Talk:Kidō

More Kido
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8PXl8lFcSQ&playnext_from=TL&videos=kEdkRJoj5uQ&feature=grec_index You can see Rukia doing some kido. Looks like more video game kido we forgot to add.Umishiru

kido gifs
so uhm last time I visited this page there was nice gifs from each kido, but now I only see images, I think thats good if all staff decided but does someone knows where all those gifs went? or where I can search for them? thank you in advance Daigo623 16:52, July 13, 2010 (UTC)

just click on the spell names they have their own pages with the gif there.Salubri (Talk)  16:56, July 13, 2010 (UTC)

Hachi's new Kido
Should we put in trivia than Hachi's new barrier techniques (Ryubi no Jōmon, Koko no Jōmon, Kikai no Jōmon and Hoyoku no Jōmon) are based on "The Four Symbols" (四象) from Chinese mythology? Those symbols (creatures) are: Geohound 08:53, July 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Azure Dragon of the East (青龍) -- The Gate of Dragon Tail
 * Vermillion Bird of the South (朱雀) -- The Gate of Phoenix Wings
 * White Tiger of the West (白虎) -- The Gate of Tiger Fang
 * Black Tortoise of the North (玄武) -- The Gate of Turtle Shell

Honestly, I see no reason why not. It's been known that those spells are blatant references to those symbols, and articles such as Love's have trivia relating to mythology. However, mythological references tend to be considered junk trivia, since they can be open to interpretation and speculation. One example being a former trivia point that pointed out that Mayuri's Zanpakuto was based on a Buddhist entity. So there is some inconsistency. Mohrpheus 16:46, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

Hadou 73: Souren Soukatsui
Since Hadou 73: Souren Soukatsui has had it's number officially changed, the only kidou sharing numbers are Bakudou 9: Geki and Hourin. Since Hourin is non-canon (it has appeared only in an Anime filler episode), should it be moved to an Anime-only section, with the reference to there being multiple spells of each level removed from Mechanics as speculation? There's really no canon evidence to support it now, that I recall. Silvercrys3467 (talk) 15:37, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Well, technically both Geki and Hourin are uncanon; Rukia never actually used the spell on Grand Fisher in the manga (unless its effect was revealed in a databook). I doubt that removing them is really necessary, so long as they are referenced to be anime-only. Same goes for the statement that two spells can share the same number. Mohrpheus (talk) 18:19, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Mohrpheus is correct, as Rukia was never given the chance to trigger Bakudo #9 in the manga. Besides, either way, doing an "anime-only" section is out of the question. It would add needless clutter to the article, and it is already lengthy as it is. Besides, with references being a requirement for all spells, we can easily distinguish which ones are manga-canon and which ones are not. Arrancar109 (Talk)  23:10, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

I'm just wondering. Has this spell been fixed in later releases of volume 30? Or is this still Hadou 63? --Shinitenshi (talk) 04:21, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

Hakufuku
I have an issue regarding Hakufuku (White Crawl). The first databook (SOULS) calls Hakufuku a binding spell, as stated in the article, but we still have it down as uncategorised. The nature of its use against Matsumoto by Gin also suggests binding rather than destruction as she wasn't injured, rather had her spiritual pressure negated and herself knocked out (Scans have been out for almost 48 hours on Mangareader now-- not a spoiler. Any comments on this? --Gold (talk) 15:22, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Its simple, take a look at the bakkudo section, notice something that all those spells have that Hakufuku does not? It has no number so it remains uncategorized --God (Pray)  15:24, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem putting it as uncategorized. But can we remove the part where it says that it also destroys the surroundings of everything around it the caster as this isn't what happened when Ichimaru used on Matsumoto. Since this isn't what happened the second time around, it seems reasonable that Hinamori used another destructive spell to escape from the prison, not Hakufuku. --Shinitenshi (talk) 04:20, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and did just that. Hitsugaya was referring to the guard's testimony about blacking out anyway. Gin's use of it confirms this. Mohrpheus (talk) 04:28, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion
I think this page should get the practitioners, experts, and masters listed on it too, like the Zanjutsu, Hakuda, and Hohō pages. I not sure who's idea it was to do those pages like that. But, they look very nice, and this page is the only one that doesn't list the users like the other ones do (not even without the pictures). I think it would be a nice addition to this page. Ltjuno (talk) 06:56, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I think we've been through this. And if we haven't, then I still must voice my objection to including it, given how large the page is already; it might very well cause more clutter to this page, since it has every Kido technique, Kido-related technique, and Kido-related devices displayed on the page itself so far. Arrancar109 (Talk)  07:13, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I don't see were we "have" been through on the talk page, that is why I suggested it. If has been put somewhere before then I apologize. But, the size that new picture method takes up isn't that big. But, that is why this is a suggestion and not demand. I wanted to hear a few other opinions on it. Ltjuno (talk) 07:35, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

This has been argued before and just recently too. It was decided to not do it--God (Pray)  12:05, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

When I did the Kido page it was for a semblance of order and to the most important thing was to highlight the various kido Spells. While the zanjutsu, hakuda and hoho pages are techniques as well we virtually know very little about the techniques used. Due to this i had made simple listings of the various partitioner levels in order to flesh the pages out, because otherwise they would be small stub like articles. Eventually I decided to upgrade the kido page to its current state. Then I recently decided to upgrade the zanjutsu, hakuda and hoho pages to their current look. Despite that this conversation has in fact held at least twice before if I can recall and we were adamant about not extending the same concept on to the Kido page as its not required as per the original reason of adding to the other pages. --Salubri (Talk)  13:36, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Whatever floats your boat. You are an admin so whatever you say goes anyways. Ltjuno (talk) 21:47, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Kido Mechanics/Combat
Could these two sections be combined? There is some information that is relevant to both in general, but is only stated under one of the two. Also, perhaps it would be better organized if the three "Eishou" abilities were bulleted like the different types of Kidou are. That way, the weaknesses/requirements of incantations can be explained in general, instead of splitting it all up. Mohrpheus  (Talk)  16:08, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

Text Reduction???
I have been wondering for sometime whether or not the kido table needs a major text reduction. Most of the kido have their own individual pages. So why do we need to pack everything into the narrow confines of the table? It wasn't must of the problem before but since the new layout has come into play the kido page just looks ugly. I say that we have no more then one to two lines giving a brief overview of the kido spell. So as to not exceed the width of the picture accompanying the kido. Certainly, we have to make the kido that don't have individual pages longer but for the vast majority we can do with less info. Also, am I the only one with the intense dislike of jointed images? Most of the jointed pictures have gifs in the individual pages. Why not replace them with a single frame? Tinni  (Talk)  12:19, November 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with reducing the text in the tables. There is no need for those that have their own page to have tons of detail here. Incantations are a big chunk of text for some, such as Hado 91 which I just edited. Limiting them to the size of the picture seems a good guideline. 17:36, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

Well if there are no objections then I would certainly like to start reducing the text. Tinni  (Talk)  20:23, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I am going to start chopping now. Tinni  (Talk)  19:10, December 8, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I have fixed up the Bakudō and Hadō tables, replacing the jointed images with a single still and getting rid of the incantation for spells that have their own individual pages. That alone, as Yyp said, brought most of the spells down to image size. However, for a few spells I had to get rid of the extended description. I personally think the tables look much better now. What do you guys think? I'll look at the Uncategorized Spells table next. The Unnamed spells table seems to be fine, which is good because most of those spells don't have their own page - although they do have gifs floating around in various galleries... weird that... anyway, hope you guys like the new look Kido page! Tinni  (Talk)  22:13, December 8, 2010 (UTC)

Infobox
Is there any support for an infobox for the individual kido pages? I like infoboxes as they are very "wiki" to me. So I would like to construct a simple infobox with the fields "name, kanji, romanji, type (Hado/bakudo/unknown)". We can use the still that's used in the kido page as the image for the infobox and push the gif down to the description section. Tinni  (Talk)  12:19, November 25, 2010 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. I think back when Getsuga Tensho had its own page, it had an infobox, but I think it was custom-made by the individual(s) who made the article and not an actual infobox template. Actually, maybe having different technique boxes (both Kido, and other techniques, like Hoho and Cero) could actually improve the technique pages we have. I'll bring it up with Salubri. Arrancar109 (Talk)  20:28, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

I could see having an infobox for kidō but with techniques like Hoho and Cero, the problem becomes what do you put in the infobox, you have basic picture, name, kanji, romaji but what else is there to really add? --God (Pray)  20:46, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

I too love infoboxes, so I would support the use of them for the Kido articles. Maybe we could even add the Incantation in those spells that have a known incantation of course. As for techniques, they could also include something like "Known users (though in the case of Hoho and Cero this would be a long list)" or "Notable users" and maybe "Race/Species" (I'm not sure of how to phrase it) to name the race that use said technique. Just a thought. Lia Schiffer  (Talk)  22:40, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

I find that in these cases an example goes a long way. Since I had to create the pages for Kuyō Shibari and Senjū Kōten Taihō, I decided to use this oppertunity to show what I mean. The info box I used is a "general" info with fields that don't show-up if left empty. I.e the "#" field. If it is left empty, it won't show-up. Making the infobox suitable for all techniques. Tinni  (Talk)  23:29, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

Removal of the "Non-spell" section
The Kido page is very long and the non-spell section seems unnecessary. The Kido cannon and the Kido gun should probably get their own pages, same as other "items". Shunko and Hanki should probably be in a page together that we can either call "Shunko" or "Hybrid techniques". That way, we can add reference to the new "Hybrid page" from both the Kido page and Hakudo page. Anyway, just thinking that the "non-spell" section is a bit odd in the kido page. Tinni  (Talk)  20:09, December 9, 2010 (UTC)

you maybe right, though not sure what to do with them im no sure giving them there on page is necessary at least not with the kido gun or kido cannon. Maybe a hybrid technique page as well as a equipment page or something. --<font color="00A86B" size="2px">Salubri <font color="00A86B" size="2px">(Talk)  22:19, December 9, 2010 (UTC)

Non-Spell -> Kido based weapon
I would like to rename the "Non-Spell" section to "Kido based weapon" to better reflect the content as it stands now. Any objections? Tinni  (Talk)  19:18, December 16, 2010 (UTC)

None, but I didn't move the kido cannon and gun because im not sure what to do with them. I dont quite think there is enough reason to give them their own page but I think we should have a page for Items, though I dont know just listing a page as items is that great. The point is some items obviously have more weight then others. Such as the Hogyoku which has its own page. Others can just be listed on the page while the Hogyoku can be listed with a link to its page similar to the kido page set up. Just some thoughts. --<font color="00A86B" size="2px">Salubri <font color="00A86B" size="2px">(Talk)  19:51, December 16, 2010 (UTC)

Small Problem
I think there's a small problem with the Kido page. I took a look at Wiki Activity, and I saw Yvp commenting on an undo of an edit that badly messed up the Kido page. I had a similar problem when modifying the kido page yesterday, and I undid my edit, but it was still messed up. Lucky us Salubri happened to be on, and he reverted my edits to the previous version, but if this happened twice then it can't have been a coincidence. Thoughts, anyone? Aeron Solo wuz here (talk) 17:19, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

I was actually going to post this same thing on here once I got off of classes. I was going to make a couple of minor edits in the opening parts of the page, nowhere near the tables. I hit preview because I saw the problems that you described earlier, not wanting to do the same by mistake. I had the same problems. I then tried hitting the edit button, then just going straight to the preview with making no edits, and I still had the same problem. I also tried editting the normal way and using the source code, but it didn't matter for either. I've never done any work on the tables here, so I don't know how to fix them, but I can back you up in saying it's messed up. CJett92 (talk) 20:52, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

I can not back up the issue here unfortunately. It may remain a mystery as the small edit that Aeron Solo was making i redid it myself and nothing else happened to the page at all. The only thing I can think of is that you may in advertently added or took away something that may have changed the content of the table. Code is very complex and can be easily messed up, then again i am the one who created most of the code for these tables on the site so its unlikely that I would run into the same issue. --<font color="00A86B" size="2px">Salubri <font color="00A86B" size="2px">(Talk)  21:16, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

As Salubri said, the code is complex and delicate. If you want to edit this page, make sure you are not using the RTE, that is a guaranteed way to make the page blow up. Always edit the wikicode. Other than that just make sure you are not touching the code but just the text. I edited it myself and it worked fine for me.--<font color="#660066" face="Verdana">God <font color="#660066" face="Verdana">(Pray)  21:20, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

I'm still experiencing the problem. I click the edit button then immediately hit the preview button, without even touching the code, and I still see that giant mess. I really have no explanation for what it could be... CJett92 (talk) 22:32, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Go to your preferences, click on the "editing" tab and deselect "Enable Rich Text Editor", then save. See if you have the same problem with editing the page then. I find that if it is enabled, the RTE makes changes to templates & tables on its own before the user even makes any changes themselves or switches to source mode. 22:42, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Follow what Yyp says and if it still does not work after that, I would suggest contacting wikia and they might be able to find the problem for you--<font color="#660066" face="Verdana">God <font color="#660066" face="Verdana">(Pray)  22:45, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yyp's suggestion did it for me. Thanks for the help. It's still something wikia should know about though, that's a real pain. I'll send a message to them about it. CJett92 (talk) 22:51, January 31, 2011 (UTC)