Wikia

Narutopedia

Talk:Obito Uchiha

Back to page

5,946pages on
this wiki
Icon-Archive
Archives

For previous discussions about this character, see also Talk:Tobi and its archives.

Obito's Age in Part II

Its clear as to hold old Obito was by the time he got crushed and Kakashi being the same age. Shippuden comes but he doesn't have a age. Is it because of the whole persona thing or what cuz I still believe he should be listed as 31 as of his death. Rachin123 (talk) 03:54, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

Obito's age is a controversial subject, seeing as chapter 599 retconned pretty much everything we know about Kakashi and his classmates' ages.--BeyondRed (talk) 04:37, October 3, 2014 (UTC)
How so? Rachin123 (talk) 04:45, October 3, 2014 (UTC)
Kakashi's younger graduation/promotion ages implied he should be younger than Obito and Rin, even though Kakashi Gaiden depicted them as looking about the same age. Then the flashbacks from chapter 599 onwards ignored all of the old graduation ages entirely, and included a bunch of characters who couldn't possibly have been in Kakashi's age group.--BeyondRed (talk) 05:05, October 3, 2014 (UTC)
True the age thing is confusing but still going by birth on on the timeline he should still be 31. We'd just have to ignore the small error. Rachin123 (talk) 05:13, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

It's no small error in this case. There are two different ways to conclude Obito's age, both are equally correct. We can't just decide that one is correct and the other is wrong, so we just have to wait. • Seelentau 愛 10:18, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

From my point of view, newer information takes precedence over the old. I mean, we already decided to ignore what 3rd databook says about Susanoo and Amaterasu after all, so I think chapter 599 and on have more credibility. In that case, since the age difference between Kakashi and Obito is 3 years 7 months (ignoring handful of days) and Kakashi turned 31 "25 days ago" that means Obito died as 34 years old.--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 11:46, October 3, 2014 (UTC)
Then what about the anime? • Seelentau 愛 11:49, October 3, 2014 (UTC)
They've got more than one thing wrong by now and should be ignored when it comes to chronology and canonicity of events, even if that means ignoring a whole filler arc or two--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 11:53, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

According to Seel's timeline Kakashi, Rin and Obito were born the same year so why would Obito be three years and some months older than Kakashi and I'd say that's pretty accurate. Rachin123 (talk) 13:46, October 3, 2014 (UTC)Rachin123

Seel's Obito-Kakashi timeline is based on the anime mostly and pre-chapter 599 manga/databook stuff. Kakashi graduated the academy as 5 years old, Rin and Obito as 9. Obito is 3 years 7 months older from Kakashi. They all took the same Chunin Exam, with Kakashi having managed to become a Chunin in it at the age of 6, while Obito age 10 failed. Obito trainer hard, took the next exams and became a Chunin at 11. Obito got crushed by boulders as 13 years old, that means Kakashi was 9-10 at the latest in the Gaiden. Kakashi is now 31 so Obito died as 34--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 13:58, October 3, 2014 (UTC)
I chose to follow that timeline because aside from that one chapter, everything in the manga and anime follows it, too. • Seelentau 愛 14:02, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

The graduation was in the manga too. But going by graduation time the age appearance doesn't fit the profile like at all. Kakashi bring five and the rest being 5 and Rin and Obito being 9. It didn't look that way. It could be an inconsistency. Its not the first time. Can we put 31-34 (presumed) or something? Rachin123 (talk) 14:09, October 3, 2014 (UTC)Rachin123

@Seel, it's not "just one" chapter though :P Obito had like 2-3 what if flashbacks of imagining himself having chosen a different path and the people in the flashback are the same ones as in chapter 599, so Kishi retconned them to be Obito's generation. Also even ignoring databooks, it's 34 anyway. Kakashi becoming Chunin at 6 is a manga fact. Obito having gotten crushed by boulders at 13 is a manga fact. The crushing took place 2 years after his Chunin promotion, so if Kakashi promoted at 6, he was 9 in the Gaiden, 10 at most in case Obito was beyond 13 and 5 months--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 14:24, October 3, 2014 (UTC) Well if that's the case Kishi needs to work on how he makes kid look their age and height. At first I thought Kakashi graduated earlier than them and was on a different team but switched or was older by four years but than manga chapter shows they all graduated together so now we are supposed to belief that Kakashi was five and they were so much more older and they still looked about the same age and height. Let's not put any ahe than cuz its iffy. Like you said it may be retconned. He messed up. Rachin123 (talk) 14:31, October 3, 2014 (UTC)Rachin123

To be honest, the notion of a 6 years old Chunin in itself is beyond farfetched. Chunin are eligible to lead other ninja on missions... can you imagine a 6 years old kid ordering around adults and surviving encounters with adult foe ninja?--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 14:42, October 3, 2014 (UTC)

I think we should calculate Obito's Part II age using Itachi's age. So, we know that Itachi was four during the Third Shinobi World war, so if he died at 21, the war was 21- 4 = 17 years before the fourth war. So, If Obito Uchiha was 13 at the time of the war, he was 13 + 17 = 30 at the time of the Fourth War.--LordofBraxis (talk) 17:31, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

But we don't know for certain that a year passed between Obito getting crushed by boulders and him attacking Konoha. According to the anime, yes, it was a year, but I'm not so sure, because the manga suggests that Kakashi's age during the war was 9-10 at most and he was 14 during Obito's attack with Kurama, so it might have been 4-5 years later instead--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 18:23, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Obito's Parents

Even though it's a small image, we can see what appears to be a photo of Obito's parents holding him as an infant on chapter 603 and Episode 345. Even though they don't have a name, shouldn't they be in this wiki as well? --Kai Maciel (talk) 12:41, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

it should be mentioned in the trivia section and nothing else. they do not deserve a separate article. Munchvtec (talk) 12:43, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

I would at least like them mentioned over at Uchiha Clan page.--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 12:44, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

this will sound rude but im not trying to be...can't you just add it then. Munchvtec (talk) 12:48, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

nvm I added it in his trivia section. Munchvtec (talk) 12:51, October 7, 2014 (UTC)

Retcon

OK, now we know Obito is the same age as Kakashi, I think we can safely assume pretty much all prior information of their peers has been retconned, no?--Reliops (talk) 18:39, November 4, 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Even if Obito and Rin had been a few years older than Kakashi, that would have only fixed two retcons when there are many more post-chapter 599. I think the lack of graduation and promotion ages in this databook is a way of telling us to disregard all of the old ones, because if you do, a whole lot of contradictions go away.--BeyondRed (talk) 19:35, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
So should we remove the conflicting past databook info from their infoboxes?--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 20:46, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
Pretty sure there's no way we could get anyone to agree to that. I think we should at least put trivia points when the grad ages directly conflict with the story though (Obito, Anko, Hayate, etc.). Like we do with Zabuza possibly not being 26. At the very least, Yahiko needs one of those now.--BeyondRed (talk) 22:45, November 4, 2014 (UTC)

Outer Path: Samsara of Heavely Life Technique

Sorry, I'm new to this whole thing so please bear with me if there's anything I've done wrong. It's just that I don't see the Outer Path:Samsara of Heavely Life Technique under Obito's jutsu list, but when I look at the techniques infobox, I see his name under it. In the anime it's been implied that he can use the technique, and in the manga he actually did I think. It's not just Obito either, I see the same issue with a ton of characters.--Minamoto15 (talk) 16:30, November 5, 2014 (UTC)

He is listed. Many techniques and so on don't show up properly, coding bug or so--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 16:33, November 5, 2014 (UTC)
Oh no wonder then. I've seen this going on for a while now and I always assumed it had mostly to do with users manually taking them off the character info boxes, while leaving the technique ones alone. A coding error makes sense. Has any progress been made in resolving the issue, or is it a fruitless endeavor at this point?--Minamoto15 (talk) 16:43, November 5, 2014 (UTC)
The latter I guess, yet I've been told that it was fixed, so shrug--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 18:06, November 5, 2014 (UTC)
Yeah I've noticed it's only the techniques that are "anime only" or "manga only" that are affected. --Minamoto15 (talk) 00:13, November 8, 2014 (UTC)

Obito as Kurama's Jinchuriki

When Obito sealed Kurama into Naruto, he transferred Kurama from his body, not from Black Zetsu's. So shouldnt he be listed as Kurama's jinchuriki as the chakra was in his body? --Sarutobii2 (talk) 23:23, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Bump --Sarutobii2 (talk) 12:39, December 16, 2014 (UTC)

Aliases

Okay. So I've realized that since the real Madara's resurrection by Kabuto, we've referred to Obito as "Tobi" when he was under the guise of Madara in order to avoid confusion, even in situations before the real Madara was revealed. Now, since Guruguru is Tobi in the databook, "Tobi" is an alias as much as "Madara" was for Obito. So, would it not be plausible to refer to Obito before his revelation in the 4th war as "the masked man" (only official alias for him left) instead of Tobi to avoid confusion with Guruguru? I understand replacing "Tobi" with "the masked man" around the wiki would be an undertaking task, but I'm willing to do it.
~•WS7125[Mod]WindStar7125 TaskWindStar7125's Task 07:03, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

No. If he's called Tobi at the time in the series an article or section is describing, that article or section should continue to refer to him as Tobi. A name is also far easier than "masked man" each time. ~SnapperTo 10:32, December 23, 2014 (UTC)
^ What he said. No reason to change it just to accommodate another article, you have to assume that people reading this wiki haven't reached the end of the manga, or maybe they don't even read the manga at all! --Sajuuk [Mod] Talk Page | Contribs | Channel 10:35, December 23, 2014 (UTC)
Per Snapper2.--TheUltimate3 Eye of Rikudō (talk) 11:30, December 23, 2014 (UTC)
Edit conflict: My point exactly, Snapper. At the time in the series an article or section is describing, he is called "Madara," but rather than refer to him as "Madara" (like how your reasoning explans), it refers to him as "Tobi" instead anyway, which is strange to me (unless we should just go back and refer to him as Madara instead of Tobi like your reasoning suggests, due to what he was referred to at the time). A name is much easier to use, I agree, but if at a time in the series described he is referred to as "Madara," then by your reasoning, he should be referred to as Madara (yet we don't do that). But that would just cause confusion with the real Madara. Same case with Tobi the Zetsu. Calling him "Tobi" would (now) cause confusion with the Zetsu like calling him "Madara" would with the real Madara, even at the given time which is described. But I digress.
~•WS7125[Mod]WindStar7125 TaskWindStar7125's Task 11:38, December 23, 2014 (UTC)
He only called himself "Madara" when he declared the Fourth Shinobi War and even then, he didn't really care. He used the name just to make the Kage bend to his plan, as he said later that he didn't care for names. Up until that point, he is "Tobi" at all times, only very randomly calling himself "Madara" (that point being when he spoke to Nagato/Konan, telling them to capture Kurama). --Sajuuk [Mod] Talk Page | Contribs | Channel 12:20, December 23, 2014 (UTC)
Most people who read or watch the series will not be aware of what the databook names Guruguru, so if they're ever going to be confused about a "Tobi", it will be over Tobi—Zetsu, not Tobi—Obito. ~SnapperTo 19:01, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Legacy

I've removed this paragraph from the Legacy section a couple of times, so I suppose I should give a longer explanation than edit summaries allow. First of all, Legacy sections are supposed to focus on a character's legacy, as in the influence they have after they are dead. Or, in cases like Obito's, the influence they have when they are believed to be dead. Basically, it's the stuff they're responsible for when they're not around. With that said:

In spite of this, Obito later proved instrumental in ending the Fourth Shinobi World War after having a change of heart. Because he was able to get Sasuke out of Kaguya's dimension and shielded Naruto from a fatal injury, the former and latter were ultimately able to seal her and end the Infinite Tsukuyomi.

This restates the end of the Kaguya Ōtsutsuki Strikes summary. A restatement of what he did is not a legacy.

Kakashi and Naruto, who Obito saved in his final sacrifice, went on to become the Sixth and Seventh Hokage's respectively, just as Obito predicted.

Obito has no input on Hokage selection, so this is not his legacy. Making a correct prediction means nothing since a variety of characters have predicted the same outcome. Saving their lives also does not factor in, or else Itachi, Hiruzen, and Sakura saving Naruto would make them "responsible" for his appointment as Hokage.

In the end, Obito's legacy was one of duality, and his final actions ultimately helped save the world he sought to replace.

An out-of-universe reflection on his character arc. This is a more subjective nitpick, but still: what's the point of it?
~SnapperTo 18:15, March 21, 2015 (UTC)

People who took Kishimoto's example and really hyped Obito up post death.--TheUltimate3 Eye of Rikudō (talk) 18:19, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
Yet we have a legacy section for Kaguya who has never died (only got crippled twice) since is immortal.--Elve [Mod] Talk Page|Contribs 21:18, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
"Or, in cases like Obito's, the influence they have when they are believed to be dead. Basically, it's the stuff they're responsible for when they're not around." ~SnapperTo 22:57, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
Some people are obsessed with Obito and just want to hype him up. None of it is needed, so I fully support removing useless content that isn't a legacy. --Sajuuk [Mod] talk | contribs | Channel 10:03, March 22, 2015 (UTC)
As do I. A summary of what Obito did while alive in the battle against Kaguya isn't needed for his legacy, or the impact he had on the world after he was dead (or thought to be). And since when was Obito a seer? He had no impact on the decision about who will be Hokage. "Just as Obito predicted," please. Let's not give him that much credibility.
And his impact on the world was one of duality, influencing Kakashi with his benevolence, and intimidating the world with his malevolence, only to go back to his good ways and end up saving the world with a sacrifice. His legacy was more of one who started out good, lost his way, and found it again.
WindStar7125 Divine Mangekyō Sharingan VolteMetalic 14:06, March 22, 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to over hype Obito by adding that paragraph. Personally I'm not fond of his character at all, but it's a fact that without Obito's Kamui, Sasuke would have been stuck in the other dimension forever, thus giving him a pivotal role in her inevitable defeat. It's a fact that Obito's sacrifice saved both Kakashi and Naruto, who became Hokage's respectively. It's a fact that without Obito doing what he did, Kaguya would have won. So omitting these things from legacy seems extremely silly to me, given that they're completely relevant to the section - more so than everything else in said section since the rest of it's stuff he influenced while alive.

But in case that explanation isn't enough, I'll go by everything you said bit by bit.

"This restates the end of the Kaguya Ōtsutsuki Strikes summary. A restatement of what he did is not a legacy."

Almost every legacy section is comprised of information showcased in other sections of their respective articles. Irrelevant.

"Obito has no input on Hokage selection, so this is not his legacy. Making a correct prediction means nothing since a variety of characters have predicted the same outcome. Saving their lives also does not factor in, or else Itachi, Hiruzen, and Sakura saving Naruto would make them "responsible" for his appointment as Hokage."

Way to completely misinterpret what I meant by that. I wasn't saying Obito had input in them ultimately becoming Hokage, but he saved the lives of two future Hokage's who wouldn't have ever reached that position had he didn't at the same time in his final sacrifice. Again, relevant to his legacy.

So my point? Obito had a direct influence in huge events that followed the last arc, and without him Kaguya never would have been sealed. All of this is relevant to the legacy he left behind - every bit as much as passing on his ideals to Kakashi and inadvertently Naruto.

--Mandon (talk) 04:38, March 25, 2015 (UTC)

Personally I'm not fond of his character at all, but it's a fact that without Obito's Kamui, Sasuke would have been stuck in the other dimension forever, thus giving him a pivotal role in her inevitable defeat. [. . .] It's a fact that without Obito doing what he did, Kaguya would have won.
But they're things he, Obito, is perfectly aware of since he was present at the time. I mean, he was literally there in spirit when Kaguya was defeated. It's not a Legacy if he was directly, knowingly involved in whatever it was. Compare with Jiraiya's, who did not know how the Pain investigation turned out after he died, or Hashirama's, who had no awareness of everything his DNA was used for, and you find that what you want to add to Obito's is inconsistent.
Almost every legacy section is comprised of information showcased in other sections of their respective articles.
For example...?
Way to completely misinterpret what I meant by that. I wasn't saying Obito had input in them ultimately becoming Hokage, but he saved the lives of two future Hokage's who wouldn't have ever reached that position had he didn't at the same time in his final sacrifice. Again, relevant to his legacy.
I think I represented it fairly. You are giving him credit, or at least implying responsibility, for something that happens in their lives merely because he saved them. To which I responded that the dozens of other characters that have saved Naruto or Kakashi can receive the same credit using the same logic. Even if you somehow only want to give the credit to Obito, why stop at the Hokage position? Wouldn't Obito also be responsible for Naruto saving the world from Toneri? Or he's responsible for the births of Boruto and Himawari? This is why Legacy sections need to be limited to something a character is directly connected with, otherwise they can go on for as long as someone pleases.
I understand the desire to add more to his Legacy section seeing as he is actually dead this time. The issue is that he dies right before the series ends, and even then he lingers for several chapters. And so there ends up never being a chance for him to have a proper Legacy. If, say, in the mini-series, Naruto teaches Academy students about the former struggles of the world and uses Obito as an example of someone who was ruined by it yet found redemption and blah blah blah, that's a perfect thing to add to the Legacy section. But to create connections in absence of that? That sets a bad precedent. ~SnapperTo 06:35, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
Okay when you put it that way I'll concede that the Hokage part wasn't exactly fitting for Legacy, however I still think everything else is perfectly valid for the section. Obito was directly responsible for bringing Sasuke back to Naruto so they could seal Kaguya, as well as saving Naruto to allow them to seal her. There's no getting around the influence he had on those events, and despite the fact that he technically did those things while he was alive and a presence in the story, the same can be said for the Uchiha Clan Massacre and the Nine Tails Attack on Konoha, which is basically all his legacy section has in it currently. --Mandon (talk) 06:16, March 27, 2015 (UTC)
Yes, he was directly responsible. He was so directly responsible, in fact, that he was there at the time. And as I keep trying to tell you, this is not suitable for a Legacy. Things in that section should ideally follow a formula of:
  • Character is directly involved in something, therefore something happens as a result of Character's prior direct involvement but that Character is not actually present for.
Some examples of this:
  • Madara bequeathed his name to Obito, therefore Obito used the name to start a World War.
  • Minato died, therefore the Third hid Naruto's relation to him.
  • Itachi stopped the Impure World Reincarnation, therefore he was called a hero by the five Kage.
For Obito, what you want to add is:
  • Obito helped defeat Kaguya, therefore Kaguya was defeated.
Are you understanding why this is a problem? I have no particular connection to the Naruto/Sasuke paragraph, but it at least satisfies the formula:
  • Obito caused the Nine-Tails' attack, therefore Naruto's life was ruined.
  • Obito participated in the Uchiha attack, therefore Sasuke's life was ruined.
~SnapperTo 16:19, March 28, 2015 (UTC)

Wolf that howled at the moon

If Kishimoto wrote it, it should be canon and moved to his canon biography or am I missing something?.Cloudtheavenger (talk) 07:59, March 27, 2015 (UTC)

No, he didn't write it. The one who wrote Kakashi novel did it, so it's considered as we think about those novels. —Shakhmoot Nadeshiko Village Symbol (Talk) 10:38, March 27, 2015 (UTC)
The hell are you talking about?--TheUltimate3 Eye of Rikudō (talk) 10:45, March 27, 2015 (UTC)
This. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 10:51, March 27, 2015 (UTC)
Ok so what does a book about Sasuke have to to with Tobi? And I assume this has more to do with that "books ain't canon" crap so I'm just gonna leave that part alone.--TheUltimate3 Eye of Rikudō (talk) 11:52, March 27, 2015 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki