Talk:Plot of Naruto: Shippūden

Official arc names from the data book
Not sure if this really matters, but the new data book has a section describing the plot for most of Part II (pages 206 to 213), with two pages for each arc up until just before Jiraiya invaded Amegakure. The names are:



Do what you will with the info. FF-Suzaku 13:36, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Differences in Anime and Manga
There are many differences in the anime and the manga series of both Naruto and Naruto Shippuuden. Maybe you guys should make seperate plot pages for the two. For exmaple the Three Tails Arc. In the manga Naruto does not make any appearence in it, but the most recent preview suggests that Naruto will in the anime. Just a thought though. One that, I believed, should be put forword. - Zero - Talk 15:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Or we could simply add the info here. Clearly stating that it happened in the anime only. - Zero - Talk 17:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Teleport?
That last line in "Tsunade and Pain": "Apparently, though, not everyone in Konoha was killed, possibly because of a ninja using some sort of jutsu that can teleport a large number of people at once, as Sakura is seen crying after the village was destroyed. " ..appears to be speculation.... I was under the impression that Sakura was safe because of Katsuya (the slug)-- as far as I can tell Sakura hasn't teleported. Where did this information come from? Perhaps it should be removed?
 * I took care of it. Jacce 11:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Sasuke's Revenge?
I don't really think that Sasuke's revenge is an appropriatetitle for the arc. Although Sasuke was the main focus in most of the chapter, I think we all can agree that it isn't him getting his revenge. Bestrapper91

Change Title - Plot of Naruto Part 2
This ain't the Plot of naruto shippuden, this is the plot of naruto part 2.

It is. Besides I plan on adding indformation from the filler arcs soon. Labling that they are anime onely of course. - Zero - Talk 10:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Automated transfer of Problem Report #16723
The following message was left by Anonymous via PR #16723 on 2008-12-27 05:05:53 UTC

In the section that says naruto fights back there is erroneous information

Filler arcs
Why aren't there sections for the Fire Temple and Three-Tail Turtle arcs here? It's been bothering me for some time. Is this merely a page for the manga's plot?Orochidayu 02:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking of adding them when I got the time. Unfortunately I cant make the time, yet. However before adding Filler arc Data here the Plot of Naruto must specify Naruto Part 1's Filler Arcs. - Zero - Talk 09:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

New Sections

 * Taken from Jacce and Zero2001's Talk Pages:

Why? If you ask me, the content I added was helpful to those who did not wish to go through the whole page in order to know the unresolved plot threads so far. Plus I was planning to link the content to the respective page sections, reference the data and add a section on the people who have died in Chranological Order. All relevent to the plot. More people have died in the Shippuuden era than during Part 1. Everything I wrote is relevent to the plot.

Why did you immediately shoot down my idea? If you think it was redundancy then it isn't. People would like it if they could access info without going through multiple topics. You didn't even bother to discuss it. I can make sure that no incorrect info is added. I regularly visit so I can delete incorrect data. Please restore my work so I can improve on it. I'm requesting you to do it instead of doing it myself because I have no desire to usurp your authority and have no wish to get into an argument. Please restore my work before someone else edits the page and I have to do everything all over again. At the very least restore it untill a discussion can take place. Thank You. - Zero - Talk 06:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I considerd that speculating. Talk to Dantman and see if he is ok with it. Jacce 06:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Specualation is defined as making guesses based on revealed data. What I wrote was simply a statement of the plot threads that had not been resolved as of yet. It was completely, 100% true and not speculation. You can ask Dantman if you wish but please restore the facts I wrote or give me permission to do so. I shall take full responsibility if Dantman objects. - Zero - Talk 06:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * But since it hasen't happen, how do you know it will happen? Something else might turn up. And what's the point, everything is already in the page. Jacce 07:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

That's why I named the topics as Unresolved Plot Threads (so far). It means that untill now these plot threads have not been completed. Plus I phrased each point as a question. How exactly is that guessing? It's a basic statement of the facts that these plot threads haven't been completed as of yet. Even if they remain unresolbved untill the end. They will be unresolved and thus belong in that section. It will be a fact that those plot threads were unresolved untill the end. That is not speculation. Read my edits carefully. Yoiu'll see for yourself what I'm talking about. Please restore my work or allow me to do so. I know what I am doing. - Zero - Talk 07:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * So what is the point of having it. Everything is already said in the page. Jacce 07:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

That's precisely my point. Everything is written but it is so mixed up with everything else that it can pass unnoticed. Creating a seperate section for things like this ensures that data can be accessed easily and quickly. This way everyone can know that the metioned plot threads are still to be resolved or havn't been resolved as of yet. It's the basic rule of information presentation. Mention imporatant points seperately even if it is repitition. And you have to admit that Unresolved Plot Threads are important. So can I restore it please, or will you do the honors? Come on. Trust me on this. I mean look at the character pages. You could say that the data on jutsu/techniques are present in it's plot section but the data is still written seperately in another section as well. So why not in the Naruto Shippuuden Plot as well? You have to admit that it is the logical step to take.

Also, I'm also going to add a list of names of the characters who have died, sorted chronologicallyby death course. There is a lot of data that has to be added. Plus haven't you noticed that m ost of the pages in this wiki have little to no pics. Especially the Plot pages. There's lots to do and if you keep deleteing things like this then noone will get the resolve needed to add things at all. So what do you say? Can I? - Zero - Talk 08:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Dantman left his opinion on my talk page, I suggest you read it. Jacce 18:33, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * : I wouldn't say it's speculation, nor would I say it's something we normally put on the wiki. It doesn't actually make any unconfirmed statements or guesses, but rather presents the guesses in a list. Then again, there are a few notes that aren't neutral enough, and other notes:


 * "(Depending on what happens to him, Though there is a very low chance of it being the latter)" would be speculation
 * Danzou (bad romanization)
 * "Unresolved Plot Threads (so far)" What happened to never using "current", something that is "so far" kind of falls under the scope of "current" that we want to avoid.
 * Best thing to do would be to make a few neutral statements on the talkpage and see what other community members's opinions on if we should be putting an unresloved plot pieces list into the article. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Apr 1, 2009 @ 18:11 (UTC)

Very well. We shall move this discussion to the talk page. - Zero - Talk 04:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Continuing Discussion here:

So correct my mistakes but don't remove the whole section just because of a few small mistakes. How is that fair? Look I get it. You want things t remain as they are as much as possible. Humans naturally resist change. But you have to underdstand that Change is inevitable. You can't just go around shooting down peoples ideas just because you do not like change. Anyway This discussion cannot be good enough unless people actually see what I'm talking about so I'm gonna restore the edits just untill this discussion is resolved. that way everything will be fair. I'll even add the improvements I was talking about. So can I? - Zero - Talk 04:16, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * For the depending thing: We know Naruto is either going to bring peace to the world or destroy it. Let that remain and delete the bracket info.
 * For the bad Romanization: Correct it.
 * For an inappropriate topic name: Change it to something more suitable.


 * I agree that a section for unresolved plot points is unnecessary, especially since it could be years before there's any development with things like "how will Naruto bring Peace to the world?" If the biggest advantage that section would provide is helping readers make sense of the synopsis, then taking an ax to the amount of detail would be far better. Seriously, I don't know who's updating this every week, but they need to exercise some restraint. Six paragraphs on one chapter? That's bound to take longer to read than the manga itself. ~SnapperTo 04:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm With Snapper2 On this one....this sounds a bit unneccesary if u ask me ~AlienGamerTalk

Very well. I wont press for the Unresolved Threads section. But how about a section containing a list of characters who have died. Sorted in Chronological Order of Death, or is that irrerlevent to the plot as well. - Zero - Talk 08:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * That Sounds like a gud idea, will help a lot of ppl to keep track. Not entirely sure if it shud be in the plot section though, perhaps an entirely new pg??But zero u've only got 2 opinions, there r a lot more users, aybe u shud wait to hear wat they hav to say before u get too disapointed....for all we know Snapper2 and i could be outvoted, and a lot of ppl mite aggree wit u...AlienGamerTalk

A new page just for a list? Look, I'll add the info in a table containing the Arc Name and Place of Death as well. Then we can discuss whether it should stay or be deleted or have it's colors changed or whatever. You cannot decide whether something is good or bad without experiencing it, thats what people always say. I mean seriously how many times has it happened that you do not like how a dish (food) looks but when you taste it you complete become a fanatic over it. But please do not delete without proper discussion first. That way the discussion is more effective. - Zero - Talk 09:01, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to help me complete the table. - Zero - Talk 09:16, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Descriptive Writing

 * I agree that a section for unresolved plot points is unnecessary, especially since it could be years before there's any development with things like "how will Naruto bring Peace to the world?" If the biggest advantage that section would provide is helping readers make sense of the synopsis, then taking an ax to the amount of detail would be far better. Seriously, I don't know who's updating this every week, but they need to exercise some restraint. Six paragraphs on one chapter? That's bound to take longer to read than the manga itself. ~SnapperTo 04:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

About my descriptive writing. i'm afraid that it's the only way I can write. So instead of cleaning up and summarizing the sections. Why not copy the data into their relevent chapter article pages as synopsis. That way my work wont go to waste. And you will have what you want while I will not have to see my work go to waste. Everyone happy.

Those who haven't had their Manga Book Names released can stay as they are here untill they do. Then you can summarize them after transferring them as well. Don't you agree that this is a good enough idea. I just don't want my work being a complete waste. Just think how you guys would feel if you spent your time writing something. Only to have someone else come along and delete it without caring for your hard work. Isn't the purpose of wikia to consoladate all info on a subject? No matter how trivial? I mean most of the people who come here do so because wikipedia deletes their work when they paste it there just because it is descriptive. - Zero - Talk 08:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I knew that this would come up someday so I thought about how everyone can be happy. Transferring the decriptive data to Manga Chapter/Book Pages was the best solution I could come up with for all parties involved. I do hope it is accepted because it really is the best solution keeping all parties in mind. - Zero - Talk 08:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Plus, since we cannot give links to onemanga, therefore we need to write descriptively. - Zero - Talk 08:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The goal is to summarize. People do not want to wad through this level of detail when they can just as easily read the manga or watch the anime (which they can find by themselves if they're interested). They want the highlights of what happens, not a panel-by-panel synopsis; maybe a page-by-page synopsis at most. I have no intention of doing anything with the content of this page ("good" or "bad"), but set some limits for yourself. ~SnapperTo 21:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * But the goal of wikia is to consolidate all information on a subject and not summarize. Summarization is Wikipedia's style. Anyway. I'm only saying that just in case it is decided to summarize this page then the data should first be copied onto the respective Manga Chapter Pages and then the Data on this page should be summarized. And now that you've touched this topic others will be sure to follow. So a contingency plan needs to be put forward. This one is the best for all parties involved. And not everyone has the pleasure of having the manga books to read or watch the anime. For them this is the only way. So we might as well give them the best we can. After all isn't the purpose of Narutopedia to become the best information site out there? It's written on the Main Page, so I can't say that Summarization without backup is a good idea. [[Image:Zero Sign.jpg|30px]] - Zero - Talk 09:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If people can find this page there's no reason why they can't find one of the many sites that provide the manga too. This article may be excruciatingly informative, but if it takes an hour just to read through it and find the desired information it's not nearly as useful as it could be. ~SnapperTo 18:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * "information" is not descriptive writing. "information" is providing facts. Plot summaries are provided so that people can find out what events happened in a chapter/episode (perhaps even use that to find out if an episode was one they are thinking about), and find out what relevance certain characters had in certain arcs.
 * When wa's wikia's goal to not summarize? When did we say that we weren't going to summarize on this wiki? Since when was summarization a Wikipedia only style? Summarization is a universal technique applied by everyone who is trying to provide information about something rather than copy the entire thing.
 * That being said, there are actually plenty of reasons not to use descriptive writing and summarize instead. Not just because the extra information is useless, but because describing an entire chapter/episode in absolute full detail starts to get into the zone where it can be considered infringing on the copyright of the author of that media. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Apr 3, 2009 @ 19:34 (UTC)

And this is exactly the reason why I'm saying that the information should be transferred to the relevent chapter pages before it is summarized here. How would you feel if I went to all the character pages and started summarizing the plot data there. Don't you feel it would be unfair to all the people who have worked hard to write that info. Seriously, It takes an hour just to write the manga into text format. Look I'm not saying that the information on this page should remain as it is. I agree that this page's purpose is to give an overview. But I'm saying that you could transfer the data to it's relevent Manga Chapter page as synopsis (where it will be acceptable) and then summarized the data here. That way everyone will be happy. And if your goal is to become the best information site out there, then do not go for summarization always, best information is always descriptive. If you want I can transfer the data to the necessary pages and then you guys can summarize all the data here you want. - Zero - Talk 06:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The tankōbon format is not out for the fight against pain yet. When it will then I'll do it. So can you guys please bear with it untill then? Seriously, I didn't see you guys complaining before. You should be happy you're getting this much info. - Zero - Talk 06:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Or if you can't bear with it that long. I can always transfer the data to a sandbox of mine. But that would be a waste since people can't navigate to the page and read it there. I think the first option is better. - Zero - Talk 06:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * As Dantman said, that level of detail is problematic no matter where it is and simply needs to be cut back. Speaking from personal experience, it is much easier to butcher your work yourself than it is to have someone else do it. ~SnapperTo 19:14, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

And as I am speaking from my experience. It is only problematic if you are unwilling to do the work. Otherwise it's quite easy. Good wikis have a way of maintaining themselves. And I do not wish to butcher my own work. If you're so hell-bent on it then I will protest against it. It is wrong to ruin anothers work if it is correct. This is a wiki. People come here to get descriptive info. Information needs to be descriptive or it is considered incomplete. What are you afraid of, a little work? Are you afraid of doing it? Or are you afraid that your work will be diminished by it? Is that it? I'm doing the work if it's the first. And if it's the second. Well you probably already know how wrong that stance is (I seriously doubt that it is the second but best to confront all possibilities). Why are you so hell bent on ruining others work? Do you seek to derive pleasure from it? If not then you should consider the plan I've put forward, which is a good compromise in my opinion. I want the information to stay where and how it is. You want it to be summarized. The plan I put forward is the middle ground. So why is it not acceptable? And it doesn't infringe on the copyright if you paraphrase. Plus if it does then this whole wiki is already infringing on that copyright. - Zero - Talk 12:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The level of detail in this article is not just difficult to maintain, it is also difficult to read through. This article should be giving a plot overview, not a novelization. The amount of detail is so great, one can't see the forest for the trees. I understand you put a lot of time and effort into this article, but too much is too much. There is also satisfaction in moderation. --ShounenSuki (talk 15:22, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Having alot of detail is nice. I personally love readin the articles of the Galactic Civil War and the Second Galactic Civil War at the Star Wars wiki. Going into super insane details which is basically just an description of every single chapter is not good though.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 17:20, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * There are severals reasons why I haven't done anything:
 * I do not want to. If I had a desire to add weekly updates I would have started doing that a few months ago. I trust that people who are interested in adding the latest developments, of whom there are many, will do so.
 * Were I to summarize your work, I would not actually summarize your work. It's faster for me to write my own version than it is to trim down what already exists. And that would be inconsiderate of the effort you've put into the article.
 * This wiki seems to favor articles on volumes over articles on chapters. You've suggested both so I don't know which you'd prefer, and the former is not possible at the moment.
 * Even if this were to be transferred to chapter/volume/arc pages, it is still too long. Cutting down the level of detail is something that should happen no matter where the information ends up. What you are doing is not paraphrasing; if Naruto was a book, this article would be a word-for-word copy of the book.
 * I am not "hell bent" on ruining your work. I am suggesting that you stop wasting an hour every week when the masses would be much more appreciative if you only took twenty minutes to do a less aggravating summary. ~SnapperTo 19:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If I may butt in, its not that anyone is ungratefull or hell bent on ruinin u'r work.....its just that this is goin a bit overboard.....for example
 * The discussion with the 4th is only 1 chapter, yet its taken 10 paragraphs
 * The Final Clash With Deva Path...only 2 chapters....but 11 paragraphs
 * The Pain Arc has taken up 87 paragraphs
 * The pain Arc Alone has taken up HALF the plot summary page....
 * So think about this.....the size of the page has DOUBLED on ONE ARC alone.....Frm the beginning of shippuuden till before the pain arc could hav been covered with the same space.....AlienGamerTalk


 * Jesus help us...gotta pay attention to this article more...--TheUltimate3 (talk) 19:37, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Deaths
This Is wat i meant by controversial....ppl hav different views on wat happened to kakashi, there will no doubt be a revert war about this, and evn in the future if there r unconfirmed deaths, summ ppl will add it, and the others will revert it :S...AlienGamerTalk

And fukasaku is NOT frm Konoha AlienGamerTalk

Fine then I'll remove Kakashi and Fukasaku as well. But bear in mind that I'm not writing where they are from but where they died. - Zero - Talk 09:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Besides if there isn't anything to revert things get boring for the higher ups. Believe me I know, Maintaining is half the fun. - Zero - Talk 09:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Sigh. Why is it that People can't bother to read talk pages... or edit summaries for that matter. This is so troublesome. LOL. By the way, Thanks AlienGamer, for reverting DjangoBrown's edits. - Zero - Talk 14:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)