Talk:5th's Scientist

Reason for Deletion
... is? This exists, so is this (who also has an unofficial name). Tsukikage-dono (talk) 11:49, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * They were called as such, this wasn't. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 11:52, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Chapter 16. Tsukikage-dono (talk) 11:53, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Brb, let me learn to read Japanese... F*ck that, I'll let Gou check the chapter to see if he's addressed as such, and if he is, i guess i'll remove the tag. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 12:00, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * In Page 12, he claimed to be the one who experimented on Setsuo and gave him that cannon arm (which makes him a scientist as that would require at least advanced engineering). Tsukikage-dono (talk) 12:02, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * So in no way did he say he's the "5th's Scientist" or that he's an actual scientist? If that's the case, its pretty speculative to call him a scientist, seeing as you don't have to be one to experiment on something such as Hibana and its also speculation to say giving Setsuo that device required advanced engineering when we know nothing of the process. Could be as easy as fitting a ring on a finger for all we know. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 12:33, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * I admit it may be considered speculative as of right now for this guy to be classified as a Scientist as there isn't enough proof of him being so, but I see no reason for us not to have an article on him. Though, Tsukikage, since you made it, you're the one who has to update the article to it's utmost (unless someone else does). There are certain things that can suggest that this dude is a scientist, so I'm fine with it laying like this-- though if someone can come up with a more reasonable name before his official name is known, let us know. --GouenjiShuuya&#39;123 (talk) 15:57, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, Tsukikage-dono was waiting for confirmation whether the article will stay, otherwise all the work Tsukikage-dono would have done would have been in vain. If your message is a confirmation that the article stays, Gouenji-dono, Tsukikage-dono will get to work once Tsukikage-dono is back from work. Tsukikage-dono (talk) 16:04, January 29, 2016 (UTC)

Still don't see a reason to keep it, as it goes against the consensus of the discussion we had about the topic. That's the whole reason why Omo deleted Mikako's father. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 16:26, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Speaking from the standpoint of "number of appearances" and "involvement in the plot", Mikako's Father is irrelevant while this man did something that influenced one of the major recurring characters of the current arc (hence playing a somewhat important role). That is just Tsukikage-dono's take on it. Tsukikage-dono (talk) 16:30, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Did we create "1st Brigade Member" because he rescued the main character of the manga? --Sarutobii2 (talk) 16:33, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * If you mean "Leonardo Burns", Sarutobii-dono, then looking at the past edits of that page, you had indeed done that. Tsukikage-dono (talk) 16:37, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * That's incorrect. He was created because he was a battalion commander because he's actually relevant to the story, not because he did a 1 off important thing like your claiming this guy did. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 16:45, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, Tsukikage-dono apologises then, for misunderstanding you. At the very least, this is no one-shot character, having debuted several chapters before being involved in a fight, so no doubt he is at the very least somewhat important. Tsukikage-dono (talk) 16:50, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, fair point Saru; I'll delete it. Thank you both for not turning this into some big pointless argument (it seems recently we are getting fewer of those c;) --GouenjiShuuya&#39;123 (talk) 17:03, January 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * I think a unnamed character that has obvious importance like a country leader, main bad guy of a arc or a battalion commander would qualify having an article. But this brigade member who's actions can all be mentioned on Setsuo's article doesn't really need a article for the moment. --Maki Oze (talk) 01:29, January 30, 2016 (UTC)