This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums: Index Narutopedia Discussion Main Article with the anime filler
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2085 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

should we do main articles on main and supporting characters, who have the anime filler? when i tried on the Kabuto article, it's different. so no villians with main article??? Kunoichi101 (talk) 22:25, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Don't know what your asking, but what you did with the template is wrong usage. It's not supposed to replace the contents of a page many people have been working on for months. Deleting all the contents of sections and replacing them with a template is insulting, not to mention downright rude and disrespectful. --Speysider Talk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 23:21, June 21, 2012 (UTC)
you really tick me off. i was waiting for the admins.'s answers. Kunoichi101 (talk) 23:21, June 21, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101

i know when im reading a page fr my favorite characters that i always expect less conetn NOT this is a dumb idea and i agree with speysider some people worked really hhard on these sections and you shouldnt just remove them ntirely stop removing this i have a right to say thing you wanted to know what other people thought and im telling you what i think so if you keep removing this im going to ask someone to block you —This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

Firstly, I don't think this should be tagged for deletion since we should have had this discussion a good while back now. The issue, for those who might be reading this, is that in some articles where "filler information arcs" are present, the content is replaced with{{Main|X Arc}} where the general information on the page is. Now, if I'm not mistaken, this started with the whole Adventures at Sea Arc which was initially done because I believed that the arc wouldn't have carried on that long. Now pros and cons for using this:

  • It makes the articles shorter and the content more manageable for readers who might click on Naruto and Sasuke's articles and it takes a longer time to load.
  • Converse to this however is the fact that as an encyclopaedia we're supposed to document what each character does and I can see how it'd be disappointing it could be to come here and get link to a page with general information on the arc and not the person in question and then have to pick out info from the general arc, if any at all is present there.
  • I can vouch for the Adventures at Sea Arc because I was involved in writing the summaries and so on, but I don't think all the other arc articles carry the same amount of information. Now while I don't think any great injustice is done when the content is removed since nobody's work is meant to be immortalised here so how hard someone worked on it, however disheartening it may be to see is of little consequence here, we might have to consider that we're taking up something out of convenience.
  • With that, the way I see it, we may have to assess what this can and cannot be done to maybe classify fillers as "major" and "minor" fillers and decide which content stays and which can be subsumed into the main articles, the latter of which will also need some looking at in order to make sure that they have decent information there.--Cerez365Hyūga Symbol(talk) 01:20, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

i can get removing the sections when the page is to long i once tried to look at narutos page on my phone at that was a bad idea although i think there are better ways to makes pages shorter then removing hole sections like if you look at nartuo the later parts of his plot are really really REALLY long when you compare them to the earlier plots so i think that could be made shorter but i thin kfor for when length isnt an issue the information should stay because if a charcter doesnt do alot in an arc then its really hard to figure out what they do through the plot page like with ino she doesnt always do alot but i like her and i think she should have more information then a link to another page and it wouldnt be to long so thank you for reading this and not deleting this because i think everyone should have their say if if SOME PEOPE dont like what they here--—This unsigned comment was made by (talkcontribs) .

so what about the other anime fillers such as Three-Tails Arc and Tsuchigumo Clan Kinjutsu Arc??? do they don't need the main template??? Kunoichi101 (talk) 01:49, June 22, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101
TheUltimate3 is tired. He will actually read this and contribute after sleep.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol (talk) 02:40, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Oh Ulti, I can genuinely say I don't begrudge your position '~' Also, IP user, please remember to sign your posts. Just put four tilde (~) after you're done writing to get your signature.--Cerez365Hyūga Symbol(talk) 12:52, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Ok have read. Ok I've skimmed. Either way its an annoying situation because Part II didn't make a long useless filler arc like part 1, they instead made substantial filler arcs where things actually happen, and apparently are called back to later. An interesting situation.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol (talk) 13:20, June 22, 2012 (UTC)
you noticed. then what about this main template policy??? Kunoichi101 (talk) 16:28, June 22, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101

Ah, that's the issue Ulti, that's why I don't think that the main template should be used with the detailed Part II arcs.--Cerez365Hyūga Symbol(talk) 01:06, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

so any agreements that we don't need main template on other characters or we do? Kunoichi101 (talk) 03:14, June 23, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101

I'd personally go with no. Not for "important filler arcs".--Cerez365Hyūga Symbol(talk) 12:59, June 23, 2012 (UTC)

Me too. — ¤ULTIMATE SUPREME ¤ (T@lk) 13:04, June 23, 2012 (UTC)
so, no main template? be specific Kunoichi101 (talk) 17:26, June 23, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101

No main template. — 06:34, July 2, 2012 (UTC)

right now, leaving the main template without removing the whole anime filler arc. Kunoichi101 (talk) 20:15, July 2, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101
Sounds good. -- 04:08, July 3, 2012 (UTC)
already did. but not all of them. Kunoichi101 (talk) 04:55, July 3, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101


The main character, Naruto, has the main template on the anime filler in Part II. Some of them like supporting characters have main template, however one of them doesn't due to the policy. Kunoichi101 (talk) 01:58, June 22, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101 (look on part II)

Finally being back after two long weeks with limited internet access and time to properly edit during the times I did have access, I'm just speed-everythinging. The reason we started cutting filler sections in part 2 was because starting with the Konoha History arc if I'm not mistaken, the fillers consisted of several memoirs, that didn't really make an arc, being one-episode plots. I don't oppose simply pointing out the main arc article, but if the filler arc was properly long, for example Three Tails and Tsuchigomu Kinjutsu, I don't see harm in leaving the section like that of a normal, canon arc. Cut it like the others for simplicity if it's less laborious. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:30, June 30, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you... i guess. I don't know they will be mad at me. but thanks Kunoichi101 (talk) 19:01, June 30, 2012 (UTC)Kunoichi101
Omni, you shouldn't have said that. At all.
Kunoichi101, you are misinterpreting Omnibender. He is not telling you to remove it completely. --Speysider Talk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 19:23, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
so how about i just put the main article on it and didn't remove anything? Kunoichi101 (talk)Kunoichi101
I do not mind you doing that, the content is still there. --Speysider Talk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 19:29, June 30, 2012 (UTC)