Talk:Getsuga Tenshō

Page Restoration
Well, as of Chapter 405, the technique is no longer exclusive to Ichigo/Zangetsu, as Isshin used it on Aizen in the end of the chapter. Should we just go ahead and turn the page back into a technique page? Not necessarily the way it used to be (depending on the page's original layout), but something similar to the Cero Oscuras page. Arrancar109 (Talk)  05:40, May 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * We'll have to change all the getsuga tensho redirects anyway as it can now refer to two characters, so a page of its own seems suitable. Though I'd wait until the next chapter is out and we get some sort of explanation (hopefully). Yyp  (Talk) 10:36, May 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * I find this a bit to be jumping the gun. For all we know Isshin's zanpakuto can mimic others attacks. We should wait until a later time until we can find out whats going on, otherwise we feed the fire of fan speculation. There is also no precedent for having two zanpakuto with the same ability. Its usually for other techniques (cero, hierro, shunpo or something along those lines), known to be open to one or more person. Salubri (Talk)  13:10, May 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think we should indeed make a disambiguation page or a page describing technique. Five characters used a getsuga so far. -- The Goblin   Talk   22:12, October 27, 2011 (UTC)

What Five characters. Ichigo and Isshin are the only ones. We know its natural to Ichigo, we dont have enough information to acknowledge if its naturally Isshin as well. Hollow Ichigo is a distinctive part of Ichigo (which is still questionable why he even still has a page), we also dont count non-canon reflection and absorptions. Im also not comfortable with the idea that we should list people who can absorb and copy abilities as users. That would require the same for various characters (hollows included). Disambiguation's aren't necessary in this instance either. Who is actually gonna look for an attack based on who uses it. There just isn't enough in variation about the ability or users to require it having its own page. Just because you can make a page doesn't mean one should. A cero, shunpo and Zanpakuto are widely used by many characters to varying degrees and in unique ways. The same cant be said about a getsuga tensho. --Salubri (Talk)  23:48, October 27, 2011 (UTC)

Users
Why isn't Kugo listed? -- The Goblin   Talk   13:24, March 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * Because it is not his natural ability. The manga is given that he won it by taking Ichigo's Fullbring. 13:42, March 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * Alzanino is right we are not playing the list every single person game. Techniques from zanpakuto are commonly unique to the wielder. We are only going from what is natural not what is stolen or otherwise.--Salubri (Talk)  14:09, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Kugo used the technique. I don't see why he isn't a 'user', makes no sense. There is even a gif of him using it. Ichigo's ability or not, he gained it and it became his as well. And if all zanjutsu are 1 person only, why have a users section if not for the times it has more than one USER not just original owner. If not add ginjo, at least change it from users to original owner(s)? Skarrj (talk) 09:10, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

I dislike "fighting against the man," but since this discussion is not closed, I'll throw in my opinion. If the ability is on the corresponding characters' page already, then there is little to no reason not to include all of them, original owner or not. As Skarrj pointed out, the inclusion of the Kugo gif is contradictory as it presents a use and appearance of the ability that isn't covered by the article. Additionally, the individual Kido spell articles already have the precedent of noting every single user, even those in video games and filler material. I see little difference in this matter. Mohrpheus  (Talk)  13:33, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

Basically this is whats happening. Im not concerned with any of the other pages, these pages were created with a simple concept in mind. To detail the unique abilities of the original owners of the techniques. Not stolen or copied. If you dont like it too bad. The other option is to delete this page altogether, but seeing as Im having no bending to the will of users, this matter is not up for discussion.--

Image Gallery
Rather than have an image subsection on the page, shouldn't we have an Image Gallery, like Shunkō/Image Gallery? I mean, this technique has been used many more times than that, so it seems like it deserves its own gallery.--Xilinoc (talk) 03:31, September 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * Does make sense.--
 * Can't argue with that logic
 * Guess so. 19:08, September 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm good with it. Arrancar109 (Talk)  19:22, September 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * In the spirit of being a standard yes man, sounds good.