User talk:WindStar7125/Archive 2

Archive
You might want to consider archiving your talkpage as it's getting a bit long. To archive, simply hover over the arrow to the right of "Leave Message" and click Archive. Then select the content you want to archive (preferably old discussions) and then hit the Save Archive button. :) --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 16:42, August 16, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Verification on usage of Senjutsu Chakra

 * Okay, Tau (not Seel, right?)
 * Right, Seel isn't even a word in German. Seele would be soul, Tau is dew.


 * Natural energy is an element of senjutsu chakra, correct?
 * Yes, it's the core element.


 * So senjutsu and natural energy are two different, though related, things right?
 * Yes. You can have natural energy without Senjutsu, but never Senjutsu without natural energy.


 * So in the recent Shinobi World War, did Juugo contribute natural energy or senjutsu chakra to Sasuke's Susanoo?
 * Senjutsu chakra. I don't know if you can contribute one of the three energies.


 * And also, only those who have used Sage Transformation can use senjutsu chakra, correct?
 * No, there is no true definition of what Sage Transformation is. Everyone who can gather natural energy and mix it with the other two energies can use senjutsu chakra.


 * Meaning Sage Mode, usage Orochimaru's Juinjutsu, and the Six Paths Sage Technique are all different types of the umbrella term "Sage Transformation," correct (which would explain Madara's ability to use techniques that start with "Sage Art," because of the natural energy of the Ten-Tails)?
 * As stated before, there's no existing manga definition of the term Sage Transformation.


 * And only those who have trained with senjutsu chakra (users of Sage Mode) are regarded as Sages, correct (like Naruto, Hashirama, Kabuto, and unlike Juugo, Madara, Obito, Sasuke, etc)?
 * There's also no manga definition of what a sage is.


 * Sorry for bombarding you with questions but I really need clarification on this.
 * Not a problem.


 * Thanks!
 * You're welcome. :) • Seelentau 愛 議 18:47, August 16, 2014 (UTC)

Chōmei
Listen. You say "don't make pointless edits", I say don't make wrong ones. Chōmei IS written with a macron and I guess you also know why, and it's not female. Writing "SHE" into the article is wrong. And you know it's true. Iloveinoxxx (talk) 20:32, August 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * And because you said to me to sit still, it's perfectly fine to have errors in an article? My edit was not wrong and you know it wasn't. What's wrong is what stands in the article right now. This is not about picking a fight with somebody, this is about deleting wrong statements and you are no help in this regard right now. Iloveinoxxx (talk) 20:40, August 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * One step ahead of you, and you indeed wasted both our time enough already. Have a nice day. Iloveinoxxx (talk) 20:45, August 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's as much Sajuuk's job as it's ours. None of us three is an admin, so we're on "the same level". And that does also not mean that we should just jump out of the admin's way as soon as they arrive, even if they could block us any moment. A wiki works by many people working together, not by a small elite trying to smash every newcomer. If I make it "harder for somebody" (and I don't think TU3, who you've mentioned, is bothered by that in any way), people can discuss about it, which is what we are doing right now. Have a nice day too, again. Iloveinoxxx (talk) 21:28, August 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * We maybe, maybe can't correct all faults, but that should not mean we can add new ones, shouldn't it? Yes, Sajuuk is a rollback, which means he can....rollback edits that are purely vandalism. In a case of vandalism, he can use this power and that's a good thing, but it did not come in handy this time as no vandalism was involved. Yes, the topic was big and bad enough to me to take it to your talkpages, because, you know, that's what a talkpage is good for and I did not wanted to have my edits reverted for (in my eyes) no good reason. That you came off as rude did not bug me at all as it's the general tone on this wiki anyway. About the elite thingy....that's a matter of opinion. Surely they are admins and sysops for a reason (they really are), but "smashing newcomers" is not okay and will never be unless these newcomers do willingly vandalism. That's my opinion at least. Iloveinoxxx (talk) 21:54, August 16, 2014 (UTC)

Re:689
Wind, Fire, Lightning, Earth, Wood, and Yin-Yang were stated to belong to TSB. Zetsu was talking about Kaguya when he said "all natures and all kekkei genkai". It makes no sense for him to start listing natures only for him to then say it has everything. She has all kekkei genkai and natures, because, after all, not all kekkei genkai are natures and I highly doubt the TSB are made of Sharingans and Byakugans too. This also confirms she had the Sharingan because that is part of all kekkei genkai. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 06:14, August 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * Wood is its own nature and Zetsu clearly separated wood and earth, so if Kishi wanted water in there, he'd add it in there. We'll have more clarity when Mangastream releases. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 06:18, August 20, 2014 (UTC)

Naruto's Relationships
Hello I see from the history page that you un did an edit of mine taking that Naruto heard Hinata and was rushing to her aid. This is unconfirmed and that piece is conjecture Naruto has shown immense sensing power. And Kishimoto has been known to deliberately put acts such as that in order to stir up pairing fans.

First you can take the stink out of that. Second I wasn't talking pairings I was talking editing and proper usage of an encyclopedia page. I would have figured that someone who made so many edits would understand that its wasn't about pairing I was just looking at all the evidence (not just was on one page) and editing something that I didn't think was correct. --Sincerely Morality (talk) 21:03, August 24, 2014 (UTC)

Look I think we are just starting off on the wrong foot. I hold no grudge. I am new to wiki editing and i thought talking to the person who reedited my post would be the appropriate way to go about making sure the article is clean and unbiased (becasue frankly you are right there are to many shippers that make unnecessary edits). I apologise for anything I may have typed that may have offended you and I just felt in your original response you were a little touchy. --Sincerely Morality (talk) 21:17, August 24, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Upcoming chapters
690 will come out on Monday. That is the day WSJ officially releases the chapters in both Japan and America. If you have a subscription to WSJ, then at 12:00 pm Japan-time (3 pm here in the US), WSJ is released digitally and you can access it from their website (legally, so I can tell you that) or from a phone app if you have one. As to the illegal, unoffical scans; the truth is, they may never come out again. Some say they'll come out on the weekends, others say next week it will be back to normal, but if Japan's anti-piracy campaign is in full swing, I wouldn't expect to see anymore new chapters for a very good while. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 23:32, August 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * Doubtful. Viz is licensed here in America and I doubt the scanlators would want two governments breathing down their necks. There is prison time involved if they're caught after all, but that remains to be seen. They might be daring and try. I'm not sure. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 00:09, August 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * What Fox said. Also, this is a case where only time can tell. We have to wait for Sunday/Monday to get an answer. • Seelentau 愛 議 10:10, August 28, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Misleading info
It's based on that anti-piracy announcement, for now we can't assume that what was leaked is correct (even though it was probably released the same way as all other scanlations before it), so I added the template. It'll probably be gone by Sunday, but just wanted to make it clear to viewers that its information is potentially incorrect. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 21:33, August 28, 2014 (UTC)

So low....so lame...
So you post to foxy's profile because you want someone else to do you're dirty job knowing im pretty much right since Ultimate and some others are okay with Kaguya being a user for the Six Paths Sage Technique

So lame... so low... Matianu.alexandruionut (talk) 17:43, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Question
I think nah. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 17:48, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed this discussion and wanted to say something. Kaguya doesn't have the marks on her back. You can check it at chapter 682, the page before the Reverse Sexy Harem Technique.--MERCURIOUS (talk) 18:36, August 30, 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I agree with you that the SPS isn't a parent to TSB, since it just happened to appear with SPS. I think that the whole problem lies with the fact that we don't have a complete grasp about what SPS is.--MERCURIOUS (talk) 18:50, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Re: TSB (again)
He's not a WR user, the Kanji was more than likely a mistake. But until we have a tankobon version of the chapter, we don't know for sure, that's why we handle it as if it wasn't a mistake. However, Naruto said that Kaguya's orb is similar, not the same. So he shouldn't be listes as a WR because of Kaguya's orb. • Seelentau 愛 議 19:14, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Dubbed Episodes
Next time, ask before you start recklessly undoing my edits. Check http://www.viz.com/anime/streaming and go to their release schedule if you want check for yourself next time.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 02:18, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

I said ask BEFORE, not while or during. Don't just assume I don't have a viable source. The admins on here know that I get the dubbed episode airdates from a viable source, therefore I do not put one.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 02:29, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

I am not angry. I only capitalized one word. I only capitalized before, because you obviously didn't read it the last time i wrote it. Next time read what i actually write.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 02:36, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

thank you a lot
For helping me. If you don't mind, would you please check Ten-Tails, Kaguya and Gedo Mazo articles and see if anything from there should make its way into the Shinju article? (like the personality you just added) thanks a lot.--Elveonora (talk) 20:11, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

Hopefully you are not the one driving.--Elveonora (talk) 20:21, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

Nope. :) WindStar7125   (Contribs) 18:28, September 1, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Another task, please?
Like this one? → Sharingan_Triple.svg Rafael Uchiha  Uchiha_Symbol.svg 03:27, September 2, 2014 (UTC)
 * ^^^ Yep, yep, yep!-- WindStar7125 WindStar7125 Task.svg WindStar7125's Task.svg 05:14, September 2, 2014 (UTC)

Just to point out... the One-Eyed Rinnegan, Sasuke's Rinnegan, Hagoromo, and Madara's look exactly the same in shape, line thickness, and line count.. minus the difference in tomoe and color I even took a few hours to analyze them completely to see if I was right. ItachiWasAHero (talk) 23:54, September 5, 2014 (UTC)

I'm positive they know what I said, because the same thing came up in the past and everyone kind of just ignored it. ItachiWasAHero (talk) 01:45, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

the shinju talk
thanx 4 doin the right thing...appreciate it... --DARK ZER06 (talk) 22:36, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

the article looks much better now buddy :] so what do U think about the off-topic thing I mentioned in the talk page... --DARK ZER06 (talk) 23:30, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

WE ALL ARE :D
 * I'm just copy pastin:
 * this is off-topic...I suddenly had this question that if it's written in the article that kaguya gained rinnegan after consuming the fruit...then why ISN"T it written that she got byakugan too...beside other possible things like dead bone pulse... --DARK ZER06 (talk) 21:06, September 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * ......again I meant that in THIS FICTION trees don't have minds...I told U call it whatever U want merger incarnation possession taking over parasitism I don't care...I gave U proof based on the madara example...it's up to U whether U wanna accept it or not...my final opinion regarding rinnegan is it should be REMOVED from the original shinju article... & about the off-topic thing I said...discussing it there than here doesn't make a difference...shinju & kaguya are related...anyone has any opinion about it?...sry about going off-topic windstar, had to throw it outta my head :] --DARK ZER06 (talk) 21:21, September 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * --DARK ZER06 (talk) 23:39, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

AW HEEEEEEEEELL YYYYYYES this is perfect...loved Ur edit star...thanx buddy...appreciate Ur caring 4 this wiki :] --DARK ZER06 (talk) 08:56, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

Edits
Yeah I kinda knew your edits where from your phone because there listed as mobile lol. we all knew. But jokes aside, its hard i know im forced to do it a lot. Munchvtec (talk) 04:36, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

I also wanted to say congrats, you almost have 2,000 edits. Munchvtec (talk) 04:39, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

Really? I did't notice. I almost never check lol. Munchvtec (talk) 04:41, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

It's not in the info box Munchvtec (talk) 04:49, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, i noticed it when i went to remove shinju. i dont know what it's for though i'll look into it. Munchvtec (talk) 04:56, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

It was a redirect to a user named Sasuke Uchiha. a bot that we have added it and it will be removed shortly. Munchvtec (talk) 04:59, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

no problem. Munchvtec (talk) 05:05, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

Re:Um...
Yep, we did decide that. I was hoping someone else would since I was quite exhausted with the stupidity of that discussion, but I suppose it wouldn't hurt to go ahead and do so. I'll do that right now. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 19:30, September 9, 2014 (UTC)


 * Seel confirmed the translation for me. Yin and Yang are not separate. Both Tobirama and Black Zetsu say Yin-Yang is the element there. They cannot/won't be separated because they aren't. The technique requires fire, water, lightning, wind, water, earth, and yin-yang. That's why its so stupid to ignore Naruto having Yin. He does. He has to. Yin-Yang, not Yin and Yang, are required for TSB. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 20:10, September 9, 2014 (UTC)


 * I know what you mean, but that's factually incorrect. Yin-Yang, as in the premixed element of Yin-Yang, is a component of the technique. For example, if a technique is made of Wood, Fire, and Lightning, we wouldn't list Earth, Water, Wood, Fire, and Lightning. Wood, the premixed element, would be a requirement. Yin and Yang aren't components of the TSB. Yin-Yang is. I hope that is more understandable. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 20:30, September 9, 2014 (UTC)


 * Exactly. Its exactly like that. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 20:36, September 9, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Deadlock
Hey, sorry I didn't reply, I did see the message but then left to do something else and forgot to respond back. Even so, you would have needed a sysop to delete the page. :P --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 08:27, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Re: shipping discussions
They're banned and not allowed. If it's on the forums, please link me the thread and I'll remove it. If it's a talkpage, delete the message entirely (assuming it's not a long ass discussion). --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 21:51, September 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Left a notice in the thread and requested a sysop to close it. Thanks for pointing that out :)
 * Regarding talkpages: if the message itself has nothing to do with improving the article and is just obvious bias, it can be removed. Talkpages on articles are only for messages on how to improve some aspect of the article, long debates like the ones in the forums don't belong there, so can be removed without repercussions.
 * Also, while I remember: when you link to something that's already on the wiki (like a thread or an article, or a talkpage), you just need to do, rather than  . For example:   --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 22:02, September 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * There isn't much to explain, you essentially described why they're banned. Plus, they don't improve the wiki and start unnecessary edit / message wars, which we'd like to avoid as much as possible. ;) --Sajuuk Talk Page 22:07, September 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's one of those unspoken rules. When the forums were opened up to more discussions, it was generally agreed that we ban pairing discussions. It's for the simple reason that such discussions would simply do nothing except allow editors to spew hate against specific pairings, start potential edit wars on articles like Naruto Uzumaki's Relationships and frankly, would attract a lot of unsavoury users to the wiki who would start a lot of questionable discussions. In the interests of trying to remain credible, it's better these discussions stay off the site. The reason you are probably seeing a lot of fanon threads is probably because the sysops (apart from TTF) don't really make an effort to moderate them, so it's really up to me and him to keep them clean where possible. --Sajuuk Talk Page 22:17, September 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, I remember a thread Snapper2 made back in May about types of topics to be allowed/banned, the unanimous decision was to ban pairing topics. See here: Thread:125347 --Sajuuk Talk Page 22:29, September 14, 2014 (UTC)

Re:Policy
Hey please take this message here User talk:Alerxribeiro.soares.7 please I do not like this Talk:Message Policy Please. Alexribeiro.saoares.7 (talk) 00:57, September 14, 2014 (UTC)

Re: what if
It does, but in terms of banned topics, we only really disallow pairing discussions. Other topics are only really closed down if they go completely off topic or just devolve into flame wars. --Sajuuk Talk Page 09:35, September 15, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Please explain this to me...
Gaara's MR was a | long ass debate that caused quite a lot of tension, and while I'm glad he has been listed, I'm sure you can understand why I'm a little ambivalent towards retreading it after all that.

To keep it really short
 * Toroi and Yondaime Kazekage (YK) debuted MR in 546
 * Toroi had normal eyes and YK manifested ringed eyes when he used MR
 * Toroi used power of attraction (a type of magnetism called paramagnetism) and YK used power of repulsion (a type of magnetism called diamagnetism); the ringed eyes are the differentiator
 * Diamagnetism can affect inherently non-magnetic material such as gold (YK used Gold Dust, Gaara later used it too)
 * YK manifested ringed eyes when using MR, like Gaara - ringed eyes are historically associated with tanuki, the type of creature Shukaku is.
 * YK and Shukaku are confirmed MR users with ringed eyes; all logic therefore indicates Gaara, who was said to be only child compatible with Shukaku, has MR.

I probably left out quite a bit but that's the gist of it. I really recommend you go through the archive.--Reliops (talk) 09:26, September 18, 2014 (UTC)
 * Gaara didn't use gold dust, though. He lifted it with his own sand. :x • Seelentau 愛 議 09:36, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Question 2
No. As I said on that talk page, "I say the TSB are from the Six Paths Power, whatever that is.". • Seelentau 愛 議 13:25, September 20, 2014 (UTC)
 * He wasn't using a TSB for his staff. Otherwise, there would've been more TSBs behind him, hm? • Seelentau 愛 議 13:36, September 20, 2014 (UTC)
 * Then what about Hamura and his staff? And what do you want me to explain about chapter 690? There's a plot error there, as many have pointed out. • Seelentau 愛 議 13:39, September 20, 2014 (UTC)

But then Six Paths chakra also comes from the Ten-Tails, since Madara nor Obito ever encountered Hagoromo, meaning it IS a Tailed Beast Skill after all--Elveonora (talk) 13:51, September 20, 2014 (UTC)

You are forgetting that Hagoromo is son of the Ten-Tails, so he has Tailed Beast chakra if you want to be technical about it. And since the Ten-Tails grant Six Paths Chakra, it means TSB is a Tailed Beast Skill because the Six Paths Chakra is necessary.--Elveonora (talk) 13:59, September 20, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, everyone is a pseudo-jinchuuriki of the Ten-Tails if you want to get technical. All chakra that exists comes from Kaguya--Elveonora (talk) 14:07, September 20, 2014 (UTC)

Only when you want to be super anal about it. But in this case we are talking about the Six Paths Chakra specifically, which Hagoromo inherited from Kaguya in one way or another (by birth and from jinchuurikiness) and Obito&Madara got it from being Kaguya's jinchuuriki. So for them, it is a Tailed Beast Skill, even though in Hagoromo's case it isn't exactly--Elveonora (talk) 14:12, September 20, 2014 (UTC)

Re: For the first time here, I'm gonna be real serious
Worrying about how things used to be is a fool's endeavor. Worrying about how this place became a cesspool of people backhanding each other is equally foolish. After tanking as much as I can with all of this I have decided to rethink my contributions here, for one I don't discuss much. Hells I didn't even go into one of those discussions until Elvenora told me to and even then I was just about to ignore it. Edit what I want, keep people in line when I see something and go off and do other things. Much better use of my time. If you are also starting to feel the weight, I suggest you do the same.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 11:12, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * In my personal opinion, a lot of the fighting comes from a few facts:
 * The newer generation of wiki contributors want to move the wiki in another direction (aka, opening up the forums to more discussions), but the older generation of contributors are not interested in this and are making efforts to distance themselves from such discussions (I will commend TheUltimate3, for although he doesn't generally moderate the forums, he does get involved in the discussions) and claim they're background noise that doesn't improve the wiki. While I agree the topics in the "Naruto" discussion board don't improve the wiki, when were such discussions ever intended to improve the wiki? Said discussions was just a way to make people have a reason to be here beyond mainspace edits and to make the wiki look decently active, rather than dead.
 * There are groups of users who have their own opinions about scenes depicted in manga chapters and don't change said opinions for others. This means that when both clash, it becomes infighting because neither will back down, creating unnecessary flame wars. This results in threads reaching 200+ posts within a short time and massive amounts of flaming that didn't really need to occur.
 * While I can appreciate some people won't like my opinion, this is my opinion and I think we can all agree that there is some truth to some parts of my opinion.
 * I would also like to take a moment to agree with TU3: I also don't do much in the way of edits to the wiki and have actually spent more time just cleaning up the forums because nobody else does it. This furthers my point that we should really have an actual forummoderator flag (another wiki managed to get this).
 * I hope this reply is understandable. :) --Sajuuk [Moderator] Talk Page 11:26, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that there's a lot of useless stuff in the forums. The problem is that trying to find ways to control the amount of useless threads doesn't really end up very far (Snapper2's thread about the types of threads never got enforced, apart from proving we don't need shipping topics). It would be great if posting on the forums didn't increase edit count, but that's Wikia's problem. :P
 * I don't really post much in them at all, other than to keep them moderated (hence, the moderator in my sig :P) and readable. It would be way better if we actually had a proper forum mod flag though to let some trusted users to do forum stuff and leave the sysops to focus elsewhere, but it'll never happen since my suggestions in these matters are ignored or insulted. :P --Sajuuk [Moderator] Talk Page 12:58, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * One major problem here now is that people tend to speculate way too much and then they want there speculation to be added as fact and these particular users are...well...stubborn and don't know when to stop pushing it onto us. I wish it would return back to how it used to be when i first joined on my old account. Munchvtec (talk) 13:04, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * @Munchvtec: Yes, people speculate a lot and claim their theories as fact. However, I have never actually seen cases where they've tried to add this to articles, because the Naruto Discussions board doesn't exactly disallow these topics, nor is it written anywhere that anything discussed there will be added to the wiki. I think there's a few misconceptions floating around about the board itself and that needs to be addressed. I may make a post about it and clear up these misconceptions and lay down exactly what the forums are for and what the wiki is not. --Sajuuk [Moderator] Talk Page 13:06, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not just speculation. there are other things like windstar said. when i first joined i was never hostile towards anyone and over time like other users im starting to become more rash and rude to others. I guess you could say that we just start doing what we see happening everywhere else. @windstar, you said that i was going at @foxies throat and yes that's true but, it's not just foxie i argue with and im sure you know that. I think that the reason we argue here most is just that none of us want to agree with each other and we push our opinions on everyone. Munchvtec (talk) 13:12, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to ask what edit counts even mean to you guys. I honestly don't see why people edit farm at all. Example: a user can make 10 great edits that help the wikia a ton and then another user can make 100 edits that are useless. this does not make them better at all so whats the point? Munchvtec (talk) 13:19, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * In my personal opinion, a lot of the hostility comes from trying to tell casual readers of the story in the forums the opinion of the wiki as a whole, rather than just accepting that everyone has different viewpoints. It's because we're trying to force the stuff written on articles into people's faces on forum threads that's causing the hostility: the articles are there for people to read so people may gain more information (mainly for those who've never read the series might find the wiki useful), we shouldn't be trying to tell the wider community that the wiki is 100% fact and everyone else is wrong.
 * In response to your second comment, edit count means nothing to me. It is an arbitrary statistic that counts how many times you submit stuff to the database. Whether someone has 10 edits or 1000 edits means nothing to me: what matters to me is what the user does on a regular basis, their attitude to the wiki and the actual edits they're making (do they improve or hinder the wiki). --Sajuuk [Moderator] Talk Page 13:24, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

That's exactly what i think. But what does it mean to others that edit farm is what I don't understand. Munchvtec (talk) 13:26, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * Again, this is my personal opinion, but I think it's the widely accepted reason: edit farming is basically when you go around making a large number of irrelevant edits on a lot of articles without any reason or improving the wiki at all.
 * For example: I recently went around cleaning up the disambiguation pages to standardise them in accordance to the wider variety of articles (some of them used the template a lot). If you were to go around and revert those edits without any rationale as to why, that could be seen as edit farming, as you are going around reverting edits for no good reason, other than to increase the edit counter.
 * In another example: in the infoboxes, a stray comma is added to the end of all lists added. Another user of the wiki would go around these particular articles and remove said stray comma. The instance of the comma affects no part of the article and removing it was actually considered a pointless edit, because the appearance of the page wasn't actually changed. As the user continually did this, they actually got a warning to stop making such edits, as it wasn't improving the wiki in any way (as well as adding a pointless revision for users to see in the edit history).
 * I hope this explains edit farming. --Sajuuk [Moderator] Talk Page 13:31, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * @sajuuk i already knew what it was. @windstar, same here, i feel the same way. i don't really think that the forums here are needed but i still pitch in once in a while. Munchvtec (talk) 16:17, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear you are taking a break from the forums. :(
 * I think the whole situation would be a lot better if some of the sysops stopped complaining about everything and doing jack-fucking-shit about sorting the god damn problem. I make threads to solve these problems and just get sneered at by people who don't seem to care or think they know better when they really don't have a clue about managing forum boards like this.
 * It's getting very close to the point where I will bypass discussion threads and just ask specific sysops directly to sort out the mess without consensus with the forums now, just to get things done and dusted with, so no more threads from me will be made. I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't keep making threads calling for new sysops, new crats and new fucking flags for this place if some of the stupid sysops got their fingers out and did some shit instead of acting like they know best.
 * Also, I agree that some stuff is getting out of hand, but my authority to do crap about it all is limited. The people with the power to do it refuse to do anything. I'm a hair's breadth away of getting UltimateSupreme or Ten Tailed Fox to contact Wikia and get them to put a new flag in here without discussions about it. --Sajuuk Talk Page 21:46, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Two questions
1. No, but neither is saying "all TSB use all natures".

2. Because it's noted in the trivia. • Seelentau 愛 議 22:24, September 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * Fine. -- WindStar7125 WindStar7125 Task.svg WindStar7125's Task.svg 00:55, September 23, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Thanks...
Why would it be a TBs? It isn't granted through a TB. • Seelentau 愛 議 11:16, September 23, 2014 (UTC)

Shakujo
Dude stop editing the truth seeking balls they are both shajukos
 * Don't edit it again. Please. -- WindStar7125 WindStar7125 Task.svg WindStar7125's Task.svg 22:07, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

Preview
I realize it's impossible to catch every typo and that sometimes things occur to you only afterwards, but please try to use the preview feature more. Because you make a lot of edits to your own comments within five minutes of making the comment. ~SnapperTo 17:48, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

re: question blaze
Because the reference is from 3rd databook and Blaze Release didn't exist then.--Elve Talk Page 19:53, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Also it may be Amaterasu specifically which uses highest level of fire release, not blaze release in general using highest level or fire release, among other thing--Elve Talk Page 19:55, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Re: pairing threads
Of course. Feel free to come on the chat to discuss it further. --Sajuuk Talk Page 21:07, September 25, 2014 (UTC)
 * Heheh. I'm dying to see what mess comes out of that thread. As I said, feel free to come on the Chat to discuss further. :D --Sajuuk Talk Page 21:13, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Some things
Since I see that you are using the chat to discuss things as we discussed in the forums, and because I trust you due to your proven willingness to take part in discussions and make trustworthy edits, I have given you some privileges that I think you will use responsibly and find useful. I'm probably going to catch flack for it, but I don't care. We need good editors and you are one. The first is the Chat moderator flag. Aside from the sysops, who never use the chat, we don't have anyone who has it. Since you use the chat, I'll leave that flag to you. Secondly is the Rollback rights. You've seen that some on the wiki think we have too many, but there is no such thing as too much good help. Use them responsibly and with discretion. ~ Ten Tailed Fox 00:05, September 26, 2014 (UTC)


 * They give you the right to kick users from the chat if they are being disruptive or ban them permanently from the chat if they don't seem to be getting the message. This keeps the chat clean, free of nonsense, illegal links, etc. Things that go against our policies and against good ol' common sense. That's why I caution you to use them with discretion. Someone who is fussy shouldn't be kicked, much less banned. Posting illegal links, starting flame wars, spamming, breaking other policies, etc., are a reason for both. Kicking a user is a form of warning. If you've warned them a few times and they're not listening, kick them. It forces them out of the chat, but they can come right back. A wake-up call if you will. Banning is more permanent and is long-term for when kicking doesn't seem to be getting the message across. Clicking on a user's name in the right-hand bar in the chat will bring up a list of options, which those tools will be available from. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 00:16, September 26, 2014 (UTC)