Talk:The Three Great Powers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on December 18, 2006. The result of the discussion was KEEP (no consensus). |
How you like it now? New Babylon
This should be a listing of the Three Great powers,equivalent ,at least partly,lets say List of monarchies .It also sumarizes the contents of several diferent pages and partialy gives brief information,that one could find within those separate articles. It has it's origin in the words of a Gorosei in episode 151,where he says "If the Three Great Powers were to collapse,the world itself would fall apart",so I believe the existence of this page is justified. New Babylon
- I'd like to point out we have much better pages that cover everything on this page... Thus rendering it complete unneeded. That these pages do the job of explaining the 3 powers well, they contain greater and high quality detail. In other words... Why bother with this page at all? Why do we need such a page of sumarizes then with these pages:
- This is badly orgainsed... Its been improved since I put the deletation template up... But its still below teir. You need to get others onto this page to help with it. You are struggling with this page it seems to me to get it together. Stop doing a one man job and go to the One Piece Main page and ask for help. Others will come (eventually). Ideally, you could have also linked this to your user page and instead of just setting it up, created a test page first and then reframed from creating an offical page until you got things together..
- And if its 3 Great powers, why are there 4 groups on this page? This group isn't amongst the 3 great powers, but merely concerned about the balance of the three: World Government (One Piece)
- My 2pence. Take it or leave it... But I think I've pointed out some good issues here that you really need to think over Babylon. Angel Emfrbl 19:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of the 'delete' template
Can we NOT remove the template! We haven't discussed to get rid of it, and until we do I'm insisting it be kept. This is a worthless page... The other full pages have more detail. If you REALLY want this page to be kept, then discuss its reasons here.
Deleting the template will only result in me putting it back until we have a formal, proper discussion... Or the page gets considered its right to be deleted by the wikipedia guys, which ever comes first. Angel Emfrbl 20:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest this page to be delete. It's useless since we have three other pages describing the three great powers. Cuttyflam 13:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- This page has been sitting here for a month now without a flickered of discussion from anyone except me and Cuttyflam... Disappointment all round. Angel Emfrbl 19:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Increditable... This page was open up for a bigger debate, but it lasted abotu 24 hours, maybe a little more or less. I'm disappointed since all the previous debates I've come across have all lasted at least a week, giving plenty of time for serious discussions and all sides to express opinions. On top of that, most people reconned the page should be deleted and yet it was kept. Something just isn't right here. Angel Emfrbl 10:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Copied from WP:DRV: The AfD was open for 10 days, longer then the 5 day minimum that is required and proper noticed was placed on the article[1] and WP:AfD[2]. The AfD was also listed on the anime and manga's deletion sorting page on the 22nd[3]. Lack of knowledge about an AfD is not a legitimate grounds to reopen the debate if the debate has been properly noted on the article and WP:AfD. --TheFarix (Talk) 16:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Things still don't seem right because this is a unwanted and uneeded article. It feels wrong that the whole debate was closed, just when the main stuff was beginning to happen on that page. I myself only just found out this page was AfD. I'm still disappointed this page exists, while I respect the outcome and those who took part I don't like that the page wasn't really discussed proper. If I had known it was about to close, I would have gone into far more detail as to why it should be deleted... Never mind. Too little too late. Angel Emfrbl 23:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] confused
isn't the three powers are the revolutionarys, Shinkinabi, and the younkou, ALso isn't the navy and Shincinabi are in the same team.
- Its Shichibukai, Marines and Yonkou. ^-^' Angel Emfrbl 20:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Preposal
I'm preposing we shorten the Navy article and merge it here alongside the Shichibukai and Yonkou articles. This way we can ditch the seperate articles and loose those articles. We then can write in more detail about the balance of the 3 powers and loose the World Government section on here.
This would make this article more important then a pointless short-hand explaination page. Angel Emfrbl 12:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- We could just write about the balance without removing the information.(Justyn 18:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC))
-
- Its a little more then just that. If all three sides are on the page then we can write the 3 powers into sinc with each other eaiser. Even if we talk about the three powers here, if you'd care to notice this is a WEAK article. I want to strengthen this page, but we can't do that without repeating info from the other pages anyway. Since this page got a no action vote when it was put up for deletetion we have to deal with it now. I don't see any way possible to do this while the infomation is seperate. Angel Emfrbl 20:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think it would make way too long of a page, and all three groups are very seperate. keep seperate pages.
This article is rather difficult to deal with... Can we put it up for deletation again? If we do that though, we have to incite strong support for or against it. The end result of no consenus was a rather boring outcome. My second suggestion is delete it for now and recreate it when we have more info to build it up with at a later date. However there is a problem with being allowed to do that here on wikipedia.
Anyone else any suggestions? I'm all out, we have two tags on the main article page currently. If we come to no conclusion with any of this we should at least discuss how to loose them. :/ Angel Emfrbl 21:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think separated it's better: united the page would be too long. Cuttyflam 19:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
