Talk:Uryū Ishida

弧雀

doesn't this mean "Arc Sparrow" instead of Lone Sparrow?75.0.189.185 23:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It's more like "Sparrow Bow" but you're right, it's not Lone Sparrow. Since 弧 (bow) and 孤 (lone) look very similar it's possible that there was a mistranslation in the English version. Mufurc (talk) 23:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Critique, please

I'm thinking of adding the following information to the Powers section, but I'm not sure if part of it is point of view or not. Could I get some feedback please?

"Quincy powers operate by drawing spiritual energy from the environment and directing it using your willpower. (As opposed to Shinigami powers, which work by using your soul's inner strength) This means that a Quincy must concentrate constantly when they are fighting, especially if there are not very much energy in the area, or if the spiritual energy that is present is being repelled by the Sanrei gloves or something similar. It also means that if there is a large source of energy in the area, they can become much more powerful by using it. If a Quincy is powerful enough, they can actually deconstruct spiritual objects to use their power. However, the human body begins to fail if it absorbs too much energy, and seals itself off from spritual energy so that the Quincy does not die, causing him to lose his powers."

Self-Critique: The part about concentration in battle could be cut out easily if it is a problem. It also needs a bit of rewriting to be less confusing in parts.--Tjstrf 10:20, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I think it's ok except for the concentration part, we have no idea about that. Also we don't know how much (if at all) the amount of spiritual energy around the wielder matters (but I guess it's logical that it does). -- Ynhockey 20:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

It may be logical, but it doesn't mean the official explanation will actually go that way, or even that there will be an official explanation. Bah. I'll just add the parts that seem less controversial. --Tjstrf 17:55, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to bring this up again, since the majority of my theory was recently confirmed, but only in the anime filler. (Ishida let the Bounts into SS so that he could fight better, due to the higher spiritron concentrations.) Do we consider it sufficiently well-grounded for inclusion now? --tjstrf 09:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Lives alone?

Currently the article states that Ishida lives alone, Yet this is unlikely, given that when Byakuya and Renji come to arrest Rukia, Ishida appears carrying a bag of sewing utensils, explaining that he needed an excuse to get out of the house, implying that he lives with family or someone else. Otherwise he would have come without the bag. There might be evidence on the contrary that I've overlooked, but I'm suggesting that whether he lives alone or not be reconsidered.

Well, he certainly doesn't live with his father, has never mentioned any other relatives, etc. If you want good places to check for info, try his bio page at the end of one of the volumes, or the omake interview with Kon. --Tjstrf 03:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

He does live alone, it says in one of the Radio Kon things. Also he said he needed an excuse to be wandering around the night, which could mean he doesn't want to look like an idiot (or whatever). It doesn't have to be about a family. -- Ynhockey 13:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

First, I am going to have to ask which Radio Kon says he lives alone as I don't remember such a thing. Second, if the information is not said in the Manga or data books that Tite Kubo himself has written it is not canon. --User:anonymous 14:09, 21 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.5.168.87 (talk)

Not like it really matters, since this reply is coming over 10 years later, but this is confirmed in Radio Kon 3 in the manga (Volume 12, Chapter 107) as written by Tite Kubo, as seen here, retrieved from here. 72.216.76.47 (talk) 00:29, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Uryuu's Mom

Do we ever know what Uryuu's mom's name is or what she looks like? All genetics tells us is that she has black hair and blue eyes. In a flashback we saw her crying in a chair and little Uryuu looking into her face, but we never saw above her shoulders. What is her name and what does she look like? More importantly, what happened to her? Where is she now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.189.42 (talk) 22:50, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Her name is Katagiri, she is a former maid to the Ishida family, killed by Juha Bach, the king of the Quincy's. She had long black hair pulled up in a bun and typically wore a maids uniform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.17.98.245 (talk) 21:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Quincy = exorcist?

The article was recently added to, and then just as swiftly removed from, the Category: Fictional Exorcists. Judging from the Exorcist article though, the classification might be fitting. Within the context of Bleach, hollows ARE evil spirits, and equivalent to demons in classical mythology Quincy do destroy them as their primary work. Also, compare with the exorcists in D.Gray-man. (Edit: We don't have a D Gray Man article? Well Google it then, or something. It's a manga series about exorcists, who are quite reminiscent of the Quincy.) --tjstrf 21:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Quincy do not remove spirits from people. Shinigami remove the sins, and guide the original spirit of the hollow back to Soul Society. Of all things, Shinigami are exorcists since they remove the evil and guide the good to Soul Society while Quincy just kill both. So Quincy should not be classified as exorcists but Shinigami might deserve that classification.--Gdo01 22:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Shinigami have a more specific classification: psychopomps. (They also share great similarities with the Angel of Death.) An Exorcist's position, stated broadly, is to dispel evil spirits from an area or individual as an act of purification. The Quincy are based on the Priest character archetype, and fight characters based on evil spirits/demons. In the context of fiction, that can very reasonably be considered an exorcist.

Actually, do we even have an article or section on Exorcists in fiction that the category can correspond to? --tjstrf 23:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Shinigami do fit the description of psychopomps but they also take on exorcism tasks. I'll condede the fact that Quincies are, in a way, exorcists but Shinigami also purify individuals and areas of evil spirits. The only difference is that shinigami do both psychopomp duties as they are exorcising an area or individual. --Gdo01 23:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

They may have similar duties, but they aren't based on priests, and aren't human. They're based on (surprise) shinigami. Nobody would call the Grim Reaper or an angel an exorcist. (Now to deal with the whole fictional warrior thing... I'm thinking of just proposing that entire category for deletion, it will be so bloated as to be utterly useless) --tjstrf 00:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree that Fictional Warriors should be deleted. On the other hand, Fictional Warrior Races should be left intact. I hope that if it's listed for AfD just the fictional warrior cat is deleted. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 00:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't know we had a Fictional Warrior Races. I'd agree though, Warrior Races is much more precise than simply "Warriors" is. The most annoying thing about Fictional Warriors to me though is that it doesn even stick to characters in the Fighter/Warrior archetype, instead going by the more broad definition of warriors as simply any character that fights with others. I feel bad for the IP editor who's been going around populating the category though. He's probably spent at least 20 hours on it.

Now I just need to remember how to run a CfD...--tjstrf 00:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Anime and manga

Many of the character pages need to be split between the manga arc and the anime arc like the Ichigo Kurosaki article has done it. Ishida needs this most of all due to his development in the anime arc due to Yoshino.--Gdo01 20:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I know, it's on my list of edits to make. (You know? That list we all have that we never get around to...) The other major change is we need to divide information that is mostly relevant to Quincy as a whole from information about Ishida himself. The whole powers section is a giant overlap between them that could be much better organized.--tjstrf 22:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hurray for Wikipedia

Anime Omnitude: Have you researched or watched a bit of Bleach in Japanese, what were your first impressions of it? Steve Prince: The research I've done so far has been what I've read on Wikipedia. It's been very helpful for me, getting a grip on Ishido's history prior to recording.

Taken from an interview with Ishida's voice actor, Stephen Price. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Minor change

Can somebody change the weapon name on Uryu's profile box, since the default weapon classification does not apply to him. Same goes for Qrihime and Chad. Thx.

The infobox doesn't even have a Weapon field. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 07:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

It also doesn't have hair and eye colour, so whoever it was that kept adding those (they're everywhere it seems) you wasted the effort. --tjstrf 09:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Inaccurate article

It looks like this article has been tampered with. (Which is an understatement.) I would change it, but I'm not skilled enough at the coding yet to do a great job. Have any of the other Bleach articles been messed with like this?--laevatein

I don't really see what you mean. The style and wording is consistently horrible, but most of the content is accurate. I don't see what you mean by "tampered with", although it would definitely benefit from a complete rewrite... --Anaraug 17:58, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Lololol. Nevermind, you were looking at this version. That was vandalism. What you can do is click the history tab at the top, then view the differences between revision, and then edit a specific revision, rather than the latest, and just save it without changing. That reverts it to a previous version, and it's what we do about vandalism. There are also some special tools that we can use to revert easily. I use popups. --Anaraug 18:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Why hasn't anyone mentioned his relationship with Orihime?

Because he doesn't really like her and they usually never talk especially in the new manga arc. Gdo01 21:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

But he went to Hueco Mundo for her and was upset when Urahara told him she was captured!

Yes, but that's speculation. It doesn't mean he likes her, just that they are friends or even merely that Ishida feels a duty to protect women. Being willing to go help someone you know doesn't mean you have romantic attatchments to them. --tjstrf 17:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

"Good" Arrancar

down in the manga section of this article nell and his friends are reffered top as "good" this seems to be POV and needs to be edited, but there needs to be some distinction between Nell and the Numero's. Would something like natural arrancar fit this? Tensa Zangetsu 00:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not POV to call good characters good when they're fictional and their personality is objectively determined by the author. --tjstrf 00:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Still for all we know Nell could be another Aizen. Tensa Zangetsu 16:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

That would be speculation, and describing Aizen as a good guy would have been accurate at his first introduction since we had no way of knowing. You might as well say we can't describe Ichigo as the main character because he might die and be replaced by his sister later. --tjstrf 16:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Images

Perhaps an image of Ginrei Kojaku would be nice, and one of the Quincy Final Form. --Tenshou

Ehh, isn't their a pic of Ginrei Kojaku already? Anyways, there are enough pictures already--Just curious, why do you think a pic of the final form is necessary? IceUnshattered (talk) 22:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

New bow

We'll probably want to say something about Ishida's new bow once the translation for 257 starts to circulate. In summary, he has a melee attack now. Upon further analysis, he carries five "hilts" on his waist. When wields one it, his reishi forms an energy blade, and his bow now visually suggests a shield. He wields this "lightsaber" of his left-handed. Speaking of which, we should add Ishida's weapon to the list of energy blades eventually.

I think I see where Tite Kubo's going with this. Ishida is likely capable of shooting his "swords" with his bow/shield. This seems the most obvious explanation as to why he is carrying five hilts rather than just one. This would also explain why he's wielding the weapon left-handed. –Gunslinger47 01:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I called that one. See chapter 258 where he uses one of the Seele Schneiders as an arrow. Interesting note on that, by the way. "Seele Schneider" translates from German as "Soul Cutter". That being a non-coincidental parallel to the zanpakutō (斬魄刀, lit. soul cutting sword). –Gunslinger47 11:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to add a little information about Seele Schneider:

I'm from Germany so it's my mother tongue of course and there's a little mistake in the name. If I had to translate Soul Cutter I'd say "Seelenschneider" or "Seelen-Schneider" (sth like that).

So it lacks a "N" on "Seele".

Didn't know where to put that one so I thought I write it down here :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.152.205.150 (talk) 04:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC).

Interesting, the katanana for it says Zēre Shunaida (ゼーレシュナイダ). Poor grammar or not, it seems that the n is not supposed to be there. This is similar to how "Hueco Mundo" is seemingly improper Spanish. –Gunslinger47 20:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I always thought it was Zaeli Schneida. Oh, well. And as Uryuu pointed out, it's not a sword. Quincies only fight with bows and arrows. If you plan to add it, make sure to include the thing where he sticks them into the ground in the shape of a pentagon and then drips a little reiatsu onto the biggest one and BOOM! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.189.42 (talk) 22:44, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

I think, based on the way he holds his bows, Uryū is left-handed.

Naming of the article

Where did the ū come from? According to the English manga, his name is Uryû, not Uryū. Can someone please explain this to me? Was it just a mistake on the article creator's behalf? Or was it intentional? Thanks in advance.

Another thing, why do people insist on calling him Ishida instead of Uryu? Nobody else is called by their last names. It's just something that has been bothering me for a while. // Sasuke-kun27 20:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The letters ū (with a macron) and û (with a circumflex) are basically equivalent; see Hepburn romanization#Variations. As for Ishida's name, I have no idea, although Inoue seems to suffer from the same problem. --Pentasyllabic 01:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I get it now. I don't completely understand why we have all the different variations, but at least I understand why we use the macron. Thank you. // Sasuke-kun27 02:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

We have redirects from all the variations because most people don't have a macron U on their keyboards, so they wouldn't be able to easily type the title. --tjstrf talk 02:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm wonder this, for a different reason; the macrons are mostly there for pronouncing the Romanziation of the name, so why do Bleach characters still keep them in the written form? Considering that some browsers have trouble with these characters and per the guideline that we use English, perhaps the macrons should be remove from Uryu's name (as well as another other Bleach character whose name is spelled with the symbols). NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 21:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Because Uryu is incorrect, since that's actually a differently pronounced word. And Uryuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu... is also contrary to policy because we use Hepburn Romanization (and looks stupid). Plus, macrons are English. --tjstrf talk 21:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

If you don't have a macron readily available to you, then you ought to spell his family name as "Uryuu". The use of Uryū conforms to WP:ENGLISH since a macroned u is a valid Latin character. For confirmation, you can see all acceptable characters for use in Wikipedia article titles in the table here: Unicode Latin. I doubt any browser would have much trouble with it, rendering Uryū as either Uryu or as Uryu- if the character is unavailable. –Gunslinger47 11:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Mercy in battle

Is it a noteworthy personality trait that twice now, Uryu has shown mercy to his opponents by relenting, not delivering the killing blow and instead restraining them by shooting them through specific points so they will no longer have the power to attack? Just curious as to what you all thought. 376231+ab 19:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, while he is a very noble person, I wouldn't exactly call that mercy... More like, stopping future threats from occurring and giving him extra trouble (ReshenKusaga 05:38, 21 April 2007 (UTC))

Well, that's the thing. He could very well do that by just killing them. He instead chooses to let them live, just not as potential threat. That's the distinction I was trying to emphasize. I know, this anime has a suprisingly low mortality rate all things considered, but it's still noticable in just how purposely he refuses to take the life of his enemies if they are far enough below his skill level.376231+ab 00:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I say yes. It just shows how awesomely precise he is. I see what above user means about 'he refuses to take the life of his enemies if they are far enough below his skill level'. That was shown with Cirucci Thunderwitch, right, he shot her 'reiatsu link' or something and just left. He isn't merciful to all below his skill level, though, because you should see him with those Hollows... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.189.42 (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

References

Do we really need to reference every single one of his stats? Having the [1] next to all of them is more than a little ugly in my opinion. Jezebel Parks 00:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

We do it for everyone else, though I agree it's somewhat ugly. --tjstrf talk 00:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Speaks Spanish

Ishida speaks and understands the Spanish terms used by the arrancar, which the other characters of the group have not been able to do, all needing the arrancar to explain things like their numbers to them. So is this worth mentioning or not? --tjstrf talk 22:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

As a minor point, sure. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 22:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, Uryuu's really smart, so of course he would know the terms! It was probably put like that for a reason, because you wouldn't seem very smart if people had to explain things to you, either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.189.42 (talk) 22:36, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Energy? What-a-what?

Ishida's bow looks like a bow made of blue energy?

First off, that's pointlessly redundant. I'd go with, "has the appearence of blue energy."

Second off, and more importantly, energy is a property of matter; it is not a substance. Considering that Ishida's bow is made up of energetic spirit particles, I think it would be better to describe it as having the appearance of a plume of blue incandescent fluid.

I'd make the change myself, but my current browser would truncate much of that section.

150.254.181.174 (talk) 02:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)Anon

People! For crying out loud, ENERGY IS NOT A SUBSTANCE! Bleach even bends over backwards to accomodate that fact by inventing spirit particles. It's not a hard concept to grasp. Matter: substance. Energy: property of matter. Got it? Good.

150.254.181.174 (talk) 01:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Pseudo-Anonymous

Whoah, there. That's being a little personal-attackish there, my friend 150.254.181.174! First we must recognize that Spiritual particles/pressure/energy, etc. are a total fictional concept, and their being energy/matter is a questionable is equivocal. I tend to concur with the energy theory, but first I want to ask: Is his bow made out of particles(matter) or energy (not matter)? Ah. Theoretical discussion (never has been my strong point). IceUnshattered (talk) 23:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Look, first, this isn't theoretical, not in any sense of the word. There is no energy "theory" here. This is a matter of how things fall together in a particular fictional work in unambiguous terms. How do we know it's made of spirit particles? Well, have you ever read the manga or watched the anime? Do you recall those flashback scenes where Ishida is first learning how to use a bow? Please kindly look over them again. The bow is made of spirit particles. The arrows are made of spirit particles. All Quincy abilities revolve around the manipulation of spirit particles; even Hirenkyaku involves a Quincy drawing spirit particles beneath his (or her) feet and pulling himself in a particular direction. The thing I appreciate most about Bleach is that unlike most braindead American or Japanese works, it sets its universe up in at least a vaguely plausible way; ie, energy is energy, and not incandescent matter. 150.254.181.174 (talk) 12:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Pseudo-Anonymous

Yes, thank you, I have the anime and puzzled over the manga. You say that energy is energy, but you state that the bow is made out of particles, specifically particles. Are you stating that the spiritual particles are energy? I agree with the energy theory, because it doesn't seem to be solid matter at all. However, I'm not totally clear on what you're saying. IceUnshattered (talk) 19:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

If I may, I suggest you re-read what this guy is writing. First, it's clear you really don't know what theory is. Please, go look up the definition. Second, it's clear that you have no grasp of what matter is. Pseudo-Anonymous isn't saying that spirit particles are energy. The bow is clearly stated to be composed of spirit particles in the anime (can't say anything about the manga, as I haven't read it myself). Just because it's not solid doesn't mean it's not material. Lightning, for example, is plasma, but I imagine someone of your mental capacity would be inclined to call it "energy." 24.177.251.155 (talk) 21:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)Random Interloper

Personal attacks, flawed logic, incoherent points, asshole IP user... First off, theory is something that isn't proven, rather, an educated guess supported to an extent by facts. That fits the energy idea well. Next, the bow is stated to be made of spirit particles in the early days of both manga and anime. It is not made of "energy" or lightning or plasma or fluid or any of that shit. It is made of spirit particles. That is all that needs to be in the article, period. StardustDragon 20:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, you really are dense, aren't you? First of all, my mention of plasma was to illustrate that matter need not be solid. Yes, the bow is made of spirit particles. I was rebutting the idea that it was energy because it glowed and had a soft appearance. Second, a theory is a systematic description of a phenomenon based on a body of observed evidence. There is no guesswork involved at all, and the term does not in any way apply to the subject at hand. Third, with regards to logic, please go look it up. The subject at hand has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with observation. The distiction is rather large. Lastly, as for personal attacks, I don't suffer idiots calmly - I'll leave it at that. 68.118.184.246 (talk) 14:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)Random Interloper

Improvement

This page was PRODed but I have removed the PROD as with the sources the page meets notability and the article is in good condition and well detailed. I am not an expert in anime but as I do not want this page to be nominated for deletion in the future I wanted to highlight some possible ways to improve it:

• Trimming the plot a bit to make it less in universe (?)
• Adding a "Development" section to show the devlopment and what the creators/animators/actors thought about the characters
• Adding a wider range of sources, including in the reception section

I may be wrong in this so please feel free to object but I wanted to start a discussion to improve the page DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 21:58, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Most of the discussion which would prove SIGCOV pertains to the show as a whole, not to the character. In order to merit a standalone article, the character himself must be the subject of the SIGCOV. If he's only notable for "being the main character in Bleach," he's not notable and this article is ripe for deletion or merging. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 04:10, 23 August 2023 (UTC)