Talk:Tatsuki Fujimoto

Akita

The reference quote that he was born in the Akita prefecture, not Akita city.--37.160.169.8 (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Age

He published his 1st work in 2011 when he was 17 yo (almost 18) so he was born in 1993, not in 1992 as in the pdf. the correct reference is the previous one from oricon article.--Sighpy2 (talk) 11:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

You are right. The Shogakukan source supposedly should be more reliable than Oricon, but the Oricon date makes more sense. - Xexerss (talk) 17:39, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

the pdf reference indicates Nikaho as birthplace, instead Oricon only the prefecture, so what is better? to put again the pdf for the place or to don't write Nikaho at all? @NikahoCity on twitter tweeted something about him, in Look back he draw places from Nikaho but there are no other references about it.--Sighpy2 (talk) 14:06, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I re-added the Shogakukan reference for the birthplace. At least that information should be correct. - Xexerss (talk) 17:19, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi, the Oricon article you cited doesn't correspond to the author's actual birthdate. He was born in 1992 as evident from his personal twitter account. He posted that he turned 25 in 2017. (Mind you, he talks in third person). As such, Fujimoto can't have been born in 1993. Source: https://twitter.com/nagayama_koharu/status/917647092612456448?s=19.

And here are sources that give his actual birthdate from the Shogakukan award: https://comics.shogakukan.co.jp/news/28695 https://www.shogakukan.co.jp/sites/default/files/manual/20210119.pdf Supes100 (talk) 00:21, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Supes100: The thing is that the numbers don't match. As Sighpy2 pointed out and two links in the own article state, Fujimoto sent his first work in 2011 at 17 (about to turn 18). If he was born in 1992, he would have been 18 (about to turn 19). So should we suppose that Shueisha gave incorrect information? I don't think Fujimoto doesn't know when he was born lol. Maybe we should leave some clarifying note? There should be a way to make this sound coherent. - Xexerss (talk) 01:13, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Supes100: I left a note clarifying the birthdate. I hope this will help to avoid further conflict. - Xexerss (talk) 02:16, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Supes100:, the same year a couple days before the tweet you cited he tweeted that he could be "24, 25 or 26" years old (https://twitter.com/nagayama_koharu/status/916988308579786754), I don't think his twitter is very reliable as a source, in the note in the incipit that @Xexerss: added that tweet should be removed and reverted to 1993. --Sighpy2 (talk) 11:28, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, that tweet makes this whole thing even more confusing. I've seen articles where when the birthdate is not clear between two sources, both are added explaining the reason. I suppose that this is what we should do at this point. - Xexerss (talk) 12:04, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

I thought about it a lot and I think his twitter really isn't a reliable source. Fujimoto is a known troll and his editor's words carry more weight. 1993 makes the most sense. Sorry for all the trouble. I will no longer edit anything. Good bye. Supes100 (talk) 17:07, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

OK I see where the confusion comes from now. Problem here is, Tatsuki's first work was not There Were Two Chickens in the Garden; it was A Forced Game, which was drawn 2010 and received Jump Next-gen Manga Prize in 2013. That would add up with the 1992 theory and Lin's words perfectly. --Maya-Maja-Maia (talk) 03:47, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

here it clearly states that A Forced Game is a 2010 work. Based on ja:藤本タツキ, Two Chickens was the first work that Tatsuki submitted for a manga prize (漫画賞初投稿作), instead of the first work at all, further justifying the point. (Also, A Forced Game is definitely worth a read and clearly Tatsuki's work, with all those "live" and "don't open the door" and such.) -- Maya-Maja-Maia (talk) 03:57, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Sounds interesting. However, the Japanese Wikipedia article doesn't have a citation supporting the claim that "Nagato wa ore" (長門は俺) and Fujimoto are the same person. Even if it's highly likely, we can't affirm it without sources (note that citing Wikipedia itself would be against WP:CIRCULAR). Xexerss (talk) 04:26, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Although the probability that NIM is not Tatsuki is marginally low (artstyle, running gags etc), and it is confirmed that Tatsuki was serializing on Neetsha like NIM did ([1]), there is indeed no concrete evidence that NIM is definitely Tatsuki. However, before another Neetsha mangaka that is more similar to Tatsuki than NIM is noticed, I will continue to personally go with the theory that NIM = Tatsuki. -- Maya-Maja-Maia (talk) 06:43, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Also in the same interview Lin stated that "it has been 7 years since Tatsuki's first work"; the interview having been dated 2017, it only makes sense for Tatsuki's "first work" to be in 2010, even if we don't consider whether NIM is Tatsuki. Maya-Maja-Maia (talk) 06:47, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

In this 2ch thread it was mentioned that NIM once linked nagayama_koharu's twitter account to one of his works. The work itself was deleted unfortunately, but had it been archived somewhere else, this would be concrete evidence that NIM = Tatsuki. -- Maya-Maja-Maia (talk) 07:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I found something else. He was credited as Nagato wa Ore on Jump's SQ. website,[2] so you're right, they are the same person. However, I'm still confused with some things. According to this tweet, he was 17 when he sent his fist work for the Jump SQ. Monthly Award. According to the image, it took him around three months to do the one-shot. Assuming that he was born in 1992 and was 17 (turning 18) in 2010, I don't get why the editor said here that he met Fujimoto when he was 17 and submitted this one-shot work, Niwa ni wa Niwa Niwatori ga ita. I don't think the production of that one-shot started in 2010 if it took him three months and was published in December 2011. I'm also assuming that the 17-21 volume is called like that because he was 17 when he created the one-shot (as the Jump SQ. tweet states). Now, don't get me wrong, the points that you're making sound reasonable, but I keep finding contradictions in this matter. Xexerss (talk) 08:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Also, the Jump SQ. link seems to imply that he was 18 in December 2011 (assuming that that was his age when the post was made and not his age when he sent the one-shot, probably, before October). Xexerss (talk) 08:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)