Talk:L (Death Note)

In the Information box

it should say that he was Succeeded by Near

This is important to know that he was not the end ...

Thanks

amlife180 Web 04/29/2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amlife180 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed JokerXpirt (talk) 10:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

AGE!!

• Seriously, somebody get rid of that "25 at Death" thing in the info box at the top. I'm still reading Deathnote, and I got on here with the purpose of looking up L's age and nothing else. I went straight to age, careful not to look at anything else in order to avoid being spoiled, and what does it say? "25 at death". I seriously just got RUINED by that. NOT COOL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.111.128 (talk) 20:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I did it.Ryuzaki0008 (talk) 18:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Note on Pronunciation

• At one point in the article, it mentions that L's alias is Ryuzaki because L is pronounced like R in Japanese...that's backwards. R is pronounced like L, not L like R. I'm gonna go ahead and fix that now... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.154.197.193 (talk) 21:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• Actually, the traditional transliteration of that consonant is "R", so "L" is converted to "R" in transliterations of Japanese (hence "kira" from "killer"). It wasn't backwards. Reference. HunterXI (talk) 20:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The first post is wrong. L is pronounce like R.

kashimjamed (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that R would actually be pronouced like L, after all, isn't that the reason why Zoro in One Piece was translated to Zolo in the manga and anime? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.188.179 (talk) 22:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Private Detective

Is L considered a private detective, police detective, or neither? He often works with Interpol, but only takes cases he's interested in, so what should he be categorized as? Ender85 23:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Beyond Birthday [AKA 'B'] in Another Note said that it was a philosophy (maybe Wammy houses') to try not to be called 'Private. I', because that would be insulting ('Unprivate. I' was what he prefered). L is able to move the police systems of the world because of his influence, but doesn't consider himself a member of them. He also reasons that a case isn't worth his time unless there're ten deaths, or one million dollars at steak. Meaning all his cases are FBI related. I'd say that it's so ambiguous that it's better to list him simply as "Detective". P.Is have no influence on the regular police (it's their maneuverability that makes them so effective)WickedKnightAlbel (talk) 09:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)L attended wammys house too right? because in episode 25 [silence]Watari is seen holding a chils hand and the hair looks distinctly like Ls when he's grown up.

Suggestion

There's not much real world-info in this article at all. And I feel that it could be merged into List of Death Note characters. Unless of course someone was able to get info like the concept/creation of L, Reaction, etc. All with sources. So, opinions?HadesDragon 00:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the two central characters of the series merit articles. JuJube 01:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Fictional importance doesn't trump WP:FICT. The two articles are basically fictional character biographies, and that's not really allowed. We had to do the same thing for the Characters of Kingdom Hearts article; all of the main characters' articles were exactly like this one, and they had to be merged.HadesDragon 14:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Since making articles about fictional characters is common, I asked Hades to bring it to the Village Pump or another body - and he agreed :) WhisperToMe 21:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

er 2607:FB91:BDBE:9844:4CA3:DE81:61F3:6DF2 (talk) 17:16, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

You Think...

I'm not sure if I'm right, but does anyone else think that L could sit in this manner because, thanks to Abe's long legs, Abraham Lincoln sat in the same way in school? I believe I read that Lincoln did in a short biography. The Matyr ^{(converse with the Matyr)} 08:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

• I can (and often do, including now) sit that way. It just needs high flexibility or something. JuJube (talk) 08:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
• I do it all the time.And I'm 13.It's not that hard.Ryuzaki0008 (talk) 18:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I sometimes sit that way, usually when I am tired or when I am thinking very deeply. Not everyone can do it, because it requires one to be flat footed. It also cuts of circulation to the feet, so if you sit even slightly off while doing it, your feet will almost certainly fall asleep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onewhohascomebefore (talk • contribs) 14:57, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Real name

And what about L's real name, revealed in Death Note 13: How to Read? Should that be mentioned, at all? Ryoji.kun (talk) 07:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

New posts at the bottom of the page. And, uh, his name is mentioned. It's the first thing on the page...did you bother looking?—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 12:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Beware of fans that want to 'protect' him.124.169.181.243 (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh and, um.....It's also on the bottom of this page.Ryuzaki0008 (talk) 17:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• Um...I'm not sure it's such a good idea to have L's name at the very top of the article. It's probably better to put it below in the section with the spoiler warning. I know it doesn't really constitute as a spoiler, but I think most fans who are currently reading the series would rather not know his name until it's revealed. It kinda takes away the mystery of L. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.154.197.193 (talk) 21:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a no spoiler tag policy. You shouldn't be reading the page if you don't want it spoiled 76.178.228.63 (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

L's logo

anyone know where i can copy L's(Ryuuzaki's) logo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiro kurisaki (talk • contribs) 17:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

• Do you mean copy as in copy the image as a file on to your computer? If so just right click - save as - And you can save it on to your hard drive. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite?

It seems to me the article needs to be rewritten for clarity. The abundance of "s and names makes it hard to follow.--74.171.62.47 (talk) 21:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Hideki Ryuga

I thought that L used the alias "Hideki Ryuga" when first meeting Light as a precaution, the same name of a person Light saw on TV recently, since you need the name and face of a person to kill them (doesn't work with fake names, but L doesnt know that), L could see this as boosting his chances of survival against Kira. Should this be mentioned? as the reason for choosing the name "Hideki Ryuga" seems a bit non-existant. --211.28.35.204 (talk) 11:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

• The reason does exist - If Light tries to kill "Hideki Ryuga" he could inadvertently kill the pop star, and that would incriminate him. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually thats incorrect. You need someone's face and name to kill them. If he wrote "Hideki Ryuga" in his death note while thinking of L's face, it'd have no effect. When he writes Naomi Misora's alias in the Death note, unknowlingly, while thinking of her face, it doesn't have any effect at all.

One of the rules:

• This note will not take effect unless the writer has the person's face in their mind when writing his/her name. Therefore, people sharing the same name will not be affected.

Xuchilbara (talk) 22:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

• No - that's correct, and I have a source - Light said that if he inadvertently thought of the pop star's face he could kill the pop star by accident. See Volume 3, Page 6. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

That's correct. Since "Hideki Ryuga" is a well known Japanese idol (at least, in the series), he says he might not be able to keep the real Ryuga's face out of his head as he's trying to kill L, thus killing the pop idol. He then thinks that L would grow even more suspicious of him.

Chibi Gohan (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that was L and Light's thinking. If you write 'Justin Beiber' in your notebook, you might not be able to stop the image of the real Justin Beiber from popping into your head, and if the real Justin Beiber dies unexpectedly, it would certainly make the news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.248.3.1 (talk) 21:26, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Age

Currently this article inaccurately states that L dies at age 22 in the anime.

The anime timeline is simply pushed back a few years to coincide with when it aired; it ends in 2013 instead of 2010. L's actual age is not different... his death is no longer in 2004, but (iirc) 2007. 24.223.151.194 (talk) 12:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Pop Idol?

The thought of Light thinking of an idol or singer is mentioned twice in the Character section, with little variation. Please fix this. 71.194.224.134 (talk) 13:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You know, you could fix too. :P --Kraftlos (talk) 19:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Quotations

This is not a suggestion for the information presented in the article, so much as the presentation of the article itself. I could be nit-picking here, but it seems that there is an excessive use of quotations in this article where they are not necessary. Single words like "unattractive" and "similar" are placed inside quotations when, if left without them, wouldn't exactly set off any "plagiarism" alarms. They interrupt the flow of the article as one reads, and give it an almost sarcastic tone in some places. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.9.195.175 (talk) 19:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the scarequotes really aren't necessary. If the article gets copyedited, these should be removed, I agree.--Kraftlos (talk) 01:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The "L" Font

The article mentioned that the font L (and the many Kiras as well and later N) is "Old English Five", but it's actually "Cloister Black", to which the Old English family is similar. I've changed the image and label to reflect this. –HunterXI (talk) 21:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC) yeah, but if you want to copy it on word you need to use "old english mt" because they dont have the cloister black font.I included this info in the article.Ryuzaki0008 (talk) 14:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Another option is downloading the font, googling found me a free version quickly --83.189.180.188 (talk) 15:51, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

What is L's Real Name?

No one knows.I think that someone should answer this question,but since we cant get Ohba to do it I dont know if it's possible.I would,But I dont know.Ryuzaki0008 (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

His real name is L Lawliet, according to How to read 13, page 10. This is already stated in the article. --PeaceNT (talk) 16:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I study Japanese and L's name in the film "Death Note 2" is not L Lawliet. It is a much more Japanese name and though I am unsure of the reading, I believe it is something along the lines of "Yattsu Fugin" (or possibly Bugin, which can be checked when he holds up the book to Light by anyone with a knowledge of Japanese kanji characters and their readings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.189.243 (talk) 22:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

• Uhhh.. - I would like to see Death Note 2, but I would assume his name is the same unless I see evidence to the contrary. If you have a DVD why not capture a screenshot and put it on Imageshack or something? WhisperToMe (talk) 23:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
• I saw the movie too and, well, maybe he wrote kanji, but I think the huge font reading "L LAWLIET" was what we were meant to see. JuJube (talk) 23:55, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Pic from film

Under the picture from the Death Note film it says 'Scott Graham-Chapple as L', but I'm pretty sure that's Kenichi Matsuyama. The pic info also says that. How'd that other name get there? Please change? I couldn't find out how to do it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jezzicat (talk • contribs) 22:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

• Idiotic vandalism, fixed. JuJube (talk) 04:52, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Childhood

L is seen in episode 25 [Silence] holding Watari's hand. But apart from that one scence not much is seen of L's childhood or where he was before becoming a detective at all. And i think the bells he 'hears' in episode 25 also is distinct to the bells in his flashback. And as Watari acting as L's 'father figure' he probably took L to Wammy's house in the first place.

220.238.227.135 (talk) 12:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)A

Anime canon only. The manga specifies nothing about L's history, and Another Note states that he was never a student at Wammy's House. 71.79.244.206 (talk) 12:49, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Interesting

kashimjamed (talk) 21:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC) Plus...L is just awesome, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.169.106 (talk) 19:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

YES, HE IS -Raziel (talk) 14:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Watari is just an alias, like Ryuga or Near. Watari = Wammy RyugaRyuzaki (talk) 20:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Collapsing under WP:NOTAFORUM. I can be a fucking idiot sometimes... -- Rue Ryuzaki  jam  19:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Regarding L's name. I want to clear up some bullshit. I've been hearing from alot of people that L's last name is pronounced "low-light", and I know that that is complete crap. I understand that the arguement for it is that Lawliet pronounced in Japanese sounds something like "low-light", but you all are forgetting one important thing. Lawliet is not a Japanese name, therefore it is not pronounced in Japanese. That's it. That is a fact. Any arguement for "low-light" is defeated because of this fact. It pronounced "law-lee-et", not "low-light." End of story. -Raziel (talk) 14:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Nationality

When L's nationality was first added it was British, now apparently he's Japanese, someone want to put the right nationality in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.248.169 (talk • contribs)

He's definitely not Japanese. If anything, he's British. In How to Read, Ohba mentions in passing that he thinks of L ethnically as being one fourth British, one fourth Russian, one fourth French, and one fourth Japanese. He doesn't mention nationality, but considering Wammy's House is located in Winchester which is the same location as the Sherlock Holmes stories, I think a similarity is at least implied in that sense. Also, with a last name like Lawliet, he's at least half ancestrally British.

L does not really have a specific nationality, and it is unknown exactly where he was born, so it is rather difficult to give him an accurate nationality. I'm going to change it to "Unknown" for now. In the meantime, what does everyone else think? -Raziel (talk) 19:09, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Well was his nationality stated in the Manga?

No, and in How to Read 13, Tsugumi Obha says he is a mix of Japanese, British, and some other European races. It is not known where he was born. -Raziel (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok i don't care what his nationality is is he freakin Dead? i just watched the episode where he dies can this be true? please tell me if his really dead or just kinda dead :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.57.221 (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Read the article. Also, Wikipedia is not a forum. Please use this space to discuss how to improve the article, not to ask questions or make comments regarding the subject of the article. Thank you. - Raziel  teatime  23:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

what is this?????

it says here, that when L says, 5% he actually means over 90%???? he says 5% TWICE IN HIS MIND, he cant lie to himself.

and i checked the reference, and there is no information on it. i re-read death note 13 and i didnt find that information at all....i'm sorry but im going to have to remove itBread Ninja (talk) 00:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually it does appear. It says so in the 13 questions section of Death Note 13; How to Read. Was it 13 or 33......?RyugaRyuzaki (talk) 20:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

RyugaRyuzaki is right 76.178.228.63 (talk) 21:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Chapter 109

I was reading the page from top to bottom, and I noticed that it said something about Chapter 109 in the "L in Death Note" Section. I'm pretty sure that there isn't a chapter 109. Better yet said, I'm SURE there's not a chapter 109. Can somebody please explain this to me?

RyugaRyuzaki (talk) 20:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Aparently there are two extra volumes, however I not sure they can be refered to as 109 and 110. They're more omake, see [[1]]; apparently they weren't important enough to mention on the List of Death Note chapters. I don't know enough about that to say anything more though. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 20:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

There is a one-shot sequel which is usually listed as "Chapter 109" on scanlation sites. It was published around the time that the L Change the WorLd movie was released, in early 2008. It's longer than a typical manga chapter, and to my knowledge, it's the only one to have run in Jump as an official sequel with manga continuity. It's set three years after the end of the Kira case. There have been unofficial omake that were obvious gags (like the material in the L File No. 15 book), but yes, the chapter in question exists and is the real deal. 71.79.244.206 (talk) 12:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus to move. Aervanath (talk) 03:08, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

---

L (Death Note) → L Lawliet — Relisting to generate more input. —harej (talk) (cool!) 20:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as L is the character's forename as opposed to a psuedonym, I believe that it would make more sense for this article to be at Forename Surname rather than Forename (disambiguator). We normally reserve the latter for cases where the surname is unknown, but if we take How to Read as canon, it isn't unknown at all. For example, Severus Snape is at the article although we rarely hear the word "Severus", if at all. Sceptre ^(talk) 18:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions#General conventions. We must use the most common name for the name of an article. I don't even remember if Lawliet was mentioned in the series or just appeared in how to read 13.Tintor2 (talk) 19:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

"Use the common name" is a deliberately weak convention which can be overruled by any other naming convention. The one I'm citing here is the spirit of the naming conventions of people, which state that, when we talk about people, we should use the "Forename Surname" convention, unless we are talking about people that either a) have a more common pseudonym (for example, Sting (musician)), or b) are Chinese or Korean, or born in Japan before 1868. L is really neither. Sceptre ^(talk) 00:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

An L is his most common name.Tintor2 (talk) 00:38, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not a psuedonym, though. It's actually his forename! For example, Severus Snape, not Snape (Harry Potter). Sceptre ^(talk) 00:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

But when is Lawliet used?Tintor2 (talk) 00:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It's missing the point. The use, or lack thereof, of his surname isn't relevant to the argument when the convention is to go Forname Surname unless in a few cases which don't apply to this article. Sceptre ^(talk) 00:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

But WP:NCP directly says its for real people. The lead already says "use the most common name" the "Nicknames, pen names, stage names, cognomens" says that it is okay to use nicknames "even if this sounds awkward for those seeing the name the first time". The confusing part is that when L appears in the series, Light has no idea what is his name, leading to a confusion if L was pretending that "L" was his first name or just a nickname. However, I think that moving the article will help due to the ambigious articles.Tintor2 (talk) 01:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It's the spirit, not the letter. And "L" is none of the four. It's just his forename. Sceptre ^(talk) 01:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

When the policemen were talking in L's first appearance, they said that they don't even though L's real name, leaving L as a nickname.Tintor2 (talk) 01:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose "L Lawliet" only appears in a guidebook. However the entire series, the character is referred to as "L", or an alias, and not "L Lawliet". --Farix (Talk) 12:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  Personally, I'd count anything in How to Read as canon, just as I'd count any of J.K. Rowling's post-Hallows statements (such as Dumbledore's homosexuality) as canon too. Sceptre ^(talk) 13:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  It's not a matter of if the guidebook is cannon, but that the name wasn't used in the main work and is not the name by which the character is commonly known by. --Farix (Talk) 13:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  But it's his name nonetheless. And again, "L" is not a psuedonym, it's his forename. Hence we should follow the "Forename Surname" convention. I could give you several examples where a fictional character is almost solely referred to as either their surname of forename, but if we know their surname and forename, we use both in an article title. Sceptre ^(talk) 14:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  When was it confirmed that L was his forename? Remember he was detective and used to hide his identity including his name as mentioned he was first introduced.Tintor2 (talk) 14:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  It's not his forename, but his initial. But that's besides the point. Most people will only know him as "L" and WP:NAME instructs to use the most easily recognized name. Readers will not know that L's real name is "L Lawliet". --Farix (Talk) 16:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

  Again, COMMONNAME can be overruled by other naming conventions. And while the letter of NCP shies away from it, the spirit of the guideline is clear, and backed up by precedent in other cases. Consider: how will people get to this page? They'll either go from L to L (disambiguation) to this page or from Death Note to this page, or from search "l death note" on Google. I'm contending that people will also just be likely to search for "L Lawliet" other than "L (Death Note)". And I am confident that his forename is just "L", mostly because How to Read gives it as his "Real Name" and it is very unlikely that its an initial. Sceptre ^(talk) 00:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Like I said before about NCP "The lead already says "use the most common name" the "Nicknames, pen names, stage names, cognomens" says that it is okay to use nicknames "even if this sounds awkward for those seeing the name the first time". NCP also does not mention fictional characters.Tintor2 (talk) 01:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

But the spirit of NCP extends to fictional characters in specific cases, such as this. I should also point out that the naming conventions, both general and NCP specifically also state that, when disambiguating, we should also use an article title that is "clear and unambiguous" if one exists. And one does exist: "L Lawliet". Sceptre ^(talk) 01:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess it would help separate this article unambiguos, but it is still confusing if L was an alias or forename.Tintor2 (talk) 01:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. I agree that the naming convention says to use the common name, which in this case clearly is "L". However, since L is about something else, the full name format is a perfectly acceptable way to disambiguate this from the other meanings. It's just a question of which is the preferred disambiguated form here. Jafeluv (talk) 11:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Semiprotection review

• 07:16, 18 May 2008 WhisperToMe protected L (Death Note) ‎ (Let's see the vandalism decrease. [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])

I'd like to review this to see if semiprotection is still considered necessary, as it's been over a year. As well as welcoming opinions from regular editors I have contacted WhisperToMe, the protecting admin. --TS 14:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

• I am in favor of dropping the semiprotection and seeing what happens next. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
• I agree with this notion. If the vandalism picks up again we can protect it again. -- Rue Ryuzaki  jam  18:57, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Real name Again

/reviews threads

Okay, HtR13 is unambiguous about L's real name. If the live action films conflict, then that's a conflict across canons which should be described (I haven't seen the second and third movies yet). All the DN articles draw heavily on HtR13 as a source, so saying that it's not canon surprises me - however, if consensus holds that that's the case, the thing to do is to remove the real name given there, L Lawliet, from its prominent position in the article. I would resist this, however. Vashti (talk) 02:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

To go further, I've got HtR13 open in front of me in English and Japanese right now, and I can confirm that the kanji for the name field on L's dossier on page 10 is 本名 (hommyō). That just means "real name"; it's used throughout the manga in precisely that way. Viz appear to have translated it as "true name" to parallel the True Name Card, which was described as that in English in the Japanese book, but there's no mystical True Name stuff going on here. His name's L Lawliet, guys, just like Mello's is Mihael Keehl. Vashti (talk) 02:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, his true name is L Lawliet, but the article's name was made "L (Death Note)" per above discussion. However, saying his alias, L, is part of his real name (meaning the two L are the same in this case) is original research.Tintor2 (talk) 12:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, I'm not arguing the name of the article. Secondly, is it also original research to say that Madonna Louise Veronica Ciccone goes by her first name? As WP:NOTOR says, "Anything that can be observed by a reasonable person simply by reading the work itself, without interpretation, is not original research, but is reliance upon a primary source." Vashti (talk) 12:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

But the case is that L was first known by the alias of L (and characters from the series said he never revealed his name to the point that Light thought he could be Hideki Ryuga, not L Ryuga).Tintor2 (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Light immediately describes "Hideki Ryūga" as "an obviously fake alias", as I recall. Plus, HtR13 is an explicit primary source for L's real name. If my secret real name is Jane Smith, and I go by the alias of Jane, it doesn't stop it being my name, no matter how many people I convince that it's not. It doesn't matter how many people say "he doesn't reveal his name" or "it can't be his real name" within canon, if we have a primary source stating that it is, in fact, his name. Vashti (talk) 13:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

But does HtR13 states that the alias is in fact his first name?Tintor2 (talk) 13:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

That would seem, to me, to be something self-evident that can be observed by any reasonable person. Surely? Especially since nobody's stated outright in the article that the alias and the first name were one and the same. Vashti (talk) 13:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

This is true. Anyone reading How to Read would clearly agree that L appropriated his forename as an alias. Sceptre ^(talk) 19:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't have the book, but is there a part of the book that gives such an idea?Tintor2 (talk) 23:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

With every character in How to Read, it has a table with stuff like name, age, blood type, with L's "true name"/"real name" listed as "L Lawliet". It's clear that, from the fictional perspective, L Lawliet is his real name, and "L" was appropriated as an alias. Sceptre ^(talk) 00:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but it does not state his L alias was meant to be his first name. By the way, from the first question, I have not said that HTR13 is not canon and my point was to start the article's lead with his alias as it's the article's title. Also, does HTR13 show L's age? It could be added to the article.Tintor2 (talk) 01:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not, or really, should not, deal with what is or is not, "canon", unless the question of course has been picked up in reliable sources (e.g. Star Wars canon). We deal with things in the original medium of work, licensed adaptations, etc. And we treat statements unambiguously made in official capacity by the creators of a fictional universe as truth regarding the subject of statements. Some people may not think Dumbledore's homosexuality is canon, but he's still gay nonetheless. Sceptre ^(talk) 01:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Unless someone else would like to chip in, I think consensus is against you on this, Tintor2. If Near, say, had been the original holder of the L title, with L as his successor, I could see your point in distinguishing between the alias and the name. The only reason L's title of L is described as an alias at all is because nobody knows his real name, and because it's such a peculiar name to have. It's never explicitly stated that the alias is his first name because the fact that L Lawliet is using his first name when he goes only by L is as blatantly obvious as the fact that 1 + 1 = 2. BTW, L's age is already in the article, in the infobox alongside his death date. Vashti (talk) 01:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but it is better with a source rather than maths and to sceptre I never said a thing about HTR13 not being canon; I don't like discussing canon since some of them are original research.Tintor2 (talk) 01:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Again, WP:NOTOR is explicit that simple arithmetic is not original research and does not require a source. It's enough that we have the dates; the ages can be extrapolated and stated from there. Vashti (talk) 01:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I did not say it was OR, just that a primary source would be better and it could be used in the age parameters from the infobox.Tintor2 (talk) 01:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

To answer your question, HtR13 and the manga canon don't state L's age at any point, though Light's is given at the beginnings of the first and second arc. Only the dates are listed. We really don't need a primary source to calculate an age on a particular date; there's no "better" about it. Vashti (talk) 01:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Add List of Death Note characters link

Shouldn't a link of List of Death Note characters be added into this page? This is pretty unfair as article Light Yagami has a link to this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.151.252.213 (talk) 07:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

That sounds a lot like WP:OTHER STUFF. The navigation box already has the links to all the Death Note articles, so adding such link would not improve anything.Tintor2 (talk) 15:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Picture from anime

Can you add a picture of L in the anime? Article Light Yagami has a picture of Light in the manga and anime. This article only has a picture of L in the manga. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.151.252.213 (talk) 07:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Again WP:OTHER STUFF. That would also fail WP:Non-free content criteria as showing such image would not help anybody as there is no notable difference in design.Tintor2 (talk) 15:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality

The quality of the writing in this article has suffered a noticeable decrease in the last few months. To begin with, the intro is now full of run-on sentences, some of which aren't grammatically correct. I can tackle it myself in the near future if nobody else does, but if someone else wants to get a head start on fixing it, they should. 71.79.244.206 (talk) 12:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I think that's not the big issue in this article. As I've seen, lots of minor details were added to the article, and we have lots of quotes.Tintor2 (talk) 15:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Role withing Death Note

Can L's role in Death Note be that of the main antagonist? After all, he does provide the main opposition to the main protagonist, Light. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stainlessboy (talk • contribs) 02:11, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

That's a synthesis.Tintor2 (talk) 02:21, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

No more than describing Light as the protagonist, surely? In literary terms, L *is* the antagonist, plain and simple. WP:When to cite Vashti (talk) 22:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Nope, that's OTHER STUFF as everything in wikipedia needs sourcing.Tintor2 (talk) 22:18, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Did you read the page I linked to? Works of fiction are considered primary sources for their contents. "L is the antagonist" is just a plot description. Vashti (talk) 01:06, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Does a manga chapter actually say that in an out-of-universe way? Characters' quotes don't count.Tintor2 (talk) 01:24, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

It's something that anyone reading the work can easily observe. The story is Light's story, told primarily from his perspective; he's the protagonist. L is the primary character opposing him; he's the antagonist. Vashti (talk) 08:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

And so there's no source. It's just OR brought by readers.Tintor2 (talk) 11:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Er. Just because I might not know what a kamidana is, doesn't mean to say that one doesn't appear in several panels. Equally, identifying the roles characters play in a work of fiction is really quite basic observation. Vashti (talk) 18:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Don't know what this example is for. One thing is seeing something and another is proving something based on what you see.Tintor2 (talk) 00:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

It's describing what you see. Okay, this is clearly going nowhere. Vashti (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

If we can't come to an agreement on this (or if nobody else chimes in soon), I'd like to ask for a WP:3O. Vashti (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I am commenting here in response to the request for a third opinion. This is not binding in any way, it is merely informal advice on the situation from an uninvolved editor. On the face of it, calling L the antagonist seems obvious, and a case of WP:BLUE. The picture is complicated a little by the roles of Near and Mello, however; also, just calling Light the protagonist and L the antagonist may mislead readers into thinking they are "good" and "bad" characters, respectively. I would support calling L the "main antagonist" if it is used in a way that doesn't misrepresent the true nature and motivations of the characters. Also, this may be ignoring the bigger issue here. In the lead, the quote is "L's character was created to be Light's antagonist". This is a claim that definitely requires a source, as it is about the intent of the author, rather than simply claiming something about the nature of the plot. I don't have access to the Death Note 13: How to Read source cited in the article body, but it seems likely that this claim would be backed up by it. If this is the case, then I think there's no problem with the claim in the lead. It would be good to have a citation straight after the sentence in question though. Hope this has been helpful - if you want any more advice, I'll be happy to oblige. All the best.— — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I noted the How to Read 13, but I don't think the phrase "main antagonist" would work considering that there are various and L only appears in the series' first half. Even more there is more than one character trying to arrest Kira across the series, so that would make almost everybody an antagonist. Just the fact that the authors mention it seems enough as the first paragraph from the lead talks about his role in the plot.Tintor2 (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

My idea was that "main antagonist" would work precisely because L only appears in the first half of the series. It is because of the antagonist roles played by Near and Mello in the second half that it is problematic to simply say L is "the antagonist". To me it seems obvious enough that L's role in the series is more important than either Near's or Mello's, but it would be a good idea to get a solid citation for this just to settle the argument. However, before we do that, I want to make sure of exactly what you are taking issue with. Are you talking about the general idea of calling L the "main antagonist", or are you talking about the specific wording you want in the lead? — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 17:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine with the wording "main antagonist", and I agree that any description of intent should be cited. Plus, according to antagonist, it can certainly be a group of characters (such as the Kira investigation team or the SPK). As for a citation, I think what the original editor was thinking of may be HtR page 61, where Ohba says "I introduced [L] as the force of justice who stands in the way of Light's criminal activity." Vashti (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Would that work as a reference? I think every volume index as well as various reviews from the series says something similar regarding L's role, but not label him. As I checked Near's and Mello's article, the authors make similar comments regarding their roles.Tintor2 (talk) 23:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that works as a reference. There is no need to have a reference that describes L specifically as an "antagonist" - all we need is a reference that says that his role is opposed to Light's. Calling L an "antagonist" is simply paraphrasing the source. Just as we don't need a reference to say that the sky is blue, we don't need a reference to say that antagonist means "the main character or force opposing the protagonist in a literary work or drama" (Wiktionary) — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 04:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Then that would mean describing him just as an "antagonist" rather than the "main antagonist".Tintor2 (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, if we go with the source, "the force of justice who stands in the way of Light's criminal activity" sounds more like "the antagonist", although I don't think that this is ideal for the reasons I stated above. But I'm still not sure exactly what it is you're disagreeing with. I don't see the use of the word antagonist as controversial at all here. Could you tell me why you find it objectionable? If I know that then it will be a lot easier to find a solution we can all agree with. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 16:50, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, as far I remember, the article had a long comment about L's role stating something like "protagonist in, antagonist, deurotagonist in, etc" and was deleted. Nevertheless, the authors say that Near and Mello replace L in the same book, so they would also be main antagonists, right?Tintor2 (talk) 18:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

They'd be antagonists in the second arc of the manga, as they don't appear before then. L, on the other hand, is still a presence in the second half even though he's dead; Ohba makes it clear that Near and Mello follow directly on from L. So L is the main antagonist; Near and Mello are not as significant. Vashti (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Yep, but they are still the only series' antagonists during that arc, and I'm sure L makes no impact in the second arc considering he was dead.Tintor2 (talk) 22:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, Light says at one point, "So I'm still battling against L", and Near is explicit that he has to conduct the fight in the same way that L would have done. Taking the series as a whole, L's influence seems far greater than either Near's or Mello's. Taking the anime as an indicator, the battle with L takes up 24 episodes (26 if you count the first and last), compared with 12 for Near and Mello combined. Vashti (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that adds anything as episode count does not seem important. While the use of describing him as an antagonist is fine alongside a source, where can it be added with flow?Tintor2 (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Vashti, Near and Mello are portrayed as being L's legacy and carrying out his will after he dies. L had anticipated the sequence of events should he have died, and handing over control to Near and Mello was part of his plan. You will recall that he had a sensor inside his body which alerted them to his death. The two are very much living in L's shadow, and brilliant and calculating though they both are, L comes off as the most important character overall. I'll leave it to you two as to where/how/if to work this into the article. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 14:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree that he is more important, but I can't avoid the fact he is absent for the second half. I would call it the main antagonist during the series' first half, as the two others are the main antagonists in the series' second half. It's like the Dragon Ball villains, none of them are main.Tintor2 (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I would call him the antagonist for the first half of the series, and the main antagonist for the series in general. Note that the meaning of antagonist is "the main character or force opposing the protagonist in a literary work or drama" (emphasis added), not the only opposing character. I think my advice has stretched about as far as it can go - as I said, it's up to you both as to what to do with it. Let me know if there are any different points you want advice on. All the best. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 16:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping us out here. I appreciate it. :) Vashti (talk) 05:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I've done some cleanup, adding a mention of L as the series' main antagonist to the lead. I can't agree that the episode count is insignificant, given that what we're dealing with is how prominent the characters are to the story! More than that, I can't agree that L is absent from the second arc. Yes, he's dead, he's not physically present, but the characters refer to him constantly. His influence pervades the arc, as is shown by numerous quotes and so on. It's like saying Jesus has no relevance to Paul's epistles because he was dead at the time. Vashti (talk) 06:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. It still was added without a reference. None of that arguments actually help as this mentions require references.Tintor2 (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I thought we just had an entire discussion establishing WP:BLUE - that is, that we don't need a reference to describe the character that primarily opposes the main character of a work of fiction as an antagonist? We only needed a reference to say that the character was created to be an antagonist, as that assumes authorial intent. Vashti (talk) 20:05, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Yep. But the reference did not establish him as a main.Tintor2 (talk) 00:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Simple observation does that, not to mention consensus. Vashti (talk) 18:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Not really as the discussion mainly stated that these statements require a source.Tintor2 (talk) 19:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I think you and I must be reading different discussions. Anyway, I'm bowing out at this point myself. Hopefully you'll find some way to improve the page. Vashti (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Quoting from third opinion "L is "the antagonist". To me it seems obvious enough that L's role in the series is more important than either Near's or Mello's, but it would be a good idea to get a solid citation for this just to settle the argument."Tintor2 (talk) 01:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Deuteragonist?

While I think this is a pretentious word to use in an article on an anime character, do we really have to have this argument over again? L is clearly the second-most-important character in the work, ranking behind Light but above Misa. This is a WP:BLUE issue; see the above discussion regarding use of "antagonist" - which I see has been removed from the article nonetheless. Vashti (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

May I propose a theory?

I know this isn't based anywhere, but it has been bugging me. Is there any chance of L being autistic? Think about it- He is highly intelligent, anti-social, does not care how he dresses, eats specifics foods and sits in a certain manner. He also refers to statistics a lot, like if he doesn't sit the way he does his reasoning goes down by forty percent. Once again, I know there is no base for this in either the anime or manga, I just want to know what people think of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.176.2.36 (talk • contribs)

Sorry, but Wikipedia is not a forum. This page is for discussing edits to the L page, not for discussing L in general. Maybe you want to try talking about this on Tumblr's Death Note tag? Vashti (talk) 15:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I should also mention Reddit's DN community. Vashti (talk) 15:32, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

"super detective" or genius "super detective"

Before I get into a revert war here, can we get some more opinions on this, please? Should L be described as a "super detective", or a genius "super detective"? Vashti (talk) 23:04, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipuffery. Prodigal detective is the most accurate and concise descripion. We don't need puffed up words like super omega god like demon. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 03:17, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

You know L is described in canon as a genius, and "super detective" is the series' creator's own description of him, right? "Prodigal detective" would be a Wiki-created term and certainly would be wikipuffery. Vashti (talk) 09:32, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely a genius super detective. JokerXpirt (talk) 10:20, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on L (Death Note). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070504101352/http%3A//www.sinchew-i.com/contests/deathnote/index.phtml?sec=cast
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090825001747/http://star-ecentral.com/news/story.asp?file=%2F2008%2F3%2F23%2Fmovies%2F20299378&sec=movies to http://star-ecentral.com/news/story.asp?file=%2F2008%2F3%2F23%2Fmovies%2F20299378&sec=movies

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:40, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on L (Death Note). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080808140654/http://www.popcultureshock.com/anime-review-death-note-vol-3/43385/ to http://www.popcultureshock.com/anime-review-death-note-vol-3/43385/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029193235/http://www.mania.com/death-note-vol-03_article_82405.html to http://www.mania.com/death-note-vol-03_article_82405.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)