Talk:Aaroniero Arleri

name spelling
Looks like his name is spelled Aaroniero on the newest chapter cover. We still don't know the true spelling of his last name but, I say "Arleri" is not right. I know I know... "but Arleri is the romanization we decided on so don't change it". Kangarugh22 20:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Agree with the "Aaroniero" reading (well, I suppose that is an "I"). I just didn't edited yet 'cause I don't remember how to move an article o.O - Access Timeco 20:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the last name should be Arlieri, although it could be inconsistent with Aaroniero, which is read as Aaronīro. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 11:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Glotonería
right now, there is only a picture of Aaroniero with Nejibana, when there should be a picture of his actual release. Also, a better description of Glotonería is needed. I have uploaded an image of Glotonería from the latest chapter where it is featured on a two-page spread. CP9Zebra 18:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Death
If he ends up dead next week, should he be placed on the Hollow page? He's fairly minor if he dies at this point. Nemu 02:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * User:65.6.62.67 apparently doesn't think so. ;) Myself I don't really care, but for the sake of completeness think that all Espada (including Luppi) should get pages for the same reason that all Captains do so would support keeping it. -tjstrf talk 02:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * yeah great, another article i take the time to create merged back in to the hollow page. that would make me SO happy. who cares if they are dead, if someone took the time to fricking write it and its not inherantly wrong leave it the hell alone. --Grimjaw 03:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Grimjaw, Wikipedia has certain notability guidelines which are to be followed regardless of who put effort into creating articles. In fact, a couple of my own articles were eventually deleted on this basis, even though I'm well familiar with WP:N and its sub-pages. However, in this case I agree with Tjstrf that the article should be kept in order to give all Espada articles. Don't know about Luppi though. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 08:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure we're required to give Luppi an article because fiction is always in the present, so Luppi, being an Espada within the period covered by the fictional narrative, qualifies. (This doesn't apply to characters introduced as ex-Espada because they haven't been Espada within the course of the narrative.) --tjstrf talk
 * My whole reasoning is that the Espada really aren't like the captains. As shown by the triple didget guys, whoever dies this arc, will just be replaced right after. That really doesn't give him too much notability. Nemu 10:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

yeah why does wonderwice margera or whoever have their own article? they are not and never were an espada. i think all espada definitely need their own pages, perhaps with the sole exception of luppi, since he was a temporary substitute (not because he died, meaning even dead *original* espada can still have their own pages). after all, we have pages for EVERY SINGLE shinigami vice captain and captain even though a great deal of them are extremely mysterious to say the least.

He seems dead
Why dont we replace the "(Deceased)" by his name now? (and refer to him in past tense). Lacking Lack 06:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * We don't put the deceased tags by their names (see Jin Kariya, for example). As for the past-tense thing, I guess it would makes sense to do so. // Decaimiento Poético  06:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I suggest placing "(died like a chump)" by his name. ^_^ –Gunslinger47 06:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Past tense = bad. Fictional works are described in the present tense - compare "Aaroniero was an Espada" (implying he got kicked out of their ranks) and "Aaroniero is an Espada" (which he is, only he's dead). --Pentasyllabic 16:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * After seeing the examples, I guess usng present tense would be the best option. // Decaimiento Poético  17:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)