Talk:Naruto Uzumaki

How old is Naruto?
The latest Chapter 643 states that the Naruto World is currently on the night before Naruto's birthday, which is October 9th. Doing the math, Naruto's age right now should be 16 years and a few months. Or was he never 15 in the first place? Should we make Naruto's age 15-17 now?
 * We're not changing his age. The manga says that, in-universe, his birthday is the next day (tomorrow). He's only 16 right now. Everything stays the same until it changes days in the manga. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 03:40, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Two tabs for long character articles
Sorry for bringing this up again, but I just think we can have two tabs ('Introduction', 'Plot') for long character articles (those that have over 75,000 bytes, more or less), since the plot section on certain characters keeps on growing. This way, we can still use the table of contents. KazeKitsune (talk) 05:23, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm just going to be honest, I've seen this done before on a wiki I'm apart of, as well as over on the Bleach wiki and it just doesn't look good. I know, we're not really shooting for looks here, but, trust me, its really doesn't look good anywhere I've seen it. Aside from the visual appearance, its a bit of a hassle for editors, and can get confusing as for what to add where. Let's add to that the fact that its unnecessary. Yes, being the titular character, Naruto has a very long article, but I can load it in less than two seconds on a speedy connection and under a minute on a slow one, like the one I have at college or on my phone's Wi-Fi. I honestly don't think its necessary. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 05:31, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh well then, at least I got to say what I want to say. KazeKitsune (talk) 06:03, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * I've seen it done on One piece and honestly I would have no problem splitting someone like Naruto or Sasuke's arcs from the appearance abilities and especially personality.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 07:36, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * As another idea related to this, why not do something like Naruto_Uzumaki/Background and Naruto_Uzumaki/Appearance and load them into the page using ? --Speysider Talk Page 08:34, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * If absolutely necessary, I would prefer Speysider's solution since that seems more consistent with our current design of articles (we use it for Relationships, etc on Naruto's page already). ~ Ultimate  Supreme  10:32, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm still against it, but, if its is absolutely necessary that we start splitting up articles (we'll have to the same for Obito and Madara soon enough if we start with Naruto and Sasuke), then I too would vote for Speysider's route. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 17:40, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

What is Speysider's route? But TheUltimate3 would prefer it if we had to move the plot off article, because it would be weird to move background, abilities and personality off page.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 17:42, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * You just looooooove referring to yourself in third person, don't you >.> Anyways, if I understand Speysider correctly, and I think I do, he suggest move, say, the plot section (as you advised) to "Naruto Uzumaki/Plot", then, on the main article (this one), in the Plot section, we just use so that it will give a short blurb on the article, while leaving a "main" link to the new article. That way we don't make the article look tacky with three different tabs hovering at the top like on One Piece Wiki, which, I have to disagree with Cerez on - it looks hideous. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 17:49, October 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes as of now I do find that enjoyable. And yes that sounds fine. If someone can whip up a sandbox to see what it looks like, that'll be cool.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 17:56, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Tabs are a short term solution. Because this article is a mound of garbage large enough to eclipse the sun. To break down its size: Naruto's article is never going to be short, but it can be proportioned better than it currently is. ~SnapperTo 18:20, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if this is what's being suggested, but we could do it like they do in the Avatar Wiki. For the really big pages, usually main characters, articles are split per season. We could simply make sub pages for Part I and Part II, and then put an abridged version of the events in the section of the main article, with a link to the sub-page. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 18:38, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

So in essence it's look kinda like Jacce's request page? @Snapper easier said than done. I've personally tried to Marshall the content that people put into articles for Naruto and others like him and no matter what we do sometimes it gets thrown out of proportion by over zealous fan editors then stuff sneaks up on you or else is repeated half a dozen times. I'd be all for cutting some of these enormous articles down to size it's just that at times it's nothing short of a Herculean task.--Cerez 365 ™(talk) 06:32, October 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's the rub. I'd always tell myself that I could shorten X article/section, but then I'd need to do it again at a later date. Like showering; why bother?
 * That's why I don't do either anymore.
 * Although, I wonder if maybe the problem was trying to prune the hedge that others had grown when the real solution was to burn the hedge down and plant a new one.
 * Quandaries... ~SnapperTo 07:07, October 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * User:Speysider/Naruto_Uzumaki. Created this by just including the Abilities section from the page (I copied the whole contents of the Abilities heading into a subpage of this sandbox page called /Abilities). Thoughts ? --Speysider Talk Page 07:13, October 7, 2013 (UTC)


 * As I've already stated, I would rather things like abilities stay on page. But to be quite honest, that can be solved by just having a nonfanboyish approach to his ability section.
 * Because honestly, the boy does in total Shadow Clones, Nine-Tails chakra, Rasengan, Sage Tech, say what you want but Taijutsu is minor.
 * Instead of having an ability section bigger than most articles that section itself could just be trimmed (and when I say trimmed, I mean gutted.).--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 11:48, October 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * well if we do this we can attack other articles like these. More than enough of us seem willing to take a hatchet to some of these articles. Gentlemen, to the sandbox? --Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 16:28, October 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * @TU3 That was just an example of what would be getting done, I just picked a random section that was fairly long to use to demonstrate it.
 * @Cerez I agree, there are probably quite a few "large" article that can have similar done to it (Sasuke, Sakura, Kakashi, Tsunade, Obito etc) --Speysider Talk Page 16:30, October 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * I see. Either way, well done because that just highlighted how stupid long his ability section has become.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 16:38, October 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think cutting all this will do good for the information. The Taijutsu section has became bare bones, doesn't mention the speed and strength increases he has nor does it mention that he's became faster than A, or even any of his taijutsu feats. I get that you're cutting the fat of the article, but it seems like you're purposely cutting the article to make him look weaker or something.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 03:15, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * "Strength" really loses its meaning when everything is made to seem like an accomplishment. Does Naruto use taijutsu reasonably often? Sure. Is he competent with it? Yes. Is he Rock Lee? Absolutely not. And yet, to read the previous version, he eats rocks for breakfast because he's just that omigosh strong.
 * My main issue with the previous version of that section was that almost all of the examples came from when Naruto used senjutsu or some percentage of Kurama. Put another way: there was very little of base-Naruto, which that section should ideally focus on.
 * That's not to say that everything that was cut was bad. The current version is pretty general and would benefit from some examples of Naruto's feats (which could also just be put into refs). I emphasize some examples, because there do not need to be literally eleven examples of how fast Naruto is. I really can't overstate how ridiculous that is, and in fact want to itemize it:
 * Naruto is fast because he saved Sakura.
 * Naruto is fast because he restrained Kakashi.
 * Naruto is fast because he intercepted Asura Path.
 * Naruto is fast because he dodged Third Raikage.
 * Naruto is fast because he was thought to use Body Flicker Technique.
 * Naruto is fast because he surpassed A.
 * Naruto is fast because he moved around a map.
 * Naruto is fast because he "blitzed" Third Raikage.
 * Naruto is fast because he reacted before Minato.
 * Naruto is fast because he outmaneuvered Tailed Beast Balls.
 * Naruto is fast because he something with Wood Dragon.
 * Use the absolute fastest example and no others. ~SnapperTo 05:56, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * While trimming could help, it still doesn't change the fact the article is long. It can be solved just by employing the use of the template and subpages with LST. --Speysider Talk Page 18:43, October 8, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Snapper. If we start listing abilities, not just here, but the whole site around, by the best known example of that particular skill set, instead of listing every single, minute detail, of every single action that these characters make, the articles would shrink by quite a bit, while retaining the importance of the most significant actions. Most of us are pretty conservative when it comes to adding mentions of abilities, but then there are others that think that every sneeze a character makes needs to be added to their Abilities section, and this just isn't so.

Like I said to begin with, the page's length isn't really a concern. The series is almost over, he's the main character, its going to be long. The page still loads in under a minute, sometimes within mere seconds, and my connection is pretty crappy, so I know its okay for those of you with higher internet speeds. There really isn't any true need to split this article up. There just isn't. So, while if we have to do this, I prefer a combination of trimming the fat (all the extra references/examples where they're not needed) and Speysider's method of things, I really think a simple trimming of unneeded or redundant information is the better solution of it all. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 21:53, October 8, 2013 (UTC)

Tailed Beast Mode Power
I'd like to include that the manga did show Naruto equaling the combined might of Matatabi, Isobu, Kokuo, Saiken, and Chomei in the Tailed Beast Ball clash. Something like that couldn't have happened if Naruto was weaker than their combined power. Not only that, he did defeat all five by himself after the clash, pages 12-13 of chapter 572.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 01:51, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * He had Gyūki/B's help throughout the fight. Equaling them in power, as far as the Tailed Beast Ball goes, does not mean Naruto is stronger than five Tailed Beasts combined. That is overhyping things at its best. And that will be the last I say on the matter. Anyone else is welcome to comment. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 02:26, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * Gyuki/B helped twice when Naruto got his own Tailed Beast Mode. And even then, it wasn't needed: Naruto already showed WITHIN the span that B helped that he could have handle himself. And Ten Tailed Fox, you are ignoring that if Naruto had been weaker than the five Tailed Beasts' combined power, his Tailed Beast Ball would have been overpowered and it both would have been sent flying back to him. And Naruto, as the manga showed, defeated all five at the EXACT. SAME. TIME. In chapter 572 without ANY assistance from B. It isn't overhyping, what you are doing is downplaying a feat.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 02:30, October 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * I happen to agree with you. It's immense downplaying, to the point of being ignorant or lacking comprehension of what's going on. And if one takes insult to that, I apologize, but it's a blatant lack of care to attention that's causing the issue. Naruto matched the power of the other five Bijuu, context being that he had to neither overpower nor underpower his own. He had to lower his power output. It was a delicate balance, and all dialogue and panels (disregarding the anime for a bit) related show him fighting with relative ease. There's more I could redundantly repeat that I've seen SuperSaiyaMan say regarding the topic spread across the Wikia, but that'd be silly. While I do agree he (SuperSaiyaMan) is hyping it, his stance is valid and points well-founded. I wish this silly argument would end already, though. It's becoming childish with how it's being handled. --Taynio (talk) 02:42, October 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * The point that the Tailed Beast Ball overwhelmed the other beasts' has been noted. But that's all that need be done. SuperSaiyaMan doesn't have to write a paragraph glorifying ninja Jesus Naruto (which is how he makes it sound in his edits) because he did so. He did not overwhelm five Tailed Beasts, he equaled their power, grabbed their necks in the confusion following it, and freed them from Obito. Before the Tailed Beast Ball was used, B/Gyūki was assisting him. Regardless of what you think is "childish", which is irrelevant to begin with, we're trying, as you can see in the section above, to cut down on the over hype that some in this community feel they need to add. Naruto's power and prowess in Tailed Beast Mode are noted, to the point of insanity (almost a play-by-play) in his Ability section. Another paragraph glorifying what the manga already makes obvious is overkill, redundant, pointless (especially when you consider his feat with the Beast Ball is already mentioned), and useless. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Yamagakure Symbol.svg 02:52, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * The arguing is childish, and the way it was being handled. People were almost at eachother's necks, from what I could tell, without either one listening or understanding the other. I have no problem cutting down the hype, but that doesn't lessen any other points being made by people, as it seems as was attempting to be done. As to whether Naruto overwhelmed or not, the manga's dialogue and panels seem to reflect he did, but that's a moot point at this current time. To reiterate: there's no issue trimming, but downplaying the valid points made in debates is an entirely different subject, even when it warps what really happened. It also came across, from each side, as very condescending toward the other; quite demeaning. That is the sole reason I even spoke up, otherwise I tend to stay out of arguments. --Taynio (talk) 03:05, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * Where in the abilities section was Naruto's Tailed Beast Ball equaled the might of the five others? And as Taynio pointed out, the manga's dialogue and panels reflected he did defeat all five afterwards. And if Naruto could equal the combined power from the five of them, why shouldn't that be the same as being as strong as five of them? To me, it seems like the same thing. And I have no problem with the trimming either, it just the way its been happening has acted like a huge downplay to Naruto from what we saw in the manga.--SuperSaiyaMan (talk) 03:12, October 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe some can update his jinchuriki section, along with this pic?



Settei from Pierrot
They have Naruto's heights at ages 5, 7, and 11(at the time of his entrance into the academy after failing 3 times before). They are 106cm(5yrs), 120cm(7yrs), and 142cm(11yrs). Are these worthy as trivia or any place on this page at all?? ItachiWasAHero (talk) 03:54, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

Switching with Kurama
Doesn't anybody think it's necessary to write a section about Kurama switching with naruto? Idk how to edit the site to complicated for me. WhiteSnakeSage (talk) 22:56, December 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * It's already mentioned in the Jinchuriki Forms page. If you want to add it to his Jinchuriki section on his own page you are free to do so, but it is at most a sentence mention.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 23:48, December 13, 2013 (UTC)

Mecha-Naruto
I think it would be wise to create a separate article for Mecha-Naruto, after all he is a new character created by Masashi Kishimoto himself.—Entondark (talk) 22:56, December 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * For now, I wouldn't create it. So far, all we know is that he is a mecha version of Naruto. Different moveset aside, he's just like those costumed Naruto versions of Storm 3. Maybe if we get something of a plot about him. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 03:08, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Naruto's Stats
I am new to commenting here so disregard this if someone has already brought it up, or it's stupid, but does anyone but me think it may be time to update the stats section? After all, his speed and strength are listed at 3.5. This seems odd since when he appeared, he was so fast that Kakashi thought he was the 4th Hokage, and since learning the senjutsu, his strength seems to be enormous. Aspenufl (talk) 05:47, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Only Masashi Kishimoto can make the stats, we have to wait for him to write a new databook. Besides, the stats only shows the characters own talents, without enhancements like senjutsu. Jacce | Talk | Contributions 05:50, December 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, I understand. It just seems like those stats, even discounting additional talents, woefully underestimate Naruto's current power levels.Aspenufl (talk) 05:58, December 22, 2013 (UTC)

Base Naruto isn't anything special - he's not particularly fast, strong, agile, it's all down to Bijuu Mode and Sennin Mode. Pesa123456789 (talk) 11:13, December 25, 2013 (UTC)I Disagree. Base Naruto have some good speed,reaction and taijutsu feats.--Arnar.ertu (talk) 19:51, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Extraction
Madara took Kurama out of him.. unless he somehow gets Minato's half then he is no longer a Jinchuuriki and is on the verge of death ItachiWasAHero (talk) 08:41, December 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Any number of things could have happened here; Nine-Tails could have gotten removed, just portions of chakra, who knows. Why have a chapter focusing on Shukaku for the first time and end it with killing Naruto? Again who knows. We my have to wait until later to know for sure.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 12:01, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Bijuu extraction wouldn't kill Naruto, because of his Uzumaki genes. Pesa123456789 (talk) 13:07, December 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Please do not speculate so far as to say Naruto no longer has Kurama sealed inside him. We don't know what happened there.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 13:13, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

The creation of this topic was completely pointless. You don't need to come here just to tell us what happened in the chapter. If there had been any issue on how to add information about the chapter, something that wasn't very clear, but that's not the case. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 16:37, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Are we really doing this? If it was just his chakra removed Naruto wouldn't have such a defeated and crushed look at the end of the chapter. Furthermore, Naruto said himself at the beginning, "I can't get Kurama to return to my body." This means Kurama was outside his body. Not the chakra, but the beast itself. So what conclusion do you come to when the shroud is ripped off Naruto, he loses TBM and he already stated he can't get Kurama to return to his body? It's not speculation, it's just logic. --Mandon (talk) 17:13, December 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Still, we know how plot no jutsu works. If Kishi wants, he can just make Naruto troll everyone with something like: "I hid Kurama in my behind"--Elveonora (talk) 17:51, December 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * There is still the possibility that the beast wasn't extracted from him. Any number of things could have happened in that wordless panel. Waiting a week for another chapter to find out decisively before de-classifying him as a jinchuriki isn't going to kill us.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 17:58, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Naruto said "I won't let you get Kurama" and "Kurama won't get back inside me" both shows him knowing that madaras' after the beast itself not just it's chakra, based on that i believe kurama's been extracted but like Cerez365 said waiting till the next won't hurt unless that's a couple of weeks from now lolRayzur (talk) 18:27, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Considering that the wiki is not supposed to solely reflect the most recent manga chapter, the article shouldn't need an "update" even if Kurama is removed. Naruto should at no point be called a jinchuriki in past tense. ~SnapperTo 19:27, December 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * You're saying Naruto shouldn't be called a Jinchuriki in past tense? Because it's not like we've done exactly that for every single former jinchuriki before. It's very cut and dry.. Naruto isn't a Jinchuriki anymore. Kurama was out of his body when Madara pulled him out. --Mandon (talk) 20:34, December 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * I said the wiki should not do past tense. But as you point out, the wiki does something it shouldn't. Which is inconsistent; infoboxes do not list statuses or affiliations as former, but the bodies of articles do.
 * Of course, several of your examples are rightly treated in past tense. Rule of thumb is that if ever something is "current" in the series, it should always remain current when being spoken of. So Naruto, Gaara, and Obito should be "are", Bunbuku, Kushina, and Fukai should be "were". ~SnapperTo 21:01, December 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Naruto, Gaara and Obito aren't though. Or if people are still in denial, let's just say Gaara and Obito aren't for the example. There's nothing inconsistent about it, a character doesn't have to be dead for them to be a former Jinchuriki. Anyways back to the original topic, I think it's pretty obvious that Madara extracted it, but if there's a majority against it then we can wait until the next chapter. --Mandon (talk) 21:34, December 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * You're missing the point. The wiki does not exclusively represent the most recent manga chapter. That's what it states in the MoS, and that's the philosophy certain areas of the wiki abide by. In other areas, such as a character's status, that practice is ignored and content becomes primarily reflective of the newest material.
 * This does not mean the wiki should ignore a character's death or loss of an ability, but rather it should be qualitative when discussing it. Rather than say, "Naruto was a jinchuriki," it should say, "Naruto is a jinchuriki until it is removed during the blah blah blah." ~SnapperTo 21:54, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Matthew6gh (talk) 22:11, December 25, 2013 (UTC)Naruto no longer a jinchuurikiMatthew6gh (talk) 22:11, December 25, 2013 (UTC) In the last page of the chapter,“The Hidden Heart", it said that,“Kurama's about to be taken... What now?"

Very likely it meant Kurama's about to be taken, as in, taken by Madara and put into the statue. It didn't say, "Kurama's about to be extracted." Taken can have all sorts of different meanings. The fact still remains however, that Kurama's shroud was separated from Naruto and he lost his TB mode. This wasn't simply the chakra being taken, but rather Kurama itself. Why would he tell Gaara his plan unless he was unable to tell Naruto? Pretty obvious that Naruto isn't the Jinchuriki anymore. --Mandon (talk) 00:52, December 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * Just like when B was captured by Taka huh. Regardless we still don't know what happened so let's not assume shall we. Naruto got ejected from the chakra shroud, what does that mean? We will find out in 2 weeks.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 02:40, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Naruto isn't B. He had the beast outside of his body, and Madara ripped it out. Very simple, very obvious. But so be it, we can wait. --Mandon (talk) 04:54, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Just leave it as is until the next chapter. Kurama made a plan with "Sand Boy" Gaara, so who knows what's going on. Just leave it. I'm sick of seeing these pointless debates with no ground to stand on. SusanooUnleashed (talk) 04:51, December 27, 2013 (UTC)