Talk:Orihime Inoue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Orihime Inoue is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of anime and manga. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page (Talk). See our portal to learn more.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents 1 Flowers 2 Brother 3 vandalism 4 My revert 5 Doesnt this need a spoiler warning somewhere? 6 Synopsis 7 Jump Heroines Special Cover 8 "Official" VIZ site 9 Realm of the gods

[edit] Flowers

First of all, please check your grammar if you edit the page, and re-read your changes right away to find out errors (this is for 124.numbers).

Additionally, we don't know that Orihime can kill a hollow but not a seated shinigami. In fact, the shinigami she targeted was 4th seat (very powerful, compared to seats like 15th or 20th who are weak, or even a guy like Hanatarou), plus she didn't actually want to kill him unlike the hollow, so it's even possible that she potentially could. Please don't add that line a 3rd time.

Oh yeah, and who knows what a chrysanthemum is? I did because it's the only word for it in Russian, but most English-speaking folk wouldn't. Daisy is a simpler and more common word which means practically the same thing.

-- Ynhockey 00:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

They don't mean the same to me, I think of chrysanthemum as a rarer flower than a daisy. It would be like changing iris to tulip and camellia to rose. They would be changing rare/exotic flowers for more common flowers in my mind. Though they all could be more common in Japan. Also if you wanted to change one, ume would be better changed to plum as the Ume page says the word's imported from Japan.Hackwrench 06:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, when I think of daisy, I think of a flower that more looks likethe picture of Bidens torta in the Asteraceae page and not like the picture of a chrysanthemum, fewer, bigger petals, not a bunch of smaller ones. Then there's the matter of what the English translation of the Anime/Manga uses. They've just shown the first appearance of them on Cartoon Network last week, so I'm not sure. There's also the question of whether the attack animations take on the appearance of flowers. If there is one that looks more like a chrysanthemum than a daisy, or vice-versa, that would be another indication of which path to take. Hackwrench 06:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, Mums is better in English, didn't make the connection at first, partly because for a long time chrysanthemums had been mispronounced Chrysanteim or some such. Hackwrench 08:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Since Orihime's healing and barrier skills are considered to be very powerful, it is likely that her division skill would be as well, if she ever put her heart into using it. Also, who doesn't know what a chrysanthymum is? Besides, all that really matters is that people recognize it as a type of flower. I guess it doesn't really matter though.--Tjstrf 09:38, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I've noticed that Orihime is consistantly referred to as liking Ichigo in "a rather sisterly fashion" in the anime. I wouldn't say this is correct. She is usually flustered, nervous and blushing around him, even in the latest episode of the series (ep 59). To me this reflects more of a crush, possibly just a 'past crush, now good friend' but definately not "sisterly". Tatsuki is probably a better example of sisterly affection.

Feedback on what others think on this issue would be good because I believe that these references should be removed and leave the 'crush' for both manga and anime - possibly with a simple "(this is more obvious in the manga)" or something. -- SpringBoy 13:09, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes I agree. I didn't change it because I thought I missed something and probably the author was correct. It should be changed if you also think this way. -- Ynhockey 13:41, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Brother

Does anyone know his name? There was Sora and now Kakei? I don't remember if it was ever mentioned but both seem strange. Anyone care to confirm/refute either? For now I removed the name entirely. -- Ynhockey 17:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

In the manga, they always call him her brother, no name given. Unless they mention it in the anime or her character bio page,he doesn't have one. --Tjstrf 18:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Terribly sorry that I'm over 10 months late here, but you're wrong. It's clearly stated by Orihime that his name is Kakei (this is mentioned multiple times in chapters 5 and 6 in the first volume of the manga). // Sasuke-kun27 03:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

That's dub/Viz only though. --tjstrf talk 03:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

In the official character polls, it mentions an Inoue Sora, the name given to Orihime's brother. Though it can be argued as non-canon, the filler episode shows a "fake" version of Orihime's brother, also refered to as Sora.

OK, the Bleach character book (page 40) clearly states that the name is Sora (昊). If you see anyone changing it again (especially to Kakei), please revert immediately. Thanks. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 11:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vandalism

Two different IP with the same first three digits recently vandalized the page in very similar ways. I don't know how you can tell if its an AOL user or other proxy-type connection, so someone should try and find out and post AOL user or whatever on their talk page. The two IPs were 200.9.73.142 and 200.9.73.103. --Anaraug 23:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My revert

Apologies for writing a misleading summary, I meant to write it for the other revert I was going to make. But as for this one, the comments about very large breasts are completely unnecessary, and sound like fancruft (whether they are or not) too. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:42, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Disagreed; her very large breasts are indeed the butt of some jokes thorough the series. And you call a cat, a cat. Her breasts ARE very large. --Delf 19:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Doesnt this need a spoiler warning somewhere?

....

Perhaps just the synopsis needs it, most of the other info is general information... Fruitcake119 08:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Synopsis

This article needs a synopsis section. Hopefully it won't be a mess like the one at Ichigo Kurosaki though. Is anyone willing to write it? I will only have time on Thursday. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

If you dont want it to be a mess, why dont you do what the Naruto articles did and make a separate article named "Plot of Bleach" then link it to every character page that is growing too large? --GhostStalker 08:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Because wikipolicy states these articles really shouldn't be plot summaries. I take this to mean only information about the character themself should be included, not everything that happened in any scene they were in. This gets to be a huge problem in things like Ichigo Kurosaki, where the most recent plot, revealed in the last 6 chapters (that's 5% of the series) takes up as much space as the entire first arc, but the solution there is simply to heavily slash the summary after each mini-arc concludes. --tjstrf 08:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Eh, the Uzumaki Naruto article had the same problem, because editors, including myself, added too much information from the latest chapters and didnt trim it down later. What Im suggesting is to make a seperate article for the entire plot of Bleach, if the synopsis portions of articles become too large to manage. --GhostStalker 09:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

If you're going to do that, why not just write a wikibook? As I see it, purposefully creating articles for fancruft is about the worst thing you could possibly do. I like thinking of our articles here as at least being well-intentioned even if not perfectly implemented, this would be a huge step away from that. --tjstrf 09:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that you can just make a summary of all the information. Like for example, the anime section. Instead of writing it all in great detail, you can just say "Inoue was captured by some mysterious people, and Ichigo, Renji, Chad and Ishida had to go through several challenges to save her" and so on. The whole page would become much shorter that way. Am I a bit confused with what you all are talking about? If you are discussing ways of trying to shorten the page somehow, then writing summaries is the best thing we can do. Sumhtun 05:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that it's not so simple to determine what information to include in the short summary. Some of it may be important for the article overall (not just as a synopsis) for example. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 05:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the Anime section can be cleared up anyway. The story about the Bount ends half-way, and is it really important to the story? I don't remember reading about any Bount in the manga. Sumhtun 06:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I have attempted to rewrite the synopsis in a way that includes only the relevent points to the overall development of the character. Also, another thing I did notice is the inconsistency over the reference for Orihime. She is referred mostly by her first name while referred by her last name in some part of the article. I've tried to edit most of them so that they all refer to her as "Orihime". -- Finestela 06:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

All right... The synopsis section is, overall, cleaned up (with the exception of the anime, which I have not followed since the Bount Arc has begun). I've concentrated mostly on the events that builds up Orihime as a character, and weeded out the rest.

Also, thanks to Sumhtun and some others, the article now refers to Orihime by her first name in all instances, as oppose to the back and forth reference. -- Finestela 21:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jump Heroines Special Cover

Here's the source for my edit.

• Weekly Jump Cover, Heroines Edition

The reason I'm making my edit sounding a bit vague (as oppose to saying outright that she has replaced Rukia) is because Kubo did not (and probably never will) indicate such change. From my understanding, Kubo never stated who the female lead (heroine in Japanese) is in the series, and referred Rukia as a protagonist (shujinkou). As far as I'm concern, both Rukia and Orihime are female leads in the story officially. Also, another reason there have been noises around the internet is the feature of Don Patch from Bobobo in the heroine coverpage (damn you! Bobobo!), which some used as an excuse to discredit the cover as "official" (while ignoring the fact that all other characters, excluding Orihime, are, in fact, female leads). -- Finestela 01:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo is intentionally irrational and tries to violate one's expectations at every turn. So it proves nothing that it would put a non-female (at least not obviously female) character where there should be a sexy female character. JRSpriggs 13:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

While I would personally agree with you (and indeed wish Rukia would up and die already), it's still speculation. You'll also notice that Orihime makes much better fanservice in the minds of most readers, so one can construct other reasons for the change. --tjstrf 01:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

There are the huge words of "Gathering of Heroines" stamped on the top right hand corner (ヒロイン集結). The only reason I've listed the above "alternative viewpoint" is stating the "speculative nature" for such dissent. The statement itself, that Orihime is "a" female lead, is a undisputed fact, via a graphical announcement of Weekly Jump. -- Finestela 01:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I thought we were talking about that IP edit that claimed she had replaced Rukia. Your edit is fine. --tjstrf 01:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. I didn't like that IP edit either, since it was phrased poorly :P -- Finestela 10:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I am so laughing at you guys. http://ileenka.livejournal.com/28427.html#cutid2

• 1. Sign your discussion entry.
• 2. Why don't you go back and do more research? Mainly when the two Official Books were published, compare to when the Weekly Jump Magazine Cover came out, before running your mouth?
• 3. Now that you've brought up... why not try to find the exact quote about what Kubo really said regarding this so-called reference for Rukia's "shujinkou" status (as well as when and where the quote was from)?? Yes? No? Maybe? The fact is you can't find it anywhere! Even 2ch stopped referring to that statement altogether.
• 4. There are plenty of people on Wikipedia that knows Japanese... so don't worry about your little sentence filled with romaji... we'll manage.

- Finestela 17:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me as I tremble in fear of your blog. Sorry I pissed off the shippers.

Besides, I actually was REMOVING the claim that Orihime had replaced Rukia in my edits. like this one

My comments on the talk page were in opposition to inserting the claim that Orihime had replaced Rukia as the female lead into the article. --tjstrf 19:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

There we go... Our beloved ileenka is finally done after having every single twisted argument she came up refuted... It's funny how it ended with the "picture side by side" argument to prove this is an official statement for Rukia's status as the "sole" female lead.

No one is disputing the fact that Rukia is a female lead (or the first female lead), but you can't just use a unverified statement to prove a fact (though she still doesn't seem to grasp this).

Oh well... it's still Finestela 1, ileenka 0 I guess... -- Finestela 19:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

...Finestela, did you HAVE to do that? I'd be slapping WP:CIV and WP:DFTT warnings all over your talk page if that were onwiki. I can't say she didn't deserve it for so absurdly misrepresenting us though. --tjstrf talk 08:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. One of my contributions[1] was ranted about in a blog. That's a first for me. Admittedly, I was being a little sassy in the comment, but it was important to reach a consensus rather than wrestling back and forth in pointless edit war. We eventually decided to go with order-of-appearance. –Gunslinger47 10:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Happens more often than you'd think. It's happened to me 3 times that I know of, and I'm not even that controversial. --tjstrf talk 10:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

What would a "confirmed federal contractor" like yourself ever do to cause controversy? :-D –Gunslinger47 10:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Wait, aren't I a sockpuppet of User:MONGO? I can't be a contractor, because sockpuppets aren't human beings and contractors are clearly defined as "person"s. (And if Cplot has a blog, then I'm probably on 4, I wasn't thinking of that.) --tjstrf talk 11:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Official" VIZ site

A link to the official VIZ site has been put on the main Bleach page. It says that Orihime weighs 75kg. Sounds like she's already been installing parts of future Orihime (maybe the lasers?). Good job again, VIZ! Dekimasu 12:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

ROFL... I can't stop myself from laughing as I see the info on that site... Someone ought to send an e-mail to Kubo and tell him what's happening in the U.S.

Jokes apart, I'm going to ignore that and pretend it's not there untill some poor soul unwittingly believes in this and tries to change the info box.

Personally, I believe it's the missles that's packing all those weight... =P -- Finestela

Update: They chanaged it back (awwww...) But for those who missed it fun, here's a screenie of the misinformation/typo: This must've packed with anti-ballistic missles of some kind... :P -- Finestela 22:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

She must have been jumping on the scale when they took the measurement. 75kg? That's nearly as much as Chad, isn't it? --tjstrf 22:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Realm of the gods

Looking at the RAW, Aizen says this about Orihime:

神の領域を侵す能カだよ

Kami no ryōiki o okasu nōryoku da yo.

M7: "This power violates the realm of god."

Kami is something I always see translated inappropriately; mostly due to Judeo-Christian baggage on the word "god". From what I can see, whenever they're talking about a specific god, it is referred to as Kami-sama. The word kami alone can refer to one or more gods. "Kami no ryōiki" is probably best translated as "the realm of gods". This avoids any incidental references to the God god, while staying true to Aizen's original meaning. –Gunslinger47 06:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

You are correct. Kami does not mean the God, it can mean any god, or gods. Although gods in plural are often referred to as kamigami. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 16:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Often, but not always, right? A realm of dogs could be translated to inu no ryōiki accurately enough. There'd be no need to say inu tachi no ryōiki or whatever, according to what my pathetically minimal knowledge of Japanese tells me. –Gunslinger47 00:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)