Talk:Hidetomo Kajōmaru

Alive?
Is he alive? He was sliced in two, wasn't he? Женёq talk 20:33, June 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * In the last frame we saw of him, he was alive. Until there is confirmation of his death, he will not be listed as so--
 * The last frame we saw him in shows his head cut in two. I don't think this wound isn't mortal, even for a shinigami. Женёq talk 20:55, June 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hiyori was cut in half as well and lived. Until we have proof he is dead, he will not be listed as so.--
 * Closing this, seriously, enough with the lacking proof argument!!

Yes. He is dead.
I don't like to speak up much on this wiki, because everyone whose opinion matters seems to be painfully set in their ways, but this is just being stubborn (don't go writing this off as some ad hominem on other users; read on). This man was vertically cut in half. The Hiyori argument is bull. She was cut in half at the waist. Shinigami are super durable, so she survived without bleeding out. Most of her major organs are in her torso. This guys head and brain were split in half. Nothing would keep this man alive unless he is later revealed to be some Lovecraftian blob master. This man is not part of the Zero Squad, or a Sternritter. He's fodder with a title at best. There is no reason story-wise for him to ever appear again. If, for some god-forsaken reason, Kubo decides we really need to see this guy alive again, it would have to involve Orihime to make any sense. Orihime could resurrect him, but even then, he is dead. Because he is so irrelevant to the story, there is no reason for him to ever be "confirmed dead." This minor character is dead. D-E-A-D. 09:27,11/29/2015 09:27, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps, though my main issue is consistency. Why are we leaving this guy alive when we have Bazz-B, Giselle, Liltotto, and NaNaNa marked as deceased for similar injuries? Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 13:00, November 29, 2015 (UTC)


 * There is really no need to be so aggressive about your opinion. You can start a discussion without attacking people here. We can have mature discussions without reducing ourselves to this and caps which is aggressive. I would agree that it is a mortal injury, we have seen in the past mortal injuries being survived but I agree I don't see this character surviving it. See what I did there? Presented pros and cons of both sides without resorting to aggressiveness. And yes inconsistency can happen Kaido but that's what happens in these kinds of sites, many, non frequent users and frequent users rush over current or big characters and sometimes things are overlooked. But thats the pro of teamwork too, we always there to proof read work. But I think the general consensus is dead here.
 * Apologies, Sun, but my past experience on this wiki was having edits undone without explanation and discussions ignored (not even coming to a conclusion that "no we shouldn't do this," just ignored). The previous discussion here even had a somewhat dismissive tone. "Hiyori was cut in half and lived" despite being bifurcated vertically having far more severe consequences (ie. brain and such.) "stop with this lacking proof argument *close thread*" This is not pointless aggression; this is frustration born from past experience.

03:47,11/30/2015 03:47, November 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * Frustration over a discussion that happened 3 and half years ago is still pointless aggression. You could have easily put points across without being so aggressive about it. One discussion being overlooked does not even equate to plural. You are full well within your capability to "bump" a discussion after a while has passed (not hours or a couple of days we do have lives) in a polite manner. If everytime something any of us did got missed was responded with aggression and accusations we'd spend more time arguing and less time editing. But we don't because we recognise we are human beings who have lives, who miss things like any other person as, mistakes happen. You have barely any main-space edits and when you got a polite warning about rules you responded with the implication that your actions were called pig-headedness before any of your discussions were missed. This place was very different 3/4 years ago as sometimes many of us did not want to stir a pot that another user created for us. It was wrong but nobody wanted arguments over every little thing. But you weren't even here around then so you don't really know why certain discussions ended the way they did. I strongly suggest you alter your attitude and stop taking things so personal if a single discussion gets you so "frustrated" you start subsequent discussions later with such aggression. And previous edits that were undone were explained to you. You changed a technique page with something never seen before and you edit warred. You then followed it up by changing coding without permission and those edits were undone for obvious reasons. Your "past experience" is a very brief one with barely anything done to judge people here in such a way. If you had even opened 2 discussions and they both got closed without discussion, fine, but your single discussion wasn't even closed but was missed so no grounds to start with an attitude.
 * Okay, let's back up here."pointless aggression" was poor wording. I'm not trying yo say "Hey, I have a right to shit on all of you because I'm mad." I was trying to say I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'm just frustrated (not at the 3 and a half year old discussion, just at what I've seen in the past and honestly a few shitty days.) I want to get along here. The points I made were already made in that old discussion (ie. he was cut in half vertically. That kills things). That's why I beat it into the ground. Nothing was personal, until you brought up my past edits. My "past experience" involves more than my own edits and the former discussion; I've seen less-than pleasant interaction on the wiki in the past (no, I don't have specific ones filed away somewhere. I have a life.) As for my past edits. I never implied anyone called me pig-headed. I was saying I made a mistake (involving having multiple tabs open or something) and hadn't meant to seem pig-headed. However I stick to my guns on the lack of explanation. Apart from the edit war warning, which was, as previously said, the result of a mistake, the only explanation I got was Xilinoc saying "Nope." As for changing coding, I don't know what you mean. If you're referring to the Gotei 13 page, not only do I acknowledge I messed it up, I undid the edit myself. Also, "something never seen before"? What do you mean? I'm not "[starting] with an attitude," I really don't understand. With luck, I've said what I mean to say here.

20:23,11/30/2015 20:23, November 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * I am closing this discussion now the issue has been resolved, in future it is not beneath you to be polite when starting a discussion. That was what I meant "with an attitude" you were aggressive and you know you were. Lets remember it was you who stated you were frustrated "from experience" and those handful of edits were all the experience you had here. Like I have said alter you attitude in how you approach discussions and there won't be an issue.

I don't want to comment further on the OP's post as I think Sun has covered that very well. But on the matter of him being dead or not, I'm honestly very surprised that this guy isn't marked as dead. I assumed he was until I looked closely at the page. It is clear that he was cut down the middle of his head (and body) and not even Shingiami can survive having their head cleaved open like that. This guy is nothing more than a run of the mill Shinigami, I think he should be listed as dead (and should have been before now). 19:07, November 29, 2015 (UTC)