Talk:Sōsuke Aizen

Hōgyoku
If Hōgyoku rejected him as a master, should we count the implantation and transformations as former abilities? -- The Goblin   Talk   00:47, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Hōgyoku Implantation Section
Looking at "Unmasked", there's a section dedicated to the forms Aizen assumes after implanting the Hōgyoku, with each being described under their own individual title, which are as follows: I was thinking it might be best to restructure/rename the current "Hōgyoku Implantation" section to reflect this, given that it comes from an official source, but what do others think? Blackstar1 (talk) 16:26, May 5, 2012 (UTC)
 * - Aizen having implanted the Hōgyoku.
 * - Aizen's "chrysalis" stage.
 * - Aizen after shedding his "chrysalis" stage.
 * - Aizen after Gin's betreyal.
 * - Aizen's Hollow-like form.


 * Best to ask the Translation Corner for confirmation of this translation first.--

Opening Paragraph
So in the opening paragraph here we have "After waging war against the Soul Society with an army of Arrancar, Aizen was defeated by Ichigo Kurosaki and then sealed away by Kisuke Urahara". I don't know how regularly stuff like this is done here, but I was just thinking, isn't this too big a spoiler to be placed right on the beginning of the page? Someone still reading through that arc could come to the page and have that spoiled for them and such right off the bat. Should this be removed? -Minish  Link   14:49, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Our front page states that reading the content here will spoil stuff for you. We just list the facts, read at your own risk.--
 * Alright. -Minish  Link   17:30, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

Appearance
In the appearance paragraph, it states that the only remaining change from his hogyoku transformation is his left eye, which remains purple with a white iris. This is incorrect. In both the anime and the manga, only his left eye his shown during his sentencing, which is clearly back to normal. Should this information be changed? --Thisdinner (talk) 08:28, June 17, 2012 (UTC)

Iagree, looking at the pictures of him tied up to the chair, he is back to normal. I will make the change --SternRitterÄs (talk) 16:39, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

Two Profile Pictures?
Is it possible that we could have Aizens page done the same way say Kenpachi is done where there are before and after pictures of when he changed his hair in the box? Since Aizen did have a important change in appearance. More important than most of the others really. Before defection, after defection in place of before timeskip, after timeskip. I think it would be a good idea, what do you think --SternRitterÄs (talk) 16:47, June 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * That type of change is only for significant changes via time skip. Aizen is not featured in this capacity. His time at defection was nothing more then removing his glasses and slicking back his hair. While its a change its a simple one that required no real change more then someone getting dressed up for prom or something.--

That could be said for changes in hair of Kenpachi, Rukia and so on but they get it? --SternRitterÄs (talk) 17:13, June 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * The switch template is for pre and post timeskip pictures. The template itself is even coded to say pre timeskip and post timeskip. Aizen's change in appearance is not pre and post timeskip.--

That can be solved just by making a new template. You only have to paste the code to a new one and change timeskip for betrayal. --SternRitterÄs (talk) 17:22, June 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Or this issue can be solved by you listening to what Salubri and I have already said, the template was designed to show timeskip changes and the change in the animation. Aizen did not have a timeskip change nor did his animation change.--

"Reception" Section
Is it really necessary to have that section about how Aizen is praised and criticized by the media? It's definitely out of universe in the article and, from how I am looking at it, also unneeded. If no one has any arguments about it, then I'll remove it.


 * It is one of only few direct critiques of a character, it is factual and there is plenty of stuff that is not in universe on articles. This is listed appropriately in its own section just like appearance in other media which also not in universe content. That concept only is concerned with the rest of the article. Removing confirmed criticism would be like censoring.--


 * Hmm, alright. But then should it be added for some of the other characters, not all, just a few? This article is the only one with this kind of section.