Talk:List of Naruto volumes

message: So, how are we gonna do this? Are we gonna have an approximate translation for the chapters with no official title, like One Piece media and release information? Also, is there a reason why chapter 125 doesn't have a title? The Splendiferous Gegiford 19:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, romanizations and rough translations would be nice, though the article is in need of someone who can read Japanese and provide that. As for 125, the title doesn't seem to be given in Shonen Jump, so we'll need to wait for the volume release in a few weeks to see what it is. ~SnapperTo 19:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Chapter titles

message: The use of images in this way is not in accordance with Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria policy (likely in that the use is not minimal (3.a.) and it is in a list or a gallery (8.)).  The gallery has thus been deprecated.  EliminatorJR Talk 21:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair Use Images

message: Guys, the main shippuden plot page looks like it's gonna be history. What do you say we pitch in and move the summaries chapter by chapter here? 69.125.198.27 03:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about volume by volume instead? Chapter by chapter is far too excessive. ~SnapperTo 18:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, see shippuden plot was fuxxored. Hopefully someone saved it. Volume by volume for what ha been published as tanks, and chapter by chapter for what is not in tank form yet. that okay? Handren Offma 23:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why there needs to be a chapter by chapter for unreleased chapters. That just gives IPs free reign to go into four paragraphs of detail for each new chapter. ~SnapperTo 02:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not if we strenuously watch it and cut it down when it gets too big, like we did at the since deleted Plot article... Granted, we could add a lot more info there, but then again, its supposed to be a summary, not an essay covering every single minor plot detail that's happened...  My proposal on the AFD called for a a max 3 to 5 paragraph summary of the uncollected chapters, removing them when they are collected in a Volume, which means, like one every 2 months or so, we remove about 8 chapters worth of information. --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 12:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, before we can figure out whether or not and how much of a summary should be included, we need a place for volume summaries to be added. I'm no good with wikicode, so someone will need to do that first. ~SnapperTo 18:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  short chapter summaries 

message: Perhaps a List of Naruto chapters (Part I) and List of Naruto chapters (Part II) should be made for Parts I and II respectively, as to prevent readability concerns, as this article is certaintly going to exceed 100 KB once the Part II summaries are added. It also makes it easier to work on the pages, and push them to FL status. Thoughts? Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 09:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would probably be for the best; I hadn't expected it to get as large as it has so quickly. I think the article's size according to the Wikipedia software is somewhat misleading, but even then some kind of split is necessary. ~SnapperTo 18:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Coming back to this, what should be left on the primary article when it is separated? Food for thought, as to prevent any controversy when the separate articles are created. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 00:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Title, volume number, release date, and maybe the chapters the volume covers should suffice. ~SnapperTo 03:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Yea, this page was updated with volume summaries after the deletion of the Naruto plot articles. The split lists should contain at least some summary... I'd understand if people are getting to it. --GhostStalker(Got a present for ya! | Mission Log) 04:59, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Splitting was a logical conclusion in any case. If you look at the List of Naruto chapters (Part I) page, it has ~45,000 bytes, and I haven't even put half the references or written the lead. See List of Claymore chapters (which is going for featured list status by the way) for what I am shooting for. As for individual volume summaries, I don't find that it is necessary. In episode lists, you can handle summaries on an episode to episode basis, making it easier to manage. Here, we have to summarize entire volumes, some of which more often than not contain plot details that require significant explanation for a reader to understand. I'm not against them if they're short enough to not invite WP:NOT#PLOT concerns, but I still don't feel that they're necessary. The old ones were way too detailed though. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 05:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For all practical purposes, I've finished List of Naruto chapters (Part I). Considering that they are indeed short and succinct, plot summaries could be added onto the volumes. Again, I believe it's unnecessary, and attracts WP:NOT#PLOT problems that could otherwise be avoided. Anyhow, if anyone cares to do so, it likely could run through WP:FLC at the moment. If someone wants to nominate it go ahead, I have three nominations (List of Naruto episodes (Seasons 3-4), List of Claymore episodes, and List of Claymore chapters) already present to monitor. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 08:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The old summaries were ~37,000 bytes. That's a tad bit too long. Again, I don't mind plot summaries, but they shouldn't delve into specifics at all. A succinct generalization is all that is needed. Six to seven sentences tops. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 23:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So it's decided, summaries are a go. I've begun cutting down the former summaries from Part I, starting backwards from Chapter 27 (just in case anyone has already started from Chapter 1). If someone wants to coordinate, let me know. Vagrant Oner 04:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting 

message: SimonSays.com has the release date to volume twenty-eight in America. Rathen then screwing up the coding on the page I'll have someone else add it.
Also, it implies that Naruto will return to three chapters per month when 'Part II' begins.
^^ do you mean three volumes a month? 3 chapters a month isnt even 1 volume  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.71.219.188 (talk) 04:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he means in the American Monthly Shonen Jump  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moocowsrule (talk • contribs) 01:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  English volume 28 release date. 

message: Wow, we've really detailed this article alot, haven't we? Well, ummm, it's TOO informative to the readers and allows them to know just about everything going on in the series' plot. I suggest we cut down the details a lot so it only reveals so-and-so. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 20:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WAAAYYYY too detailed 

message: Given the comments at the featured list nomination for List of Naruto chapters (Part I) here, plot summaries appear to be conducive to understanding of the topic, and increase the similarity between the article and existing FL episode lists. Ergo, the summaries should be restored. However, the level of detail that the previous ones approached should not be the case, and the summaries should do nothing more than briefly describe what is occurring in the volume. Remember that the summaries are not a substitute for reading the manga. Thanks. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summaries 

message: Can someone find sources for the release dates of the movie manga (the Japanese ones rather)? I haven't been able to find any. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 22:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This'll do it. I think, anyway. See if you can sort through that. I'm not so clear on it. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I think these (1, 2, 3) are the manga. They at the very least seem to sync up with what's already in the article. ~SnapperTo 03:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie manga 

message: I've nominated this article for featured list status here. Feel free to comment there or improve the article in any fashion. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 07:51, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FLC 

message: I've nominated List of Naruto manga volumes, List of Naruto chapters (Part I), and List of Naruto chapters (Part II) to be a featured topic. Feel free to comment at the nomination here. Regards, Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 19:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured topic nomination 

message: I found this while scouring the Anime News Network
http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-11-06/viz-reportedly-plans-11-more-naruto-books-in-3-months  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akatsuki.sousui (talk • contribs) 23:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. Should probably wait for an official announcement though. ~SnapperTo 03:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking that, too. Hopefully they do so at some point in December or January.Akatsuki.sousui (talk) 04:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Both options A and B can be used (C would be factually inaccurate). I've switched the articles to A for the moment. ~SnapperTo 04:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, but if there is no second news posted that Viz officially  confirms the story personally then Plan B should be put in effect at some point when the waiting time for the extra conformation needs to  expire especially in between after Vol. 33 is released and before January ends. The only reason I proposed those ideas was for different scenarios in handling this issue. I will keep my eye on Rightstuf (since they post release dates faster than Amazon) for further updates for any conformations on accuracy and especially if they post the other dates for the other manga that is part of this deal and place the sources here on this page. -67.171.250.39 (talk) 05:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds pretty interesting, but it should be noted that as of the December 2008 issue, there's been no mention in Shonen Jump of an accelerated release schedule. If it's true, then, they'll probably have something in the January '09 issue (which should be here in around 2 weeks). —Dinoguy1000 20:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

text: I first heard about the last Naruto marathon maybe a week before it was officially announced. If that stays true this time, coupled with the fact that the rumor is now seeing much more attention, we should have confirmation soon enough. ~SnapperTo 22:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the Naruto Nation campaign was announced at least 2 months in advance in SJ IIRC, so the fact that there's been no announcement of this release schedule in the December SJ, even though it seems to be starting in February, has me pretty interested. —Dinoguy1000 20:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am also more interested as all the February releases had been posted on Amazon and Rightstuf though I will still be a professional and wait until either they actually confirm it or until a fixed amount of time has passed especially after the release of Vol. 33 and that more release dates for March and April are be posted on those two sites since it provides more sourcing. -67.171.250.39 (talk) 05:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Actually, Amazon.com has all the way through 45 for the English releases. I'd know; they're all on my shopping list xDAkatsuki.sousui (talk) 17:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Maybe they aren't planning on skipping ahead in Shonen Jump this time? Last time they needed to explain to their readers why the story was jumping ahead 100 chapters, and to convince them to read up on (aka. buy) the missing plot details through a different venue. ~SnapperTo 23:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... could be... but it would seem to me that they would still want to let the readers know to encourage them to buy read ahead in the tankoubons... In any case, they can't get me, since I do all my Naruto volume reading via the local library system. =D —Dinoguy1000 20:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volumes 34-44 

message: Borders.com has more acurate release dates than Viz itself. If you go to borders and search the books you will find the release dates there. Volume 33 is going to be released on December 16, 2008. Here is the link that proves it :  It has every release date up to volume 44. 45 is expected in July.
Volumes 34-37 February 3, 2009.
Volumes 38-41 March 3, 2009.
Volumes 41-44 April 7, 2009.
Volume 45 (not available to search yet but Viz press release estimates July 2009.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwolvesto50 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volume Release Dates 

message: Amazon has the volume 45 release date. here is the link 
Borders also has the release date here: 
I am not sure what the title is.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwolvesto50 (talk • contribs) 01:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, and it's already on the article, in a hidden comment in the source, precisely because we don't have a title (or any Japanese release info) for it. 「ダイノガイ千？！」(Dinoguy1000) 18:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volume 45 

message: I notice that many titles for the English releases here and on the List of Naruto Chapters articles have been changed from their official (Viz) names to literal translations of the Japanese volume titles (perhaps from illegal scanlations?).  Volume 1 is one such example..  Based on previous topics on this talk page, it appears they used to be correct.  I'm pretty shocked to see no discussion of a change rather central to the purpose of this article.  Comments? If no one speaks up soon, I'll change them all back to the official titles.  It's not hard; one need only open each book to see its title. ^^  edited to add: Actually, I can't do a darn thing; I have no idea where the code for those tables is located!
After further investigation, it appears Viz changed the volume titles! The titles in the articles do indeed match the ones on the Viz website. However, they do not match the titles in 1st printings of the book. Totally weird. Seems like this should be addressed somehow, but I don't know how...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.47.26 (talk) 22:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  English Titles Changed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Naruto volumes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.viz.com/products/products.php?product_id=7199
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011001023/http://naruto.viz.com/intro.php?sz=1152 to http://naruto.viz.com/intro.php?sz=1152
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Due to Wikipedia's "post-expand inclusion size limit" discussed at the top of :Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded, this page was not displaying properly.
I removed the section-transclusions to get around the problem.  However, as this page is a WP:Featured list, it is highly desireable to restore it to its previous condition.
Hopefully, the outcome of the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 February 2#Template:Nihongo-s may allow for this.  if not, then some other action will be required.
Please do NOT attempt to demote this from "Feature List" status until at least a week after the discussion linked above closes.  Please do not attempt to demote it as long as there is an effort to get this page back to its former glory without running into the technical limitations of Wikipedia.  davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This issue has been resolved. It was caused by the template-discussion notice on .  This notice has been removed, but it may come back temporarily.  For now, no changes are needed for this article to keep it out of :Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded.  davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:46, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section transclusions removed