User talk:Blackstar1

Hello Blackstar1, greetings and welcome to the Narutopedia! Thanks for your edit to the Boil Release: Skilled Mist Technique page.

We do hope that you will stay for a long time. Enjoy your stay as we work to become the best Naruto info site out there. BELIEVE IT!

If you're looking for something to do why not look over the Forums or more specifically Narutopedia Collaboration for a list of projects we're working on. And the Community portal has a lot of recent discussions and places to go listed on it.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Snapper2 (Talk) 22:01, 2 October 2009

New infobox
Please dont forget to remove the obsolete semantic system at the bottom of the page, example. The only fields that should stay there is uses kekkai genkai. Simant (talk) 21:31, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Writing
The level of your writing is superb, just had to say. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 00:20, January 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * I also agree, great job with some of swordsman's sword articles, and some of the pictures you've added also help liven up the wiki. ~ Fmakck → Talk → Contributions 02:14, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Strategy Planning Group
I couldn't find any mention of such a group. —ShounenSuki (talk 13:02, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * In the raw, he says .—ShounenSuki (talk 17:51, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ginkaku says:.
 * Although not 100% literally stated, there is no doubt in my mind that Ginkaku is saying he and his brother killed the Second Hokage. —ShounenSuki (talk 13:28, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

Re: 526 stuff
Actually, the way it read to me I was assuming it was you who translated the text. There's no need for me to check the conversation between you two I merely wanted verification. --Cerez (talk) 15:30, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Chapter 527
Although it seems to imply it, the text doesn't actually say that the Nine-Tails' chakra is required to wield the Treasured Tools. Instead, I believe it implies that the brothers managed to wield the tools for the same reason as they managed to survive the Nine-Tails' stomach. They probably had a naturally great chakra reserve, like Naruto and Kisame. Of course, not even the Raikage is anywhere near certain of the story and the Hokage is outright sceptical, obviously. —ShounenSuki (talk 12:58, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * They used the weapons before they were eaten, you can see it on one panel. So I guess you just need much much chakra to wield them. Seelentau 愛議 16:13, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Although I admit that the situation is murky, I actually don't personally think those situations are unconnected. i have seceral reasons for this:
 * It is odd for Kishimoto-sensei to introduce on one occasion the Kinkaku Force that would be connected to the Second Hokage's death, and on another occasion Kinkaku and Ginkaku who would be connected to the Second Hokage being brought to the verge of death. The situations are far too similar.
 * If the situations are unconnected, the Kinkaku Force incident (which should have led to the Second Hokage's death) should have occurred after the Kingin Brothers incident. However, the Kingin Brothers incident happened during an the signing of an alliance treaty. There should have been no fighting afterwards between Kumo and Konoha.
 * The time line can still be wholly consistent with the two situations being one.
 * SWWI is raging.
 * Konoha and Kumo decide to enter an alliance.
 * The SecondHokage goes to Kumogakure to sign the treaty, bringing along his students and other high-ranking shinobi.
 * During the ceremony, the Kingin Brothers attack the Hokage and Raikage.
 * The Second Hokage and his entourage flee Kumo, but are hunted down by the Kingin Brothers and their Kinkaku Force.
 * The Second Hokage stays behind as a distraction while his subordinates flee to Konoha.
 * The Second Hokage is all but killed by the Kinkaku Force, but manages to escape and reach Konoha.
 * The Second Hokage dies of his injuries in Konoha, after telling the tale of the fight.
 * —ShounenSuki (talk 21:12, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Vacuum Wave
First off let me say, you write very well; I'll be the first one to say that anytime. But sometimes you overdo it and make the articles a tad bit confusing. You have to remember that there's a lot of people of varying ages that read the articles. When I say "fluff" i don't mean it in a negative way just that it's sorta not needed or you need to simplify what you're writing. Btw Susanoo's an ultimate defense so it would make anything look weak so it's kinda not fair to state that thought i suppose there isn't anything wrong with doing so in the same breath. I apologize if you took it the wrong way. --Cerez☺ (talk) 00:59, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Understood ^_^ --Cerez☺ (talk) 01:32, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

You know that was all fl-i kid i kid! ;D --Cerez☺ (talk) 01:37, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Chapter 530
Hanzō says, but this can actually be interpreted as either "Ibuse do it!" and "Smoke them!" It's rather ambiguous if you accept the possibility of イブセ being a name. —ShounenSuki (talk 00:07, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Hanzō
I know it may sound strange to find such a message on your Talk Page from a perfect stranger, but... I just wanted to congratulate you on your edits on the "Poison" section in Hanzō's page! Some of the best edits I have ever seen, very technical and complete with Wikipedia's links, and even the image is very fitting! Even though, I'm not joking, I wanted to upload THAT same image and to place it in THAT same space, I swear... But it seems I got anticipated... You tricky bastard xD

Just joking ;)

Anyway, again, excellent work! I hope to see more edits like this soon! See you around =) --Aldarinor (talk) 17:12, March 17, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Chapter 532
Hanzō doesn't make it quite clear who transplanted the venom sac, but from he way he's talking, I don't think he did it himself. —ShounenSuki (talk 12:28, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Tools category
It's unnecessary to add the tools category to most tools articles. If the article in question makes use of the tools form/infobox, it is automatically added to the tools category. Adding it is only required for pages which don't use it, for example, puppet. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 03:03, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Mind Puppet Switch Cursed Seal Technique
He doesn't say that in the translation I read, he says "He's almost there... Take good care of my body, Torune". As a sensor type he would be able to tell how far the enemy is from his position.--Deva 27 22:44, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Second Mizukage - References
I see your point not that I didn't in the first place but I simply mean that doing that to Capt. Awesome's article would mean reciprocation of the same in every other article. My reference to "laziness" isn't about what you mentioned in the latter part of your message but simply points to the fact that it's unnecessary to cite references for every paragraph when people can simply go and read the thing. references have never been given like that before and it's never stopped people from finding or adding information.--Cerez365™ 22:07, July 20, 2011 (UTC)

Gold Dust article
The article as it is now (i'm assuming that it's been reverted by now) plainly put uses too many big words. Narutopedia is supposed to cater for everyone and if I, someone who's in college has to sit there and read over one sentence two to three times and can only come up with "huh?" I really don't want to know what younger children who tried to read it are thinking. As I think I've said before you write very well, but eloquence is not measured in the use of big words, it's through explaining something in its simplest form, so that everyone can understand it. For example:


 * "fashioned into a diverse range of forms, with the most simplistic employed"→ "various shapes and forms"
 * "More complex structures could perform even more intricate tasks, such as observing an area from afar" → "He could also use the sand to perform the Third Eye technique with which to observe an area from afar."
 * "...integration of his gold dust with the sand that remained under the beast's control, which due to being significantly denser than the latter material, would vastly increase the sand's weight when combined. Consequently, this made it more difficult for the creature to manipulate and thus slowed the sand down considerably, if not halting its movement entirely."→ "...either by layering his gold dust on top of or mixing the gold dust into the sand that remained under the beast's control. Because gold is heavier than sand, it made it more difficult for the creature to manipulate the sand, thus slowing if not stopping its movement entirely."

What I changed parts of the article is much simpler, more concise and yet gets the point across without the added confusion.--Cerez365™ 23:16, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed this about your writing before. When one editor would say, 'Naruto punched Sasuke,' you'd say, 'Naruto used his fist offensively on Sasuke's flesh with the intention of damaging him and even disabling him.' It makes your contributions stick out like a soar thumb and for all the wrong reasons. --67.228.150.154 (talk) 23:45, August 13, 2011 (UTC)


 * I looked through the tug of war going on. And I must say, Blackstar, your current edition is ridiculous. The very core doctrine of writing for any discipline is "brevity and intended message". It basically means, you should fully relay your intended message in the briefest way possible. I don't know why Blackstar choose to compound the whole article with excessive description that barely leaves any image to the imagination of the reader. If a word can replace two words, why not use it? If a point has been made why repeat it again?


 * Below are a few of the major problems with your text
 * 1) "This gold dust could be fashioned into a diverse range of forms, with the most simplistic employed to merely attack or block an enemy."


 * You realize "a" is an article that signifies the noun is singular. One, there is no noun succeeding that "a". Two, "range of forms" is plural.


 * What is the point of "merely" in that sentence? it adds no further meaning to that sentence. If the sentence can survive without that word and still retain its intended message, then get rid of the word. "Brevity and intended message", that's one of the traits of good writing.


 * Here is my suggestion without altering much: "In sufficient quantities, this gold dust could be fashioned into diverse range of forms, with the most simplistic employed to attack or block an enemy."


 * 2) "When used offensively, the Kazekage tended to form dense fast-moving surges that could range in size from narrow streams to colossal waves, intended to injure a target by violently crashing the compacted material into them."


 * First of all, I don't understand on how you erred over basic grammar. Don't you know a simple past tense can never succeed the verb "used? "Tended" in that sentence is a gigantic grammatical taboo.


 * And why the word "injure"? You're aware that "injure" is not the best word for a non-living target. And who says that the gold dust attacks only living targets?


 * And why go an extra mile to state the phrase "compacted material"? You're aware the word "dense" is synonymous to "compacted material" in this context. And you already mentioned "dense" as part of the properties of the offensive gold dust. Why repeat the same message again?


 * why use two words "violently crashing" when you can replace it with an action word like "storming" or "barraging"? You need more words in your vocab.


 * In fact that whole sentence can be rewritten in half the words without missing out any of the messages it relays. Here is an example: "when being used offensively, the Kazekage tends to form dense fast-moving surges that could range in size from narrow streams to colossal waves, intended to storm the material onto them."


 * And this is not the only mess you have on that page. Please let someone else edit that page. Although Cerez is not without his faults. In an instance, his wordings gave a new interpretation to the message being relayed.Newestman (talk) 00:31, August 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Ehm… I'm not really following this discussion, but my god Newestman, your grammar sucks. Those two example sentences you gave were both written in perfectly correct grammar, if a bit on the wordy side. Don't throw stones when you live in a glass house. —ShounenSuki (talk 00:41, August 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) What I changed it to is more direct. I don't see the need to say a million things when I can say three.
 * 2) There is no basis for that unless it was that time he sent his sand to attack Gaara from behind and we don't know what he was going to do. Odds are in the favour that he uses his dust in the same way Gaara does and was going to bind him or something.
 * 3) All the bravado for the third eye can be found in its own article. Simply saying he can manipulate his sand (yes Sand Gold) to form the third eye
 * 4) Again everything was explained, just in a less roundabout manner
 * 5) The tense bit is a simple oversight
 * 6) I hardly get offended
 * 7) Don't believe Newestman, my skin is flawless v_v --Cerez365™ Hyūga Symbol.svg 00:54, August 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * @ShounenSuki


 * There are 3 main things I corrected here: misuse of the article "a", the use of "tended", and being overly wordy. and if you're referring to the grammar i used here, then yes it will suck. this is a chat page and nothing pro. But if you're referring to the points I corrected, then you're really terrible in grammar.Newestman (talk) 01:18, August 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * @Ceraz, the thing i was referring to was simply when you stated he can make the gold dust into "various shapes". We really never saw him make it into an well-defined shape. i think "shape" is a more specific word than "form". Although, by "shape" you could've meant "form" but i don't know if others see it in the same way. Or unless we are now assuming he can do things the iron sand and gaara's sand can do.Newestman (talk) 01:28, August 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * @ShounenSuki: Let me say thank you, although I may appear to have great confidence in my writing ability, what I've learnt has come about purely through experience rather than education as I have only studied English to the most basic requirements over here in Britain. So, in spite of others kind comments, I still have doubts about the worth of my edits from time to time, meaning I always appreciate support from other editors such as yourself when it is given.
 * @Newestman: I will firstly apologise if you were under the impression that I meant any offense towards Cerez because of his remarks, my later comments were never intended as such. Although discussions do seemingly get quite heated between the two of us, we always resolve our issues in the end and I actually highly respect the fact that he chooses to discuss, rather than making the decision to simply argue. However, in spite of all this, was such a derogatory tone really needed in your previous comment? On what occasion have I myself ever even implied that my grasp of grammar is superior to that of any other user on this site, or even if that was so, that it would make me correct in every circumstance as a consequence? Also, I never quarreled over Cerez's decision to simplify the article, I am aware of my own fault when it comes to being overtly wordy, I simply disputed the removal of some of the content.
 * @Cerez365: I think at this point I'll choose to bow out graciously while I still have the opportunity. Thanks to some of the above comments, I now have neither the time nor energy to continue our discussion further in a reasonable manner, so in this case I will relent and just abide to your proposed changes. Blackstar1 (talk) 01:26, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

@blackstar: I apologize if i let out any harsh tone. I would have cleaned if up if I had proofread it. But i usually don't proofread chats. I truly apologize. It was not intended. I only noticed it while reading it again a couple minutes ago. My bad. I guess i was writing with too much emotionNewestman (talk) 01:35, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand where people get the idea that I have heated arguments with them when i'm so chillest person ever B) In any case I've lost interest in this for quite some time now. But perhaps there's a midpoint between both edits, I know there's at least one point that i'd still like to add to the article.--Cerez365™ 01:38, August 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * @Newestman:
 * The use of 'a' you 'corrected'? Yeah, that's just plain wrong. The article here doesn't refer to the plural 'forms', but the singular 'range'. Using 'a' isn't just correct, it's required here. The tense usage you corrected, although not the neatest, isn't really incorrect either. If you want to call it incorrect, than it's perhaps the single most made mistake in the English language. One that can actually be seen as correct, depending on the form of English you use.
 * Also, I don't care about the grammar you use on the talk pages. I called you out on this because you think you're in a position to call others out on their mistakes, while making making mistakes in this yourself. This is plain foolish at best and terribly hypocritical at worst.
 * The wordiness of Blackstar1's sentences isn't even a mistake, it's a matter of style. Purple prose has its uses and as long as it's easily understandable, there's nothing wrong with it.
 * Oh, and as for my 'terrible' grammar? I study the English language at one of the best universities in Europe (and even the world) and am currently at the top of my class in each and every subject I follow. I've had conversations with US and British professors of English who commended me on my excellent use of, and mastery over, the language. I'm also an author in my spare time, and a pretty successful freelance English–Dutch–English translator. What are your qualifications? —ShounenSuki (talk 01:44, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

Along with Shounen's qualifications, I'd also like to add that I can make a mean egg sandwich <_< >_> --Cerez365™ 01:56, August 14, 2011 (UTC)