable enough rather than attacking me. Shrine Maiden (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Not really. If you look into our history, you will see this user who pretty much did the same thing, except listed the articles for deletion instead of merge. While I admit that merge is less disruptive than deletion, it is such a time consuming process, and most of us have jobs we need to go to. All we ask is that you consider the reasons for such a merge proposal, and prove us wrong. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Those characters are not main characters and only appear briefly here and there, so prove that they are notable other than "I'm a Bleach fanboy and I love those characters so they deserve a page and I will oppose those who propose a merge". Shrine Maiden (talk) 21:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Alright then. Here goes. Notability is established through outside sources. Most of these sources are either found in a Creation and conception section or in a reception section. Of the two articles that I opposed merging below, they both have reception sections to the best of my knowledge, and they have had some trimming done on plot summaries, albiet thy probably could use more, but that's my proof. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
There's a discussion below so you can vote for it or against it. It's simple. As for the "reception", being "mentioned" in one review doesn't mean they are that notable. Shrine Maiden (talk) 21:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Already voted. The only thing left on my to do list is to attempt to reason with you so that discussion can proceed normally for everybody else. Sasuke9031 (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
You don't need to reason with me, I have good faith = ) Shrine Maiden (talk) 22:06, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Good to hear. Let's get underway then shall we? Sasuke9031 (talk) 22:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
One again, Shrine Maiden, you are very close to being uncivil and making personal attacks on editors without any real basis for those attacks or valid reason. No one has said they will oppose those who propose a merge. Indeed, despite your poor attitude, a merge discussion was started to allow consensus to be reached on each article. So stop calling people "fanboys" just because the articles exist and allow the process to happen without flame baiting. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Sources that "fanboy" = personal attack? I am a proud Lucky Star fangirl. Shrine Maiden (talk) 00:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Your tone makes it very obvious you don't mean it in a good way. It falls well within the whelm of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Particularly: "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views" which your comments do. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Is that so? = \ Shrine Maiden (talk) 01:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
(ec) The same can be said of almost all fictional topics. Even real things have that issue; does humanity really care if George W. Bush "as a child, was not accepted for admission by St. John's School"? I highly doubt it. But it is relevant to Bush, just as a character's techniques are relevant to the character. ~SnapperTo 21:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Certainly Bush plays a more significant role in human history than "Strawberry Ichigo". Shrine Maiden (talk) 21:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe, but this is an encyclopedia, not a history text. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

"I did not place merge tag on Ichigo or Orihime because they are obviously main characters" ORLY? Gamma Akutabi is the main character of Zombie Powder, another of Kubo's manga. See his page? No, you don't, because he doesn't have one. The same goes for Izumi Konata, Nietono no Shana, Kazuki Muto, etc. They're main characters of their respective series and they don't have pages. Orihime has absolutely no real-world notability. Why not put a merge tag on her? Ichigo has little more than Gin and arguably less than Kenpachi. Stop adding merge tags on a whim. Suigetsu 02:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, stop your annoying "shonen anime (x)" elitist bullshit. Your neutral point of view is already questioned enough without it. Suigetsu 03:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Masashi Kudo cite

This ANN news piece says that the guy does the anime character designs. However, an old Studio Pierrot site citation that I recall adding some months ago and has apparently either been lost or gone deadlink since then credited him as "anime designer", and in a Japanese interview given prior to the Diamond Dust movie release Kubo said that he does all the anime character designs personally.

This begs the question of exactly what the guy's job really is. I would presume that he's in charge of translating the manga designs into something animatable, but that's just a guess. Anyone know a better/clearer source? --erachima talk 07:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Every mention I've finding of him refers to him as the character designer for the various movies and series, as well as the animation directory. Basically, as you already guessed, the character designer designs the basic characters for the animated series, based on Tite's original manga characters. That's why there are some subtle differences between the media appearances, if you do a side by side comparison, as they will often put their own little touches on the characters, or make subtle changes to match a change in tone or focus of the anime. :) Most anime series based on a manga have a character designer deal with adapting the characters to the animated version. http://www.aicanime.com/introanime/process06.html has a nice article on the process of making an anime talking about the role of the character designer.-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 07:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Soul Reaper List

We could use some folks over at Talk:List of Soul Reapers in Bleach#Officer/Former Officer issue to discuss the issue of current/former officer labeling. There was so much edit warring going on over it that the article is currently fully protected while we talk it out. Please come offer your thoughts so we can reach some consensus and get things going again. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggested character merges

As per above, several character articles have been tagged for a suggested merge by User:Shrine Maiden. I'll leave it for her to add her reasoning, but I've created sections below for each character. Please respond on a character by character basis. I'll add my own views later, for now this is just a straight list of the proposals. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Kenpachi Zaraki

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Resolved
 – Consensus felt the character Kenpachi Zaraki met all requisite requirements in WP:N to remain a standalone article.

Suggested merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Oppose. This article has been mentioned in the previous discussions, and has the potential to eventually become a GA. Considering Sephiroth's success rate when it comes to things like this, a merge is unwarranted. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - fairly prominent. If I recall correctly, IGN had quite a bit on him in the episodes he was in. I know I've been promising to do work on these for a while, but hey, I have to enjoy my summer before going to my new school :p sephiroth bcr (converse) 04:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see why this article needs to be merged. It has a lot of information in it and I highly doubt that all of this information will be kept if merged. Wouldn't deleting possibly-helpful information be pointless? I thought the point of an encyclopedia was to have as much helpful information as possible. By merging this article I believe we will be unnecessarily removing helpful information. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 05:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC))
  • For the sake of brevity, I will reply to only your post here. We have articles on Wikipedia solely because they are notable. Notability in the context of Wikipedia means that the subject of the article has received significant coverage by sources independent of the topic (i.e. newspapers, books, online sources). The majority of the merging here is because the subjects of these articles do not meet this requirement, namely Wikipedia:Notability. The only reason I am arguing to keep Kenpachi's and Byakuya's articles is because I believe such significant coverage can be found and notability demonstrated. If I feel that not enough significant coverage exists when I try to cleanup those articles, then I will support a merger. sephiroth bcr (converse) 06:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • But it's still important in my opinion to have as much information as possible. That's the point of an encyclopedia to me. Merging these articles will remove information and that's just unnecessary. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 18:27, 21 August 2008 (UTC))
  • Unfortunately, that's not how Wikipedia sees it, and it's their site. Their creed is "Verifiability, not truth". Just because something is informative doesn't mean that it should be included. King Zeal (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • As much as you believe in your opinion, it does not trump guidelines and policy. That's the bottom line. The goal of an encyclopedia is not to include as much information as possible, it is to summarize information in a succinct and concise manner. Foremost, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. sephiroth bcr (converse) 02:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Seems wikipedia needs some new management. Regardless, I still oppose all. If they're merged, I suppose I'll just have to find somewhere else for bleach information.(Skunkboy74 (talk) 18:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC))
  • Feel free Google Bleach wikia if you want a place that caters to fans rather than an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is the latter. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Good luck reading the Bleach wikia. That place is a shithole. Suigetsu 23:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Well aren't you kind. Anyway, at least that site keeps information. That's what I want. Information. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 06:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC))
If you're looking for horribly-written, more-often-than-not speculative "information," Bleach wikia is the place to go. Suigetsu 19:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
And if I'm looking for a place where helpful information is removed, Wikipedia is the place, right? :) (Skunkboy74 (talk) 04:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC))
If by "helpful" you mean speculative and unnecessary, yes. Good thing Wikipedia caters to standards and not the bitching and moaning of one user. 70.138.167.143 (talk) 22:37, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay, this subject really needs to get dropped, but I'll make one last attempt at explaining why Wikipedia operates the way it does.
Let's say, for example, that I come up with a theory that Nel Tu is evil and only faking her interest in Ichigo to betray him, like Aizen did earlier in the series. And let's say that I scour every episode, manga chapter, and omake for any scrap of evidence that supports my theory. For example, I write: "Every Espada except to Top 3 has been revealed, leading some to speculate that Nel is still the current number 3, and that the other Espada are numbers 0 - 2. If this is true, this could possibly mean that Nel is actually an enemy."
The problem is, there isn't a scrap of evidence that proves that this isn't true, and even if there is, I can still try to stick as much "information" into the article as possible so that it proves my point. This is the exact reason why Wikipedia doesn't just allow indiscriminate information to be put into an article. If they did, anyone and everyone could throw any wild theory or speculation they wanted in there, and it would be impossible to tell the truth from the fanfiction.
I hope that explains it for you. If not, I'm sorry, but we really need to drop this topic now. King Zeal (talk) 12:16, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above Suigetsu 02:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Byakuya Kuchiki

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Resolved
 – Consensus felt the character Byakuya Kuchiki met all requisite requirements in WP:N to remain a standalone article.

Suggested merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Oppose per Kenpachi Zaraki. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - per comment in Kenpachi above. Do note that if I can't feel I can pull off a GA with these two when I start working on them, I'll support a merge at a later date. sephiroth bcr (converse) 04:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see why this article needs to be merged. It has a lot of information in it and I highly doubt that all of this information will be kept if merged. Wouldn't deleting possibly-helpful information be pointless? I thought the point of an encyclopedia was to have as much helpful information as possible. By merging this article I believe we will be unnecessarily removing helpful information. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC))
  • Oppose per above Suigetsu 02:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Kenpachi Zaraki Cristian Cappiello (talk) 02:49, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose He has enough recep info for my taste. I still think there's lots to improve, and I feel getting Bya-kun to GA won't be easy (but then again, when has GA been easy?), but I think it's possible. IceUnshattered [ t ] 17:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm on it. I'm fairly positive his name was thrown around in my new SJ issue, I'll check it later today. 207.80.142.5 (talk) 18:57, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Kisuke Urahara

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result is as follow: Merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach.

The votes were as follow:

  • 5 Support (Character is not notable, Minor character).
  • 10 Oppose of which 4 are by anonymous users, 1 by an account with only 2 edits (Has a lot of information, Main character, No deadline, Future chapters to provide more information, Lots of hits).

Basis for conclusion: The article consists of plot content only. This is inappropriate per WP:NOT (Plot summaries. Wikipedia treats fiction in an encyclopedic manner; discussing the reception, impact and significance of notable works. A concise plot summary is appropriate as part of the larger coverage of a fictional work.) As such, the plot content of the article should be trimmed, and a significant of out-of-universe content, such as reception and production content should be added. It seems though that this information will be hard to come by and add: As there are no third party sources available (as the character fails WP:NN), the article will never be able to satisfy this requirement.

While there is no deadline to improve the article, one has to consider whether it will be possible at all: currently this does not seem to be the case. However, if at a later stage new reliable third party sources is found, and the character is able to satisfy WP:NN, the article can and should be split back to a seperate article. G.A.S 06:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggested merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

  • I actually support this one. As pointed out by User:Sephiroth BCR in earlier discussions, this character has not demonstrated notability and therefore should be merged. Sasuke9031 (talk) 20:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support, while he amuses me to no end, the 1-2 real world sources I found for this character do not demonstrate the necessary notability to have a stand alone article. What is there can easily be fit into a well-written section in the Soul Reaper list. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Per above comments.Tintor2 (talk) 16:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see why this article needs to be merged. It has a lot of information in it and I highly doubt that all of this information will be kept if merged. Wouldn't deleting possibly-helpful information be pointless? I thought the point of an encyclopedia was to have as much helpful information as possible. By merging this article I believe we will be unnecessarily removing helpful information. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC))
  • Support per above. Stop copypasting the same sh*t skunkboy. Suigetsu 02:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose agree with User: Skunkboy74 Cristian Cappiello (talk) 02:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Urahara's a main character in the series, and has an entire arc starring him. More English information on his character will become available when the parts of the story which focus on him are released stateside. As there is no deadline for Wikipedia articles, I do not see merging his page as useful. (Especially as his page holds the inventions list, which several other articles rely on for information and cannot be feasibly placed elsewhere.) --erachima talk 02:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Not really valid, per WP:CRYSTAL. When reception and creation info do come out, we can reinstate the article. Sasuke9031 (talk) 03:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, have you actually read the link you just cited? WP:CRYSTAL is the segment of WP:NOT which warns against writing articles which speculate about the future. i.e. 2015 Afghani-Iranian conflict, or Speculation sub-sections in fictional articles (which used to be quite common back in the day). It doesn't apply to this case at all. --erachima talk 03:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I think his intent was to say that there's no present notability asserted for his character. If sources are found in the future, then the article can be recreated. And welcome back BTW. sephiroth bcr (converse) 03:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
That makes more sense, yes. However, I still don't think lack of sources in a particular foreign language (English) is a reasonable grounds for deletion of something that appears notable on all other grounds and similarly important characters from the same series have sources. It's the classic problem with writing about non-English subjects, English sources are a huge drag to find for them.
And you're welcome, I'll see how long I can go this time without the constant meta arguments annoying me to death. --erachima talk 04:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
That's true. English sources are regrettably difficult to find. That said, there's a line we have to draw at some point (say for more minor characters or whatnot). I got Rukia Kuchiki to GA status now thanks to such sourcing, and I recently managed to get List of Naruto characters to FL status (which should be a relevant model for List of Bleach characters). And yeah, I know those arguments are a drag. A new version of WP:FICT ignited into inclusionists vs. deletionists round 4532, and led to FICT losing its guideline status (causing more problems, as we're left with WP:NOTE on one side and the rather pointed inclusionism on the other side with nothing in between). I've gotten so drained over those arguments, fiction AfDs, and whatnot that I eventually just started writing film articles as a way to get away from fiction for a while. sephiroth bcr (converse) 04:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Which has nothing to do with nothing. See above. This isn't about his part in the story, but whether he has any real world notability. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose to all remaining You know, I'm finally looking at all six of these articles right now and none of them are particularly different from one another in terms of formatting or content they present to the reader, so this should be an "all delete" or "all keep" argument. The fact we're actually using some nameless IGN editor's irrelevent fan ramblings and opinions as the sole basis to delete or include articles here is a pathetic joke. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 19:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose There is more information than you could store viably in the soul reaper page without crouding it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.187.191 (talk) 00:38, 15 September 2008 (UTC) — 58.168.187.191 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Oppose As he appears to be the main character in Turn Back the Pendulum and there being presumably 97 more chapters of it, there is little point in my opinion to delete a decent article only to put it back months later.86.7.174.100 (talk) 21:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose- Urahara is one of the main protagonist of the show, many of the storylines revolves around something he did. He is a major character and deserves his own page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nanaochanisluv (talk • contribs) 02:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment None of the "oppose"s have any valid excuses. They're all referring to in-universe shit that we don't care about (WP:ILIKEIT). Merge it. 70.138.167.143 (talk) 22:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Suigetsu, you really need to log in (at least, I think that's you, right?) :P -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I've asked an uninvolved editor from the project to close this one to ensure neutrality. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Not that actual, real-world notability has any relevance here, but evidently this article gets between 50 to 100,000 hits per month which is several thousand more on average than Ichimaru and Kenpachi, which are being kept as articles. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 00:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
That isn't real world notability of the topic. Its hits per month are irrelevant here. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
This topic is looked at by thousands and thousands of people, who presumably exist in the real world, every day. That's the real world definition of real world notability. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 00:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
No, it isn't. Its hits to a webpage, with no discrimination between editors and readers. It speaks to nothing. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
That doesn't even make sense. Even if you take the extremely drastic assumption that 50% of all views are from editors, you still have thousands upon thousands of readers viewing the page because the subject is relevant to their interests. Notability. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 01:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Again, no, that is not notability. There is no clause in any notability guideline that includes "how many hits the page supposedly gets." Period. You are interpreting the "hits" per your own personal desire to call this article notable. Significant coverage in third-party, reliable sources. That's real notability. Period. No one has shown any extensive coverage of this character in reliable sources that meets Wikipedia's actual policies and guidelines, not your own personal point of view as to what is "notable."-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:31, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
My own personal desire? I hate Bleach. I'm trying to point out that the clauses being used here to decide an article's inclusion are nonsensical and borderline asinine. Reliable, third party sources used to decide an article's literary notability? Yeah, that is good logic. But when did some schmuck on IGN no one's ever heard of saying how cool the character is become anything more than such? That's not real notability, no matter how much you believe that it is. This article doesn't have any less actual notability than the ones for Byakuya, Kenpachi or Ichimaru (Evidently per users above, it actually has more considering the subject's far more relevant to the plot of the series than the other three on top of being relevant to the interests of more people). The articles all look nearly exactly the same in terms of content presented with the small difference of a three-five sentence blurb about character polls and IGN babble that I'm willing to bet no reader truly even cares about. It's basically trivia. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 01:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
If you disagree with Wikipedia's guidelines, please take your argument there. IGN is considered a reliable source, and its editor reviews are valid sources. If you disagree that it is a valid source, there is a reliable source notice board for that where you can bring up the issue. This isn't the place for that either. As of now, it is considered a reliable source and per other articles that use it being GA, it is a valid source for reception information. Relevance to the plot is irrelevant here, and this is not the place to attempt to make some sort of point. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Kaname Tōsen

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Resolved
 – Consensus is that Kaname Tōsen should be merged to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach.

Suggested merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach (originally tagged in March, updated to be included in new discussion).-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

  • See my comment at Kisuke's discussion above. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Per above comments.Tintor2 (talk) 16:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see why this article needs to be merged. It has a lot of information in it and I highly doubt that all of this information will be kept if merged. Wouldn't deleting possibly-helpful information be pointless? I thought the point of an encyclopedia was to have as much helpful information as possible. By merging this article I believe we will be unnecessarily removing helpful information. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC))
  • Oppose I agree with User: skunkboy74 Cristian Cappiello (talk) 02:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC) (I'lL be more original next time)
  • Support Per Sui and WP:N, which I think Kaname just fails. Do what AnmaFinotera said :D IceUnshattered [ t ] 17:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gin Ichimaru

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Resolved
 – Consensus felt Gin Ichimaru met all requisite requirements in WP:N after additional real world information was found regarding character reception.

Suggested merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach (originally tagged in March, updated to be included in new discussion).-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

  • See my comment at Kisuke's discussion above. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support, while he has some minor coverage in an IGN review of a single episode and he seems popular in the Bleach merchandising, that isn't enough to establish the necessary notability. Again, his article should be trimmed, written to be tighter prose and less in-universe, and merged to the list. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - per Tosen. sephiroth bcr (converse) 04:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm satisfied with what has been found in terms of notability. Good job to erachima. sephiroth bcr (converse) 08:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see why this article needs to be merged. It has a lot of information in it and I highly doubt that all of this information will be kept if merged. Wouldn't deleting possibly-helpful information be pointless? I thought the point of an encyclopedia was to have as much helpful information as possible. By merging this article I believe we will be unnecessarily removing helpful information. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC))
  • Oppose per the fact that he has reception info, tosen doesn't Suigetsu 02:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Can you point out additional sourced reception info, besides the two relatively minor IGN episode reviews? -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't see why you get to arbitrarily call the IGN reviews minor when they're enough for other articles. Suigetsu 03:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, I highly doubt other info doesn't exist, given Gin's... well, Gin-ness. Suigetsu 19:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose per the same fact as User: Suigetsu Cristian Cappiello (talk) 02:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A minimal amount of Google searching found me a third party source on his popularity, as well as some character commentary from Kubo. I believe that proves we have grounds for future out of universe expansion. --erachima talk 08:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose Seems established notability-wise, merge not necessary. IceUnshattered [ t ] 22:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Yoruichi Shihōin

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Resolved
 – Consensus agrees that Yoruichi Shihōin should be merged to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach.

Suggested merge to List of Soul Reapers in Bleach (originally tagged in March, updated to be included in new discussion).-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

  • See my comment at Kisuke's discussion above. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support, as with Kaname, I found no reliable, third party coverage for this character, and as such feel her article should be properly trimmed up and merged into the list. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - per Kisuke. sephiroth bcr (converse) 04:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Per above comments.Tintor2 (talk) 16:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Per BCR. Don Quixtote (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see why this article needs to be merged. It has a lot of information in it and I highly doubt that all of this information will be kept if merged. Wouldn't deleting possibly-helpful information be pointless? I thought the point of an encyclopedia was to have as much helpful information as possible. By merging this article I believe we will be unnecessarily removing helpful information. (Skunkboy74 (talk) 05:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC))
  • Comment I don't particularly care about the fate of these articles, but it really makes my blood boil when I see an everyday person on Wikipeda with a concern being written off by "higher" users as an idiot fan and basically being told to go away through copy-pasting links to policies. Please stop. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 02:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Good for you. Too bad the policy is completely valid because his main argument is that he doesn't want the "info to be lost." I copypasted a policy that specifically contradicts this sentiment because he copypasted the same response to all of these characters. How dare I wish to uphold Wikipedia's standards and policies instead of giving in to the demands of someone who openly goes against them! 207.80.142.5 (talk) 18:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • It really is more like "How dare I try to apply Wikipedia's vague and sometimes subjective information inclusion guidelines in an arbitrary manner against average users and long-standing articles", but I digress since a few of the pages in question should probably be merged anyway. By the way, all your links go to the wrong policy page, you're looking for WP:NOT. - Norse Am Legend (talk) 04:27, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
First, I want you to look up the word "arbitrary" because I don't think it means what you think it means. In layman's terms, arbitrary means random. In no way is "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" random given his claim, which is just as vague, given that it is just "it's info and shouldn't be deleted. I also don't appreciate your painting me as an "established user that bullies less-established users." If you did some research, I'm not established at all, most of my edits amount to little more than stupid corrections and arguing with this dude (hehe). Sorry to burst your bubble, but no matter what, the policy I cited (or attempted to cite >.<) directly contradicts the user's argument. I didn't see it worth much more than that for a response. Suigetsu 23:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
By the way, "average users" and "longstanding articles" are not excuses for articles that do not uphold Wikipedia's standards and policies. That shit don't fly here, bro. 4srs. Suigetsu 23:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Norse's point is that doing nothing but citing WP:NOT#INFO isn't really constructive. While Shunkboy's argument is exactly compelling, it would be more productive for you to explain why he is wrong beyond merely citing policy (see WP:BASH). Such a tone could be considered in violation of WP:BITE and WP:CIVIL, so try to be a bit nicer in the future. Yes, NOT#INFO is a refutation of his argument, but it would be more mature to frame that in the context of a larger argument. sephiroth bcr (converse) 06:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Edited comment to reflect what I meant by WP:NOT#INFO, mmm? Although I agree I should have been more specific, Norse's original post was using something resembling slippery-slope logic: I am copy-pasting links to Wikipolicies, thus, I must be writing off newer users as fanboys, thus, I must be telling them to go away. Only the first is true, which was what I was trying to argue. Suigetsu 13:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and Skunkboy, you do understand that if you really wanted to see the article again you could just look at the history and use an old diff to get your info?Suigetsu 13:59, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually did not know that. Thanks for the tip! --Skunkboy74 (talk) 17:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

That would've been nice for me to know as well.....can someone provide me a link or something that would let me see old articles? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.153.118.232 (talk) 14:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Use http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NAME_OF_ARTICLE&action=history to browse associated history. ~SnapperTo 18:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Bleach_characters/Archive_3&oldid=1140127289"