User talk:GokūBlack10/Logical Conclusions rule

Discussion
To see prior discussion on this matter, please see the related forum page. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 08:34, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Having read that forum thread, I'd have to agree with what Cerez said: this just opens the wikia up to even more random speculations because someone decided to draw a logical conclusion from an event to make it fact, causing this whole wiki to lose its credibility. I see no purpose in this policy as it only serves to increase speculation becoming fact. --Speysider Talk Page 10:00, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Same thoughts here.-- ~Ulti  Sup~  10:26, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with Cerez: the arguments about Tobi/Madara being Obito being a good example why we should wait for more concrete evidence to surface, since at the time Obito was listed as dead and Zetsu had demonstrated the ability to copy people, it wasn't logical that Obito had survived going off the info we had. TricksterKing (talk) 10:54, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Who made a rule about this? I thought we were trying to have a discussion, trying to enforce this by a policy is very much not the right way to go.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 11:08, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yup, I agree with the argument that drawing a logical conclusion is not right, however obvious the source of the conclusion may be. There maybe instances where Kishimoto leaves some things to the readers, in such cases, not every reader may end up at the same point but everyone will have their own opinions leading to chaos.. So, until and unless things are specified, I agree that drawing conclusions is not right. 11:09, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

Thats my only problem, because if one or two start adding logical matter, everyone will try to do the same, there are some "logical" things that were posted, like Orochimaru using Substitute Technique, if that was so logical to be posted, there's not much to say against adding logical matter, or we start adding only with evidence, and when logical matter appears we point it in the trivia section until we get evidence. Dan.Faulkner (talk) 12:24, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * I would like to point out that with logical conclusions there is also the possibility of being completely stupid. For example, using the Orochimaru case, there are three possible techniques he could have used: Substitute Technique, Vanishing Facial Copy Technique and yes, even the Transformation Technique. Unlike say the recent Scorch Release, this one has no clear conclusion because based on what we've seen and what we know there are three possible outcomes. The argument here is the willing desire to be stupid and fight about it.--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 12:49, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l507/0nag4/meme-guy-staring-at-computer-screen-thinking.jpg Wow. This is one long discussion and we're all saying the same thing.. 13:26, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * @Elveonora doesn't seems to get it, assumptions should not be the way, and even more, when no one agrees with the Orochimaru's Substitute Technique thing, there are at least three techniques that fit in the description, but she insists because it was her/him logic assumption, and because it is so childish, took Mokuton from Orochimaru. 85.241.75.149 (talk) 14:50, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

No, there is no other technique that would fit the description, your brains don't get it. And yes, if we take away Substitute Technique which is obvious, so should go Mokuton--Elveonora (talk) 14:52, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Random user we don't change things like that, we reach an agreement first, stop causing trouble. Dan.Faulkner (talk) 14:57, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

It just should be fair. Like to you it's obvious that he can use Wood Release, to me it's obvious he used Substitute Technique. The difference is though, that in latter case he indeed used something. Figure that Orochimaru dies before he even gets the chance to actually use Mokuton? So "assumptions shouldn't be the way" ;D--Elveonora (talk) 14:59, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Clarification: If he did use Living Corpse Reincarnation, he does indeed have Wood Release. It's the reason why he wanted Sasuke's body so he could get the Sharingan remember. That being said, relevent--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 15:13, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * An argument isn't if he has it, but he is yet to use it, so shouldn't be listed. My example, in case he gets killed too soon, we won't even see him using it because he didn't get the chance. And by same logic of Living Corpse, since he took over Zetsu's body, he has all their abilities, so two-facedness at its best--Elveonora (talk) 15:23, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

@Elv I was not referring to you in my last comment. About the Substitute Technique, we didn't reach an agreement, so a mention in the trivia section about a similar technique it's ok to me. Dan.Faulkner (talk) 15:36, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

@Dan, I know. To tell the truth, I don't care if we decide to go with facts alone or logical conclusions, because slowly, I'm getting apathetic as times goes on thanks to these arguments, it's not my wiki, do whatever you want, just be fair. What I hate are exceptions to rules, it either applies to everything or nothing. It's biased to select which things pass and which don't. And yes, I'm "bitter" and my attitude is as*holish cruel sarcasm. It's wasn't me who brought up this whole "policy changes" debate and it even actually began before this forum topic with the whole scorch release thing. The reason why I'm angry, is because as you said, Orochimaru gets abilities of whoever he takes over. So he gets everything, not just wood release but substitute technique and even mayfly too (something else to be discussed) we should apply a general rule if to or not to list a yet-to-be seen performed by x character techniques in x's infobox/abilities section, because it then turns into a mess without a set order--Elveonora (talk) 15:52, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thats true, admins should take a major role in this. Or it's going to get a bigger mess than already is. Dan.Faulkner (talk) 15:58, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * For added clarity, all discussion should be directed at the place where they all started..--TheUltimate3 Allied Shinobi Forces Symbol.svg (talk) 16:31, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

This is insane. The reason I brought this up in the first place is not to let wild speculation run loose, but to open up our use of facts that we do have to reach a conclusion. I didn't intend to change it all through one forum post without discussion and certainly not without order. If I were to suggest a system for this type of thing, it wouldn't be dissimilar to what we do now, open up a topic on the talk page, see if we can get a consensus on the idea and if so, add it in such a way that it is clear that, while not directly stated, the evidence at hand points to this conclusion. Instead, under the current system I see ideas like this presented all the time only to get shot down by "It's not stated". I mean in this very discussion Orochimaru's ability to use Wood Release is being debated, we all know the facts of his ability, its well within the realms of his techniques to now do everything the White Zetsu Army does, but we don't list it, even with a little presumed or anything. Now I'm not saying I'd list Orochimaru with the ability to fuse with several of himself 'til he looks like a KISS concert gone wrong, but all I'm looking for is a slight shift in policy where everything that isn't stated word for word in the story isn't shot down for it. Honestly by my own standards if there was one piece of evidence against or a equally viable, yet conflicting theory, I'd avoid adding anything myself, and even with this change there isn't likely going to be any vast overhaul with people's logical conclusions. All it does, all I wanted it to do, is to allow editors a bit more freedom when it comes to interpreting and implementing the information we are provided. Once we set a standard, hell, if we even go by the standard I just outlined, anyone who doesn't like this need only find one thing to the contrary to stop an edit. But like I said, that's just the standard I would work by, ideally, we should be approaching this like we did the character creation articles and create a standard that suits everybody to the best of our ability. --Hawkeye2701 (talk) 16:47, June 22, 2013 (UTC)