# Talk:Boruto

This review is transcluded from Talk:Boruto: Naruto Next Generations/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 08:49, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I will review this article. Thank you.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 08:49, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Comments
Wikilink "prequel" and "sequel" even if many readers might have heard of the terms.
"Unlike the manga, which began as a retelling of the film Boruto: Naruto the Movie," — Add the year of release for the film.
"to make a sequel to the famous manga" — "famous" sounds like a Wikipedia:Puff phrases. Just write it as "Boruto originated from Shueisha's proposal to Kishimoto on making a sequel to Naruto."
"following his marriage." — Write it as "following his marriage to Hinata Hyuga."
"Kishimoto advised Ikemoto not to imitate his own art style and instead make his own. While noting long-time fans might be disappointed Kishimoto is not drawing Boruto, Ikemoto stated he would do his best in making the manga. Ikemoto said he remained optimistic about his art style. Kishimoto also revises the manga's scenario." — These sentence sound pretty staccato-like. How about "Despite Kishimoto revising the manga's scenario, he advised Ikemoto to make his own art style instead of imitating his. Ikemoto agreed and felt optimistic about his art style. While noting long-time fans might be disappointed Kishimoto is not drawing Boruto, Ikemoto stated he would do his best in making the manga."
"A spin-off manga titled Boruto: Saikyo Dash Generations (BORUTO-ボルト- SAIKYO DASH GENERATIONS) was written by Kenji Taira and has been serialised in Saikyō Jump since the May 2017 issue." — Source?
No source is there for the "Chapters not yet in tankōbon format" subsection.
"The television anime series, supervised by series creator Ukyō Kodachi, would be co-directed by Noriyuki Abe and Hiroyuki Yamashita" — Shouldn't it be "The television anime series, supervised by series creator Ukyō Kodachi, is co-directed by Noriyuki Abe and Hiroyuki Yamashita" as the series is already underway?
I'll look at the sources tomorrow.....
@Ssven2: Hi and thank you for providing the review! I tried to fix every issue pointed out above. I will be waiting for the rest of the comments. Flowerpiep (talk) 23:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)Flowerpiep
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: 

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section: 

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
Pass or Fail: 

Thank you for addressing my comments, Flowerpiep. Congratulations, the article has passed.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 06:33, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I was reading over this article and it seems a bit out of date. The Boruto: Naruto Next Generations anime is now over 200 episodes long, and probably needs its own article separate from the manga since there are now so many differences between the two. I'd be happy to assist in developing a separate article for the anime. -- Pisces Unicorn (talk) 21:27, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

That might be quite difficult to make. Pointing out differences comes across as WP:Original research and thus official sources that have this are hard to locate. If the article were far bigger, I would support it but now everything seems fine.Tintor2 (talk) 01:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Naruto has two different pages for manga and anime. We can do same for Boruto Realexpert1 (talk) 10:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Kishimoto being credited as the current writer of the manga is based on a mistranslated announcement. The proper translation stated the Kishimoto's original idea drafts would be used for the manga plot going forward after Kodachi was removed as writer. No writer has been credited since then, and Kishimoto is still credited as just the Series Supervisor and Creator. WillFanofMany (talk) 03:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

From the credit pages of Viz´s Manga Plus:
Masashi Kishimoto is credited as the "creator/supervisor" from chapters 1 to 80. Ukyo Kodachi is credited with "script" from chapters 1 to 51 and stepped away there. The anime stopped crediting him as "story supervisor" with ep 217. Ep 216 was the last to adapt a chapter by him, namely chapter 51. Mikio Ikemoto was always only the artist and didn´t even do the NAME (rough storyboards) when Kodachi was on story duty to my knowledge.
So who did chapters 52-80? Kishimoto would be credited differently if he fully plotted the manga. 77.64.147.61 (talk) 10:20, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
The official release of Boruto: Two Blue Vortex chapter 1 just came out and Kishimoto cotinues to only be credited as "creator/supervisor". Mikio Ikemoto again only receaves credit for the art and I fail to find Japanese sources that explain the issue any better.
The last chapter of Part 1: https://mangaplus.shueisha.co.jp/titles/100006 and the first chapter of Part 2: https://mangaplus.shueisha.co.jp/titles/100269 in case someone wants to check. 77.64.147.229 (talk) 17:37, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Kishimoto should not be credited as the writer. He's the supervisor. Every volume cover that released after Kodachi left credits Kishimoto as the creator/supervisor and on the Japanese covers it credits him as orginial series creator and supervisor. KingAgniKai (talk) 07:57, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
He is considered as the writer for practical purposes. Ikemoto is only credited for the art according to Viz Media's current volumes [1]. Kishimoto may not be exactly credited for the story, but Ikemoto is only credited for the art, so then, who else should be listed as writer? Xexerss (talk) 08:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
No one. That's how it is on the manga covers in both English and Japanese. Why must he be ladled as the writer here when he isn't on the covers? KingAgniKai (talk) 08:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Given the role that he has, he is the closest to being considered the writer of the story. Leaving the parameter with no one would be like saying that no one is in charge of the story, which doesn't make any sense. Xexerss (talk) 08:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
The VIZ link you posted also clearly shows us that Kishimoto isn't credited as the writer. It's been like this since it started and since Kodachi left. KingAgniKai (talk) 08:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
If you want to look at covers, look at the Japanese original covers.
Every manga where the role of writer and artist are separated, the writer will be recorded as "原作".
You can check it out on the Japanese covers of Death Note, OnePunchMan, Dragon Ball Super, Samurai 8. 原作 can be translated as "Author, Creator, Writer, Original idea, etc." VizMedia translates "原作" in covers for such manga - "Story By". You can check it out on the English covers of Death Note, OnePunchMan, Dragon Ball Super, Samurai 8.
But for Boruto, they decided to translate it not as "Story By" but as "Creator". Since Kodachi used to be a screenwriter, and "two writers" label would confused a lot of people. And VizMedia decided it this way. Whether this is the correct translation or not is a separate discussion. Realexpert1 (talk) 12:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

 AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:23, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Boruto should not be called a sequel. I found this picture https://imgur.com/gallery/BYXGJbd from the Bleach Anniversary Exhibition. The exhibition ran from December 18, 2021, to January 16, 2022. It states that it's a spin-off. The word sequel isn't used. It says: Masashi Kishimoto serialized the NARUTO manga in 'Weekly Shonen Jump' from 1999 to 2014. Currently, he has a serialization in 'V Jump with spin off work - BORUTO: NARUTO NEXT GENERATIONS - working as the original series creator and supervising editorial director.  KingAgniKai (talk) 08:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok, and where does it say it should NOT be called a sequel? The lead of the article already makes it clear that it is both a spin-off and a sequel, why do you think that it cannot be both? One image where it is only labeled as a spin-off is not enough to negate the other term. Xexerss (talk) 08:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
A sequel is work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier story. Boruto doesn't do that since Naruto isn't the main character, his story isn't continued nor does it continue Naruto's central theme. It also changes things from Naruto with no explanation. Calling Boruto a sequel is not appropriate. It's a spin-off since it's something new based on a popular franchise. KingAgniKai (talk) 08:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Calling Kishimoto the writer is also wrong as all the volume covers clearly say he isn't. Even in Japanese. He's the supervisor.  KingAgniKai (talk) 08:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
The series takes place after the events of Naruto. Where do you get that a sequel must have the same protagonist as the original series to be considered so? Here are sources explicitly calling it a sequel. [2][3][4] Xexerss (talk) 08:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Those aren't sources. Those are just news sites. The pic I posted was from an exhibition organized by Shueisha. That is proof from the publisher that it's a spin-off.
Here is the website that Shueisha made for the event https://bleach-exhibition.com/ KingAgniKai (talk) 08:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
The second link is literally from Shueisha. Also, we prioritize secondary sources over primary ones, so they have more weight that some image ommiting a word. And what exactly do you mean with "Those aren't sources"? Xexerss (talk) 08:46, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Even the official Naruto website calls it a sequel [5] Are you gonna say that the official website of the series is not a source either? Xexerss (talk) 08:53, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
How is the image for Shueisha not a source too?  KingAgniKai (talk) 08:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
But what are you trying to prove with that image? The image only serves to support that it is a spin-off, but not to demonstrate that it is NOT a sequel. Now, if you could at least provide some kind of reliable source supporting the idea that it shouldn't be considered a sequel, we would have something to discuss here, but it rather seems that you're looking for a reason why YOU don't consider it a sequel and the article shouldn't either. Xexerss (talk) 09:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
But that image proves that it's not a sequel. If it was a sequel it would have said so in that image right? None of the novels that take place after Chapter 700 of Naruto is considered a sequel and Boruto should be the same. They both don't continue Naruto's main theme as well KingAgniKai (talk) 09:14, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
We're not talking about the novels, stay on topic. What I'm asking for is a reliable source explicitly stating "Boruto is not a sequel", not a source that is just not calling it a sequel. Xexerss (talk) 09:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Again, how is that image not reliable? Why would they omit sequel? It's clear that it's a spin-off. At the very least Shueisha considers it a spin-off now. KingAgniKai (talk) 09:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
No, Shueisha never said that it is not a sequel anymore, they just didn't use a word in some tribute image and you automatically assumed that it is no longer considered a sequel by them. The source is not the issue, the issue is your unconvincing motive to support your stance. According to your logic, I could argue that the other sources I provided (two from Shueisha) don't call it a spin-off, so Boruto shouldn't be considered as a spin-off. Do you get the point? Xexerss (talk) 09:37, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Shueisha also called it a sequel here,[6] a post from October 2022 (after the Bleach Anniversary Exhibition), so it doesn't seem that they don't consider it a sequel anymore. Xexerss (talk) 09:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Boruto literally continues Ootsusuki plot from Naruto. That's why it's sequel.
Kishimoto credited as 原作. In Japanese literally means Author/Creator. Any manga where the role of artist and writer are separated, the writer is called 原作 (Creator). For example - OnePunchMan. One is original author, when Murata is illustator. And One is credited as 原作 (Creator)
I hope you know that Kishimoto is writer of Samurai 8. There he is also credited as 原作 (Creator).
"Creator" in Boruto manga means "Drafts, original work". It's not about previos manga (Naruto).
VIZ/MangaPlus usually translates 原作 as "Story by". But for Boruto they decided write him as "Creator". It was because Kodachi was already credited as "Script" and it would be confusing for some readers. I think they did wrong choice. It's correct translation, but they made difference between Boruto and other mangas.
How it worked before:
-Kishimoto gives a lot of ideas for Boruto plot
-Kodachi writes script
-Kishimoto and editor check it and fix some things.
-Ikemoto draws it
-Kishimoto and editor check it and fix some things.
-Chapter is done.
How it works now:
-Kishimoto writes drafts, then script
-Editor checks it
-Ikemoto draws it
-Kishimoto and editor check it and fix some things.
-Chapter is done. 37.150.190.228 (talk) 20:00, 30 November 2023 (UTC)