manga04_jpg login_tab_left_jpg
Username:   Password:    Forgot Password?
App
Try out our new iPhone application!
App
Manga Poll
For a really long, ongoing series, you prefer to
Keep reading since you're already so invested
Keep reading as long it's good
After a certain point, just stop and wait for it to finish then read the entire thing at once
Just give up reading after a certain point
 
See Old Polls

Manga is the Japanese equivalent of comics
with a unique style and following. Join the revolution! Read some manga today!

Coded in ConTEXT

Join #baka-updates @irc.irchighway.net

RSS Feed
 
center_left_tab Forums center_right_tab

You are now viewing a topic.

Pippira Note, possible double entry

Back to Suggestions & Bugs


You must be registered to post!
From User Message Body
futz
Post #611455
Member

5:23 pm, Aug 19 2013
Posts: 4


Hello,

I think there might be a double entry, concerning the manga Pippira Note.
The main entry linked above should be fine, it is a 2 volumes series. But there shouldn't be a sequel to it. If you look for the book on the publisher website here, you'll notice that the name for the two books of the series are :
ぴっぴら帳 1 and ぴっぴら帳 完結編
And the latter name, has its own page here, but shouldn't exist. That is, because if Futabasha considers it's from the same series, the main entry (Pippira Note) should be enough, right ? Also, I don't see 3 different books with this title "ぴっぴら帳" on Futabasha. Which leads me to believe even more that Pippira Note: Kanketsuhen shouldn't exist.

Thank you for your attention.

Gradonil_Ral
Post #611459
user avatar
[ONeoRa] Co-Admin
Member

7:01 pm, Aug 19 2013
Posts: 196


If Pippira Note: Kanketsuhen was meant to be the second volume of Pippira Note, then it would be listed on the publisher's website as either ぴっぴら帳 2 or ぴっぴら帳 2: 完結編.
A subtitle usually indicates a new series. The publisher probably keeps it on the same page because it's more convenient.

________________
ONeoRa is always looking for interesting people to join our ranks.
Visit our forum to apply: http://www.oneora.net
User Posted Image
futz
Post #611472
Member

10:16 pm, Aug 19 2013
Posts: 4


Same could be said about Hoshi Mamoru Inu then.
First volume = 星守る犬 (Hoshi Mamoru Inu)
Second volume = 続・星守る犬 (Zoku Hoshi Mamoru Inu)
Yet, both appear in a single entry.

So I believe either Hoshi Mamoru Inu deserves two entries for each of its volume, or Pippira Note should get a single entry for its two volumes.

So which one is right ?

Gradonil_Ral
Post #611473
user avatar
[ONeoRa] Co-Admin
Member

10:29 pm, Aug 19 2013
Posts: 196


Yes, it probably should. "Zoku" means "sequel".

________________
ONeoRa is always looking for interesting people to join our ranks.
Visit our forum to apply: http://www.oneora.net
User Posted Image
lynira
Post #611618
user avatar
Site Admin

1:37 am, Aug 21 2013
Posts: 433


If the titles are distinctly different, then they're two different series, and each gets its own entry. So Pippira Note and Pippira Note: Kanketsuhen each get their own. Same goes for Hoshi Mamoru Inu and Zoku Hoshi Mamoru Inu (fixed now).

________________
Manga Cover Database
futz
Post #611658 - Reply to (#611618) by lynira
Member

6:26 am, Aug 21 2013
Posts: 4


You can't disagree for one only and not the other. Because, Kanketsuhen (for Pippira Note) means Final Chapter right ? So both case are really similar here, only a single word more, but if we stick to the rule of different name = different entry, then it's only logical that both manga get a double entry.

Though I had to edit volume number in Pippira Note as it's a one volume only series.

Thank you for the clarification of the rule.



Edit: but I would also prefer to combine the series. Makes sense to me too, but a rule is a rule, and it also makes sense, unfortunately, so I can't argue back bigrazz

lynira
Post #612094
user avatar
Site Admin

6:18 pm, Aug 24 2013
Posts: 433


holy'bell: I don't think a sequel only having one volume is enough of a reason to merge it with its prequel. It's still a different series with a different title, right?

For Hoshi Mamoru Inu, even though the titles are only one character different, that character is zoku (sequel), which along with shin (new), is pretty commonly added to titles to make a new title for separate, sequel series. But if Zoku Hoshi Mamoru Inu is really considered volume 2 of the original series, then I agree it should be merged; but could you show me some proof? The cover layout and title font on both are the same, supporting that they might both be part of one series, but the way there's no number on either makes them both seem like volume ones (in other words, different series).

Last edited by lynira at 6:56 pm, Aug 24

________________
Manga Cover Database
futz
Post #612401
Member

9:34 am, Aug 27 2013
Posts: 4


Alright, I just noticed about Hoshi Mamoru Inu, and I'm glad about it, but now I have to defend Pippira's case as well.

So first of all, in Kouno's first book, Pippira Note, she wrote a comment about a part 38. However, the first book goes up to part 29 only (translated page here, check third paragraph, untranslated here, hopefully the translation is correct...).

With this, it is easy to guess that both books are one and the same series already, but to prove it, here you can check out how the numbering is handled, last part of Pippira Note vs. first part of Pippira Note: Kanketsuhen

For me, I think it's pretty clear that there's a direct continuation here. This is obviously a sequel, but not a sequel as in a new series. But of course, for this you'll have to trust me about the numbering...

So I tried to find something more, and I finally found a very nice information. Pippira Note had a bunko edition. Here are the cover : volume 01 / volume 02. Numbering here couldn't be clearer!
The bunko information can also be found on JP wiki here, under this title 単行本, the line naming it is:
『ぴっぴら帳( ノート)』1、完 結編(2000-04年、双 葉社)のち文庫
And it can be seen on Futabasha website here.

Hopefully that should suffice to revert back the initial judgement about the double entry.


edit: forgot some links -_-

Last edited by futz at 11:41 am, Aug 27

lynira
Post #612575
user avatar
Site Admin

11:45 pm, Aug 28 2013
Posts: 433


You're right, I looked it up to double check, and Pippira Note Kanketsuhen's first chapter is indeed labeled chapter 30... I never would have thought so from the totally different cover layout and different title, but that proves it, it is volume 2 after all. So I've merged the two entries together.


________________
Manga Cover Database
You must be registered to post!

Back to Suggestions & Bugs  Back to Top

Search This Topic:
 
Manga Search
MANGA Fu
MEMBERS
TEAM-BU


footer