Talk:List of Death Note chapters

	Anime and manga portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

ISBN

Y'know what this article needs? Some ISBN numbers. That way, there'd be no need for a references section; the books themselves would be all the references we need. --Ppk01 22:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done and done for both the Japanese and North American ISBN numbers, excepting the Volume 12 ISBN for the North American version since it isn't available yet, even for pre-order. I didn't know where in each Volume section they belonged, so I just put them at the top of each. Sorry if that was wrong. ^^; Nique1287 14:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 13

I removed the previous Volume 13 section ("It's just wishful thinking." didn't seem very encyclopedic), but I was wondering if there would be any objection to adding a section about Death Note How To Read 13 in here. Nothing too large, obviously, but a description of some of the content (i.e. interviews, character profiles, etc.) and the different versions that are/were available (the Normal and Special editions, and the differences between them) and so on. It isn't really another volume of the manga, so I can see why it perhaps might not belong here, but would be nice to have a section on it somewhere since it is part of the Death Note collection, as it were. Nique1287 14:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Description Quotations

Every volume (except for 13) has a one-line quotation accompanying the chapter listing. Where did these descriptions come from? If they weren't actually in the manga, they shouldn't be in this article. If they are, I apologise in advance. --Ppk01 11:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War

Would that be what this is considered to be? The 3RR has already been broken, and it's just been two people reverting and reverting, from what I've seen. Perhaps protection is in order, until this can be resolved? Dan 21:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it could just be even semi-protected until July 3rd with the release date intact, as it should be, I'm sure things would work themselves out. It's gone beyond a simple 'edit war' at this point: this dynamic-IP anon has tried to make it personal, repeatedly, ever since June 18, and again on June 19, and on June 20, and three separate times in the last 48 hours as well. I don't think s/he even cares anymore, it's just a game to them now. Nique talk 02:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at this, and submitted a request to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection quite a while ago, with no response as of yet. Dan 02:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just noticed that after I posted. As well as remembered this little beauty of an edit. Though I do realize this isn't the place for trying to justify anything, of course. Nique talk 02:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well. Nothing to be done about it, now. The article's protected for a week, so that's the end of that. And, as a side note, don't stereotype. Not /all/ Canadians care about Canada. Some of us want to get out of this country. :3 Dan 02:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see what the big deal is, the edit war would of course stop 7th of July, ne? --BiT 02:40, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was the third of July. That's why I requested a Full Protect until the third. Dan 02:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was a good edit war, We both had our points, and in the end I still of course, think I'm right. Sorry for the personal attacks, that was just me not caring at those points because I felt you weren't even considering my points. So hey, that ends that I suppose, no more editing untill after the book is OFFICIALLY (as you like to keep pointing out) out anyway! Canada still sucks though, that's a fact.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.160.92 (talk • contribs)

Sheesh stop with the personal attacks already! --BiT 04:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What? On canada? They deserve it. But this is not the place for that, I'll see you over at the canada page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.160.92 (talk • contribs)

Copyvios

Please do not copy Viz's summaries into this article. They are copyright violations, forcing me to roll back all edits to the version without copyright violations that I am aware of. Jesse Viviano 14:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're just the summaries off the back covers. I think that would qualify as fair use, would it not? Considering that it's a quick outline and explanation of the volume. Also, you didn't have to roll back the edits, it's not terribly difficult to remove the text manually. Aside from which, the lines previously existing for the volumes are unsourced and seem to be completely random. I've reverted and removed the text manually, though I don't agree with the removal, because it does merit discussion, but a number of changes were made that must remain in the article (i.e. chapter titles corrected with the release of the Viz volumes, images deleted, etc.). Nique talk 15:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your points. However, I did the best I could. You can rollback my edits if you want, but those back cover texts are hardly encyclopedic and must stay removed because they do not contribute much if anything to this article. Jesse Viviano 15:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to ask that someone who read the Death Note manga to replace the copyvios with real summaries. Jesse Viviano 02:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to start adding my own summaries of each volume. Is that alright? NinjaRooster 00:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added Fair Use Rationales

For the following images (all that had not yet been deleted), I added a Fair Use Rationale to prevent them from being after being tagged by BetacommandBot. Please add a Fair Use Rationale to any future images uploaded/reuploaded to prevent future problems. Image:Deathnote10.jpg, Image:Deathnote12.jpg, Image:Deathnote2.jpg, Image:Deathnote5.jpg, Image:Deathnote6.jpg, Image:Deathnote7.jpg, Image:Deathnote8.jpg, Image:4088736524.09. SCLZZZZZZZ .jpg, Image:Death Note 4.jpg

Shimawa zen (talk) 14:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Death Note How to Read 13 has been released in English - Use this as a source to add real world information

VIZ Media has released Death Note How to Read 13 in English: http://www.viz.com/products/products.php?series_id=827

This book contains real world info about the series, and it can be used to establish separate articles for Light, L, and Misa. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One shots

Do the one shots also count as Death Note manga chapters? I know at least two- one being an alternate retelling of the end (Light living and finally asking Ryuk to kill him instead of losig as he did in the actual series) and the other dealing with what happens 3 years later when in Japan a new kira appears (the story with Near). So, should it be included? Regards, Joan M (talk) 19:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added it after it was released, but i guess it was removed... I feel that they belong. Rau J16 23:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Novel

If we have How to Read covered here, should we add the novel? Doceirias (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind adding the novel. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But isn't that a different media? This article refers to Death Note's manga chapters, not novel. How to Read 13 is like a guidebook with the size of a volume, so it shouldn't be covered in the list.Tintor2 (talk) 00:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Book?

Did anyone notice book 6 doesn't appear? Also, I think the chapters under 5 belong under the non-existent 6. I'm new to this whole series so somebody else should look at it, but I'm pretty sure something is wrong here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.237.155.61 (talk) 00:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The data is here, so there must be a wonky bit of code in there preventing display. Couldn't find the error myself. Anyone who actually understands the code care to take a look? Doceirias (talk) 01:16, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that it was during December 2009, when development info was added to the list (though I don't find it needed here). In this revision, vol 6 is shown, while in this one, it is not.Tintor2 (talk) 01:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spindori already fixed it.Tintor2 (talk) 01:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New "Creation and Conception" section?

Directly under the Volume list is a load of information that does not contribute to its overall understanding. I view it as pure trivia, and vouch for either a split into a new section or its complete removal by WP:HTRIVIA. But is it common for chapters lists to have a "Creation and Conception" part, or would it fit but under a new name? Help, suggestions are all welcome. Spindori (talk) 23:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any section that matches your description. The final volume description does contain more sourced content on the creation than other volumes, but nothing stands out as excessive detail. It's only natural for the creators to have more to say about the ending. Doceirias (talk) 00:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant above it; where it states how the chapter titles were decided and other things. Spindori (talk) 00:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Death Note chapters. 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 archive https://archive.is/20071226030951/http://www.viz.com/products/products.php?product_id=7228 to http://www.viz.com/products/products.php?product_id=7228

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:05, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]