Board Thread:Wiki Discussions and Support/@comment-5407586-20141206094948/@comment-28861328-20141209200531

You can be goddamned however you please, but that won't silence me. "Fuck organization"? Are you forgetting it is this wiki's problem, in the first place, that it chose to ignore the arcs when they began being named? Do you really expect me to pity the overhaul that has to be done when it could have been fixed right from the beginning? I am not a child, TheUltimate: this "organizational dilemna" you are seeing is solely the wiki's fault. Not Kishimoto's.

If it were a simply matter of preference on organization, then you would hear no complaints from me. My problem lies with the fact that Kishimoto has:
 * 1) Named the arcs.
 * 2) Laid out when certain arcs begin and when they end.

This stands in contradiction with what we present as fact, which is that our arcs, their names, their beginnings and endings, are better suited than for the story than what the author himself has said the parameters of the story are. I don't give a damn if you are paid or not, or who's checkbook you operate off of. I also, frankly, don't give a damn if this is a fan-made site or a site made for the lulz. This site presents information about the series as factual as we can possibly get it. Do we make mistakes from time to time? Sure, but we don't willfully misrepresent information; or, at least, that was my presumption before this incident.

There is no gray area here: Kishi is right, we were wrong.

The information is organized incorrectly with how the author says it should be organized. I used the example of chapters earlier, so let me make that clearer. Chapters are simply a way of organizing the content of a story, yes? Well, what if, in my infinite wisdom as a "fan not paid by Kishimoto", I decided that the Obito flashback chapters should be mashed into one big chapter, because that'd be better than Kishimoto splitting them up among three or four separate chapters? According to your arrogant argument, I'd be in the right for doing so, because I would have determined that the information was "better organized" that way.

Well, sorry, it doesn't work that way.

The purpose of this site, as you have so aptly pointed out time and time again, is to record the information we are told by Kishimoto (and relevant sources) about his series. Well, he has told us how to the content is organized and we have said, in effect, "Eh, fuck that. We'd rather stick our thumbs up our asses and press on the way we've always done it." Because apparently our organization is so much more superior. Well, that may be the case, but we're not here to record our opinions and pontifications of what the content should be or how it should be organized: we're here to document the Naruto series as Kishimoto has written it.

You can try to dance around that all you please, but at the end of the day, it all has comes back to that.

Edit: Snapper, as to your question on the numbering of the anime episodes: I actually understand the logic behind the numbering of the anime episodes. Naruto and Naruto: Shippuden are two separate anime and, while they do use the numbering as if it was continued from the original anime, it is also correct to say that episode 1 of Shippuden is #1 because it is the first episode of that separate anime.

It is not comparable to the arc problem: We have the information divided up differently than Kishimoto does; named, in most cases, something Kishimoto did not name them; and we're just going to twiddle our thumbs and ignore that issue because it is convenient for us. Its not a matter where everything matches up and both ways are right, like with the anime, it is an issue where we got literally almost everything about the arcs wrong and we're choosing not to do anything about it, acting like five year olds, because we think our way is better.