Talk:Akatsuki (Naruto)/Archive 13

This is an archive of past discussions about Akatsuki (Naruto). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Pein or Pain?

In both translations that I have read his name is spelled Pain. Is there some overriding authority as to the correct translation somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.106.33.90 (talk) 03:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no official spelling. "Pein" is merely the more popular choice. ~Snapper T o 03:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

If we're going by Japanese spelling, it's "Pein"... "ei" in Japanese is pronounced like "ay" in English. Jazz Band Member 11:55, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Spelling it phonetically, you'd get Payeen. –Gunslinger47 05:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, after chapter 373, it's pretty obvious it should be Pain. 72.168.196.22 05:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it's obvious that Nagato chose his name because he said, and I quote "... I just wanna keep them safe, no matter what kind of PAIN I go through." end quote. Doesn't that explain it? Although, i agree with those who might say this is a speculation since pain is an english word, so why would the author choose it in a japanese manga. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.214.41 (talk) 19:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

For the same reason he chose "Rock Lee" and "Might Guy". I'm very much in favor of changing it to Pain, especially after 373.HisshouBuraiKen 13:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

And it looks like 374 even further reinforces this through continued references to "growing strong through pain." 69.19.14.44 23:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

if so, why isn't anyone changing it? I think I will... since it seems everyone agreed it should be "pain" Istillcandream 08:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to start changing it whenever I see it. HisshouBuraiKen 15:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with that. I just went about reverting all of it. Its Pein here, deal with it people--TheUltimate3 21:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

"Here"? this isn't some little forum community, this is supposed to be about accurate information. All the recent translations use "Pain", the consensus on this page is "Pain", it should be "Pain." If the fan translations are the primary source of info, then Wikipedia should stay accurate to them. HisshouBuraiKen 17:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with HisshouBuraiKen. TheUltimate3 pretty much said, I'm changing it back to "Pein" because that's the way I like it. Wikipedia isn't the place for fanfiction. Hyuugamoto 16:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

A more active discussion can be found below. A translator such as yourself would do well to contribute his two cents there. ~Snapper T o 22:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I see... down there, but can someone put a link to that part? I didn't notice it before and other people might do the same thing... (although most of this is pointless since it will end up "pain" anyway... but anyway, since we should follow the rules for now...) Istillcandream 08:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

It should not be changed to Pain because it has not been translated officially by Viz Media and pain in japanese is Itami not PAIN —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magic Tatum (talk • contribs) 08:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Sheesh, is it that big a deal? In the Japanese it is Pein because that's how its pronounced! But in the English Naruto, its Pain. Like Guy is Maito Gai in Japan and Might Guy in America! Lee is Rokku Rii in Japan but Rock Lee in America! The company who translates Naruto into english is to blame for this confusion! Tobi rox your sox

Add on for Tobi

Shouldn't we mention what Tobi says at the start of ch. 371? "Will Sasuke remain a snake? Or will he shed his skin and become a hawk?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.53.37 (talk) 20:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

And this matters alot to Tobi because...? Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 23:19, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:NOT#IINFO. You need to have a reason to include information, otherwise it's indiscriminate. –Gunslinger47 05:08, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I thought it might give hints as to what Tobi's planning. As well as what he wants with Sasuke. It might even hint what WILL happen to Sasuke. However, I'm guessing you guys will think it's too early to add this on right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.204.100.226 (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

how can that hint to anything? and sign your posts--Blue-Eyes Gold Dragon 05:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

hey, when deidara died and tobi went back to the akatsuki hide out, he mentioned he had the power of uchiha madara, and just recently jiraiya had mentioned there was just only one person who could summon the nine tails, and that was madara! and when naruto was inside the his inner conscious and sasuke had invaded, the nine tailed fox had had noticed sasuke's eyes and had mentioned madara thus making it clear the nine tails had knowledge of madara or they havcrossed paths!, thus concluding my theory, TOBI CAN SUMMON THE NINE TAIL FOX! but maybe that is the reason the 4th sealed it in his only son huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codenamenothing (talk • contribs) 17:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Summon and control are two different things. Naruto could summon Gamabunta, but he had no way of controlling him. Regardless, I really don't se ehow this info is mention worthy beyond the Nine-Tailed Demon Fox and Madara Uchiha section.--TheUltimate3 17:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that's just because Gamabunta's weird like that.

well, lets see the ability to summon a force strong enough to destroy an entire village could really be the strongest attack in the show, as too, what are the akatsuki trying to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.93.229 (talk) 20:20, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

It is stated/implied (can't remember which) by Jiraiya that Madara could control the Bijuu with his Sharingan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.143 (talk) 19:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Neither.If memory serves, Jiraiya believed Madara to be capable of summoning the Nine-tails.Lastbetrayal 00:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

He also could Summon AND control him . At least thats my theory. Notice that Sasuke could summon AND control Manda, so whose to say that Madara, higher in abilities, isnt able to do the same with the Nine-Tailed Fox?--Chipmonk328 November 02 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.128.102.43 (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Theory=/=Fact. Sasuke can summon Manda because he signed the snake contract. The Nine-Tailed Fox is not a summon animal and as such has no contract. And if Madara could control the Bijuu, then what is the purpose of Akatsuki? Lastbetrayal 22:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Not to mention the fact that Sasuke could only control Manda, because of a genjutsu. It seems even people like the Sannin and the Sandaime Hokage were unable to really control their master summons. They had to get them to cooperate, or bribe them in Orochimaru's case. JadziaLover 05:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I've been thinking of this for a while (and I just found out about the talk thing), it says that after the blast killing Deidara, Tobi started acting different. Is there proof that that was still Tobi, or are people just assuming this? If people are, then also assume that Tobi might have been killed and it's an impostor. If Tobi was always carefree and goofy, do you think he could have gone through with being serious? CatsartisT 11:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'm rather new at this so forgive me for any errors or problems with my bit of the discussion.. But I'm rather curious about the assumption that Tobi in fact identified himself as "Uchiha Madara". If memory serves me, at least in the translation I read, in Chapter 364, pg 17, he says "My Chakra, Uchiha Madara's chakra" not "I am Uchiha Madara" or anything of the like. A similar reference is made to Sasuke by the Nine-tailed fox when Naruto and Team Kakashi attempt to retrieve Sasuke, and Sasuke enters Naruto's subconscious to suppress the spirit of the Nine-tailed fox. While the exact quote evades me, he compares Sasuke's eyes and Chakra to "Uchiha Madara", much like Tobi refers to his Chakra as "Uchiha Madara's".

Now, not to bring pointless speculation or theory into the debate, but there is a large amount of debate about whether or not Tobi is in fact Uchiha Obito. Proponents of the theory cite that Tobi's visible Sharingan eye is the right, which Obito did not give away, his hair is quite similar, the fact that Tobi is an anagram of Obito (with one O omitted) and that the bolts of his outfit underneath the robes may in fact be the result of some reconstruction. On other theory that in a way blends the two concepts is that Tobi is in fact, the corpse of Uchiha Obito, inhabited by Uchiha Madara.

I'm merely curious about everyone's thoughts on the matter, and whether or not it should be assumed Tobi is Uchiha Madara without being identified as such by an outside source other than himself, or without any official pictures available of him without the mask, and I also wonder if perhaps the previously mentioned theories should be included in the mix, at least until something conclusive appears in the manga/anime or is confirmed by Masashi Kishimoto? Anyways, I rambled enough. Delitasan 09:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

As we have gone over this repeatedly and at great length, I shall deliver the annotated version. Translations are sometimes unreliable, and you could consider this to be the penultimate example in relation to this series. Directly translated, Tobi uses a form of speech that villains typically use: he refers to himself in the third person just to deliver the point that he is really that bad-ass. While in English it may be ambiguous, it is not when read in the original context of the language. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 10:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Finally! Someone who thinks Tobi is Obito! I beleive that Tobi=Obito and Madara. Tobi only has his right eye, has the same hair, is carefree and goofy, and they both wear orange! While Madara is your common villain, serious, evil, etc. When Tobi gives orders to Pein (or Pain), he turns all serious out of no where! Plus he wears a hood which obscures his hair. I beleive there are 2 Tobis. Madara has a lot more hair than Tobi from what I've seen. If Madara is Tobi, his hair would look different. That is why I beleive there are 2. Madara obscures his hair so he won't look suspicious under the guise of Tobi. Obito probably created the name. He may be alive because of Zetsu. If you don't understand a word of what I'm saying, please tell me. Tobi rox your sox

Pain, not Pein

Sorry if this has already been discussed. But Pain's name spelled with an "a" not a "e." Why? Because Yahiko and Nagato mention a lot about the feeling of their pain. This is why the Akatsuki Leader is referred to as Pain. It's just like Maito Gai is actually spelled Might Guy. 71.168.85.188 01:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Fantasy Leader

wrong--Acetylseryltyrosylserylisoleucylthreonylsery 01:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

To elaborate on that, Pein is nowhere near his official introduction in the Latin-alphabet versions of the anime/manga. As of yet, he has no official romanization, so Wikipedia goes by the Hepburn romanization that is closest to the original katakana. If Might Guy's official English spelling hadn't been released, for example, we would probably be going by "Mait Gai". You Can 't See Me! 02:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Because "ai" in romanji is pronounced like a long "i" (like Sai, and Kurenai). "ei" is pronounced "ay". Jazz Band Member 20:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you meant "Maito Gai", which I think threw off your credibility. There's also the fact that Rock Lee was accepted long before an official romanization of his name was available.

it's pretty obvious that it's supposed to be the English word Pain, because they keep going on and on about their pain. There's also the fact that "ぺいん" (Pein) has absolutely NO relevance in Japanese. There aren't even any Japanese words that start with the sound "pe". Pein means nothing in Japanese. As far as I know, with the exception of Might Guy and Rock Lee (the only other two characters with names made of foreign words), all other characters have names that actually mean something in Japanese. WtW-Suzaku 00:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

No, I actually meant that "Mait Gai" was the proper Hepburn romanization prior to the revalation of their names in English. Should an "o" come after "t" or "d", it's left out. Now, "ai" has the same pronunciation as the "i" in "Might", but there was no reason for us to choose "Might" over "Mait" until his name was released. Likewise, "Pein" may very well be "Pain," but we have no reason to believe that "Pain" is the proper spelling aside from logical conclusion, which is original research. Instead, we go by the romanization closest to the original katakana, regardless of the fact that it does not mean anything: Pein. You Can 't See Me! 00:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You are incorrect. I think you need to study up on Hepburn Romanization. ト/と and ド/ど are romanized as "to" and "do". The only consonant not followed by a vowel is ン/ん, "n", which is technically a sonorant consonant. The only time you drop anything is if it's part of a long vowel, in which case you use a macron instead (トー would be "dō").

Furthermore, romanizing it as Pain is no more original research than using any fan-translation or scanlation as a source, because just about any Japanese sentence can be translated in at least two different ways. The Naruto wikipedia articles are chock full of original research, from the translation of Shippūden as "Hurricane Chronicles" to Kamatari's "斬り斬り舞", which most people don't even realize is actually a pun! Hell, the fact that this article uses edited scans from an illegal scanlation should make this whole topic moot.

So, tell me again, why can't we just change it to Pain? I propose we have a vote on the subject.WtW-Suzaku 10:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Switch to Pain imo. Altough both spellings work, Pain is both more accurate and seem to fit the theme of the Nagato / Yahiko / Konan arc. Although the second point is an inference (as I'm sure some kind Wiki editor will both point out and flame me for) it's better than calling him Pein just to spite the inference; doing so is just as wrong. AnimeNikkaJamal 00:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

We will wait until it is official. Of course it is likely "Pain," but until we have 100% certainty, it will be "Pein" which is the proper romanization of his name. The great kawa 00:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

No. That's your preference. It looks dumb saying he took the name "Pein" because of the pain he went through. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.19.14.44 (talk) 00:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Preference doesn't play here. It's direct romanisation under the guidelines in the manual of style. σмgн gσмg 12:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The style manual would be more so in favor of the use of "Pain", though. There's obviously no specific mention of "manga character names that are likely English in origin, but still technically unrevealed due to lack of official source", but there is the explicit rule of reverse-transliteration of English words written in Katakana. 24.20.172.130 08:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Just make it into Pain then. Pein isn't a word. 66.82.9.88 00:33, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Then perhaps we ought to call him Pane. That's equally as viable as Pain, isn't it. Or perhaps Payne, or Paine or something. All of those are words (one is a proper noun) too. Or we could just go by the strictest, most literal transliteration of the katakana, which is Pein. You Can 't See Me! 00:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think that manual of style applies here. Even I have to admit, the latest chapter made it really clear his name is meant to be "Pain". The Splendiferous Gegiford 00:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

"Pane" is not just as viable as "Pain", and this should be abundantly clear after the latest chapter. Put simply, "Pain" is by far the most plausible possibility in terms of what was intended by Kishimoto. Proposing "Pein" to be reasonable romanization would effectively require that Kishimoto chose the name purely for its sound which is not the norm for character names in Naruto. 24.20.172.130 06:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Well "Pein" could be the german word for pain. Isn't it that japanese people pretty much like german words and stuff? So maybe it IS pein for that reason. 13:53, 13 October 2007

I have effectively no German competence, so correct me if I'm wrong, but the German "pein" is pronounced like the English "pine", correct? In which case it would be transliterated into Japanese as パイン, which in turn has a Hepburn romanization of "pain" (ironically). German words, also, typically don't make their way into Japanese nowadays. The English "pain" on the other hand is relatively accessible to the average Japanese person and is used most frequently in the Japanese transliteration of "pain clinic". 24.20.172.130 18:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I think his nickname is Pain. Not Pein. He nicknamed himself as Pain because it's pain that helped him grow up, pain that helped him to become a god. And the recent manga chapters are typing the wikipedia's pein as Pain. I don't think they're going to repeat that mistake way too many times.194.204.117.237 21:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it definitely should be Pain. Do we have to vote on it or can someone just change it? 75.42.65.234 08:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Well I'd prefer vote. Not that I am confident that Pain will win but because it's not us that edits the akatsuki section. it should be them that changes it.194.204.117.237 21:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

It's most likely not going to be changed until either we get an official spelling from Kishimoto or we reach a new consensus that the Romanization of the name was incorrect. I agree that the name is most likely "Pain", but "Pein" is the most direct Romanization we have, so it'll stay that way until one of the two things I mentioned above happens. --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 21:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Question - There seems to be a general consensus that "Pain" is most probable. That comes with a converse saying that a romanization of "Pein" is improbable. Given this, how does keeping the romanization of the name as "Pein" for the time being serve the people coming to this article for information? Furthermore, even if it is defensible that using "Pein" for the time being is the best option, is it not in the best interest of the reader that the article clearly mention, one, "Pein" is merely a direct phonemic transliteration of the Japanese name being used here as a placeholder until an official romanization is established, and two, that the name is most probably intended to be "Pain"? 24.20.172.130 01:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Most probable. Not definante. As said before, the most DIRECT Romanization we have so far is Pein. It being "intended" to be Pain is irrelevent (especially as again someone mentioned above we get these scans by illegal means). --TheUltimate3 01:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

One, would it be possible to get a response to both questions I posed? Two, why is the "most direct" romanization, and one that is quite likely wrong, a better alternative to the most probable one? How does this direct transcription serve the reader better? Three, why does a significant number of people getting Naruto scans illegally cause the general perception of Kishimoto's intentions to be any more irrelevant and why would those perceived intentions be irrelevant in the first place? 24.20.172.130 02:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Because the threshhold for incluision in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. Pein is verifiable because the katakana literally read "Pein". Pain may be true, but it is not directly verifiable. I personally think it's "Pain" based on Pein's latest speech. The problem is, I had to jump to a logical conclusion to link his name to the theme of his speech, which in turn is original research; that his name is Pain is obvious, yet not verifiable. You Can 't See Me! 02:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

~~There's no need to include ironic remarks in the edit comment. It comes across as being condescending and that would certainly seem to go against a pillar, while we're on the topic.~~ At any rate, "pain" being a probable romanization of ペイン is something that is verifiable. ペイン not being a Japanese word is something that is verifiable. The vast majority of names in Naruto having meaning and or a backstory attached to them is, likewise, verifiable. I would also point you to one of the other pillars and point out that the guidelines of Wikipedia do not exist merely to be blindly followed. I still would also still like a response to the questions I posed. Specifically, what purpose does keeping the romanization of "Pein" serve the reader? And secondly, even if "Pein" stays, would it not be prudent to call a spade a spade, so to speak, and add mention that the romanization is nothing more that a placeholder at the moment? 24.20.172.130 02:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

You misunderstood his edit summary. –Gunslinger47 02:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

So I have. My apologies. 24.20.172.130 03:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. In retrospect, I probably shouldn't use the word "damn" so much, regardless of context. Sorry about that. You Can 't See Me! 04:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Keeping it as Pein serves to (as I'm sure I mentioned. Might not have been clear, and for that my apologizes) the DIRECT translation of the Japanese characters given. And given that, I would refer to you Green, where for a while I insisted based on previous Nintendo traits that the named character in the manga, and the female character in the game was the same person. No matter how "obvious" trends are, its not variable as it still counts as Original Research. As such while Pein being the direct romanization of ペイン is valid, saying that its probably ment to be Pain and trying to use past reasons as support is not valid or verifiable. --TheUltimate3 03:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I would point out that there are more than enough examples of "original research" in the exact same vein as the Pein/Pain issue here where direct romanization is not being used, the first one coming to mind being Vizard (and in that case it's even more probable that it's "visored" instead of "vizard"). I would also reiterate the fifth pillar, and claim that it serves the best interest of the reader in this case to allow some flexibility on the OR guidelines. But aside from the OR issue, I will again request that someone attempt to respond to my inquiry as to why making specific mention in the article of the status of "Pein" as a placeholder would not be prudent. 24.20.172.130 03:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

In the case of "Vizard", Viz media spells it as such, so it is by no means an originally researched spelling. ~Snapper T o 03:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Did they? Interesting. I only own the Japanese volumes. I wasn't aware that VIZ had released up to vol 21 already. At any rate, after checking VIZ's page just now and seeing that 21 is the most recent release, I'm still quite sure the page still was listed as "Vizard" well before an official English translation was made available. 24.20.172.130 03:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, yeah, but Tite Kubo lets a lot of official spellings show up in official Japanese materials anyway (i.e. "Grimmjow Jaegerjacques", etc.).—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 03:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Many of which have gone completely against the more plausible candidates for reverse-transliteration, I would point out. But to the best of my recollection, "Vizard" was never one of those that was revealed (correct me if I'm wrong though), which is also the precise reason I cited it. 24.20.172.130 03:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Just change it already. Jeez. 66.82.9.54 17:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

”ペイン” is simply a phonetic katakana version of the word "Pain". the character describes his motives as ending a world filled with 痛み> itami (romaji)> "Pain". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anachronic (talk • contribs) 13:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC) We're supposed to ignore any rules, especially minor guidelines, that interfere with an article. So since it's obvious it should be Pain, change it. A similar thing happened with Hellsing. Arucard should obviously be Alucard, because it's Dracula re-arranged. In the same way, you can't experience pein, but you can experience pain. 66.82.9.75 23:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Except in this case, Pein, is as its been said over and over is the direct translation. While Pain may be the more logical one, however, that logic falls under original research and can't be used.--TheUltimate3 23:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

While I take issue with that interpretation (as I have stated above), could someone please reply to my inquiry as to why we don't mention that "Pein" is nothing more than a placeholder? I asked it multiple times above and have yet to receive a reply. 24.20.172.130 06:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Because it doesn't need to be mentioned. Pein is the direct translation of the mans name, so technically its not a place holder. Its a place holder among the all us editors because as of now, he doens't have a name (no offically translated name=no name) but in context of the article, Pein is his name.--TheUltimate3 11:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a pronunciation guide would help? It is correct to say that Pein is pronounced similar to to the English word "pain". The typical person might read it as "Peen" if they don't know how to pronounce Hepburn. –Gunslinger47 16:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm for romanizing it as Peen, just because that'd be hilarious. And when does he say that he got his name from the pain he had been through? That's original research if ever I saw it.Muramasa itachi 01:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

FYI, the terminology is "transliteration", "transcription", or "rominization", not "translation". As I fail to understand the reasoning behind it, I would like you to elaborate on the assertion that it doesn't need to be mentioned and on how it being a "direct transliteration" makes it not be a placeholder. I would assert myself that presenting the name as "Pein" without an explanation, while perhaps not as "severe" a violation as "Pain", is still equivalent to OR. The reason being that, to a person reading the article who does not have any knowledge of Japanese, they are more likely to assume that "Pein" is the ligitimate romanization of the character's name. Simply put, adding a statement such as "'Pein' is being used in this article currently due to a lack of an official romanization" is short and too the point and provides relevant information to the reader. 24.20.172.130 05:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

At this moment, the direct transliteration 'Pein' is the official name. We don't know if Kishimoto wanted it to be Pain or Pein. Until Kishimoto himself tells us it should be romanised as 'Pain' (as he did with Might Guy and Rock Lee), the name is 'Pein'. Anything else is original research.

Saying the name Pein is simply a 'placeholder' is like saying the names of Sasori, Konan, Zetsu, Chiyo, Sai, and Yamato are simply placeholders. There's no need for it, in my opinion. If people want to know how to pronounce it, they can simply look up the the pronunciation of Japanese and come to their own conclusion of where the name comes from. JadziaLover 06:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

pein is not the official name. it is merely a transliteration of a japanese word according to a romanization guide favored by wikipedia. it is obvious thru the story that pain is the correct transliteration, original research or not. the decision not to use this spelling or even to display it may follow guidelines, but it masks meaning. the spelling pain should be displayed as an alternate spelling along w/ a citation to the specific issue and page where "pein" explains the amount of pain he has endured. --24.214.236.85 16:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

"Pein" being a direct transliteration does not constitute it being an official romanization. Official romanizations are established by copyright holders, not arbitrary methods of romanization. Also, your bringing up "Rock Lee" and "Might Guy" is convenient for me here in that it is an ironic example showing how arbitrary the rominization issue has been has been (and still is). By my account (and correct me if you have evidence to the contrary), "Rock Lee" has consistently been romanized as "Rock Lee" on Wikipedia since 2003 at least, well before a citable official romanization existed for the full name (the 2002 databook only had "Lee" and the VIZ translation appeared, I believe, in the second half of 2004). "Might Guy", on the other hand, primarily remained "Maito Gai" (for a time with an uncited, not to mention likely bogus, explanation that it comes from the English "a mighty guy") well after an official romanization appeared for his full name in the second databook. The other names you cite are irrelevant to the issue here in that (with the possible exception of "Zetsu" and, even less likely, "Sai") they are clearly qualitatively different from Pein/Pain (they're obviously Japanese). Nonetheless, to the extent that they have no officially established romanization, they are indeed "placeholders" and, in the strictest of senses, original research. I wouldn't raise issue with any of them personally, however, as the likelihood that a contrary official romanization will appear is next to zero.

At any rate, I would ask that you reread the message you replied to. I did not suggest anything that would go against a strict no-OR policy. Quite the contrary, my suggestion fully synergies with such a stance. Also, my suggestion is not to provide people pronunciation help (that is already in the article), but is instead intended to state the facts of the situation, namely, that "Pein", in this article, is merely a direct transliteration of the phonemic value of the Japanese name and does not represent an official romanization. If you think the reader has no need for this information, then please substantiate such with an argument extending past citation of your own opinion. 24.20.172.130 19:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

We're just going around in circles. It's Pain. Pain was translated into japanese as pein, and comes out as pein because it's direct romanization. However, since there seems to be no question that his name is intended to be Pain, I say we just change it already. 66.82.9.75 18:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

i second the idea of a vote to seek consensus. i see the romanization guideline as a fairly minor guideline that should be superceded if the situation calls for it. this is one of those situations. it's fairly absurd to keep the romanization pein when he has explained how the painful events in his life shaped his outlook. it is obvious to everybody reading the series including those who insist on spelling it pein. that makes keeping the spelling pein a form of willful ignorance. my vote is to change the spelling. --24.214.236.85 00:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Third that idea. This stupid debate should be over with. It's Pain.

That will work when Wikipedia becomes a democracy. I don't have the WP to it, but apparently its not. Also, what you, IP24.214 said was pretty much the reason on WHY its still Pein, namely you had to go by what Pein said in the manga to get it, I.E. OR--TheUltimate3 02:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

from wikipolicy: "An English loan word or place name of Japanese origin should be used in its most common English form in the body of an article, even if it is pronounced or spelled differently from the properly romanized Japanese; that is, use Mount Fuji, Tokyo, jujutsu, and shogi, instead of Fuji-san, Tōkyō, jūjutsu, and shōgi. However, the romanized Japanese form should always be listed in the opening paragraph, especially if it differs from the English form." right now, the most common form is pain. we can retain the romanized version right in the opening paragraph. pein is seen nowhere on the english language internet except old posts on naruto fan forums/blogs and wikipedia. new posts regarding the character all reference pain. it isn't original research if common usage indicates pain. --24.214.236.85 23:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Pein is neither a loan word, nor a place name. It's a given name and can have any number of possible spellings. As long as we don't know what exactly Kishimoto wants, we should use the standard romanisation. JadziaLover 06:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You mention common usage. The question is, common usage by who? The examples you listed all have common English spellings used by most of the English world, so it was easy to see why you dont use macrons and other romanization techniques. Also, the policy you cite only mentions English loan word or place name of Japanese origin, of which the proper name "Pein" is neither. Until another official romanization that contradicts this comes out, we're gonna stick with Pein. --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 14:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, although ペイン (Pain) isn't a exactly a loanword, ペインクリニック (Pain Clinic) is. Just saying. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

So the main sticking point is common usage vs. wikipedia standardization. As has been said, the common trend among translators (including myself) has been "Pain", especially since the flashback chapters. "Pein", unfortunately, came about during his first appearance by a random translator who hasn't done a Naruto chapter since. As the majority here seems to support "Pain" vice "Pein", I believe it should be changed. Wikipedia may not be a democracy, but if anyone can edit it and more people support Pain than Pein, doesn't it make sense to agree to use the majority's choice and avoid constant back-and-forth edits and reverts? Googling for "ナルト　ペイン　Pain" (without quotes) produces numerous results　from Japanese sites and discussion forums relating the word 痛み (itami - pain) to the character, suggesting that the general Japanese population has also accepted the name's intention to be the English word "Pain". The only argument for "Pein" is that it's a direct romanization, while Pain has both a reasonable argument on the romanization side (pronunciation), strong inferences in the source material, and the agreement of the community at large. HisshouBuraiKen (talk) 05:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

While all that brilliantly displays why Pein should be spelled Pain, it also brilliantly displays blatant original research in finding so. Wikipedia may not be a democracy but it is a thing that follows the its policy like it was a friggin Bible. Until an official romanization is released that clearly spells Peins name as Pain, then you can throw majority rule, common sense and the like out the window.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 13:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Well since HisshouBuraiKen is a translator, he should know that it is spelled in the manga as ペイン and not パイン so Pein is how it is officially spelled basically until it is transcribed into English. Of course the first sounds like the English "pain" and the second like "pah-een," but until we have an official source, sorry. :( The great kawa (talk)07:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

This brings up an important point. If the translation of ペイン as "Pain" is considered "blatant original research", then what of the translations of various attack names or episode titles? Or similar translations in other such articles, or articles in general? Even in cases where "official" translations are available, there is no guarantee that their translations will convey the intended meaning of the original author, and, are in fact, in many cases (some would argue most), inferior or altogether inaccurate. On top of that, the so-called "literal" translations are still often just one translator's interpretation, and could generally be rendered with a variety of synonymous words or alternate phrasing. Translation, especially in the case of Japanese, a language which is often intentionally vague and exceptionally reliant on personal interpretations of the stated and unstated, is almost always some form of "original research", regardless of the source of the translation or their percieved knowledge of the language.

Frankly, I think that, at the very least, the article should be rephrased to include the same contextual referances to "pain" and "suffering" that permeate Pain's monologues, so that readers at least understand the ~~overt~~ possible connection and can come to their own conclusions on the subject, and it would likely be most prudent to just render his name as Pain (ペイン, Pein), which includes both the direct Hepburn romanization and the most widely accepted intended romanization. I mean, if we were editing a wikipedia article about a manga featuring a poet named エドガー・アラン・ポー who constantly talked about a raven, do you think we'd be having this same argument as to whether it should be romanized as Edogā Aren Pō or Edgar Allen Poe?

WtW-Suzaku (talk) 08:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, curious as to how this situation should be handled, I asked on the OR talk page using a fictional but roughly equivalent example: the one of ドガー・アラン・ポー. The reply was what I expected; that "common sense is called for here", and that (paraphrased) if there is clear contextual evidence that a connection is being drawn, then it is not considered original research. That said, I believe it is quite clear from the context in the manga that ペイン is a referance to the English word "Pain", and even those who object to the change have admitted as much in this very discussion.

Contextual evidence includes: Pain frequently makes referance of his own pain and suffering, and the pain and suffering of those in Amegakure. His beliefs essentially parallel with the Buddhist principal of samsara and the Rikudō (Six Realms, also known as the six paths of suffering) and are essentially a twisted variation thereof, whereby experiencing pain has lead to his own enlightenment and transendence, and as such, Pain wishes to lead the world to enlightenment and pacifism through pain (this, along with the prophetic nature of the Rinnegan, essentially parellels the additional four noble realms of the ten spiritual realms, or at least what is considered the extremely rare occurance of Buddhahood, whereby a highly enlightened human appears to spread these beliefs, amongst which is a strong emphasis on pacifism). Furthermore, in the most recent chapter, he refers to his six bodies as The Six Paths of Pain (ペイン六道, Pein Rikudō), which draws a parallel to the aforementioned "six paths of suffering", and makes progressively less sense if other romanizations are substituted in place of pain.

I believe that all of this warrants the change from Pein (ペイン) to Pain (ペイン, Pein), and the subsequent changing of other cases of "Pein" to "Pain". If this doesn't resolve the dispute, than I propose a simple keep/change vote based on the contextual evidence I have previously outlined. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the current transliteration of "Pein" is doing more harm than good. Is it not a wikipedia policy to make sure that infomation is presented in an accurate and useful way to the reader? AnimeNikkaJamal (talk) 19:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

What harm, other than bloating the talk pages? –Gunslinger47 21:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I would say it hamper's a reader's full understanding of the character, unless they already have knowledge of both the character and the Hepburn romanization system, and the article should be be formatted to best serve standard English readers who are seeking to learn more about the character.

Anyway, this isn't about splitting hairs on the original research policy, and the issue at hand is actually not an issue of the OR policy, and is, in fact, an issue of common sense. So, the question is, put as simply as possible: Is there enough contextual evidence to warrant it being rendered as Pain (ペイン, Pein), and would doing so benefit the article? Yes or no?

As far as I'm concerned, I'm going to answer with a yes on the first count (refer to my previously outlined evidence), and a yes on the second count for the following reasons: it is an apt translation, generally agreed upon by people well versed in the subjects, and would help to further a reader's understanding of the character, especially with the recent revelation of the "ペイン六道" terminology, of which the use of "Pein" in place of "Pain" in the translation makes little sense and robs it of some genuine meaning, as the Rikudō (six realms, also known as the six paths of suffering) is a Buddhist theological belief in which one may eventually obtain enlightenment, and Pain has stated outright that he has obtained enlightenment through pain. It's a no-brainer. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow, a lot of fervor. It is "officially" Pein as per Hepburn romanization. Having professional translators using their positions to say they are right is ludicrous since it doesn't take a Japanese person to know basic katakana and roumaji transliterations. It is Pein literally translated. That being said, I see nothing wrong with Pain being used as his name, since that is obviously what it is intended as and due to the fact that there are many translations on Wikipedia not using the direct romanization (also without official confirmation). But I also respect Wikipedia's policies on the matter and what is being done I guess does constitute original research. But the Akatsuki page is a mess anyway. No images, no articles...it reeks. And it looks like we cannot change that anytime soon; a shame too since the Wikipedia Naruto pages used to be the best. Now they are out-of-date and horribly vague and uninteresting. The great kawa (talk) 23:58, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Change it. This doesn't qualify as original research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.105 (talk) 02:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually it does. You gained the knowledge that his name is Pain, when the direct translation of his name is Pein, by gathering facts and the like. While all of this may be true it still does count as Original Research. And yes Great Kawa, the Naruto articles used to be the best but to actually survive on Wikipedia they had to be gutted. If you still watch interesting, got to the Naruto Wiki we are always looking for new people to help.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 02:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You can argue about being Pein being correct all you want, but its obviously PAIN. Now we can be safe and go with pein and look like half a tard when we're wrong or we can go the smart route and end up being correct. I don't know about you conservative "pein" lovers out there but I don't like being wrong about anything. If you want, you can argue WP:ILIKE, but not because I like the name PAIN better, but that I like being right.172.165.79.222 —Preceding comment was added at 10:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

To put an end to the argument, "Pain/Pein"s official English name is to be determined by the creator and writers, and them only. If it's kanji translates to Pein, despite the "obvious" mentions of "Pain" by Nagato, Pein would still win. This is a broken argument: Make the fucking title of the "Pain's" subsection "Pain//Pein". We don't need opinionated rationalizations of what his name should be, just include what it could be. It's why the millions of people who watch the Japanese subbed manga will forever call Maito Guy just that: Maito Guy. Is it wrong? Nope. Is it correct in it's translation? Nope, but people don't care. Is the article still called Might Guy? Yeah. Does anyone truly care? Nope. This is how it should be for Pein//Pain. I say keep the roumanji spelling, since none of the names are meant to be English. Stop bastardizing names through translation, please. Solve the problem by including both. 74.12.7.106 (talk) 17:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC) Joe

The problem is that he does not have kanji in his name - he has katakana, which are traditionally for phoneticizing (not, translating - merely making it pronuncable to a Japanese speaker) foreign words. As for the Japanese subbed manga - technically, it is wrong. Because with katakana, it's usually not meant to be a Japanese name. It's like saying that Mount Fuji is pronounced "Huzi", because that is how the romanization once worked - its only meant for writing it down, and is not what the intended pronunciation is. For an example, look at Organization XIII in Kingdom Hearts - they were designed to have x's in their names, even though "x" does not exist in the Japanese language. It's an approximation, nothing more. Hell, Bleach even has actual kanji have wildly different pronunciations, because its not meant to be a pronunciation guide. "Pein" isn't even a word in Japanese, so it doesn't have the excuse that Hinata or Naruto might have for their katakana.

I know I've basically said the same thing over and over, but you have an awfully bad understanding of the situation (and, I would suggest, the translation of Japanese names in general).Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 18:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Individual Akatsuki member pictures

What happened to the individual pictures of the Akatsuki? I remember there used to be a few, but they haven't been there for a while. Tristan Uchiha 08:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:FAIRUSE concerns. Having one for every member just doesn't work. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 08:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

And yes, we know that the group picture at the top doesn't show Pein and Konan's faces. We've been arguing the stupidity of this for weeks. Basically, if you haven't read the manga, you can only guess at what they look like. Wikipedia at its finest, right here folks... 214.13.209.200 09:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it is.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 21:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Once we've seen all six of his bodies, then I'll suggest someone put images of the bodies together into a single image (like Bleach (manga) did to Grand Fisher). Konan and Kakuzu will have to deal with having bad shots, and Sasori not being there at all. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 23:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

If noone minds, I could go ahead and upload a temporary picture of Pein's face from the manga until we get all six in one shot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.231.47.180 (talk) 23:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Article

What does Itachi need to do to have his article? I mean he has abilities(apart from mangekyo) 2 personalities(first the good bro and then the bastard) other media(too much) and etc.

Tintor2 16:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

According to WP:FICT we need reliable Secondary sources. IIRC the main problem is all if not most of the sources we had for him were from the manga etc and that is a primary source. --69.156.205.23 22:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Well let's see. there's the databook, the name reference, and i don't know. Can someone who does NOT have to do college-level homework just go out and find us a secondary source, or is that too much to ask. I'd do it myself, but I am in college, so I rarely get time to do this. ItachiUchihaArticleForTheWin 19:31, 31 October 2007 (UTC) 19:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Like i said before since it was a merge I can't link the conversation (besides it was way long and I doubt you have the time to read it) nothing has changed since the merge disscussion and until then what you';re saying now is no different than what was said before and I don't real like argueing something that has alreay been disscussed.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 21:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

If you are interested. most of it is here. Talk:Itachi Uchiha. There is a little bit more near the end of the first archive from the article Talk:Itachi Uchiha/Archive 1#Second merge attempt. It is long but if you want a good idea of why the page was merged this is the best place to go. --67.68.154.6 23:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

it's still here, wow I had no clue, thanks pal. Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 14:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Main Articles

I think we should make main articles for Deidara, Pein, Konan, Itachi, and Kisame.

Who ever you are, read the discussion from above.

Tintor2 19:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

What does it have to do with anything? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzapalot (talk • contribs) 23:01, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

The topic above directly discussed the Itachi Uchia article and talked about why it was merged. There is no need to two topics to discuss creating article in a row. --67.68.154.6 23:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, so this is still going on. It's not like Sam is really going to let up on this, so if you want to see his reasoning, here's the link: Talk:Itachi Uchiha/Archive 1#Second merge attempt. ItachiUchihaArticleForTheWin 19:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

No it's not going on, that was the point of the two discussions until we can find 3rd/2nd party sources and he does a little more non-Akatsuki stuff then why bring up something that was discussed, argued on, agreed upon, and then carried out.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 14:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

And you're linking the wrong one, I won't say what I think about you linking "that particular one" but you should just use the one where we all agreed (for the most part).Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 14:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

What do we need 2nd and 3rd party sources anyway? We already have tons of information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.20.80 (talk) 01:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

We need second- and third-party sources because they show that the article's subject has some sort of relevance or notability in the real world (as in, outside of its own fictional universe).—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

AFD result

I've closed the AFD as Snowball keep per perceptible consensus produced. Happy editing. @pple complain 08:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

It was good what you did, but as it was dicussed the article still needs improvements. Tintor2 17:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

And as was revealed in the AFD, it CAN be improved, but the problem is that most significant out-of-universe information are on Japanese websites, and being in primarily English-speaking nations it is very unlikely we can dig it out quickly. Once Akatsuki plays a larger role in the English series, however, than we'll begin to see out-of-universe info on this article. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 18:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Pein is not Naruto's father!

Someone's just said on Pein's article that Pein is Naruto's father, it should be removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayssummerdays (talk • contribs) 09:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism, I reverted it. σмgн gσмg 10:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Itachi Article

Itachi had his own article for a while there, but it up and disappeared. Why is that? Obviously because thy decided it isn't necessary, but WHY did they decide that?--76.116.185.196 13:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

In universe, not enough appearances, and not enough of his information centered more around himself than others (Sasuke, Orochimaru, Deidara, etc.). Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 15:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Yep everything Artist said and this.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 17:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Where the Hell is Kisame's Section?

Well? and dont bother telling me to sign my post, cuz i cant figure out how

Edit: nvm, its back -.-

For future reference, if you see a stupid edit like a character's section vanishing or crappy information being added, it's probably just the work of some loser trying to be a pain. No reason to make a topic about it. By the way, signing is easy. In newbie language, just hold shift and press the key with the accent mark on the upper, far-right side of your keyboard right under the Escape button. Intellect Ninja 23:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

u mean left side. left. --24.214.236.85 20:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that someone should change the "Nine-tailed-fox-posessed Naruto" or whatever in Kisame's article. I think that "Kyuubi Naruto" would sound much better. And also, for Tobi and Sasori, they have the same rings -_- And the character on their rings means "jade". I should know. I'm asian. Also, I'm not editing, because I'm new; I just signed up today. So somebody please change those (if you want) because it's bugging me. Narutards are learning the wrong info.--Itachi Uchiha of Konoha (talk) 02:40, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Pein/Pain's Guard

I know we didn't really get a good look at it, but when he summoned it, minus the tubes and Rinnegan eyes, it seemed like it was one of Garra's barrier Techniques, when he summons the image of the Shukaku that looks like the stuffed toy. Shouldn't this be mentioned? 209.209.199.102 06:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Nah it was just an animal summon, a stone panda, just like his hydra-cerberus, and his fly-chamelion. What's more interesting is his other active bodies. It seemed like the skinny one was Taijutsu oriented and the big one was more interested in absorbing chakra, farther enforcing the 'each body does something different' thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.46 (talk) 23:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Completely on a different tip looking at the translation for Rinnegan as Samsara and appliying the Hindu definition to what Pain's article says, it would seem as it is logical to say that in this case the Rinnegan Eyes having given him an egotistic attitude in his desires and ambitions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.215.4.201 (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

In short, no.70.138.167.143 01:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

In the Budism reincarnation cycle, there are six realms of potential reincarnation, ten, gaki, ashura, naraku, human, and animal. Pein has six bodies, and from what I can tell, one for each reincarnation possibility. His summoning body may reference 'animal', while his fat body probably represents 'gaki' or 'hungry ghost'. This is merely theory at this point, but the relationship (similar to Itachi's similarity to a Tengu, Kisame's similarity to Isonade, and Deidara's minor references to Garuda) cannot be completely ignored forever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.79.129.119 (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Zetsu

In the article it is said that Zetsu 'serves as a sort of superior to other members', what evidence there is to support this? Just because the other members report to him doesnt mean he is a superior member. Survival705 14:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Hence the "sort of" qualifier. ~Snapper T o 23:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

On Pein

I'd like this part changed, please: Pein can summon bodies he is not currently using and remotely control them in battle, sharing what they see to protect one another from attack. Reasons: It hasn't been, even vaugly, hinted that he's remotely controlling the bodies, or even that he only occupies one body at a time... Sounds like madness? Well, if the rinnengan is truthfully derived from the samsara legend (the six ways of life and death and all that funny stuff), I see no reason why Pein should not be able to split his soul in six and occupy six bodies at once. So, some changes, please? 81.228.148.16 (talk) 02:09, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

We go by what we know. What we do know is this: Currently the "main" Pein is the one he showed up in, and the Summons are currently just summons all with the Rinnegan. There is no mention of him splitting his soul and all we know is that he gave his summons those eyes. --TheUltimate3 (talk) 11:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

i don't think 81.228 was talking about putting the shared souls bit in the text. he's just talking about removing the "remote control" reference. also, we don't know that the bodies he summoned are the ones not in use. we haven't seen the faces of the other bodies that were in the casks. how about something like: Pein can summon bodies endowed with Rinnegan which share visual information seamlessly with one another. Pein is able to coordinate attacking and defending with these summons as if they were a single entity. --24.214.236.85 (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

My god you people are pathetic. This stuff is blatantly obvious to any two-year old, especially but not only after the newest chapter. Jiraiya even said in 378 that he was sure they were sharing eyesights. It was explained by one of the toads as well. Wikipedia at its finest, right here, folks.Muramasa itachi (talk) 16:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

The Pein which started the fight with Jiraiya was adept at summoning, that was his "thing" so to speak, so I'm assuming he just summoned other bodies but is not CONTROLLING them, per se. Ring Finger (talk) 08:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

WTF

Why is it Itachi doesn't have his own page? By reading this article, you would never fully understand what a prominent role he's played. [[user:SxeFluff--SxeFluff (talk) 17:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)]] 11:35, 17 November

You mean the total of what 4 times he has actually appeared IN the show/manga that WASN'T a flashback? Anyway its been discussed before, look it up.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 17:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

The Ultimate 3 is right you know. Even if we take the number one rule of Naruto (Flashbacks are the longest part of the series) into account, he's still not notable enough to have his own article yet. KEYWORD BEING YET!!! Sasuke9031 (talk) 06:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Exactaly, yet is the correct word but as of now there's no point to disscuss this, again.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 18:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Zomg, you people gangbang when it comes to the topic of Itachi getting his own article. It's sorta scary x.x AnimeNikkaJamal (talk) 19:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

lol, AnimeNikkaJamal's right, you just sort of dogpiled on the guy. SxeFluff is right though; Itachi is Sasuke's main motivator for the majority of his actions in the series, including the huge (almost the singular motivating factor) part he played in Sasuke's leaving Konoha and pursuing more power, even temporarily allying with Orochimaru. He was also the first link to the now main story-focus Akatsuki, and whose mention is always notable among the dialogue of the characters. I'd recommend a separate Itachi page, as his role is rather unique in Naruto, and is more notable than almost all other "supporting" characters or "second-party characters". Even if it's not a full-length page, it could have a defining picture (of the apparent third-last Uchiha), and some info on his role, his background, his motivations, his appearance in important flashbacks, his actions and apparent reason, and a synopsis of his role throughout specific important parts of the series.-TAz69x (talk) 12:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Kisame's Death

I don' read the manga so did he really die? If so an expansion on how should be put in and a thing about how Suigetsu killed him on Suigetsu's page. All it says now is "Killed by suigetsu" BioYu-Gi! (talk) 22:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

As Kisame nor Suigetsu hasn't appeared in the manga in weeks its safe to say this never happened.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 23:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

however in the most recent manga I read suig. and kisame just started a battle, so you never know Dragon queen4ever 16:39, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Pein

Because Pein has 6 different bodies(7 if you include Nagato) shouldn't he have an individual picture for his section in the article? If so, there is a panel in ch 379 that depicts his six bodies.Lastbetrayal (talk) 03:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm adding one right now (using a dinky image editing software, but I don't have access to photoshop at the moment), as was previously suggested back before they appeared. This is the first time all six have been depicted, and in actuality, there is considerable possibility that he has (or will have) a total of ten bodies, if they delver further into the Samsara theology and include the four realms of nobility in addition to the six realms of suffering. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 09:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

We do not know if Pein is using summons, his eye technique has not been thoroughly explained. His abilities are currently unknown and his information in the article MUST be rewritten. This is the same thing that happened with Tobi; people speculated things, those things made sense and then they were added to the article, then all of the sudden the manga turned up saying something nobody imagined. Let's not make the same mistake with Pein. We can't say he switches bodies and we can't say he summoned human clones or humans, this week's manga tells us the six bodies share the name Pein and not one of them resembles Nagato. Pein section might end up renamed to Nagato. Let's not keep adding speculations. Bvazq (talk) 14:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

What speculations were added (to the article)? In this talk, I was just pointing out that what Pain refers to as the Pain Rikudou (a direct referance to the buddhist Samsara theology involving the six realms / six paths of suffering) may be further expanded into what is known as the ten realms in the same theologies, and that we shouldn't assume that he only has six bodies, or that Nagato isn't amongst them. I worded the article to state more accurately that he has at least six bodies, which can be confirmed, whereas it can't be confirmed that he has a set number of six bodies. We also do know Pein is using summons, as Jiraiya stated it several times, and that he summoned the other two bodies, and must've summoned the other thee before he (Jiraiya) was able to determine the hidden locations (when he was trying to track down the invisible Pain). Jiraiya may be disproven, but at this point, all indications are that they were summoned. At this time, I don't believe that anything in Pain's article oversteps the boundaries into speculative information, though I agree completely that Tobi is the subject of far too much. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 15:50, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm positive "Rokudou" should be translated to Paths, and not Realms. I went ahead and changed it so that it calls them paths while still linking to "six realms," but go ahead and change it back if I'm wrong. Now please tell me we're not arguing over whether or not the Rokudou are his bodies. That would make me quite angry. You won't like me when I'm angry.Muramasa itachi (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Rokudou/Rikudou (Rikudou is actually used in the manga, I realize) is specifically the Japanese term for the Buddhist principal of the "six realms", but I do agree with you, as the kanji used would more literally be translated as "six paths", and though the two shouldn't be mutually exclusive, it also draws a closer parallel with the "six paths of suffering" (another name for the "six realms"), which serves to better highlight Pain's own beliefs. And no, we aren't arguing whether the Pain Rikudō are his bodies (at least I'm not, as I believe this to clearly be the case). I'm only pointing out that the appearance of six bodies in the manga doesn't preclude the possiblity of additional "bodies" which could include the form of "Nagato", and that the article shouldn't specify there being a set number of bodies at this point, as it did previously. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 17:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Although it's speculation, it's interesting to note that Pein's summoning body seemingly coorresponds to the animal Realm in the Samsara cycle, while the fatter, ninjutsu absorbation-body seems to represent the hungry ghost Realm, and the main/Yahiko body is regarded by Pein's cronies as a God, the Ashura Realm.

Paeinful, 2007

Since the Pein v Pain debate has gone past the point that I care to read the discussion, and since Wikipedia is founded upon consensus, why not just put the matter to a vote? Does the dude with orange hair and six bodies go by Pein (ペイン) or Pain (ペイン, Pein)? Leave your opinion below citing whatever policies/guidelines/opinions/workings of the universe you feel are applicable. Whenever one spelling seems to hold majority opinion so will the discussion endith. ~Snapper T o 04:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

E. Actually, a straw poll is definitively not a consensus. Anyway, my stance as always is WP:V. We'll get an official romanization of his name eventually. It likely will be Pain, but that's beside my point. –Gunslinger47 04:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
A. As has been stated a few times (and in a similar case in the OR talk page) that it's not a matter of "verifiable sources" or "original research", but rather whether or not the manga provides enough context that Pain be considered the common sense translation, which it does. Pain frequently speaks of pain and suffering, has numerous piercings on all of his bodies, and so on. Furthermore, I highly object to "Pein Rikudou" being translated as "The Six Paths of Pein", which simply makes no sense and deprives it of meaning, as "Pein" is nothing more than a sound. The Rikudou, or six realms are alternately known as "the six paths of suffering", and being tied closely to the samsara, are the means by which an individual can reach enlightenment. Pain specficially states that he has reached enlightenment through pain, which should essentially confirm that Pein Rikudou is intended to be "The Six Paths of Pain", and as such, that his name is "Pain". At the very least, the change would do no harm, and in most (if not all) cases, would actually benefit English-speaking readers who are uninitiated with the manga, as even those who are splitting hairs on the issue have come to the same conclusion based on the context of the manga. There are other reasons, which have been stated before, but essentially, the only reason it shouldn't be changed is if you're being picky and splitting hairs over policies that do a poor job of dealing with this situation to begin with, which only serves to make the article less insightful than it could be, with the simple change of a letter. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 05:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
A citing WP:SENSE and WP:IGNORE. The Splendiferous Gegiford (talk) 06:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
A. The reasons cited above combined with the fact that there's plenty of precedent in anime-related articles for using an "assumed" romanization (see the old Bleach Arrancar articles, for example). There's no sense in prolonging this any further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HisshouBuraiKen (talk • contribs) 06:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
E by WP:V. We can verify that there is an E im Pein's name, but we cannot verify the A. Sasuke9031 (talk) 06:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
A for reasons stated above. and even if this is only aesthetic, wikipedia looks pretty bad as a source of information if it is the last "up-to-date" english resource that spells his name w/ an e. thats almost an embarrassment. --Wongba (talk) 07:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
E Mainly because everything that says it should be spelled with an "A" is all based on Original Research. And as I have been told many many times: It don't matter if it "makes sense", as long as it is still Original Research, it has no place on Wikipedia. EDIT: I also agreed with WP:V but seriously, Wikipedia has so many WPs that I thought V was for vandalism.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 15:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
A - we're being a little too stubborn on the issue when it's presented rather blatanly to us. Wikipedia:Ignore all rules in this case. Mind you, this straw poll will inevitably end in no consensus the way it's going. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment "A" has 2/3 at the moment. Certainly not a vast majority, but it's a percentage good enough for Congress. And while I acknowledge the fact that this "vote" is not with the spirit of Wikipedia and/or consensus, this really isn't the kind of thing you can compromise on aside from calling him ペイン. That, of course, defeats the purpose of this being the English Wikipedia. Someone will be unhappy no matter the outcome. ~Snapper T o 06:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Someone will inevitably be unhappy, as such is the nature of consensus here. That said, this discussion isn't really a straw poll, considering that people are placing rather detailed arguments allowing with their !vote. Given the evidence to support the use of "A'" is rather overwhelming, WP:IAR safely applies. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:40, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

A - Not that i'm menber of the taks force, but i think the manga as prety much put into context the use of the translation Pain, now more than ever before with the hole six paths of Pain thing from buddhism cosmology. The article even as a link to the page on the subject--Tosta mista (talk) 11:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
A - I think this has gone on long enough. I agree that "Pain" is the most logical name of the character, taking into account his constant references in speech to pain and suffering. Theres also the Buddhism connection to consider. Common sense and WP:IAR would apply here. I realize that this may contradict my opinions above, but after reading through the topics repeatedly, I guess the logical pro-"Pain" arguments won me over. --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 19:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
A - I readily support the Wikipedia community and though I have been one of the main obstacles to "Pain" being the name put up, as opposed to "Pein" which I supported since it was the official Hepburn romanization of his name, I am finally willing for a change in stance. Since many have presented evidence based on other names where no official source was given, and since the context is officially clear, and for seeking mediation, I propose the name be changed to "Pain." Plus, "the Six Path of Pein" makes no sense. :P The great kawa (talk) 00:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
A - I've already stated my reasons at length above, so I won't repeat them here (especially since other people have already effectively restated them). I would point out that those arguing for maintaining the name as "Pein" have yet to provide any specific argument as to *why* it is important/beneficial to go by strict OR/verifiability guidelines in this case. To the extent that a coherent argument has been produced as to why WP:IAR should apply here, it logically follows that counter arguments should attempt to explain exactly *why* that line of reasoning would be damaging to the article. 24.20.172.130 (talk) 07:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
E - Pein is the directly translated version. A is original research and fan-cruft in a sense. For example, I could say that the actual way to translate his name is "Perfectly Energetic In-universe Nobody", but that doesn't make it true at all. Pain is the exact same thing. Until VIZ (meaning not Saiyan Island or anywhere else that says Pain) gives an official (meaning it is verified) English translation, there isn't an official translation. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Comment I just used a kanji to english guide and as it turns out ペ=pe, イ=i, and ン=n so I think this discussion is over and it's Pein. I can give you the source material if you need it. Sasuke9031 (talk) 21:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

comment any kanji to english guide u find won't make pein or pain official. the reason pein has been used in the first place is b/c wikipedia already employs a popular kanji-english system. ur guide doesn't close the discussion at all, and it doesn't even further ur point any. everyone already agrees that w/o extenuating circumstances it would be spelled pein b/c thats what wiki policy nominally supports. it's that there is strong circumstantial evidence to spell it differently that is the issue. --Wongba (talk) 22:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment ペイン is katakana, not kanji. Katakana is most prominently used in Japanese to "sound out" foreign names and words, and is a purely phonetic, with no deeper meaning to individual characters than how they are pronounced (unlike kanji, where each character has a specific definition, or multiple definitions). For example, the English word "rock", as in Rock Lee, is rendered in Japanese katakana as ロック (rokku), just as the English word "pain" would be rendered into katakana as ペイン (pein). ペイン has no signifigance as a word in Japanese, and in fact, there are no actual Japanese words that even begin with the sound "pe". The only way to extract any meaning from the word is to render it as a foreign word or name, and a great deal of evidence points to the English word "Pain". This vote is essentially trying to discern a translation, and would be comprable to deciding between "Rokku Rii" and "Rock Lee". WtW-Suzaku (talk) 00:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

We had printed, verifiable sources for the spelling of Rock Lee and Might Guy at the time when the switch was made. –Gunslinger47 02:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

It was just an example. But, was there even a "switch"? I'm pretty sure their names were printed in English in the first Character Official Data Book, circa 2002. The Naruto wikipedia article wasn't even created until 2003. Besides, Rock Lee was widely (if not completely) accepted in the community from his first appearance in the original Toriyama's World scanlations, which were the only ones around back then (likewise, this is why Maito Gai is still so widely used, as that's how TW translated it). WtW-Suzaku (talk) 03:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Guy used to be called Gai at some point on Wikipedia.[1] –Gunslinger47 04:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

He was "Gai" in the first databook and "Guy" in the second. Lee was "Lee" in both books. ~Snapper T o 07:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, he was ガイ in the first databook, because the first one didn't have any romanizations at all. Yet at that point, Lee was still "Rock Lee" because that's what the fansubbers used. The opening comment is basically the first, last, and only argument for "E", and it's nothing we haven't heard before.HisshouBuraiKen (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Romanizations of first names (or in Guy/Lee's case, last name) appear in the background of the first databook. Example. ~Snapper T o 04:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, what's the databook say about pein? Sasuke9031 (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The two databooks only cover material up to chapter 244. Pein debuts in chapter 363. If there had been an official spelling of his name, there would have been no reason to be having this discussion. ~Snapper T o 00:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

It looks like the "A"'s have it. How much longer should this be left open?HisshouBuraiKen (talk) 01:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

A week-long "debate" should suffice. ~Snapper T o 04:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

So in the end, a vote had it? What happened to all that "Wikipedia is not a democracy"? I ask as alot of what I tried to propose/support/ect. got turned down (The best example was the List of Akatsuki members. Overwhelming moves for Keep, deleted.) yet a vote can work here.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 04:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, it does give you a good view on the opinions: Seven people basically say, "It would benefit the article to ignore the original research and verifiability policies in favor of common sense as per WP:IGNORE and WP:SENSE, and and here are several reasons why," versus three people blindly following WP:OR and WP:V, despite generally admitting that Pain is the common sense translation. :/ WtW-Suzaku (talk) 05:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, and common sense and all that jazz was given and stomped on in the afd of the Akatsuki Members page. So how does a vote work here and failed there?--TheUltimate3 (talk) 11:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is quite different from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Akatsuki members, largely because this is a discussion about a character's name rather than the notability of an article. Notability is taken very seriously, and whatever argument you placed, it wasn't going to change the fact that the article was not really notable, and was going to be merged or deleted no matter what happened. Conversely, content discussions naturally have much more space in which to operate in. WP:IAR and WP:SENSE carry much more weight here than in a deletion argument, where the aforementioned arguments are widely frowned upon, and disregarded by most closing administrators unless there is a significant set of reasoning behind the said argument. In any case, being bold and changing it is fine. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

As to the straw poll being conducted here, straw polls are indeed rarely considered an outright consensus, and are more for simply testing the waters on an issue. Given that people are indeed stating arguments, however, this notion can be disregarded, as this is a discussion rather than any simple vote. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Changed on all other pages. Glad to see that common sense prevailed in this debate.HisshouBuraiKen 15:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Please! Stop! You aren't who you are! Wikipedia is not a website! We must change it back to the original tankabon format that clearly states him as PEIN! -Lord Nanners

if we aren't who we are, then who are we? and if wikipedia isn't a website, how are u viewing and editing this page? and the entire argument here is that the original japanese doesn't provide a clear transliteration unless u rigidly accept hepburn romanization. try coming up w/ a coherent argument in order to advanced ur point. --Wongba 16:39, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

He means that Wikipedia isn't a fan site but an encyclopedia. Pain is technically fan cruft, while Pein is the direct translation. Wikipedia is entirely against fan cruft altogether, thus, unless VIZ directly states they will use Pain or something else, we should recognize no official translation exists as of yet. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

One, "Pein" is a transliteration, not a translation. The former of the two is merely a rendering, according to an arbitrary system of transcription, of a word in a character system typically not used to write the word being transliterated. The latter takes a word, phrase, etc from one language and attempts to render it using pre-established words in a target language, words which are also likely to have no particular etymological connection to speak of. Two, "fancruft", or rather the exclusion of such, is not an explicitly key part of Wikipedia policy (it's more so a rhetorical term), nor is there any significant objective ground to label "Pain" as being more so "fancruft" than "Pein". Three, a coherent case has be made as to why WP:IAR and other related guidelines should be applied in this case, so please, instead of merely attempting to label "Pain" with rhetorical neologisms, I would request that you attempt to provide an argument as to why strict application of WP:OR, etc is an important/beneficial in this situation (preferably with an understanding that any translation/transliteration/romanization without an officially citable source, "Pein" included, is technically at odds with WP:OR). 24.20.172.130 19:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The manual of style guidelines suggest the use of revised Hepburn romanization in this situation, making it the default. Reasons should be given when diverging from guidelines, and this appears to be what happened. –Gunslinger47 20:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

ペイン is certainly not applicable to a category of "names of modern figures" and it is also clearly not a Japanese name (in terms of having native-Japanese/Sino-Japanese origins). Also, reasons for the diversion from guidelines, WP:OR and WP:V clearly being most relevant here, *have* been given, along with constant citation of WP:IAR. 24.20.172.130 21:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It is a name. It is written in the Japanese language. It is applicable to the MOS-JA. :) –Gunslinger47 22:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:MOS-JA does not have any prescriptive content that specifically applies the debate here (i.e. they don't tell us exactly what to do, in absence of an official romanization, for the name of a manga character which is quite probably derived from an English word). More importantly, perhaps, even if there was something that did specifically apply to this situation, WP:IAR is still higher up on the guideline foodchain. I again invite you to, please, provide an argument refuting the IAR-based argument that does more than merely cite a Wikipedia guideline. Remember, IAR establishes that it is the spirit behind the rules, not specific wording of the rules themselves, that should be considered. WP:OR, WP:V and all other guidelines exist for a reason and it is important to consider whether their application is truly serving the purpose for their existence. 24.20.172.130 22:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, I have invited WP:V to give an opinion on this matter. Don't let whatever opinion given (dis/en)courage you from expressing your own opinion, however. I have only did it because most users here are under the belief that illegal manga translations (Saiyan Island, for example) are official. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

did u not read any of the debate above? pein is a direct transliteration only according to hepburn romanization. the argument for spelling it differently doesn't assume fan translations are official in the least. everyone knows thats unofficial and doesn't provide reason to change the spelling. also, i wasn't telling nanners not to express an opinion but to express it coherently. --Wongba 19:39, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Attacking the translation sites is a red herring at this point. Trying to refute why WP:IAR should not be applied in this situation is the relevant part of the argument that you should be addressing, which involves focusing on the nature of the translation posted above. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 20:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Sasori

why isnt there a picture for Sasori?--Blue-Eyes Gold Dragon 00:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

That's a good point, he isn't included with the other guys. There are a couple color pictures of him from the manga (one of the volume covers and one of the character polls), though it's too bad there aren't any depicting him alongside Hiruko. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 03:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

well i think we need a picture of him anyway even if its just him and not him in his puppet--Blue-Eyes Gold Dragon 05:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You can always merge the pic.--Tosta mista (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Pein/Pain- More than one ring?

-will use Pein for the sake of this talk- I noticed a few times that the Pein that resembles Deidara has a ring on his left thumb. First Pein we saw had a ring on his right thumb. Now, my eyesight isn't the best, so I can't make out the kanji, but a good picture is chapter 379, page 13, last panel (not sure if I'm allowed to link directly to OneManga). Although it might not be the Deidara look alike Pein in that panel, there's still one that has a ring on his left thumb. DarkRyan75 03:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Could have been nothing more than author error. Happens quite frequently. The fact is that Pain has one ring and its on his right thumb. Like I said before, it was probably nothing more than author error. Sasuke9031 18:18, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

To further specify, he has one ring and it's on the right thumb of his first body (that is, both the one which appeared first and got in the pod numbered 壱, "one"). WtW-Suzaku 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Senetnce structure of Pein's last line.

It refer's to Yahiko. "Of the six bodies, none resemble the former Nagato, though Jiraiya notes that the first body Pain appeared as (third from the right) is noted by Jiraiya to be that of Yahiko."

Really crappy grammar. The author of this line has stated Jiraiya has noted it's Yahiko twice before stating it's Yahiko. It should read "appeared as (brackets)" then either "Yahiko" or "that of Yahiko." The way it is now is just someone pretending to have good control of sentetnce structure. Really, too many draw outs will make the wikipedia document worse than Bleach's filler arc. Stop it, someone edit it please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.67.227.71 (talk) 10:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest you be bold and edit it yourself. WtW-Suzaku 05:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll fix it.-Lord Nanners —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.31.60.136 (talk) 21:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it after the first IP mentioned it. IPs cannot currently edit the article, thus why it was brought up here in the first place. ~Snapper T o 22:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)