Jump to content

Talk:List of Death Note characters/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Soichiro Yagami

i recently thought of a theory about Light's dad's death. Since Soichiro sacrificed half of his lifespan for the shinigami eyes, and then died the same night, wouldn't that mean that he would've died the next day anyway? that's something to think about...

also, i've thought of a loophole to the effects of the death note, would the death note still work if you legally changed your name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.125.148 (talk) 23:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


Characters in wrong sections

I think it is strange -and wrong- to have, for example, Near and Mello in "supporting characters" and guys like Mikami or Takada in "main characters". Leaving these last two there is fine in my opinion, but only as long as Near and Mello are put in "main characters". Considering Mikami or Takada more important than them is stupid, dont't you think?

As always, sorry about my english if anything went wrong. HighLight43 19:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I've put the section 'L's successors' underneath the 'main characters'. Feel free to correct/alter! Ninja neko 09:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

There is an error with Near, specifically about the SPK. It stands for the Special Provision for Kira, not Secret. Frost490 10:12, 3 July 2008

I think that Mikami is more important than Takada. Mikami is considered a main character like Misa, Near, and Mello and they're all secondary as opposed to Light, L, and Ryuk being the main.

Sakashiro

In the anime, Misa had never seen Sakashiro before. Correct this please. It currently says he was an ex boyfriend. He may have been so in the manga, but not in the anime. Antoids 19:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Lifespans

We should list the lifespans of the characters. The number underneath their names in the anime refers to the month/day/year in that order, as far as I can tell. You could at least list them. Then someone who figures it out for sure can tell it to us. Antoids 20:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

According to the Shinigami eyes article, the lifespan is displayed in 'Shinigami realm time', and to the best of my knowledge no definite/official conversion rate between Shinigami realm time and human time has been determined. As such, it seems to me that listing the lifespans in Shinigami realm time (being the only available definitive unit of measurement) would be somewhat crufty. Simply my understanding, though, perhaps others know better. ^.^ Lithiumflower 02:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe the best way to find out is to see if Misa's lifespan is ever displayed. I've heard the theory that it's hours, but if we ever see hers, we know she died by jumping off a building (or bridge, I was too disgusted with Light's loss to tell) on the day of the meeting of Light and Near (01/28/09 at 1 PM I believe. Then give 1-3 hours for the meeting to end). If it hasn't been displayed, there is an early episode where Light's lifespan is displayed, then another, when his father dies. We'll at least know if it's a timer or a date. But I understand it is most likely inconsequential. I don't find it all that necessary myself. Just for the sake of completeness. EDIT: Wait, I just realized, Misa's lifespan was cut in half a second time, so her lifespan would have changed. This changes the whole theory. If it is merely half the number it was before, then we know. It's so much simpler now. Antoids 20:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

1548306 (Bit blurry, low quality video), then 56437 when she has halved (quartered) her lifespan. That's considerably less than half. We at least know it depletes. If it were in hours, thatd be over 6 years. As such, I dont think its hours. Antoids 23:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

If we use Near as an example, it is listed that his lifespan is (43406) and light's lifespan (93312639) and presuming it takes place over a 6 year period before his death. That would would give us an equation similar to "X = 6(43406)/93312639 = 0.0028"

That would give Near ten days of life assuming that it is a linear countdown.--Nimnom (talk) 02:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

"By dividing Light's number of days to live in Shinigami time by every Shinigami day, and then dividing that by 365 days in a year, we can come to the conclusion that light has 71.8 years of his lifespan left, making him 88 when he would have died." I'm having trouble understanding what this is trying to say. Is this a fact only under the assumption that the number above characters' heads is in Shinigami days? Even if so, why is the process:

  1. Shinigami days / # Shinigami days? That would just equal 1.

Assuming we have the number in "Shinigami days," why is this divided by 365 human days in a year? I may just not be able to understand the intention here; can this be reworded more clearly? Impermanence (talk) 03:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Late addition is late, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinigami_Eyes#Designing_the_Shinigami_Eyes answers this question of the algorithm: no such equation actually exists and the numbers were pretty much made up on the spot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.92.40.49 (talk) 11:38, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Shinigami Eating

It is stated in the anime (Episode 23 I believe. Shortly before L's death.) by Rem, in response to L's "Do Shinigami really eat only apples?", that Shinigami do not need to eat because their "organs have deteriorated, no, evolved" so they no longer NEED to eat. However, Ryuk's love for apples, and another's love for chocolate suggest that they eat for pleasure, and typically prefer sweet things. I understand if you won't put the second part in, but the 'deterioration', I must insist on being added. It's completely reasonable and stated as fact. Sorry if I sound bad. Don't mean to. Antoids 04:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Nobody owns the article, you can add this yourself, be bold :). Ninja neko 06:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
You'd think so, but no. I can't edit wiki pages. There's a lot of coding involved and I don't understand wiki code. Only basic HTML for me. Sorry. EDIT; Well I tried, and it wasn't hard, surprisingly. That'll teach me to be bold more often. Thanks. Feel free to edit my work for grammar, though i think I did a fair job. Antoids 23:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Ryuk's Incompetence

"He is also shown to be quite incompetent, not knowing some of the basic rules of the Death Note or even a few rules which Light himself figures out." This does not show incompetence. According to the rules of the Death Note, "Even the original owners of the death note, gods of death, do not know much about the note." Removing this sentence. Antoids 23:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

L Lawliet

L is actually regarded as the three greatest detectives in the world,but very few people in the world know this. May be limited to the investigation team. I don't know how to integrate this, though, because it sounds weird wherever I put it. Antoids 00:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


Can we get a spoiler notice on here? It says very clearly in the beginning of L's bio, with absolutely no warning, that he dies. This might spoil something for those who are just starting to watch Death Note, especially those who watch the dubbed version. -KS 16 Dec 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.184.231.207 (talk) 03:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


You know, L's real name doesn't include the "L" part. It's just "Lawliet". They only included the "L" on the name card to show how the "L" represented "Lawliet" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.163.231 (talk) 06:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

... And where's your proof of that? The card was released while being stated that it would reveal L's real name. If it shows his real name as "L Lawliet" I think that that proves that it's his real name. So on what grounds is his real name being changed to just "Lawliet" on the Death Note related pages? 75.88.65.32 (talk) 02:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The card only had the "L" to show how it stood for "Lawliet". You can't have a letter as an official name on legal documents and whatnot. His name is only "Lawliet". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.163.231 (talk) 05:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Repeating the same thing again without adding anything new will not convince people you are right. JuJube (talk) 05:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok then, give me proof that someones name can legally be a singular letter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.163.231 (talk) 06:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Who cares whether it's "legal" for us or not? This is a work of fiction. The rules of reality need not apply. Unless you carry lethal notebook paper?—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 07:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Unforunately, the real-world legality is irrelevant. The character in question in more known as L in the series and by fans. Anyone looking up the character on Wikipedia would go on the name L. That's given priority. Regardless of the outcome of your debate, L will be included in the name used. Read WP:COMMONNAME is you have questions. We follow Wiki Law. Fox816 (talk) 07:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Obviously he goes by the name "L", what I'm saying is that his birth name is only "Lawliet". Put the "L" part in quotes then! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.163.231 (talk) 17:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Something else I'd like to point out about L (according to a short and light-hearted discussion in the anime, however I have not read the manga and so I am not sure whether it is exclusive to the anime or not, but if its true, then it would obviously apply to the manga also.) For the sake of stressing the fact to observers that L is indeed extremely smart and self-sacrificing, and thus can be regarded as non-human in the sense that he he's too good to be human (as speculated by the alternative Death God). The point being that I think it is nesseccary to include that L can deprive himself of sleep and remain unaffected by it. The animaters (once again, I have only observed this in the anime) made sure to emphasise this by showing the setting being late at night and the Jp Officers looking tired and L looking completely unaffected by fatigue, despite L doing most of the tihnking. This ties in partially to how he doesn't gain fat from sweets; that being that apart from the fact that the brain uses the most calories (according to L) but he can psychologically trick his body into thinking that he is exercising as well as deprive his brain from the thought of fatigue (or possibly from the sugar of the sweets which are quickly seperated from the fatter substances due to L's theory). This 'setting' source is first observed very early into episode 8 of the anime, and then once again touched upon during the captivity of Light. DrTheKay (talk) 10:52, 20 January 2008 (UTC)DrTheKay

It's already quite apparent that L doesn't sleep and there's already been made a note in the article regarding the sweet and how they affect his body- he stated that his brain uses up all the calories. Without proper citing though, anything else wouldn't be considered WP:OR and removed unfortunately. We can't include theories, only facts. If you have in mind to place in more info about L and can provide sources then by all means go for it. Fox816 (talk) 15:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

--Something I need to point out--the birthdays of L and all other main characters were taken out recently. Please, whoever did that or whoever has accurate knowledge of their birthdays, please put that back up! It really matters to a lot of Death Note fans that we have access to that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.106.230.224 (talk) 09:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:FAN. Thank you. --Eruhildo (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


It's kind of weird that L is referred to as an antagonist. It might give false impressions, because, yes, although he opposes Raito, he's sort of the "good" guy. malisa (talk) 00:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Main Characters in Separate Articles

Light's, L's, Misa's, and some other characters have really large information on them. It would be more suitable to move those main characters to separate articles, link to the separate articles, and just write a short summary under their name. So the page isn't as crowded. DoubleLn2 (talk) 01:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, this topic's been discussed already. I even brought it up to the Village Pump:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive_4#Character_Article_Policy

So,I'm afraid that they can't have separate articles, especially Misa. See, the reason they were merged was because they were just basically detailed plot summary, no real world content (which is supposed to be the focus of the article in question), and that isn't allowed per Wiki's guidelines (see WP:FICT and WP:NOT for details.

So if you think the information there is too lenghty, I suggest you do the following:
a) Condense the content (prefferable with the stuff we have now).
b) Look for real world content, like the Concept/Creation, Reception of those characters, etc. How to Read Death Note should have that sort of thing, if it exists.
It might be a common practice with other anime, but it is still frowned upon, and I see no reason as to why Death Note should follow that terrible trend.HadesDragon (talk) 01:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, it should not be difficult to find real world content - Death Note Volume 13: How to Read should explain how the characters were created. If you find a wealth of information, go and make the articles! WhisperToMe (talk) 02:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

This article should be split in accordance with Wikipedia:Article size as the file size is excessive at 94 KB, and 14,412 words which is over the upper limit of 10,000 words. [1] —Dispenser (talk) 08:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:SIZE doesn't actually call this excessive, and one must keep in mind that this is a list, which doesn't have some of the same concerns as other long articles. -- Ned Scott 08:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Not to say that I disagree. I could definitely see the main characters being split. -- Ned Scott 08:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Ned Scott, if Death Note Volume 13: How to Read contains development notes about the characters, the main characters can definitely be split! WhisperToMe (talk) 19:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Now the character descritptions are too small, espicially for important characters like Light and Misa. It also doesn't go too in depth into their personalities, which is a shame due to the fact that so much work went into them. Febuary 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alucard Xis (talk • contribs) 03:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Too small? They look just fine to me. All the unnecessary, overly detailed plot is out now, and it looks much better that way. That's the way a character article SHOULD be like. I think the short description of each character's traits/personality looks great. It's not ver long and gives the reader a general idea of what said character is like.HadesDragon (talk) 13:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I received HTR 13 so I should able to fill in more details :) WhisperToMe (talk) 20:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Watari Death Note.jpg

Image:Watari Death Note.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Takeshi Kaga in Death Note.jpg

Image:Takeshi Kaga in Death Note.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Raye's last name

When he shows Light his ID, it looks like it says Penbar, with an A, not an E. Or am I seeing it incorrectly? 69.182.118.139 (talk) 00:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

It's written, in plain English, as "Raye=Penber" in the Japanese manga, not to mention volume 13. Chibi Gohan (talk) 08:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Too many images!!!!!

There are way too many fair-use images in this article! In fact, to be specific, there's a guideline that says unless a fictiona character is notable enough for its own article (Freddy Krueger or Link (The Legend of Zelda), for example) it isn't notable enough for an image. Although I won't go that far (yet), I do suggest you only give an image to the really, really major characters, like Light, Ryuk, and L. Otherwise, characters like the buss jacker fro Volume 1 shouldn't have an image at all. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 01:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

?

who is the third kira? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.70.254 (talk) 08:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Death Note How to Read 13 has been released in English - Use this as a source to add real world information

VIZ Media has released Death Note How to Read 13 in English: http://www.viz.com/products/products.php?series_id=827

This book contains real world info about the series, and it can be used to establish separate articles for Light, L, and Misa. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Near as main character?

This has been bothering me for a while - if Mikami and Takada are considered main characters, why isn't Near? IIRC, his part was arguably larger than either of them, being the main antagonist after the timeskip. --Pentasyllabic (talk) 01:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Personally think the "main characters" listing is somewhat haphazard. I figure breaking them up into their distinct groups (Kiras, L's team, Near's team, etc) would work better. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 02:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree. I think maybe "Kira's team", "L's team", "Investigation team", and "Minor characters" would work well for main headers ("team" sounds kind of funny for some of them, so substitute whatever word you want). Under Kira would be all of the kiras and the shinigami section. Under L would be Watari and L & his successors. Under Investigation would be the investigation team members (minus Light and L of course). The minor characters section can probably remain how it is. Well, that's my idea anyway. Oh, while I'm here, does anyone think Misa's picture is a little strange? I could upload a more natural looking one if anyone wants me to. --Eruhildo (talk) 03:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Not really. I think the pic is rather befitting for her personality. Though you could upload another and we can do a comparison. Fox816 (talk) 04:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
By all means. I thought it odd someone would choose "L does some grab-ass" moment out of all the possible scenes. Just have to choose between goth/non-goth. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 04:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
There are very distinct groups of characters so that could work too. My personal suggestion would be "Kiras" (Light, Misa, Mikami, Takada), "L's team" (including Soichiro and company), "L's successors" (Near, Mello, Matt, possibly with subcats for Near's and Mello's respective teams), and "minor characters". --Pentasyllabic (talk) 20:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
How about this:
== Main characters ==
Light
L
...
...
...
== Investigation team ==
=== L's team ===
...
...
=== Near's team ===
...
...
...
== Minor characters ==
..
..
And the characters should go to their respective positions. We can decide on if someone is important enough to be a main character later.--Sunny910910 (talk|Contributions) 03:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Higuchi was also a "Kira"

So, why is Higuchi not in the "Kiras" section? I think he should be there. No need for a big text, but he deserves it. He made a lot more killing than Takada and probably even Mikami. 62.57.129.232 (talk) 21:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Higuchi wasn't doing anything under Light's will. Technically, he IS Kira #3, but other than that, he's nothing more than some random criminal used by Rem to save Misa. --Juigi Kario (Charge! * My crusades) 22:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
(Remove this if you think it's inappropriate. Probably just mostly food for thought.) Oh, by the way, somebody could say the same thing about Takada. But you know what I think? I think Death Note is carrying a secret, negative message about societal norms. Who is the top class killer known as Kira? The popular guy. Who is the supposedly more powerful Kira #2? Some teen idol girl who believes herself to be an innocent person. Who are the people trying to catch Kira? ADULT detectives. And let's not forget the primary antagonists who bring down Kira are childish and socially inept, and the one who prevents Light from trying to escape happens to be the most immature of those same adult detectives. Now I will grant Takada was pretty much used, but she, while being the local Ms. Popularity, still supported Kira through and through until she realized the truth--too little too late. --Juigi Kario (Charge! * My crusades) 22:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
You're reading too much into it. Over-analysis of anything can lead to conclusions like that. Obviously, unless the staff of the anime/manga actually say they had those intentions in mind it's just personal speculation. Just to point out one thing, the fact the detectives are adults and not children trained at some secret private school designed to churn out kid police is pretty much spot on to as real as you can be...unless Japan decided to lower their requirement age for their forces. Fox816 (talk) 23:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, I said that it was how I think, not how the DN staff thinks, though I wouldn't be surprised. But I don't think it's over-analysis. I got interested in DN during the episodes where Light was trying to handle Raye Penbar. And I caught on that Light was aware of being a popular guy and had used that to his advantage. And then I was seeing Soichiro's company walking in to try to talk to L. And the detectives being professional adults? Well, I don't know if Japan lowers their age requirement or not. I'm just talking about this because I wonder if the DN staff is speaking against teenagers and the likes of MySpace. --Juigi Kario (Charge! * My crusades) 23:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

L's motivation

Chapter 109 reveals the fact that L apparently only picked up cases out of personal interest and amusement as opposed to a sense of justice. Think there's a way we can incorporate that into the article?—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 22:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You can probably stick it in the second paragraph. It's already worked into Near also. TTN (talk) 01:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
It's also mentioned in the anime.--Sunny910910 (talk|Contributions|Guest) 01:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

A new topic completly based on the Deathnote book its self.

I think there should be a new topic strictly about the Deathnote book. There should be all of the rules and other things to. It would be nice to check the rules and see other things such as the fake rules and images..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shnigamilover13 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a fan site. Such things were already discussed and the conclusion was to remove all but a certain few of the rules. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rules of the Death Note and Talk:Death Note#Written Rules. --Eruhildo (talk) 20:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I also think there should be a new section completley on the deathnote and the rules itself... poohman0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poohman0 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

No. Eruhildo is right: such a thing belongs in fansites and the like. That's not what Wikipedia is for.--HadesDragon (talk) 16:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaceds section

In the artical it said that L was disoriented and that was why kira killed him, However this is only in the animePoohman0 (talk) 03:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Trimming business

Okay, TTN, why do you feel that this stuff you trimmed is not needed in the article? I feel that a good explanation is needed in particular because influences, references, etc. are important. Also the section was not quite complete yet (I need to get more of Ohba's commentary) - Also if you make the edit you need to ensure that the refs are in working order. It's a lot easier to discuss first and act later, especially when dealing with experienced editors. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The point should be to succinctly describe the character's development. Filling it with redundant information, unnecessary quotes, and making it completely unorganized doesn't help. Though you're trying to order it by each person's commentary, that is not actual organization. I didn't actually remove any information as far as I can tell. I just condensed the pointless quotes and placed relevant information together. The references work as far as I can tell. It's that I don't know if your organization is complete or not. TTN (talk) 22:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I use a lot of quotes because I want to do as little interpretation of what the author is saying as possible. If I cannot tell what the author is trying to say or if I think the sentiment is best expressed in quotes I use quotes.

I'll look at the diffs here [2]

  • Regarding the part about L being given the alias, it is important to say who gave him the alias (Two people were responsible for the work) - Some decisions were made by Ohba and some decisions were made by Obata, and some were jointly made by both - Ohba gave L his alias
  • Some of the condensing looks fine but some details were lost (i.e. the suggestions by Ohba - he left the design to Obata but he made suggestions such as "He's English" or "he has a sweet tooth") - Also the initial rough draft of L appearing proves how the design changed to the final version
  • The assigning colors for the character for book covers could be seen as relevant to the character, but it might be considered relevant to the main series too. If you think that the book cover bit is more relevant to the main series I will have to think of how to incorporate that in the main article

The best idea could be to bring a third party in and see what he or she thinks about rearranging the content.

WhisperToMe (talk) 22:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

While quotes are definitely helpful in understanding their thought process, using one every other sentence does not help. Plus, we're not here to substitute the guide. The point is to use it to help build the section rather just copy it in a way. Unless there is special reasoning behind it, small details like that don't matter. If he decided on the alias because of some other detail also, it would matter, but it's trivial otherwise. I guess I accidentally just misplaced those details. They would have stayed had I noticed. Though, the part about the rough draft was left out because it is technically in the first part, so there is no need to repeat it again. The part about the color was left in the second paragraph. TTN (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
The thing about trying to rewrite primary sources into Wikipedia narrative is that the author has to convey the same information given by the guide with less text, right? Whenever an author (or translator, as in this case) uses a lot of slang I tend to pick apart the key words and use them in quotes to leave as little as possible to interpretation. Substituting words could wipe out the interpretation and using the exact wording without quotes sounds strange and may end up taking out of context. What I'll do once I am done schoolwork is that I'll compare your revision to mine and I'll see which parts of each work best. Perhaps we could see which quotess are easily substitute with prose and which ones are not. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Yea, I agree with TTN. It does need to be cut down. But about the refs, if you have <ref name= at the bottom of the page, but then use it at the top, the reference will still work just fine, so long as the source reference stays intact. Rau J16 00:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, I have never thought of using the ref=at the bottom.. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


Pic for Mikami

i was searching the net and found this pic of him

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/e/e6/Teru.JPG

and i thought it would be a good pic for his articel. Near and Mello are my fav characters (tied with L) and i'm glad they have pic, but i think Mikami is one of the ones that should also have a pic (and mabye light's dad) Allen Walker 15:13, 05 April 2008 (UTC)

Reception Sections

The article contains only two "character receptions", both of which are from a single source with very little information. They are for Soichiro and the Yotsuba group, two very trivial picks. On top of that, the reception sentence for Soichiro isn't even about the character, the only thing that would be relevant; it's about the voice actor for the U.S. dub. If nobody objects, I'm removing this. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 20:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC).

Image restoration

I think some of the images seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Death_Note_characters&diff=175639854&oldid=175621522 that were deleted in a previous revision can come back. Since this discusses character design we could have individual images that support and illustrate the text regarding Ohba and Obata's decisions. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

  • I added back Takada and Mikami as per Wikipedia:NONFREE#Non-free_image_use_in_list_articles - Section 2 "Images which are discussed in detail in the context of the article body, such as a discussion of the art style, or a contentious element of the work, are preferable to those that simply provide visual identification of the elements." - I intend for the images to be used to aid discussion of the wardrobe, so the images shown should represent depictions of clothing and/or drawing design. I.E. Mikami looks a bit like Taro Kagami and Takada's clothing is more formal. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Same with Soichiro, since he was intended to look like a "stereotypical detective" WhisperToMe (talk) 21:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Move Mello?

The Spanish Wikipedia has an article about Mello here: es:Mihael Keehl - How many of you believe that Mello is ready to get his own article? How many think that Mello needs more commentary before a split is made? (Splitting Mello would reduce the article from about 72 KB to 66 KB) WhisperToMe (talk) 06:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Matsuda's theories

I forget - did Matsuda believe that Near had killed Mikami? Page 198 of HTR has Ohba state that he has not decided if Matsuda's theories were correct and that the reader should decide if they were correct. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Film information

I believe that film information should stay in here as the films essentially are Death Note but with an altered story. Also we have Shiori Akino and Sakajo in here, so we may as well reflect the characters as they are in the films. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Unless it's a complete change in character (like with Takada and Near), there really is no need to bother with it. The film articles will cover the exact plot, while these will cover the characters themselves. Even the main series is given too much weight in some cases. TTN (talk) 22:16, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
But this also covers the general outcomes of the characters (if the bulk of the character's content is here) - And having a character live in the end instead of die is a major change in the outcome. Using this logic, there wouldn't be a separate personality section regarding the film, but there would be a blurb about what happens to the character in the film. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Looking at that part again, I guess I overlooked the living part and focused on the unnecessary details. Just the part about living seems fine to keep. TTN (talk) 22:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Merge Shinigami list into this

I thought we had agreed to do this ages back, but apparently it never happened? Or did we just not find the time? Doceirias (talk) 23:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. Merging these two articles would make it hard for people to load a ridiculously long page. And I oppose cutting out any information, since all materials presented in both articles are important. 117.3.7.48 (talk) 14:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I concur. There's a bunch of important material that would be lost in such a process. Kopf1988 (talk) 19:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
The article on shinigami has creation and other real world information. Going on precedent, it can remain as its own notable article Scapler (talk) 00:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Mello's Name?

As it said in the article, Micheal Keehl it's spelt Mihael Keehl. Sorry if you didbn't notice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flock-of-doves (talk • contribs) 02:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Death_Note_characters/Archive_4&oldid=1092077442"