Talk:Shimura Clan

extinct clan
They aren't mentioned when manga or databooks talked about clans in Konoha at all. Before someone says: "but Kish just might have made them up" then I doubt it. Not to mention, no known living members with Danzo dead = no clan--Elveonora (talk) 12:10, March 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Kishimoto drew a whole frame worth of clan symbols only three of which are known to us. Suppose they're amongst that? I'm not too sure what you're proposing here but there could still be Shimuras living in the village. Just because Danzō, his father, and grandfather are dead doesn't mean the clan is extinct. There might be a multitude of unknown clans to us. They'll always pop up as we go along.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 12:39, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

There are no known living clan's members atm. that's what I'm proposing. I edited it before from is to was and someone reverted it back--Elveonora (talk) 13:03, March 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * That does not mean the clan is extinct. It just means we only know dead Shimura. There's nothing to suggest that other members of the clan aren't still alive and well in Konoha just as much as there's no evidence to support that there is, so we err on the side of caution and say the clan is, not was.--Cerez 365 ™Hyūga Symbol.svg(talk) 13:23, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

It's safer to assume that when there's a lack of evidence for something, it's not true, rather than believing it might be because it wasn't proven to not exist. Sorry Cerez, I'm an atheist--Elveonora (talk) 13:49, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

There's no need to imply anything, we say what we know: clan exists, only known member is deceased. We don't have to say anything more than that. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 14:59, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

We know that the clan did exist and have a proof for that, but there's no proof that it still does. As stated, there's nothing to support that it doesn't either, but since there are no living examples of evidence currently, it means we know for sure that it only WAS, but not that it still IS, so stating otherwise is an unsupported speculation/assumption--Elveonora (talk) 15:15, March 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * omg elveonora, stop it already. unless it will be stated that the clan is not longer present, it is to be listed as a clan that still exists. I mean, everybody talked about Naruto being the only living member of the uzumaki clan now nagato died, but it was later shown that karin is also a mamber of it. so the possibility of more members being around is pretty high, also for this clan. I mean, all we know of 3 members. I don't think you can call it a clan with just 3 members in it.79.223.67.120 (talk) 16:27, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Who are you again to tell when should I stop or do else? You are missing my point, read it again. Stating that they still do exist is nothing but assumption, stating they existed is true, with a POSSIBILITY, only implicitly hinted that they may no longer exist since there's no proof they do as all known members are dead. You are assuming something is there, why we are only told it was there sometime, while we are certain it isn't there, unless evidence aka. members show up.--Elveonora (talk) 16:38, March 27, 2013 (UTC)