Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:40, 27 January 2008

Anime and manga B‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sasuke Uchiha has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 25, 2008.

Archives
Talk:Sasuke Uchiha/Archive 1 Talk:Sasuke Uchiha/Archive 2
How to archive a talk page

curse mark

Sasuke usually uses his curse mark to learn more about it to kill I Itachi. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasukecursehurts (talk • contribs) 20:18, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

habataku?

You put that his dark chidori is called habataku chidori, but in the 2nd databook it isnt his dark chidori in the jutsu page, the only thing was that in the sasuke file page it said that the "sword" that kakashi gave him was to protect his love ones. But now its all in the darkness and now howls, I think you mistranslate the habataku (flapping) with the nezt line of the databook in sasuke page: The chidori turned into the wings that helped sasuke to fly into the darkness I think you should consider this Tintor2 13:27, 13 September 2007

I assumed that was the name given to it in the anime. If it is never actually named as such, I'll take it out of the section. ~SnapperTo 21:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

In the videogames and in the anime when sasuke used it he called it chidori, try checking in naruto episode 134 and narutimate hero ougis of sasuke ~Tintor2T22: 08, 13 september 2007 (UTC)

Habataku Chidori is a nickname for the Dark Chidori. Leafninja.com has a description of it under the "Cursed Seals" section. It says that instead of using the Chidori to save his comrades, Sasuke uses it sever his ties, warping into the dark Chidori, hence the black color. Also, the sound changes from chirping bird to flapping birds. --Mangekyou

However Sasuke in part 2 manga he has never used it although he used chidori in level 2 of the seal, leaf has put many invented names to jutsu, like for example the gou wan of sakura. If the databook 2 doesnt have it, it is not a new technique, sasuke only called it chidori twice!! ~Tintor2T16: 08, 18 september 2007 (UTC)

I didn't argue that. Habataku Chidori is just a CS2-powered Chidori. It's a nickname, not a new jutsu in and of itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.153.118.224 (talk) 15:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Manda?

Shouldn't something be in here about Sasuke killing Manda? Cybergoonieenderwiggin —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 03:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

No. We're avoiding minor plot details like the plague.

(Post-edit conflict) When you sign your posts, please use four tidles instead of three so that SineBot doesn't end up in an edit conflict with the next person :) You Can't Review Me!!! 03:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

And technically, Deidara's the one who killed Manda. Sasuke's just the reason he was there to get killed. ~SnapperTo 03:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Gary-stu?

Shouldn't there be something about his transformation to a canon-sue in the earlier chapthers? I'm not trying to be nasty, but his developmnt has started to run out the line. I hope you can discuss with me maturly about this.

From what I'm reading, a canon-sue is someone who does a face heel turn from how they were to who they are. Sasuke from the beginning of the series was a jerk with superiority complex, who "got better" with friends, only to lapse back into jerk with a superiority complex when his "failiure" friend got stronger than he was. If I missed what a canon-sue is please tell me, but for the most part I saw no difference in the character.--TheUltimate3 11:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

More percicely according to the mary sue page this is what a canon sue is

Canon Sue (in original source) A "canon Sue" may also refer to a character whose canon portrayal itself is seen as a "Mary Sue," rather than a character who has been altered in fan fiction. Typically, this refers to a character accused of being overly idealized or having other traits traditionally associated with fan fiction "Mary Sues," such as being "special" by having a gratuitously tragic past, unrealistic skills, or a seeming inability for the character to do wrong. Characters such as Wesley Crusher and Amanda Rogers in Star Trek: The Next Generation have been criticized as being "Mary Sues

Opinions about wherether this matach Sauske however would not be enough to add this into the article because without reliable sources calling his a cannon sue any addition to that effect would be clearly original research because it would only be based on personal opinion. --67.68.155.119 23:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Falsifying information

there is a person severely and indiscriminately editing information on this page. September 26, 2007

Yes he is and he is putting false information on other peoples user pages. He should be blocked from Misplaced Pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KusanagiTsuragi (talk • contribs) 14:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC) OK seriousy can we PLEASE put the info back to how it used to be! I cannot begin toexplain how INFURIATED i am about this happening! please ban the person from wikipedia responsible for this! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.91.85.148 (talk) 08:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sasukereup.jpg

Image:Sasukereup.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. σмgнgσмg 08:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Evil's plot

Should we add that Sasuke is supposedly a part of Tobi, Obito, Madara's (quite frankly i doubt if they are any of those) Master plan. In the latest manga Tobi or whoever talks about Sasuke. So add it or not? this is just an anomy thing you know. I don't like getting flamed. Also how is Madara tied to Sasuke besides blood. I mean it seems like Sasuke might become the new madara or something. Naruto is the new shodaime er...nidaime? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.112.4.123 (talk) 01:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Speculation. And all Madara/Tobi/Obito says is that he wonders if Sasuke will stay a snake or shed his skin and become a hawk. Jazz Band Member 20:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

How am I able to edit the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.71.211.66 (talk) 14:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Dots?

What's with the dots on his face? The previous main photo had no such thing, but now this new one, and the Part 2 image, both have an obscure dot which appears to have been added in Paint, as well as a third image, can someone explain that? Revrant 17:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism. Not a problem, anyway, someone reverted it. 72.200.64.226 04:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually I have seen these dots on TV many times. Maybe Sasuke really has these dots. --85.71.211.66 16:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Why is the dot there? --NicolasLord 18:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC) --Chcek this image, I think is the best and it should replace the main one, there are no dots.

--Tintor2 20:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok i know this is compleatly off subject but this article about the plot overview hasnt changed for almost a year, and why did we take out some details about sasuke recruiting Karin Jugo and Suigetsu. Well those three arent my concern but we need to tell what happens after Sasuke gets rid of Naruto's Shadow clone. Also on karin's and Sakura's page you can mention that they meet in Shippuuden and have a fight about Sasuke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.91.85.163 (talk) 18:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

BEST IMAGE

I found great image of the face of sasuke even better that the main one(in my opinion) its the episode 73 and pause at 00:54 to see it. Check this http://www.youtube.com/watchv=mRwJ_fFVhUc it will be in spanish cos I am from SouthAmerica (This can be noted by my awful way of writting. How many mistakes? Just please check this page and pause at 00:54, or just click this

Tintor2 21:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

With relative ease..?

This article claims that Sasuke managed to defeat Deidara with relative ease. This is obviously false. If anything Deidara was stronger than him, considering the only thing that saved Sasuke from C4 was that he happened to be of lightning affinity. Sasuke had his wing blown off and his body charred at C2, just to succeed with his plan, was forced to electrocute himself to survive C4, and ultimately used up almost every ounce of his chakra, with the last of it used to diffuse to clay snake bombs that Deidara had attached to his legs. The only way he summoned Manda after that was with a summoning scroll that he carried with him, and Suigetsu had to summon him back. This is not "with relative ease". If anything, it's possibly one of the closest battles throughout the entire series. --Waenishikusu 15:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

This is one of your pointless rants I can actually agree with, and I've rewritten it accordingly. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 21:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Well then it wasn't quite pointless. --Waenishikusu 01:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it is still mostly pointless, because you're still fixated on your long-winded original research tirades rather than taking the simple option of doing it yourself. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Sasuke only survivng C4 due to his lightning affinity is not original research. Sasuke having his wing blown off and his body charred at C2, just to succeed with his plan, is not original research. Sasuke being forced to electrocute himself to survive C4 is not original research. Sasuke using up almost every ounce of his chakra is not original research. Sasuke only summoning Manda via summoning scroll, having no useful chakra, is not original research. Suigetsu having to summon him back is not original research. In previous discussion, Kisame and Itachi changing their minds about Jiraiya had not been original research either. Jiraiya using a huge amount of effort just to scare them off, was not original research. So don't throw that at me. The only valid claim you have in that statement, is that it would have been more simple to take initiative myself first, and discuss the changes, but the simple answer to that is that I'm not that good at editing what other people have written. I'm contributing how I know how. I don't like how that's turned into something negative. --Waenishikusu 16:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

It's negative when you do nothing but troll talk pages your with original research about how you think people fared against who or whose stronger than who. It is neither productive nor relevant to the article, it's just you complaining because you think your opinion trumps fact. If you have nothing better to do than post your theories here, you're better off not posting them at all. If you can't figure out how to edit an article, then why bother coming here in the first place? Go to WP:HELP and learn how to edit productively. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 05:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

In the future, Waenishikusu, you can simply be bold and make the necessary changes. Not all edits require a discussion on the talk page before they can be made. It also averts these types of discussions. Sephiroth BCR 05:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

How incredibly rude. First of all, nothing I wrote here was original research, so it was foolish of you to bring it up. I posted exactly what happened during that fight, and said that it was in contest with what was written in the article, and you agreed. Yet, you still found the need to call it a "pointless rant" dispite getting the article change, and more importantly, you still found the need to so politely point out that I'm, and I quote, "still fixated on your long-winded original research tirades", when nothing I wrote contained original research. Furthermore, you took the liberty of pointing out that I think my "opinion trumps fact", when once again, in this case, I did not post a single thing that was not literal fact. For the record, my point was ignored continually in the last debate, being that if I could put up such a large argument about it (not that it was not original research), then the wording that was used in the article was not nuetral enough. Of course, it's worth pointing out that the direct statements I cited from Viz translations, in addition to other sources, were mostly also ignored, and my whole point called original research. In fact, even if every other word I posted on this site before now had been original research, it would be irrelevent right now if I did not post it in this discussion. Have you considered that it takes time to learn how to edit productively? While I am learning, it should be considered helpful that someone might still be able to point out problems within an article quickly, so that someone more experienced can make the correction. Is it preferable that very poor edits be made while an individual is still learning, and then at least as much time is spent correcting them as it would have taken to find the problem pointed out, and take care of it? I'd rather learn and contribute at the same time by helping behind the scenes, than learn and contribute later. Still, Sephiroth BCR for one, has spoken to me intelligently, and I will thank him for his post, and look to learn more about editing productively on wikipedia. --Waenishikusu 21:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Waenishikusu, I understand that you point facts, but anyway most conclusions you take about the facts you post are Original Research. I don't mean to offend you, really, but just take a look at what you wrote here and in Jiraiya's discussion. For example, you said that if anything, Deidara was stronger than Sasuke. I disagree, IMO, sasuke was stronger and faster than deidara, but deidara had excellent jutsus, and thus it wasn't a battle about strenght only; but I'd say that it's better to avoid personal opinions (both your's and mine) in a encyclopedic text. Though I agree with you that sasuke didn't defeat deidara easily, you should just try not to jump into conclusions that are not explicitily stated. And someguy, this guy is trying to help, why can't you be polite to him? 201.78.232.40 20:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I would have were it his first thread, but I'm less inclined to be patient after his last spat about how Jiraiya can't be stronger than Itachi, which was ten times worse than this. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 20:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Number of chidori in part 2

Shouldnt we mention that in Part II he can use more than 3 chidori?, against Deidara he used a lot. Does that count as chidori?, because he uses variations. Tintor2 21:38, 2 November 2007

I believe it is just chidori shaped differently, as nothing about it is altered asside from it's form. Still, even if it is to be considered to be unique, like chidori nagashi, is it in the interest of the article to mention it? The number isn't really important, so much as that he can use form manipulation to change it's shape, or that variations exist in the first place, in my opinion. --Waenishikusu 05:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

You are right, maybe we should wait to the 3rd databook (that should come soon becasue part 2 has 13 volumes) before jumping to conclusions, I only mentioned this because what its mentioned abour sasuke in the chidori article. -- Tintor2 21:58, 4 November 2007

I believe it already states that he does not seem to have a limit on how many Chidori he can use in one day.70.138.167.143 17:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Where's the evidence for this?

In the Abilities section it states that in the second cursed-seal level Sasukes chakra dramatically increased, where did it say this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayssummerdays (talk • contribs) 22:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

When Sakon gave that drug to Sasuke in the reference and when Sasuke hit Naruto in the stomach in volume 25, after that he realized the power of the seal level 2.-- Tintor2 20:55, 11 January 2007

Feelings and Friendships

Okay, Kishimoto has clearly stated that yes, Sakura is in love with Sasuke and Naruto is in love with Sakura (okay, change "love" to "crush" if you want to, I don't mind), and that we don't know which one Sasuke likes, if he now ever will like someone more than a friend.

But, even though Sasuke may not consider Sakura as an potentional love-interest (maybe not now), SHE IS STILL HIS FRIEND. Remember, when he and Kakashi had their heart-to-heart talk, when Kakashi told him about all the people he cared about was dead? Sasuke started to think of two persons. And which ones? Yes, Naruto AND Sakura.

And you may wonder why I brought this up? Because, in Sasuke's "personality" space, it says "Naruto, the only character Sasuke comes to consider a friend," when we are explaining how Naruto tries to stop Sasuke from leaving but he didn't succeed.

Okay, since when did Sasuke not care about Sakura? Maybe not in a romantic way, but she is his friend! There are many facts that clearly says that he cares about her, but that he is closer to Naruto. So, why saying that Naruto is his only friend? I have to disagree! We have to change this! And, why are we not mentioning Sakura, as she was the only person to see Sasuke as he left, and the point where she confesses her love for him MUST be mentioned here! If not, then tell me why. And, I'm not saying anything about shipping SasuSaku or NaruSaku or NaruSasu, but we can't hold back information about Sakura here.

Are you with me or not? I really think we have to change that line and insert the "Thank You" moment. NazaliaSan (talk) 16:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Kakashi tells Sasuke that they were lucky enough to make new comrades to fill the void and THAT's when Sasuke thinks of Naruto and Sakura. Sasuke only mentions that Naruto is his friend, even when talking about Team 7. In part 2 he doesn't mention her of have any flashbacks of her either. Besides, there are a lot more examples to support Sasuke not liking Sakura at all, than for him to think of her as a friend. What does Sakura confessing her love for Sasuke have to do with anything? It certainly doesn't make her his friend and a lot of girls crushed on Sasuke. If you do feel the need to mention this, then it should only be on Sakura's page, not Sasuke's. Though personally i feel that this is more like a fan-girls crusade than an overlooked fact.76.23.112.101 (talk) 03:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Conflict in Sasuke personality section

In Sasuke's personality section it says "In the two-and-a-half years he spends with Orochimaru, Sasuke's goal to kill Itachi takes precedent above all else, such that he is willing to give his body to Orochimaru if it means gaining the strength he needs." I know Sasuke said this to Team Kakashi upon leaving them for the second time, but he also says to Suigetsu that he had picked his members for Snake ever since he came to Orochimaru. This leads me to believe that he was lying to Team Kakashi and it should be taken out of the article. It should at least be mentioned that he was lying if it's not taken out.

but naruto was his BEST friend which makes the difference, thats why he had to kill naruto —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stickred (talk • contribs) 23:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

sasuke obtaining the mangekyou

from what ive seen in the new manga sasuke looks like he has the mangakyou —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stickred (talk • contribs) 23:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

i saw that too, i was like =0 *gasp* he has the MS?? and yea, did u see that one guy tho? mabye madara lives inside itachi like kyuubi inside naruto, or mabye it was just a genjutsu, who knows, but omg....i cant wait!!

Abilities in genjutsu

I think we should state in the abilities section that his genjutsu are strong enough to hold of Itachi's efforts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayssummerdays (talk • contribs) 22:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Sasuke killing Deidara

When Sasuke killed Deidara, was he still an Oto nin or was he in Snake? Sasodei787 (talk) 02:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Sasodei787

He was in Snake. NazaliaSan (talk) 10:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

So close to GA status!

After rewriting much of the article, the only thing left before a GA nom is sourcing the plot overview section. That and some of the {{cite book}} refs might need fixing. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR 05:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

In reference to missing page numbers, I believe User:JadziaLover owns the Japanese volumes of the manga. Perhaps he'd be willing to help? In any case, great work on the out-of-universe sections. Do you think the Outline section will need additional shortening before being shipped off to GA? ~SnapperTo 20:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

If it is the manga page numbers you need, I can get them. Earthbendingmaster 20:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

To clarify, these page numbers would be from the actual manga volume, not from individual chapters (ie. page 153 of volume 33 as opposed to page 15 of chapter 293). You can find these? ~SnapperTo 21:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thats a little harder, I could try. Earthbendingmaster 22:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

May I ask why the volume pages are wanted instead of chapters? Earthbendingmaster 23:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Part of the {{cite book}} template. To Snapper, I think the length of the character outline section is fine given how long the series has been writing. Of note, I don't think his chokutō is ever mentioned. Sephiroth BCR 02:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I ask because of what was requested of Naruto's article. And no, there isn't a mention of the chokuto; there wasn't an "ability-topic" it could easily fit under, and I didn't want to go off topic by detailing it. It could be inserted somewhere if need be. ~SnapperTo 04:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It's fine. It could be longer and there would be no problems. See Soma Cruz, a GA I wrote, and his plot summary section so to speak (both games take ~10-15 hours, about 10-15% of that is plot) is longer than here, where Sasuke is present for certainly a longer period. The only problem comes if it is excessive or composes the entirety of the article's content. It doesn't and actually is much shorter than necessary, although there's nothing wrong with that either. As for the chokutō, it can be fitted under the Chidori section, as you can transition in by saying how he channels it through his sword to increase cutting power, etc. Anyhow, are the references for the plot going to be added so the nomination can be made? WP:GAN is pretty backlogged, and the faster we go the faster it gets reviewed. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR 04:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Nominated it. I think the referencing issuing is kinda minor and might not be a problem for acquiring GA status. Sephiroth BCR 07:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I should have known that, still a little new. (in reference to the cite book template). Earthbendingmaster 15:50, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The article looks great now. My opinion is that we may need to reduce a bit the abilities/personality section as those are the longest parts of the article. That is just my opinion.~Tintor2 12:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

uhhh? what???

Smart fans conclude that Sasuke is too good for Sakura; her obsessive nature the major turn off.

umm, Wouldnt that be considered biased? I think we should get rid of it.Dragon queen4ever (talk) 16:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Powers: Speed Not Mentioned

Why have the references to Sasuke's speed been removed? Throughout the story Sasuke's speed has been almost as developed as the sharingan. In his first seen fight with Zabuza and Haku we saw a reference to his amazing speed. After his training with Orochimaru this attribute was intensely heightened; where as now similar to Itachi, during the Uchiha slaughter, we see Sasuke develop super speed. We see examples of this speed when Sasuke raps his arms around Naruto after they first meet after the time skip. It was almost as if he teleported similar to Itachi. The next example we see in the Deidara fight, where he uses his spuer speed to cut right through tobi and almost hit deidara; this was where Tobi told Deidara Sasuke's whatever jutsu was too fast for them. That said, someone please include the super-speed as one of Sasuke's powers. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.238.175.221 (talk) 09:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

it has never been stated that he as super speed--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 14:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   Good work on this; most fiction articles don't cite the obvious facts to their sources. I don't see much in the way of OR-like intepretation here, so I'm passing.

   C. It contains no original research:

   See above.

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

   Without looking at the history, I'm passing here. Talk shows huge amount of collobration, and the reverts, if there are any, will be standard OR removal, which I have no problem with passing.

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Will 20:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• B-Class anime and manga articles
• Unknown-importance anime and manga articles
• All WikiProject Anime and manga pages
• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Good articles without topic parameter