Allowing the use of start/end of chapter blurbs

[MinatoSparkle]

For a while now, this site hasn't allowed the use of the blurbs at the start and ends of chapters for scaling as they're only in the fan translations, not the official VIZ which the site uses. But this is a misrepresentation of the truth.

While it's true there's nothing written in the volume editions of the VIZ translation, that's due to the fact that in a manga volume, there's no real reason for them, as the reader can simply flip to the next page, and doesn't need a hook or a summary or anything of the like. In the original Shonen Jump release, they're definitely there. While it is difficult to find the original versions, thus making the reliance on fan translations necessary, fan translations of the databooks and such are used, so there's really no difference there. In both cases, they're canon sources that can't be accessed officially in English, but have been given fan translations. The only real difference is that the databooks are considered much more important for scaling and most people don't even realize the chapter blurbs are canon to the original releases. I understand that there are sometimes inconsistencies in the translations (for example, Ch. 601's blurbs are quite different between the two popular fan translations), so I propose that the fan translations can be used if both versions of the translation are essentially the same (such as the blurb statement about SM Naruto~Pain or Juubito being the strongest character in the series), and that if there's only 1 translation for something or there are conflicting translations, the statement's validity can be discussed on a case by case basis.

So, what do y'all think?

 

[AnimesFreak2]

Interesting.....

Following

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Interesting.....

Following

Thoughts?

 

[AnimesFreak2]

Thoughts?

I can see why you would want to use them and I'm cool with it

Though let's see what other have to say

 

[Chariot190]

For a while now, this site hasn't allowed the use of the blurbs at the start and ends of chapters for scaling as they're only in the fan translations, not the official VIZ which the site uses. But this is a misrepresentation of the truth.

While it's true there's nothing written in the volume editions of the VIZ translation, that's due to the fact that in a manga volume, there's no real reason for them, as the reader can simply flip to the next page, and doesn't need a hook or a summary or anything of the like. In the original Shonen Jump release, they're definitely there. While it is difficult to find the original versions, thus making the reliance on fan translations necessary, fan translations of the databooks and such are used, so there's really no difference there. In both cases, they're canon sources that can't be accessed officially in English, but have been given fan translations. The only real difference is that the databooks are considered much more important for scaling and most people don't even realize the chapter blurbs are canon to the original releases. I understand that there are sometimes inconsistencies in the translations (for example, Ch. 601's blurbs are quite different between the two popular fan translations), so I propose that the fan translations can be used if both versions of the translation are essentially the same (such as the blurb statement about SM Naruto~Pain or Juubito being the strongest character in the series), and that if there's only 1 translation for something or there are conflicting translations, the statement's validity can be discussed on a case by case basis.

So, what do y'all think?

Wait we don't? That's odd, some manga have little blurbs that are kinda critical at points or detail specific information or exposition. Should be ok just like anything else, obviously some aren't ok and exists just to be a cliffhanger, draw excitement, and what not, but sometimes it's just basic ass info not unlike any other statement.
Should be case by case just like literally anything else.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

some manga have little blurbs that are kinda critical at points or detail specific information or exposition.

Some manga like Naruto

 

[Chariot190]

Yeah I don't know **** about Naruto so I can't comment on that but in terms of general usability, it should be treated like literally any other statement and what, and be treated case by case and how it coincides with the happenings of the manga to see if it's useful.
So I'm aight with them used as long as they're not contradicted or hyperbolic or there to just draw hype, so basically treat it like any other statement.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

This is very very interesting

And I agree, I see no reason at all as to why the blurbs would ever lie or spread misinformation, unless they are meant to be a red herring for readers

But unless directly contradicted, I think we should be able to use these blurbs

 

[MinatoSparkle]

This is very very interesting

And I agree, I see no reason at all as to why the blurbs would ever lie or spread misinformation, unless they are meant to be a red herring for readers

But unless directly contradicted, I think we should be able to use these blurbs

Staff approval!

 

[Baken384]

Baken of The 384 Family agrees with the use of blurbs

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Alright, so far there are 5 regular members and 1 staff in agreement and none opposing. I think if 1 more staff approves this can be accepted.

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

Well, for as long as I've been on the wiki, there seemed to be this unwritten rule that we should generally use officially licensed translations whenever possible. In this case, we happen to have the Viz translations.
We can ignore them if they happen to be consistently awful or inaccurate, like with One Piece and One-Punch Man; however, I don't think we've encountered such issues with Naruto.

Now, yes, the nature of these volume releases means they won't have the blurbs, obviously. That unfortunately means we don't have any official source for them.
Now, you likened this case to our use of fan-translated Databooks, which isn't a terrible point. But the thing is, we pretty much exclusively use the Narutoversity translations. While they aren't perfect by any means, they do hold up rather well when re-translated by the translators on the wiki (and off-site), so they have a bit of a better track record than random fan-translated scans.

If you really feel strongly about this, then I suggest tracking down the raws if possible, and then having them translated. Fan-translated manga scans for Naruto are preeeeeeetty damn inconsistent from my experience, so I'm just not comfortable with using them on the profiles at all.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Now, you likened this case to our use of fan-translated Databooks, which isn't a terrible point. But the thing is, we pretty much exclusively use the Narutoversity translations. While they aren't perfect by any means, they do hold up rather well when re-translated by the translators on the wiki (and off-site), so they have a bit of a better track record than random fan-translated scans.

I did bring that up. That's precisely why I suggested using the statements if both translations (handled by completely different teams, meaning the likelihood of both coincidentally translating to the same wrong thing is very low) are similar. At the very least, they should be taken into consideration instead of being regarded as completely unusable.

If you really feel strongly about this, then I suggest tracking down the raws if possible, and then having them translated. Fan-translated manga scans for Naruto are preeeeeeetty damn inconsistent from my experience, so I'm just not comfortable with using them on the profiles at all.

As far as I know, there's no site that has scans of all the original Shonen Jump releases.

 

[Damage3245]

Absolutely not. Will get into this when I can, but to summarize I am 100% against this proposal.

We should not endorse using editor notes that have nothing to do with the actual canon manga. These annotations are not on the official final product which means they're completely worthless in my opinion.

 

[Chariot190]

We should not endorse using editor notes that have nothing to do with the actual canon manga.

editor notes

Quite literally not what an editor note is.
And half the time they actually do have something to do with the canon manga, half the time it's literally just a line of text detailing what's happening or is about to happen within the manga itself.

 

[Damage3245]

Quite literally not what an editor note is.
And half the time they actually do have something to do with the canon manga, half the time it's literally just a line of text detailing what's happening or is about to happen within the manga itself.

And it's still not in the final product. In my point of view, they're essentially non-canon.

Obviously the notes are going to be about the manga that they're on. That doesn't make them a valuable, reliable source, especially when they're not in the volumes.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

And it's still not in the final product. In my point of view, they're essentially non-canon.

Obviously the notes are going to be about the manga that they're on. That doesn't make them a valuable, reliable source, especially when they're not in the volumes.

Did you not read about why they're not in the volumes?

 

[Chariot190]

Are you actually going to argue because it's sometimes not featured in the tankoben volumes that it somehow doesn't exist. You realize how widly inconsistent and variable that can be among manga as a whole right?

Sometimes they are, and sometimes they aren't, and sometimes they are but only in certain releases, and sometimes they aren't in others, and not just those, sometimes there can be other such info in some releases but not in others so it's not even a tailpiece or blurb issue but a supplementary issue as a whole, off the top of my head, the power levels listed at the start of the freeza saga volumes saying Goku in SSJ1 has a PL of 150,000,000, 100% Freeza 120,000,000, that's in one volume, and sometimes not others, and it can go back and forth depending on the type of release and the format it was released in. If for example a blurb was featured in the magazine release, would it suddenly not be usable because it wasn't featured in the 3rd, 7th, and 10th tankoben release but was featured in the 2nd, 4th and 8th but was also featured in the kanzeben release but at the same time not the bunkoben? Which one would you consider the "final release" there Damage?

The information still exists, it's a thing that gives information, it was pretty obviously given for some reason whether that be to generate hype or to give actual relevant information that should be taken seriously, and arguing because it's not the "final product", whatever the hell that means, somehow invalidating it is extremely disingenuous when even among "final products" things can vary greatly between releases, if a manga had it in magazine, didn't in volume release, but had them again in a even later release, would you say it still isn't usable in that situation too?
Not withstanding in 99% of cases this type of thing is completely useless and gives us absolutely nothing of value, in the off chance a blurb gives us actual useful information that isn't actually contradicted anywhere in the source material and clearly said with the intent of revealing or granting information on the subject matter, I see zero reason why it can't be used. We're supposed to index things, this sounds like something that's worth indexing to me instead of just ignoring it. As said, it should be case by case, not "let's use all of them" or "let's ignore all of them", context matters.

 

[Damage3245]

Can't get into a detailed argument about it for a few days, just making my position clear as being absolutely against this so it doesn't get rushed through into acceptance.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Well let’s all wait for damage

 

[Damage3245]

Addressing the OP specifically;

While it's true there's nothing written in the volume editions of the VIZ translation, that's due to the fact that in a manga volume, there's no real reason for them, as the reader can simply flip to the next page, and doesn't need a hook or a summary or anything of the like. In the original Shonen Jump release, they're definitely there.

It is not just a matter of Viz not releasing them in the volume editions. The original Japanese volumes don't include them either. They're purely an artifact of the magazine itself and there is no indication as far as I'm aware that these little magazine statements are written by the original authors themselves.

When we look at what is "canon", I consider the best version of that to be the author's final creation which is the volume version of the manga. Here they make their final corrections, some redraws or rewrites, etc. It takes priority over the magazine version of the manga.

And these little statements? They're not included in the volume version. Never are, as far as I'm aware. So, coupling that with the lack of proof that the authors wrote these statements in the first place, I see no reason for these statements to be considered canon.

The only real difference is that the databooks are considered much more important for scaling and most people don't even realize the chapter blurbs are canon to the original releases.

It's not that people "don't realize" that these statements are canon, it is that there is not enough support for them to be canon.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

It is not just a matter of Viz not releasing them in the volume editions. The original Japanese volumes don't include them either. They're purely an artifact of the magazine itself and there is no indication as far as I'm aware that these little magazine statements are written by the original authors themselves.

Why would you assume something part of Kishimoto's work isn't written by him? That's such a weird assumption and idrk where it comes from. Even if it wasn't written by him, why would they publish those words without at least letting him look over them for approval? This all sounds like some random leaps in logic to deny them. Further, even if he didn't write them AND he randomly wasn't given the opportunity to approve them, none of that changes the fact that the blurbs are part of official material owned by the publisher, and are in fact the original release. The Boruto anime isn't all looked at by Kishimoto, but it's still canon. This is both probably written/looked at by Kishimoto and unlike the Boruto anime is the original release of the series. There's no actual reason to deny the blurbs' canonicity.

When we look at what is "canon", I consider the best version of that to be the author's final creation which is the volume version of the manga. Here they make their final corrections, some redraws or rewrites, etc. It takes priority over the magazine version of the manga.

That only changes some small cosmetic things ftmp. That doesn't just decanonize everything in the magazine release, especially when it goes uncontradicted like the blurbs.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

bump

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

Bump.

 

[Nierre]

bump

 

[MinatoSparkle]

@Damage3245 @UchihaSlayer96
Do y'all have further thoughts on the matter?

 

[Damage3245]

I've stated my thoughts futher up.

 

[Jibz]

So now its a matter of who do you agree with more folks. Damage or Goku?

 

[MinatoSparkle]

I've stated my thoughts futher up.

Which I responded to

So now its a matter of who do you agree with more folks. Damage or Goku?

Ngl, personally I got Goku, could be convinced otherwise tho

 

[Damage3245]

What could convince you? Because to me personally, these lines being omitted entirely in the volume version suggests strongly that they're either not canon or not important.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

What could convince you? Because to me personally, these lines being omitted entirely in the volume version suggests strongly that they're either not canon or not important.

I was joking by speaking in third person

Do you disagree with the fact that it's part of official material either way?

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I'm still under the mindset that unless they are directly contradicted, they should be fine to use

 

[Damage3245]

I was joking by speaking in third person

Do you disagree with the fact that it's part of official material either way?

Yeah, I agree they're printed in the magazine version. But I disagree with them being considered canon.

 

[Jibz]

I also heavily agree with Mitch’s view. What is not contradicted is fine. What is contradicted isn’t fine (examples include the infamous light speed jab statement in Baki).

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Yeah, I agree they're printed in the magazine version. But I disagree with them being considered canon.

What part of this do you disagree with?

1 - Shuiesha owns the Naruto franchise

2 - A series' owner's work is canon

3 - Shonen Jump Magazine is owned by Shueisha

4 - The blurbs are part of Shonen Jump Magazine

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Bump

 

[ssgengar]

If nothing is contradicted what’s the problem? They should be completely fine to use

 

[MinatoSparkle]

If nothing is contradicted what’s the problem? They should be completely fine to use

Not what Damage and Slayer think

 

[Lynieryz]

Disagree fra.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Man every time I think a CRT is so simple and uncontroversial it apparently isn't