Talk:Shabadaba's Assistant

Necessity
So you know, since we're cleaning up the wikia(sorta), I propose we delete this article. --Cerez365™ 19:31, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) She says absolutely nothing in the movie not even emotive sounds
 * 2) She mimics Shabadaba's facial expressions and gestures most of the times
 * 3) Her greatest role is apparently bringing Shababdaba(lolz name) a dish of fruit.
 * 4) She is 'ideous.

On a weird question: why does she have the same infobox image as Shabadaba? Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 19:44, February 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I was just gonna ask that Omni. Maybe it's Shabadaba's shadow clone XD --speysider (talk) 19:45, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Uhm ._. she was in the background of the first one but then I uploaded an image of him alone in the frame with the intention of grabbing one for her, then this revelation hit me...--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 19:46, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's why I used Shabadaba's picture for the infobox. I didn't upload an entire picture of herself. But if we're gonna delete this one, why not, even though we do have something like Orochimaru's Previous Body and Iwagakure Bodyguard, both of whom says absolutely nothing and made only made incredibly minor appearances. Yatanogarasu (Talk) 19:57, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think this wiki should only have articles for main, major and characters who actually speak. Those that are just background characters or have absolutely no relevance to the outcome of the plot should be deleted (eg, like this article and those Yatanogarasu linked to --speysider (talk) 19:59, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I have to agree that we have gone too far with these conjectural-characters. Time to smarmy up and wipe them off, right? Yatanogarasu (Talk) 20:14, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

Why does everyone always attack the Iwa bodyguard when he looks so kewl Q_Q In time it could be deleted as well but my attention was drawn to her...--Cerez365™ 20:16, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

They should all be deleted. I was getting tired of characters with little importance getting articles.--Deva 27 20:32, February 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree, along with all the jutsu and tools/weapons that go unnamed. The point is, it gets a place only if it has an official name. That reminds me, what about Shield of Black Flames and Mirage Genjutsu, they have a kanji name, but seems unofficial.
 * But that aside, should we move this talk to a forum? Yatanogarasu (Talk) 23:03, February 26, 2012 (UTC)

I think you guys are going a bit too overboard for something that's just for one entirely unnecessary article. There are unnamed articles that have purpose. If they should all be removed, a couple Kage for instance would be gone... Shield of Black Flames and Mirage Genjutsu are descriptive names. They're unnmaed but somewhere in the manga/whatever medium they got a description that is used for the article name.--Cerez365™ 23:13, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. I'm not against all unnamed articles--Deva 27 23:23, February 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, how about just the ones that seem too minor, like a simple dagger or something with no significant value? But as for the characters, all unnamed ones are going, right, except the Kage, as they all have numerical prefix, like First Tsuchikage, Fourth Kazekage, or people with titles, like Aniki, Wind Daimyo? Yatanogarasu (Talk) 00:47, February 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree, let's just get rid of articles that have too little information to go on for requiring an article. They could be mentioned in like their main article (in the case of Orochimaru's Previous Host) --speysider (talk) 08:39, February 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, and while we're on the subject, let's delete something like Earth Release: Earth Shaking Palm. I mean, Jirobo just slammed his fist on the ground, it wasn't particularly a technique, Lee could kick the ground and cause it to shake and shatter. Yatanogarasu (Talk) 00:38, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh lawdy... Techniques is an entirely different argument.--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 00:43, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Should we start a talk about that then? Yatanogarasu (Talk) 00:52, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

In a way, I'm going to have to agree that articles such as this are meaningless. But that leads to questions on articles such as Okyō and Inaho. There isn't any difference concerning the amount of information between those two and this one. It basically becomes a policy decision: Names provided by the databooks are a bit tricky. On the one hand, databooks provide useful information, on the other hand articles such as Okyō and Inaho are completely useless.--Joolushko Tunai Fenta Hovalis (talk) 13:32, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Do characters without a name get an article? → No.
 * 2) Do characters with a name provided by a databook get an article? → Discuss!
 * 3) Do characters with a name provided within the manga or anime get an article? → Yes.


 * I'm of the opinion that characters that appear in just one episode, have little information, no given name or simply came from a databook and was never seen in the anime/manga etc don't belong here. They are just a waste of time maintaining because they contain no useful information. This wiki should concentrate on the characters that appear quite a bit in the story or have genuinely enough information for a wiki article to be created. --speysider (talk) 13:36, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Named characters should not be deleted. I'm more concerned about unnamed characters who have no real significance and jutsu like Sage Art: Fire Release Stream.--Deva 27 15:59, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree with named characters to some extent. Characters who just appear once and never return (eg background characters) in the series are a pointless addition to the wiki. For example, what the heck is Inaho or Okyo gonna do? They've never been seen again since their appearance in the original series. --speysider (talk) 16:03, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Kishimoto-sensei thought them important enough to give them names and background information. Who are we to ignore that? Besides, it's not as if we only have a limited amount of space. —ShounenSuki (talk 16:23, February 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the point I'm making is that we don't have to put an article in for every little thing in Naruto. The wiki should contain articles that are about people who appear in more than just 1 episode. A 1 episode character is a complete waste of time on having an article. Just because Kishimoto-sensei made up a background extra character to fill the spaces, doesn't mean they need articles here. Inaho, Okyo, Orochimaru's Previous Body and Iwagakure Bodyguard are unhelpful articles that do little to help people understand the plot, nor do they influence the plot much. The article this talk page is about the same: Shabadaba's Assistant does absolutely nothing whatsoever to influence the plot in Guardians of the Crescent Moon Kingdom film, she's just a background character to make the antagonist seem better. This all falls under housekeeping and making it more orderly, rather than a jumbled mess of hundreds of characters and jutsu that a) never appear again and b) are weak and useless. --speysider (talk) 16:30, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * It's rather hard to waste a near-infinite amount of time and space. Also, since when was our only goal to create articles that help people understand the plot? Last time I checked, we were trying to cover each and every aspect of the series on here. If we were only trying to help people understand the plot, we should do away with eighty per cent of all articles, including many technique articles; all articles on games, films, and OVAs; and great amounts of character articles. In fact, we could do away with everything except the overarching arc articles. Why have a wiki at all? We only need a single page to achieve our goal. —ShounenSuki (talk 17:47, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * That's just going a bit far imo. All I'm trying to get at is articles of about 5 lines or about characters who appear in like 2 seconds of an episode just don't need an article here: it's just pointless and a waste of time. --speysider (talk) 17:50, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not saying every single background character ever shown on screen deserves a page, either. I just don't see why would should ignore information given to us by Kishimoto-sensei, even if that information isn't all that plot relevant. It is still part of the core canon of the series and a part of the greater Naruto universe imagined by Kishimoto-sensei. Who are we to decide what gets ignored and what not? We should be describing the series, not editing it. —ShounenSuki (talk 17:56, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Okyo is clearly just a background character, all she did was dance in a waterfall with her mate. As I said before, just because Kishimoto said something about that person doesn't mean they need a page. There could be a page on the really minor characters for people who appear for about 2-5 seconds, then don't appear ever again. "Who are we to decide what gets ignored and what not?" < you do have the choice, you just are choosing to list every little thing. After all, Kishimoto is not actually editing this wiki himself nor even an admin here. I'm still going to keep saying that we delete these useless few liner articles about characters that do little to the plot as they just clog it up (housekeeping is a good thing to do). If the character makes a later, more important appearance, then I'm not stopping people making the article again, just at this present time they don't need an entire article to themselves. --speysider (talk) 18:03, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * What are these articles 'clogging up'? The pipes of the interwebs? What harm are these articles doing? All they do is make this site more comprehensive and helping us cover all material Kishimoto-sensei has offered us. And if we do decide to start deleting these 'useless' articles, where do we draw the line? What is useless and what is not? —ShounenSuki (talk 18:23, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Not to sound offending, but your acting really rudely over a really simple suggestion. They aren't doing any harm, but they are just pointless. Just like this article, a character who says nothing whatsoever or is just a background character doesn't need a wiki page here. I define useless articles as being "articles which have no relevance to Naruto or are discussing a character that won't likely appear again in the series." --speysider (talk) 18:33, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

Ok TheUltimate3 stepping in. Calm down everyone calm down. We are a encylopedia of information so even the lowly of the low should get a note somewhere, so long they are actually doing something worth mentioning and not random background character #37. If this Assistant has been shown doing something tangible instead of being random background character #37 then they get an article.--TheUltimate3 ~Keeper of Lore~ 18:55, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Some of the articles mentioned are all random background characters that say nothing whatsoever. --speysider (talk) 19:00, February 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Background characters that say nothing whatsoever, yet still have been given additional information. That makes them different from random background character #37. —ShounenSuki (talk 20:43, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

Look, the point is to delete all minor characters who have no official name/title (i.e. Shabadaba's Assistance, Iwagakure Bodyguard, and etc.) because they have little significance. At least, if the databook gives the name, then we can add them in. Also, can we delete redirects like Unknown Hyuga clan member and Unnamed Admirer? They aren't really nice. And then there's techniques: minor ones like Earth Release: Earth Shaking Palm and Body Flame Technique. I mean, the former is just slamming a fist onto the ground, and the latter may be a variation of the Body Flicker Technique, or a simple genjutsu (which also leads to Demonic Illusion: Burning Paper Body being too general and vague to be kept). We really should put all of this into a forum. Yatanogarasu (Talk) 06:28, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

Uhm I personally have no issue with adding articles for characters that Kishimoto have named no matter how trivial their role was. I not really sure why anyone would have a problem with that :s We're supposed to be "chronicling" Kishimoto's work even if the person farted and he named them someone should be able to come here and find the article with that one line "…he farted." There are a lot of minor characters that haven't been named that deserve to have articles as well. It's like saying we shouldn't add articles on the unnamed Kage until they're named then have to sifting through chapters to get information instead of being able to record it in "real-time"

Also, any talk on this woman, you know and the article up for deletion... would be awesome.--Cerez365™ 13:18, February 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, given the response to your question, I don't believe anyone has a problem deleting this article. Instead, people started to suggest other articles to delete. Ignoring the side discussion about nameless jutsu, nobody seemed to be in favor of keeping the pages about nameless characters. Except for yourself.--Joolushko Tunai Fenta Hovalis (talk) 17:52, February 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to get the discussion back to what it's supposed to be on — discussing the deletion of this article. I didn't start it to begin a wikia-wide discussion that's died a couple times over. Keeping nameless characters at times is necessary, the logic in that must be seen...--Cerez365™Hyūga Symbol.svg 18:00, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

If support the deletion of this article. However, if an unnamed character has a somewhat significant role, I think they deserve to have an article. I don't feel the need of deleting those nameless techniques as well. As far as certain unnamed characters go, it was agreed that if those are clan characters, they can be listed in the clan's section until further info is provided. I think that for potentially relevant characters and techniques deleted, we should keep a list so they're more easily restored should it be the case. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:53, February 29, 2012 (UTC)