Talk:Volume 69

Pages
The number of pages in English version is glaringly wrong. It shows 200 pages, whereas there are actually 245 pages. I can't seem to find any way to fix that, so if anyone's reading this, please fix this if you can

We use the official viz site as a reference, and it says 200 pages. Do you have an official source that says otherwise? Also, you mast add a topic titled and signed your talk page edits. Rhavkin (talk) 05:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I own the volume. It's 245 pages. DewClamChum (talk) 06:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

You know we can't use that as a reference. Rhavkin (talk) 11:32, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Then check the table of contents. Chapter 690 starts on page 227. Dragonus Nesha (talk) 13:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not about if it is true or false. How do you reference that? Rhavkin (talk) 14:26, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

The table of contents on the official site already indicates that it's a typo. You don't need a separate reference. Dragonus Nesha (talk) 14:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I personally can't see the table of contents. Maybe it's a ip thing. Either way, I checked and the digital has 245 pages listed. Do you have the actual volume or the digital? Rhavkin (talk) 15:15, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Like DN said, the table of contents shown in the preview on the website says that there's more than 200 pages. I own the physical volume and it's 245 pages, the website listing is incorrect. We don't even list references for page numbers so why does the reference matter? DewClamChum (talk) 00:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The reference is for any detailed about the volume release. It may be placed at the date, but it is also for the ISBN, name and yes, pages. Rhavkin (talk) 17:22, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

If the official site gives two different answers, then look to the primary source: the volume itself. Also, 12 chapters with 19 pages each cannot fit in 200 pages unless there were massive cuts and edits. Think critically about what sources are used and what information is pulled from them. Dragonus Nesha (talk) 05:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

The official site give two different answers to two different versions: the printed and digital. If I'd have a fake volume that said that Zoro is Ryuma descendent, I still can't add it based solely on my version. I am of course giving an extreme example, but at the end of the day if you can't provide an official source, regardless of reason, we can't include it. AT most, it can be added in a note that the chapter pages does not add up. Rhavkin (talk) 19:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)


 * How's that? Rhavkin (talk) 19:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

"Fake Volumes" aren't a thing. The chance that DewClamChum would own a Viz volume that had a big individual error (especially something as wild as that Zoro example you tried to make) is close to zero.

And even if Dew did have a volume with a rare error (which wouldn't even be a thing with page numbers as he can count the pages himself), such a thing can be disputed with another copy of that volume. Currently all other evidence from he volume backs Dew up, while the only thing contradicting him is the Viz listing. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 20:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)