Talk:Barefoot Gen

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

First header[edit]

Though Nakazawa's original work, I Saw It, is closely based on his actual experiences as an A-Bomb survivor, Barefoot Gen is extensively fictionalized (and, in my opinion, is much the worse for this). The real Nakazawa did not witness the incineration of his family, for example, nor was he forced to act as midwife for the birth of his sister. Barefoot Gen should be described as loosely based on his experiences.

True - thanks. The sloppy wording was mine, and I knew better. ←Hob 03:52, 2005 May 21 (UTC)

Reference Tag[edit]

Can we correctly remove it now? I think there's been enough referencing between the data box and my ISBN additions. Bo-Lingua 20:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External Links[edit]

neither external links are working. i don't know how to edit things. 68.120.193.214 03:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Terri[reply]

Well, you did edit the comment page, so you know something! :) Thanks - those websites seem to have been changed around a lot, and I haven't managed to find any Barefoot Gen pages on them, so I've removed the links for now. ←Hob 04:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Japan Assessment[edit]

I'm afraid I do not think this warrants B-class status as it stands right now. This is easily one of the most widely known and most academically significant manga/anime to ever be released. The origins of the manga, its themes, its significance within Japan and around the world, as well as mention or brief description of the Barefoot Gen Society all need to be expanded upon. Which works made reference to this? Which scholars have discussed it, and what have they said? With research and work, this can potentially become a long, detailed, Featured Article that all of Wikipedia can be proud of. LordAmeth 13:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BarefootGen.JPG[edit]

Image:BarefootGen.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barefoot problem[edit]

Okay...first of all "I SAW IT" was not published in Weekly Shonen Jump, it was published in Monthly Shonen Jump. Also you can't say that Chu-Shinsha published the manga (which it did) and was searialized in Weekly Shonen Jump. Weekly Shonen Jump is created by Shueisha so I also put Shueisha on there. Chu-Shin. did the tonkobon. Jump Guru (talk) 21:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Order of publishers[edit]

On the article we only mention Last Gasp and none of the other publishers beforehand. We need to mention the other publishers and their versions:

EduComics - did phamplet versions of the series similare to Viz Monthly Comic series, under the title Gen of Hiroshima
New Society Publishers - second publisher of series under the title Barefoot Gen: The Cartoon Story of Hiroshima.
Last Gasp - third publisher of series, version two being a dialoge adaption by Art Speigelman comparing it to Maus.

That's the real line of publishers; not just Last Gasp. - Jump Guru (talk) 22:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Page[edit]

Hello! i tried : http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/culture/news/20090725-OYT1T00756.htm as reference when Volume 9,10 will be published but it seems the website says in japanese: this site can't be found any longer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.162.254.225 (talk) 09:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage[edit]

--KrebMarkt (talk) 20:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary is a synopsis of the first film[edit]

Someone with access to the comics needs to write a summary of the series as a whole. As it stands now, the film synopsis is an overly detailed account of the very beginning of the story, completely ignoring the later (and more overtly political) sections dealing with the Occupation and the Korean War. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.169.28.56 (talk) 03:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it. I'm in the middle of Volume 4 so far. WordwizardW (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content fork in userspace[edit]

Is there anything here, User:Jump Guru/Sandbox, that could be conceivably merged to this article, or is it entirely redundant or lower in quality and best deleted? It is currently nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jump Guru/Sandbox. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:46, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Barefoot Gen. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 08:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]