Talk:Ichigo's Relationships

please tell me this is not turning into one of those wikis which are pretty much a fanfiction dump (like the castlevania one). Why is this here anyway? People can form their own opinions from the main article. Exdeath64 23:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

→because out of everyone Ichigo has interacted with the most characters from the show so it would be more usefull to have one as long as no one tries to add in their own unproven facts.Darthwin 13:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I question the bits about how Ichigo and Rukia's relationship has 'romantic potential'. Is there any REAL evidence that Ichigo likes ANYBODY AT ALL aside from Harmonian-esque rationalizing and straw grasping? Doesn't this qualify as an unproven statement? 21:48, 23 January 2009 Supabuggs

Well, they've been through a lot, looked at each other a lot with big shiny eyes, talked softly during sunsets a lot, and he risked his life to save her. That really shouts romantic potential to me.

Moeoftoe 01:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Moe

I would like to see some references for the stuff that's been written about Shinji and Ichigo's relationship because I can't seem to track down which chapter all that stuff came from. Tinni 15:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

wording
the wording of this newest edit is kind of akward
 * always correcting,  Aunva 00:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Needs editing.
Hello, I've been a fan of Bleach for a long time now and when I found the wiki I enjoyed reading it... but then I noticed somethings which need to be taken away. Now reading the message on the beginning of the page I had already prepared myself for fan speculations but really guys? They shouldn't be here, this wiki is here for the information from the manga/anime only. One thing I really noticed here was this:

'It is worth noting that their love-hate relationship has romantic potential, though they have yet to act upon it. Some characters have made allusions, assumptions and queries to the possibility of non-platonic feelings between the two characters.' Mizurio and Keigo said that people have started rumors about them being an item because of them spending so much time together. Nel, Orihime, and Ririn have been envious and/or suspicious of Ichigo's relationship with Rukia.

That is fan speculation. Also I was wondering where this came from: It is also noteworthy that Tite Kubo made poetry using Ichigo and Rukia. The rain drags the black sun down, but the rain is dried by the white moon. Ichigo is the black sun, while Rukia is the white moon.

Could I please have a link to where that was said, because I don't recall seeing that anywhere.

TheDarkVizard 19:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea where that information came from, but I would generally agree that things that make such a strong statement like those two lines you pointed out should be either referenced or removed. And even in general, I find it surprising that such a long article that has a notice saying it's avoiding fan content doesn't have any references at all. Twocents 13:49, September 1, 2009 (UTC)

Right, although I don't think we can exactly do anything about it, can we?

TheDarkVizard 16:35, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Well, we could take it upon ourselves to reference statements like that and remove statements that are fanon rather than canon, but maybe the admins are very attached to the article as it is. Maybe they revert our edits, thus making the effort a waste. I suppose I'd rather get a yay/nay from them before I dedicated a large amount of time to overhauling an article that is, in my opinion, primarily fanon with some basis on canon. Twocents 17:26, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, I'll go find an admin and ask them about this.

TheDarkVizard 19:51, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

I think that statement might have come from the bleach official character book SOULs. I'm not sure thought. and I may have got the title wrong. KnowledgeandImagination 20:24, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Well if that's true it'll clear up one of the problems.

TheDarkVizard 20:29, September 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * It's pretty much on my To-Do List to re-do certain parts of this article concerning the whole "fanon" stuff listed, so it's indeed in one of the administrators' attention. Arrancar109 23:01, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response Arrancar109! And as always, if you need any help, you can pawn off some of the work on me. Might help to have people tackle a couple of characters each. Twocents 00:19, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for responding to this. I am willing to help if needed, although might not get to it for awhile.

TheDarkVizard 16:58, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Rukia's section
Rukia's section is utterly missing anything after Ichigo's departure from Soul Society, a pretty big hole to have. ZeroSD 22:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Alphabetical Ordering of Characters
It seems to be that there's an attempt to make pages here look like "encyclopedia" entries (which I have no problems with) but the first thing I noticed here is that the characters were randomly listed here (grouped by type of creature). It would be much better if the characters were listed alphabetically by surname (like proper encyclopedia articles). Otherwise, it reads like an Ichihime shipper wrote this and placed Inoue right on top of the list (when her and Ichigo's relationship is not the most significant relationship in the series). In the interest of objectivity, the list of characters here have to be based on a logical order (alphabetically by surname would be one option).

Also, why is Masaki Kurosaki listed under humans? There's no proof that she was human.

And why are Yuzu and Karin not mentioned here? If this was an article about Ichigo's relationships, I would think that his siblings should be listed, yes?

Shinigami wannabe 12:30, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

-Also, why is Masaki Kurosaki listed under humans? There's no proof that she was human.-

There's also no proof that she *wasn't*. Until we're given reason otherwise, putting her elsewhere is speculation. ZeroSD 14:54, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

Hirako Shinji's section
While I was doing some basic cleaning of the article, I noticed that Shinji's section is, well, terribl. Firstly, there is no structure to it - the entire thing is just 2 or 3 incredibly long sentences that I find are nigh on impossible to get my head around. Secondly, it is highly speculative (suggesting that Yamamoto ordered Shinji to train Ichigo, etc). Thirdly, there is information in there that is not relevant to the relationship between Ichigo & Hirako. I know that there is a lot of work that needs to be done on this page, but I find that this section is one of the worst parts of the article. I tried to improve it, but soon found myself stuck. It's such a mess that I just don't know what to change, what needs deleting and what to leave as it is. Could someone else (who has a lot more patience than me) please have a go at it? --Yyp 23:08, October 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * I second this. The Shinji section is VERY speculative but I think they were trying to say Urahara ordered Shinji to train Ichigo. But still it is speculation since we are never told if Shinji was acting on Urahara's instructions. Now normally I would be happy to rewrite the section but I absolutely refuse to be associated with this article as a contributor (see my talk page if you are curious about why). Tinni 23:26, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I actually questioned why we had the page at all (I had no idea who started it), but considering how long Ichigo's article is, it would be WAY too long, given the amount of characters he's associated with. I might have to dive into it, but I think Mili-Cien either started it or supported it being up. But yes, it's WAY too easy to vandalize/speculate (the latter being the main problem as of now), and needs to be reworked. Arrancar109 23:37, October 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Wait, that statement was wrong, Mili-Cien didn't start the page, but didn't object to it being put up either. Arrancar109 23:40, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Right, I had another go at it and this time managed to edit it without my head exploding. It ain't perfect, but it is a big improvement, imo. I also cleaned up some other sections a bit. Still needs a lot of work though, but it is a start. --Yyp 10:39, October 8, 2009 (UTC)