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)