Talk:One-Punch Man

Main image

I replaced File:Onepunch-Man_manga.jpg with File:OnePunchMan_manga_cover.png, since I believe it's better to depict the cover page of the manga rather than a seemingly-random jumble of characters from the story.--Atlantima (talk) 02:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

The title in English

I´m going to chance the article name to the proper name. It´s Onepunch-Man , not One-Punch Man — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.150.177.96 (talk) 13:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

There's a reason it's "One-Punch Man". This is the title it was licensed under in English. ー HigherFive^ＴＣ 14:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Even if this were not the case, WP (AIUI) says that English orthography (etc) should be used in WP:en. The cover of the Japanese manga is (obviously!) in Japanese, with Japanese orthography (word spacing random or nonexistent, etc), capitalization random, and so on. It's not even clear that the character on the cover between "PUNCH" and "MAN" is a hyphen - it is more likely to be a raised dot (nakaguro). Also if you look carefully the spacing between "E" and "P" is distinctly more than that between other letters, showing that there may have been an awareness in the mind of the artist (this is artwork, not writing) that the name has three elements (just like An-pan-man). Imaginatorium (talk) 06:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

The name persistently suffers from well-meaning attempts to "correct" it to the Japanese form, which is "ONE PUNCH*MAN", where the space should really be a "thin space" (meaning "slight degree of separation") and the asterisk should be nakaguro, or middle-dot, (meaning "distinctly more separation"). Thus the Japanese writing, just like the adopted English title, shows the grouping ((one punch) man) -- of course: it's a man with one punch, not (one (punch man)), or a "single human, who is a punch-man, whatever that would be". It really seems like overkill to include a lecture on Japanese punctuation in the article, but is there any way we could dissuade the well-meaners?? We could add a rendering of the Japanese title, using (something like!) UNICODE+THIN+SPACE and UNICODE_JAPANESE_RAISED_DOT_SEPARATOR, but I am not going to bother to work out how to do that unless at least one other person thinks it's a good idea. Imaginatorium (talk) 07:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC) (correction) Imaginatorium (talk) 08:52, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

The last rename attempt I could find was in January of last year so I'm not sure this is currently an issue. Though what we can do preemptively is to put a comment at the top of article saying not to change the name without developing consensus on the talk page first. If it becomes a big issue, we can get an admin to insert an edit notice or in bad cases move protection. There's not much of a point adding the Japanese orthography because it's not much different and we're already including the kanji and romaji, along with the North American English title. You also have to realize that the English rendering is only used on the cover for the "Western cool" effect rather than because it is the actual title. Shueisha uses the Japanese title in its catalogue as does Young Jump, which takes liberty with the hyphenation in ads where it actually uses the english title as well. Opencooper (talk) 09:40, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

One might as well consider adding a "(stylized as OnePunch-Man)"? Lordtobi (✉) 17:59, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

No, not really, because it is not stylised like that. You could attempt to reproduce the artwork on the Japanese cover, but this requires something like "ONE<thin-space>PUNCH<middle-dot>MAN". And it's easier just to show an example of the Japanese cover. Imaginatorium (talk) 18:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Character section

Lenghty, enumerative character listings are somewhat common in comic and manga articles, but I think in this case it's gotten kind of ridiculous, given the short run of the series and specially the consciously throwaway nature of most characters. Beyond Saitama, Genos and other main characters, a descriptive 'graph per faction with a couple of highlights would probably do, and the article would flow a little better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.61.80.166 (talk) 23:25, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

I tend to agree, but for the time being have restored the Japanese versions of all characters. Although sometimes this may seem reduplicative, at least in some cases (e.g. Kombu Infinity), the Japanese name is definitely not derivable from the English version. Imaginatorium (talk) 08:49, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Plot

Somebody please delete a lot of the plot section, or at least make a premise section.

Must of it is based off the manga and the show is not yet that far ahead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.211.116.13 (talk) 02:04, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I understand the issue, aye - had a friend scroll past the hidden synopsis at the start (since obviously that's just full of links, right?) and be turned off by the many unnecessary details (Is Mosquito Girl really so important to get fully named in the first paragraph? Is it that important to name the man who founded the hero organization before we even mention our main character?) What's worse is we have a beautiful premise already written up, it's just buried away in the top. ...I'm going to duplicate it and make a premise section. If people want to change it back, that's okay - just please replace it with something better than the rather sub-par plot retelling we currently have. I have seen first-hand how people can drop a show just because its plot wasn't written well, putting emphasis on the wrong things. One Punch Man is a story about a powerful hero being unrecognized by a flawed system, what it means to be a true hero, and the cost of power. Maybe even something about friendship, too. It is *not* about Mosquito Girl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FinnTheOwl (talk • contribs) 04:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@FinnTheOwl: Just because the plot section has wording issues does not mean that we have to include two sections oriented to the same thing. What you added also seems more like something an AI would write than someone who is writing in an encyclopedic tone for Wikipedia. Xexerss (talk) 11:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a proposal for how to improve the unfocused Plot section? I agree my saccharine word-choice and biased tone felt more like an anime promotional summary than a dispassionate, clinical tone... but it at least put the focus on what the show's about. I don't see how to fix the current plot without overhauling a lot of it, which (as you agree) my writing is not skilled enough to do in a way which is dispassionate but still accurate.

If you have faith in your own writing abilities, I'd appreciate you taking a crack at said overhaul... or is the issue that you do not agree the plot is in need of editing? (addendum: I imagine it's faux-pas to yoink the MAL summary, but... it's much more acceptable than what we currently have. And most other sites have either dedicated pages for going episode-by-episode summaries, or else they simply leave that job to the fandom wikias. Idk.)FinnTheOwl (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Listing of Road to Hero on Infobox

I was doing some quick reading, and I realised that the infobox lists 6 OVA, without any reference to "Road to Hero" as an OVA in the infobox. But I'm not too sure whether it should be counted within the "anime television series" section, or be listed separately as an "original video animation". I say this because the "Road to Hero" OVA was bundled with the manga, and not released with the main anime series, like the other OVAs, and thus it would make sense for the 6 OVAs released with the anime to be counted as part of the "anime television series" section of the infobox. However, since "Road to Hero" was not released as part of the anime series releases, it should be listed separately.

TL;DR: What I propose is placing an additional section in the infobox just for the "Road to Hero" OVA, since this OVA was released with the 10th volume of the manga, and not with the anime series itself. Alex Tenshi (talk) 17:06, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I think we should include it with the OVA, but perhaps add a note. On a technical level messing with the infobox parameters might be difficult. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:51, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Training

One Punch Man said he got as powerful as he is by training for 3 years. In the third episode of the TV series, he reveals his daily schedule but his cyborg partner accuses him of talking crap, saying what he is talking about is just normal strength training exercises.(2405:9800:BA00:451B:ED5F:C84B:E8B2:3322 (talk) 12:08, 25 December 2017 (UTC))

Tentative Second Season Release Date

I've been skimming through the japanese article and found that they credit this source to say second season release date will be on April 2019. I'm not a fluent japanese speaker and mostly what I did was use google translate. Should this be added to the article? Lenkense (talk) 18:37, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

End date and Season 3

Sk8erPrince, from {{Infobox television}}

The first air date of the show's last episode on its original network. Use "present" if the show is ongoing or renewed and  () if the show is ended. Only insert the last episode's date after it has happened. In some cases the fate of a program might be uncertain, for example if there are no announcements that a show has been renewed. If such a program has not aired a new episode in 12 months, "present" can be changed to the date the last episode aired, using  (). This does not imply the series has been cancelled, rather that the program "last aired" on that date. This is to prevent programs from being listed as "present" in perpetuity. In the event that a program resumes airing after a long hiatus, such as more than 12 months between episodes or cancellation and subsequent renewal, the date is simply replaced with "present" to reflect the "current" status of the program.

EvergreenFir (talk) 18:21, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Was an edit conflict, but copy-pasting here: @Sk8erPrince: I was mistaken. The info is in the template documentation. I am going to WP:BOLDly add it to the MOS as well, but this has been the standard for a while. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:24, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

There it is! WP:TVPRESENT as well. Sorry about the confusion. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:25, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

So in other words, what I am doing is absolutely correct, because broadcast has ended for the time being. It just makes no sense to wait for 12 months when the current information is erroneous. If a S3 announcement were to be made, anyone could just remove the end date and replace it back with "present". Playing the waiting game just seems to be silly, when we really should be posting information that reflects the *present* state of things. Sk8erPrince (talk) 18:33, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

@Sk8erPrince: I am sympathetic to your view, but this rule of "wait 12 months" is the current consensus. Unless we have confirmation from a reliable source that the series is cancelled or that the most recent episode is the series finale, we keep it as "present". EvergreenFir (talk) 18:50, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

"wait 12 months" is the current consensus

Uh.... no, it's not. First off, no anime article I know of does this, and for good reason - we cannot predict the future. And reading the MOS again, just because I put the end date, that doesn't mean I'm implying that it got canceled. So where's the problem?

On another note, it makes no sense to assume that this show will get renewed; let the production committee confirm that instead. As of October 2019, One Punch Man has finished its broadcast. There is no evidence that suggests otherwise. It is hence *not ongoing*.

I'm bringing this discussion to WT:ANIME and let the wider community determine what we should do. Sk8erPrince (talk) 19:06, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I am happy to hear what others have to say (adding to WT:TV as well). EvergreenFir (talk) 19:36, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

WP:ANIME follows its own rules separate from WP:TELEVISION. i learned that the hard way. I dont ever see the renewed option either and seems like unnecessary upkeep to me.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:55, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

we cannot predict the future - Very true, and that's one of the reasons that we don't change |last_aired=present until we have a reliable source confirming that the program has been cancelled. Many TV programs have long hiatuses between seasons; sometimes years pass between seasons. However it was decided after long discussion that we need to be practical and it's reasonable to assume that a program has been cancelled if a new episode hasn't aired in 12 months. The last_aired field can then be changed to the date that the most recent episode aired. We did that with The Penguins of Madagascar and then, 11 months after the last episode, 2 episodes aired. Then, 14 months later another episode with the final 4 episodes airing 9 & 10 months later. Obviously we had to change Last_aired a few times but it's no great burden. Changing last_aired from present to a date without a source goes against WP:V, which is a core policy of Wikipedia and that's why the infobox instructions and WP:TVPRESENT say what they say. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:28, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Listing the end date doesn't mean we're implying the program has been cancelled. That's not how anime broadcasting works. We're just reflecting the present state of things, in the absence of an explicit confirmation of a new season. Read my reply at WT:TV for more info. I've cited a report that describes the nature of anime broadcasting. Sk8erPrince (talk) 08:55, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Keeping |last_aired=present doesn't indicate that the program has not been cancelled or ended. It indicates that we don't have a reliable source confirming that the series has ended. That's how the infobox works. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:07, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Not when it comes to anime. When the final anime episode finishes airing, the program comes to an end. It is taken off the air. We shouldn't assume that it'll get a new season; anime production committees only make announcements on season renewals. If the show isn't getting renewed, they're not going make an announcement about it. The reliable source that incidates the series has ended for the time being is the final episode date; the program schedule has all the dates and we could easily fact check. You have to understand that Japanese TV broadcasts just don't work the same way as western programs.

I don't think you've read the report I've cited in WT:TV, so why don't I link it to you? ANN REPORT #1

To quote the report: In order to limit the risk to the companies on these committees, each season is planned out at only a finite 11-13 episodes. If the show is a hit, additional seasons can be ordered down the line. If the show tanks, each member of the committee is only out for the cost of a single season -- and often that cost can be made up through international rights sales, home video, and whatever small number of merchandise items managed to get released. Sk8erPrince (talk) 13:35, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

BTW - read my reply below regarding {{infobox television}}. Sk8erPrince (talk) 15:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Is this series a television series? Yes? Then it comes under WP:TV and MOS:TV's guidelines and consensuses. WP:ANIME is simply a subdivision of WP:TV that can make its own rules for anime-related content; however, the issue here come under television-related content. Consensus has always been to list "present" until there is either a definitive cancellation or no word after twelve months. If you want to change this consensus, then I recommend you hold a discussion at a wider venue; until then, it applies. -- /Alex/₂₁ 23:56, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

You are correct that this is a TV series; however, what Evergreen did goes against the instructions listed in {{infobox television}}. To quote the "last" row: The first air date of the series's last episode on its original Japanese network. Only insert the last episode's date after it has happened. Leave empty if the series is ongoing or renewed.

So again, what I did was correct - it was done in accordance to the instructions in the template. This should put this issue to rest. Sk8erPrince (talk) 15:32, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Sk8erPrince does bring up some valid points. Japanese production communities usually make a set number of episodes for a broadcasting season (usually 11-13 episodes for one season and 50-52 episodes for a year-long series). After that, it's taken off air. Japanese production communities usually do not assume a series will be renewed. Whether a series is renewed depends on the home release sales. If it's renewed, they'll announce it. If it's not, they don't. The general assumption is the television series has "ended" unless there's an announcement that it's renewed. lullabying (talk) 22:56, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

So basically we have to avoid "next" if nothing was confirmed right? I mean because it would be like predicting that the 2016 series D.Gray-man Hallow could have a sequel after so many years. Same with List of Psycho-Pass 3 episodes. Nobody knew there would have been a new series after the 2015 movie.Tintor2 (talk) 00:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@Tintor2: That is correct. lullabying (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:One-Punch Man/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adamstom.97 (talk · contribs) 03:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

This article has waited for long enough. I'm not super familiar with the subject but I have heard of it. I'll take a look at the article and come back with comments in a bit. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: Thanks for picking up the review. I'm currently pretty busy IRL due to COVID-19, but I'll try my best to resolve any suggestions in a timely manner. Bobbychan193 (talk) 01:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bobbychan193: no worries, I'll try get my review written up soon and then it can go on hold for a bit if there are changes required. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I have read through the article and have a few suggestions for things that could be improved, but first I was wondering if you could help clarify for me what the intended scope of the article is. At the moment I can't tell if it is supposed to be about all iterations of the franchise or if it is supposed to be about the original webcomic with further information about its adaptations included. Once you have cleared this up for me I'll be able to give a full review. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:46, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: I think the scope of the article is the entire franchise, which includes the webcomic, manga, and anime. I believe that the original webcomic has been eclipsed in popularity by the manga and anime, but each one follows mostly the same plot, so separate articles might not be warranted. Bobbychan193 (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I think it would be a big improvement if some structural changes were made to the article to help clarify this for the reader. I suggest beginning in the lead by introducing the topic as a Japanese superhero franchise created by One, then saying the franchise began with a webcomic and talk about its creation and reception, then the same for the manga adaptation, and then again for the anime adaptation.

In the body, your background section is about the webcomic and the manga, and then there is a separate section about the manga which also includes the webcomic, and then there is the anime and video game sections. The reception section doesn't mention the webcomic at all. Again, I think reorganising this could help. Having the one plot section works well since it is shared by them all, then I think you should merge the "Background and production" and "Media" sections so there is just one subsection about the making of the webcomic, one about the making of the manga adaptation, one about the making of the anime adaptation, and one about the video game. A subsection about the webcomic should then be added to the "Reception" section. Once you have been able to tidy up this confusion I think the article will be a much easier read. Let me know what you think of this. I will be able to give a full review of the article once this is sorted out. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:42, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: Tried my best to address these comments. The article's overall organization should better now. Unfortunately, it was difficult to find any reliable information for reception of the webcomic, and any sources that could be useful are probably several years old at this point. Bobbychan193 (talk) 02:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Bobbychan193: Hey, can you let me know if you are going to be able to work on this review in the next week or so? I do think this is a very good article and would be a good candidate for promotion once my points have been addressed, but I understand if you are busy and can't get to it. It has been open for quite a while now so I would like to make a decision on this either way soon. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: Hey, sorry for the hiatus. I'll try to free up some time in the next few days. Bobbychan193 (talk) 00:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The article is looking way better after your response to my structural issues above, I think it makes a lot more sense laid out this way. My next step was to give this a full review and come back with a list of more nitpicky concerns for you to deal with, but having given the article another read through I have not come up with any major concerns. The writing is strong, neutral, and informative, and the only other recommendations I would have would be to consider adding another image to the article if it gets much bigger and there is one available, and hopefully you can find the sources you need to expand the reception section at some point since it is pretty strongly weighted towards season 2 of the anime at the moment. Besides those points, the structural change has done enough for me to make me happy to promote the article now, so I am going to go ahead and pass this review. Congratulations! Keep up the good work, especially as more information comes out about the subject / the new movie. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

New game Sept 2022 missing

New game released in the US Sept 2022 missing, One Punch Man - The Strongest, available on iOs and Google Play and released in select regions since 16 June 2022 Defknightsoul (talk) 04:51, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Official producer game site https://opm.moonton.com/ Defknightsoul (talk) 04:52, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Web comic not the same as the manga

No clue as to why this article says they are the same but they are not the same and web comic should be split from the manga article they have different illustrators 71.169.160.200 (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Where does it say that they are the same? Xexerss (talk) 13:04, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I think he's talking about the plot section where it discusses plot points from the webcomic that the manga hasn't covered yet, but still covers points that are exclusive to the manga like the martial arts tournament. I'm not sure if we should edit it or keep it in because it's an article about all forms of one punch man, maybe someone should add some headings to differentiate or a note of some kind.

I'm gonna try that 144.86.57.76 (talk) 16:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)