Forum:Possible Fanon on Zangetsu Page

Taken from the {[Ichigo Kurosaki}} page:

Enhanced Bankai Duration: Furthermore, the fact that all of his energy is "compressed" means that usage of his Bankai doesn't expel as much spiritual power as other Bankai from the point of activation; thus allowing him to use Tensa Zangetsu at a much longer duration than any other Bankai users of his level.

The only source listed for this is the entire Hueco Mundo arc. Was this ever confirmed at all?

During the Soul Society arc Byakuya did explain that Ichigo's bankai was compressed, and the fact he's able to maintain it for so long because of that has been proven as he's been in Bankai for almost the entire Hueco Mundo arc without any visible negative side-effects, that description is kind of combining a partial explanation with some observation and common logic. Prophet of Sanghelios (talk) 07:46, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

But the former does not automatically mean the latter. We know that Ichigo's bankai is a compression of energy, but when is it specifically stated that this is what allowed him to stay in that state for so long? Using "observation and common logic" without direct statement from canon is the very definition of Fanon.King Zeal (talk) 07:59, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

I'm just putting my opinion forward, I cannot speak on behalf of the person who originally put that sentence in. As for when it's specifically stated, I don't think it has ever been actually said. But I don't think things need a direct statement from canon to make it offical, as when describing a character's personality all we can go from is what we observe, a direct statement is not required. Fanon is more like "In 6 years Ichigo shall have a daughter with Rukia's eyes and Orihime's hair." Again, that's just my view on it. Prophet of Sanghelios (talk) 09:01, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Well, personality is observable. If someone becomes angry when insulted, that can be observed and noted. This, however, seems like nothing but speculation based upon fandom assumption, which is dangerous within an encyclopedia. But also, just to clear things up, what you describe is not "Fanon", per se. "Fanon" is a term used for assumptions and speculation which are made based upon educated guesses based upon information which is observed or stated in canon. Being right or wrong does not make something more or less "Fanon". In this case, this speculation could be absolutely right--but, unless it's directly stated it's just an original theory. No matter how educated or reasonable a guess it is, if it's a guess, it's "Fanon". King Zeal (talk) 09:25, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I guess if you really want to change I'd try taking it up with an admin or bring it up on the article's talk page. Prophet of Sanghelios (talk) 10:15, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Y'know, I just read through the whole Byakuya fight and the only thing he ever mentions is that the compression is why Ichigo is so fast in that form. Not even his strength, let alone his Bankai duration, are mentioned. So you are right in that respect.

As far as a the Hueco Mundo arc reference, it is accurate as far the fact that Ichigo's bankai has been constantly active, battle after battle. I suppose the mistake was attempting to back it up with an explanation. Then again... the last 200 hundred chapters or so have all taken place in just one day - nowhere was it ever said that it is particularly difficult to keep your Bankai on for that long. I suppose this should be brought up then. Mohrpheus (talk) 11:46, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Enhanced Bankai Duration
King Zeal brought up a good point on the forums. He pointed out that there is no credible source that Tensa Zangetsu's compression ability is the reason that Ichigo to use it for so long. Looking back over his fight with Byakuya, the only thing that he mentions the compression affecting is Ichigo's speed. This ability is never elaborated on again, so I can't think of any other possible sources. Zeal also pointed out that the entire Hueco Mundo arc is used as a reference, even though it never gives an explanation as to why Ichigo's Bankai can last so long; the "expelling energy" thing is more or less a fan theory. The original forum post can be found here. Mohrpheus (talk) 11:56, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Yo Mohrp how bout my blog then [|here]. Anyway it is nice to finally had someone or a few users here to finally want to bring this up seriously.Soulreaper1234 (talk) 14:33, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

A better point would be to prove it not to be true. Plenty of information on the site is gained by observation and common sense and is supported by references. Instead of bringing stuff to a talk page as uses I would think it made sense for someone to look it up themselves. Instead we have a user that should know better once again neither defending the information or the site. We have another user once again bringing up his ridiculous blog topic which very content proves he knows little to nothing about the source material. Either way doesn't all matter seeing as this is another pointless argument I would suggest seeing as this is an issue what i previously suggested should now take place. Anyone concered can blame the above two for most of deletion of ichigo's page content. --Salubri (Talk)  15:42, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with Salubri. What else could it be, yes I do not think it was directly stated that that is the reason but I think it was pretty heavily implied to the point where it is safe to list it even with our own speculation policy. Ichigo's bankai compresses his spiritual energy, what else could this mean other than he uses up less energy allowing him to use his bankai for longer--God (Pray)  16:09, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

I understand why you have deleted alot of the stuff Salubri, to proove a point about infered knowledge and stated knowledge. However can you please return it to how it was, im on agreement with God here and i think the vast majority probably are too. GinIchimaru (talk)

What do you mean, Salubri deleting those contents with this thing Enhanced Bankai Duration that probably does not even have proper reference and back up, we just cannot assume something like few hundred episodes ago with the Byakuya's explanation as backing the theory of why Ichigo can stay that long with Bankai form. Even though he sounded angry with us - on my part I can only apologize.Soulreaper1234 (talk) 16:29, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

@Soulreaper1234 what Salubri has done is taken your idea of it can only count if its explicitly said and expanded it over the whole power and abilities article. If you see what he changed it was mainly attributes that had been expanded on through common sense and logical inference. Basically you cant have one rule for one section of the powers and abilities (bankai duration) and then have a different rule for the rest. So basically it's either we accept the bankai duration thing or we take out all the other info that isnt explicitly stated. GinIchimaru (talk) 16:36, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Yes what he done here is the most sensible thing, taking a stance, this Bleach wiki are not about assuming things through some observation it is all about cold hard facts & figures all about the info from manga, art books, anime, game etc. Again I am so sorry for this happening mates.Soulreaper1234 (talk) 17:05, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

"Ichigo has over twice the spiritual power of the standard Shinigami captain, allowing him to maintain his Bankai for a longer period of time than most." That's another "likely" reason as to why he can use his Bankai for so long. The point is, anybody can come up with a logical explanation that sounds correct, but that does not necessarily make it so. Telling me to prove something wrong rather than right is a moot point; the very same people pointing the finger at me are the ones that taught me that this wiki deals with nothing by the facts. This is the second time I have been accused me of "failing to defend the information on the site." Assuming that I only started this topic for the sake of removing content is nothing short of ignorant, not to mention insulting, considering that the page was mutilated seconds after for the sake of proving a point. If I knew that that was the response I would get, then I would never have brought it up in the first place. This issue is far too trivial to get worked up over - if the consensus is that it should say, then I agree. Mohrpheus (talk) 20:17, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Firstly there is no established bases for that, by that point no one should be able to maintain a bankai more then a minute. Secondly The point being that your one of the main users on the site and yes this is the second time the fingers been pointed at you. Because instead of doing some form of investigation or possibly taking it upon yourself to figure out right or wrong of the content, it was another jump on the band wagon type of situation. I think all the admin are about sick and tired of having to be the only one alongside certain users to be the only ones defending the content. Whatever happened to taking some incentive here as its not like you dont know the content. Your right we deal with facts but observation is also supported by references. Its never stated factually that in bankai ichigo's getsuga tensho is black and red so by that point we cant list that it is either. But then again we have observed that it is an observational fact. So unless there is a way to rectify that concept with the one your insinuating we should logically go by the next time someone brings up something without a majority of support I wouldnt be qick to back it. Otherwise all observational facts are just as liable. Whats insulting and ignorant is that every time one person has a problem your quick to jump on their side instead of dealing with the issue and supporting the content. If the content is questionable and you dont know you need a large consensus, but do it on a forum they take up to much space for a talk page.--Salubri (Talk)  20:41, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

But that's just it: there ARE no references. The only reference is the entire Hueco Mundo arc, which isn't evidence. Yes, we can observe that Ichigo's bankai is activated for a long time, and we can make plenty of assumptions as to why. Is it a bankai ability? Is this unique to Ichigo? Is it because he's a human? Because his reiatsu is so high? Because he's a Vizard? Or because of something completely arbitrary like the fact that he has orange hair? (That one was a joke, don't take it seriously.) The point is, observable "facts" are not "facts", they're speculation. We know that Ichigo has kept his bankai activated longer than anyone else, but that's it. No other characters have made mention or notice of it. No words have been said about it in any sense. Stating that it's because of XYZ reason is speculation and nothing more. King Zeal (talk) 02:48, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Not really, in Byakuya's original explanation of Ichigo's bankai, he says it compresses all of the energy that a bankai normally expels into a smaller finely controlled form. I think its clear that this means that this is what allows him to keep his bankai going for so long. He is not emitting huge amounts of energy like most bankais. The energy is released slower and controlled much finer allowing him to stay in that state for an extended time--God (Pray)  02:57, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Again, one does not necessarily mean the other. The object here is not for me to prove the answer is wrong (because it could very well be right), but that there isn't anything which directly states this connection. The very definition of the term "Fanon" is to use logic and observable facts to fill in unexplained gaps. Again, I'm not debating that the explanation isn't plausible. I'm saying it isn't canonically connected. King Zeal (talk) 03:18, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

The problem with only using directly stated facts is that not everything is directly stated, it is shown visually or contextually stated. Just because something was not outright stated does not mean that it is not fact when we have several things that all point to it. An example is the Visored's enhanced strength. It was never said that they had enhanced strength yet we see Love ripping a Gillian in half and Kensei taking them down with just his bare fists.Do we not say the visoreds have enhanced strength just because it was never directly stated but we know it to be true. --God (Pray)  03:26, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

But that's just it: it's NOT "contextually stated". It's pure fan speculation whether or not the two are connected. There's nothing that connects these two points of fact. We know that Ichigo's bankai compresses energy into his muscles to enhance power and speed. We also know that he has been in bankai longer than any character insofar as we know. This doesn't mean that any other shinigami can't be in bankai that long, or that Ichigo's kai specifically allows him to do that. The two are connected only by theory. The visoreds, however, are constantly stated to have increased power. Shinji himself directly says this in the anime version, Aizen states it, and Tousen states it. However, a bigger assumption is that lieutenant-class Shinigami need that power to rip Gillian in half to begin with. No one in the Karakura Town arc had a limiter, and we've seen lieutenant-class (and higher) shinigami curb stomp Gillian class Arrancar (Grimmjow's Fraccion). So again, it's fan speculation which is used to justify an observed theory. King Zeal (talk) 04:48, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Actually we do. I think it was Byakuya who said it that because of the Bankai's size, it consumes an impressive amount of energy, therefore, the user can't keep it for long periods of time. Thus why Ichigo is the exception. Because his Bankai is compressed, and so it doesn't involve said energy consumption. Lia Schiffer  (Talk)  04:57, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

If it's true, I don't know which chapter the part about bankai not being able to stay active long is stated. You may be right about that. However, this still does not invalidate the point I'm trying to make. As I said before the very term "Fanon" is defined as a reasonable and educated guess as to an indirectly explained phenomenon. Once more, I'm not saying that the theory isn't sound. It is, and it could be true for all I know--but it is NOT said in canon. I expected that the Bleach Wiki would try to keep out subtle examples of Fanon from its pages (as stated in the Policy Committee page, for all we know, Ichigo has a crush on Kenpachi), so I don't understand why this is being overlooked. Even if it may be true, there is no direct statement which I know of which confirms it. I would think that in this case, the burden of proof would be on the claimant. King Zeal (talk) 05:04, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

As pointed out, not everything is directly stated. I am currently looking for the chapter Lia is talking about as it does exists. Byakuya says Bankai's consume large amounts of energy, causing the user to only be able to stay in bankai for a limited time. He then says that Ichigo's bankai compresses all this energy, not consuming as much. Therefore it is perfectly acceptable to say that the reason Ichigo can stay in bankai for so long is because his bankai does not use that great amount of energy. It is not speculation. So what if this was not directly stated. We have the reason bankai's cannot stay activated for long periods of time and we know ichigo's does not fit that reason. It is perfectly legitimate of us to say that the compression of energy allows him to stay in bankai for so long.--God (Pray)  05:11, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Regardless of any of that, it's still speculation. Once more, "Fanon" is a reasonable conclusion that is not directly stated, but is gained by analysis and inferred implications. You may firmly believe that this is the reason, but that does NOT make it more than speculation. The fact of the matter, regardless, is that it is NOT canonically explained. Once more, implication is not canon nor fact. Since I'm in the minority here, I suppose your minds are made up and it won't matter what I say. To you, this may be perfectly acceptable, but please, don't call it something it isn't. King Zeal (talk) 06:46, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * O for crying out loud! "Fanon" is a term rooted in fanfiction. It doesn't have a meaning divorced from fanfiction. Fanon "is an interrelated concept in that the term encompasses invented (non-canon or not verified as being canon) facts or situations, especially those which are used so frequently in fan fiction that they become seen by many as an extended part of the canon." Fanon is not reasonable conclusion based on observation. Its just an invention of a fanfiction author, and it can be something like Gin is afraid of spiders, that other fans start to be believe is canon. Fanon does not have to have any connection to canon. Hell canon can even contradict fanon. Please stop using the term incorrectly. What you are describing is not fanon. Tinni   (Talk)  07:03, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

I can link stuff, too. Fanon is rooted in fanfiction, but it is also "the set of theories based on that material which, while they generally seem to be the "obvious" or "only" interpretation of canonical fact, are not actually part of the canon. Occasionally, the explanation seems good enough to just be 'common sense.'" This argument is a textbook example. King Zeal (talk) 07:11, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's not a text book interpretation and if it is "obvious" then its obvious and not fanon but canon and as it has been pointed out, "interpretation" is pretty much how we describe a characters personality. I repeat, fanon does not have to be a theories based on canon material. They can be anything that fanfiction authors make-up. There is a difference between fanon and speculation. Speculation is set of theories based on material. Please refer to our speculation policy to note the difference. Look, I don't care if you want to argue that saying Ichigo's bankai lasts a long time because it compresses reiatsu is speculation because it was not explicitly stated. But do not, I repeat, do not call it fanon. They are two vastly different things. Tinni   (Talk)  07:19, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

If I implied that "Fanon" is limited to only acceptable or logical conclusions, then I apologize. However, even within the sources of Wikipedia article you link to (in the "Canon" page, rather than the "Fanon" one), it's stated that Fanon can be rooted in believed misconceptions, but it can also be something that is explained so well that everyone simply accepts it. And that is what I'm trying to prevent. This is a chicken-or-egg debate: would this theory have to have originated in fanfiction for it to be "Fanon", or will it become Fanon if a fanfiction writer reads it and interprets it as fact. (Which, actually, is the reason I brought it up. I'm a Bleach RPer, and I wanted to know how valid this claim was.)  But if you want to cherry-pick semantics, we can do so. So now that that's out of the way, my position remains: why is it not speculation? King Zeal (talk) 07:28, September 30, 2010 (UTC)