User talk:Seelentau

Verlassen des Wikis
Bitte lass es nicht dazu kommen! Ich verstehe, warum du sauer bist, aber in manchen Fällen muss man einfach über die Ignoranz und Sturheit der anderen hinwegsehen, bis eine glasklare Antwort vom Mangaka kommt (am besten in Form eines neuen Databooks, wann immer das auch sein mag). Aus genau diesem Grund nehme ich an den meisten Diskussionen nicht teil, weil ich Angst hab, mir das Wiki dadurch verderben zu lassen.

Auch wenn wir bis jetzt nicht so viel miteinander zu tun hatten bitte ich dich, die Sache mit dem Aufhören nochmal zu überdenken. Immerhin bist du meiner Meinung nach eine der wenigen Personen hier mit einem gesunden Menschenverstand, ganz zu schweigen von deinen Japanisch-Kenntnissen. Dein Verlassen wäre ein Verlust für das Wiki, ganz sicher! Norleon (talk) 23:03, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

Re: I'd like you to
Request denied. You're upset that's understandable. You want to leave, that is understandable. But I'm not going to encourage this kind of response by banning you and keeping you from coming back if you calm down and decide you want to come back.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 15:53, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

Your a great addition to this wiki and deep down i don't think anyone wants you to leave. The wiki needs you. Munchvtec (talk) 17:38, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

Seelentau-san, what's going on?! I was held at school, so I couldn't come on the wiki until now, but from what I understand, you're leaving? Why?! The wiki needs, and I'll be really sad if you leave. :(-- Ninja Sheik  02:26, September 9, 2014 (UTC)

Apology & Question
So, first, I would like you to know that, though I disagreed venomously with your analysis of the Jiton (and still do), I do not harbor any ill will towards you. I'm glad you decided to stick around because, truth be told, you were right about one thing: you are a pretty unbias reader of the series. Doesn't mean I agree with some of your explanations, but I'd be wrong not to say as much. I never wanted to drive you from the wiki because, as many others have expressed, you are very much needed here and it would truly be a loss for the wiki without you around. If you still dislike me, well, I can't help that, but I do want to extend to you an sincere apology for letting my frustration with everything get the best of me. I miss the days when we, as a site, could sit down and discuss conflicting ideas without feeling the burning desire to tear each other's throats out and I know you feel the same.

That being said, I have an honest question for you in regards to the Gudōdama. We're both aware of how contentious that debate is, and the fact of the matter is, we're banging our heads into a wall over some fairly simple questions. It is my belief that Kishimoto finally gave us the natures for the Gudōdama (regardless of the user; the technique itself) with Black Zetsu's remark. I realize that some disagree with me on this point, and you might too, which is the point of my question:

After examining the RAW of Black Zetsu's text, and knowing what previous characters have said in regards to the Truth-Seeking Balls, do you think that solid'' manga evidence suggests that each user's Gudōdama is of a different and unique composition? Or do you think that the technique, like any other technique, is composed of the exact same elements?''

That question seems to be the only one keeping us from finally putting this whole TSB debate behind us once and for all. Let me be clear, I don't care either way. I have my beliefs, but if the manga says something, we obviously need to document it. If its still too ambiguous, we wait, but recently it was decided that every user had the same natures except Naruto, whom the consensus said should have every nature but Yin-Yang, due to a few user's absolute refusal to believe he can use them. I just want the issue behind us. So, regarding that question, what is your thoughts? (And for any third party reading this, please don't butt in. Its rude to barge into other's conversations.) ~ Ten Tailed Fox 23:06, September 9, 2014 (UTC)


 * I suppose the only logical thing to do then is to wait, and, as you said, record what we know. Madara did say something about being surprised that Naruto wasn't erased when he blocked his Gudōdama, and thought that it might have something to do with him being heavily wounded (having not noticed his senjutsu enhancement yet), so I assume that means his can too. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 23:40, September 9, 2014 (UTC)


 * I believe the evidence is there for Jiton. Using context clues and making an assumption are two different things. With the TSB, I understand the convolution, but there really is nothing like that for Gaara, Shukaku, and the other Jiton users. If you go back and read all of related chapters (even some of Gaara's words in his fight with Kimimaro) its quite apparent that's what Kishi intended. TheUltimate3 and the others have a valid point when they say Kishimoto won't tell us everything. Like any author, he's going to assume that we have the necessary material to put two and two together to get four. In areas where its murky (I believe that 3 out of 4 users of TSB having consistently all the same thing isn't murky, but I can see why you and others do), we can just do our best and record only what has been flat out told to us, but in areas where its pretty much obvious, we need to be readers, no Kishi's editors, and do the math. That's just my opinion though. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 00:33, September 10, 2014 (UTC)


 * Its pretty simple: does the manga support it, or is the evidence too flimsy to hold up? If someone can show me page, after page, after page, after chapter, after interview, after quote, etc, ect, that something is a certain way in the manga and it all holds up: add it. There's nothing wrong with that. Jiton is one example of that. When Gaara's father displayed the exact same rings as his son in his eyes, Kishi was basically handing us that information on a platter, regardless of whether we think so or not. If weren't a contributor to this wiki, and was just reading this manga to myself, that would've been an "Aha!" moment for me, because I'm the type of reader who will connect information. That's part of reading a story like this and its enjoyable when the author wants you to notice something rather than slap you in the face with information all the time. Sometimes, they want you to find it yourself, and I have fun looking for it. But if someone tells me that Sasuke has Hashirama's cells, for example (this was an actual argument), just because Kabuto said he used his studies of Hashirama's cells to heal him, and that's the only evidence they give me, I'm going to wave them off and call crap on it.


 * That's why I, personally, wasn't involving Science in the Jiton debate (yes, I know others were). Kishi says he sucks at Science. We don't know how much he sucks (he obviously thought that Sakura's method of keeping Naruto alive was legit, for example; it wasn't. Punched through a rib and a lung scientifically), so its an assumption to say he'd even know what diamagnetism is. To him, it literally could've been as simple as "Hey, I want [insert Jiton user here] to magnetize this!" and that's it. But the manga itself held up, in my view, consistently. So to answer your question in one concerted effort: Where do we draw the line? If the manga supports it, and we can give enough references to back it up, add it. If it doesn't hold up or the references are too flimsy to use? Wait. That's how I see it. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 01:00, September 10, 2014 (UTC)


 * That's where consensus comes in. Its one thing if one or two people are seeing the same thing. If three, four, five people are all seeing the same thing based on the same evidence, you've got one of two things going on: mass hysteria, which is unlikely, or something legitimate is being presented. I mean, the consensus, prior to your analysis on Jiton, was literally unanimous. Even in the recent debates, I only saw Elveonora and Munch (can never say his full username) that still saw things similarly to you (Elve had his own ideas, but that's getting more and more common lately). And what's more, we were all seeing the same evidence. The same consistency. The same patterns and the same context clues. In those cases, consensus is our best option. If there isn't one, then obviously the evidence is too flimsy. You'll see me doing the same thing. Where I'm on the fence with something, or want to believe something, but the current evidence just doesn't hold up, so I'll ask to wait on it. I have no problem waiting when the information isn't there. Its when we literally have the answer right in front of us and we're screaming at each other over the stupidest technicalities that I start having issues. As for "grasping for straws", I shouldn't have jumped on that bandwagon, and I apologize. I let my frustration get the better of me. But there are cases of that. The debate on whether or not Naruto could use certain elements through his connection to the Bijū, for example. We had one user who just refused to let it go through and was even reverting the edits once the decision was made out of nothing more than his own stubbornness to give in. That is grasping for straws and when that happens, we obviously need to deal with the user in question, because that's a person problem, not a wiki issue. So, yes, it was wrong of me to accuse you of that. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 01:28, September 10, 2014 (UTC)


 * If the manga supports it? Absolutely. Kishi may retcon or correct facts later, but you can't tell a group of users who have reference after reference from the manga supporting their argument that they are wrong. Their basis is the manga. No different from anything else we add on this wiki. I mean, if we can't use the manga to prove our points, and get stuff done around here, we might as well lock the entire wiki until the series ends and the last databook comes out. We have to do something, Seel. Its not like we're saying, okay, add whatever you want to the wiki! We're saying, "If you have credible, consistent (direct confirmation works too, obviously) and the consensus sees it, then we add it. If you don't, we wait." That's not a bad system. It literally requires manga evidence, which is what you want in the first place, correct? Like I said, Kishimoto isn't going to tell us everything on a neon billboard. No author anywhere does that, so we shouldn't expect him too either. ~ Ten Tailed Fox Rinnegan Sasuke.svg 02:09, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in...
But I had to tell you this. I overlooked your messaging with TTF, and you asked if Madara ever negated something with his TSBs. He did actually, in chapter 665, page 12 when he cut off Minato's left arm with his TSB. Minato's left arm never grew back, just like Obito did with Minato's right arm. So yeah, Madara's TSB also has Yin-Yang Release. Again, didn't mean to butt in and be rude, that's why I created a separate headline on your page, but I was just trying to help. :) Glad you haven't left the wiki, that would have been a blow to Narutopedia. -- WindStar7125   00:22, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course they do, Madara is a known YYR user since he had told Obito he would teach him just that--Elveonora (talk) 09:25, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

SPS&Rinnegan
Not entirely:
 * both Naruto and Sasuke received power from Hagoromo which allowed them to awake SPST and Rinnegan respectively (I originally thought it was because of Hashirama stuff alone), so having 9TBs chakras by itself wouldn't give him SPST without Hagoromo's touch--Elveonora (talk) 22:33, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

I mean latest chapter made it clear that Hagoromo has to do with their SPST and Rinnegan (so the tattoos weren't the only things he gave them) but Hagoromo didn't give Naruto TB chakra, they themselves did and Obito did the remaining 2. So whatever Hagoromo gave Naruto is the "missing piece" to the puzzle.--Elveonora (talk) 10:18, September 11, 2014 (UTC)

Talk about coincidental timing 0_0 we messaged each other at the same time :P And yes, latest chapter makes it seem Hagoromo has to do with their powers, but you may figure out otherwise once you get your hands on the raw or so. And even though Madara didn't meet Hagoromo, he was TT jinch. TT is 9TB + x, the 'x' being what allows Six Paths Sage Technique--Elveonora (talk) 10:21, September 11, 2014 (UTC)

Hagoromo said that giving power only to one of them resulted in Ashura and Indra rivalry, giving power to both Naruto and Sasuke didn't fix it tho. So if the only power Hagoromo gave to Naruto and Sasuke were the tattoos, then either Ashura or Indra must have had one or both tattoos as well. Unless he was talking about different thing than the tattoos--Elveonora (talk) 10:27, September 11, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Indra was already born with strong chakra and Ashura's eventually matured/bloomed as time went on. But birth inheritance isn't gift, unless Hagoromo created Ashura weak and Indra strong with Creation of All Things. So I suppose what the original gift refers to is Ashura's "battle avatar" Hagoromo likely gave Ashura Six Paths Senjutsu. Indra wasn't given anything, thus had only Sharingan. This time around, Hagoromo not only has given Ashura's incarnate Six Paths Senjutsu, but Rinnegan to Indra's incarnate as well. This way it makes sense--Elveonora (talk) 10:42, September 11, 2014 (UTC)

But Ashura eventually became equal to Indra. Hagoromo says giving power to one caused rivalry, so that doesn't seem like it refers to one of them having been born stronger. Hagoromo had no input about how their genes would turn out. Also I believe in an older chapter this is referenced and Hagoromo says he gave power to Ashura, so giving power to Ashura made him stronger than Indra thus caused trouble and as such can't refer to their birth inheritance, since Ashura was the weaker one originally. But you are the translator, so you may know better--Elveonora (talk) 10:52, September 11, 2014 (UTC)

So Hagoromo gave Naruto and Sasuke successorship to Ninshu? That's it, Hagoromo made a clear parallel between giving power to Naruto and Sasuke and having given power just to Ashura--Elveonora (talk) 11:12, September 11, 2014 (UTC)