Talk:One Piece/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Who is Evan?

I have altered "As the popularity of One Piece swelled after Evan became a character in Shonen Jump" to "As the popularity of One Piece swelled with its serialization in Shonen Jump"

I'm placing this in discussion because this "Evan" has persisted throigh numerous revisions; perhaps I am missing something. If Evan is someone other than a vandal who slipped his name into the text, restore, but please let us know who "Evan" is! Bustter 23:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

One Piece Cancelled in the U.S?

Lately I've been hearing rumors from the Arlong Park fourms that 4KIDs has suddenly dropped One Piece from it schedule. Can anybody clarifiy this?

It won't be airing on Saturday, November 19th. However, this doesn't mean it won't be on the week after.

I'd take a wait-and-see attitude with this. It's easy to get carried away in fanboyish optimism (or wishing death on 4Kids, whichever) and throw caution to the wind, but I'd rather make sure that it's officially off the schedule for the foreseeable future, until commenting on it in the article proper. Wikipedia is designed to give the facts, after all. Any reporting on rumors should only be done afterward, in light of what actually emerges, either to give an idea of an event's context, or to explain away a commonly-held mistaken viewpoint. --Julian Grybowski 07:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah I know, just wanted to make sure. Truthfully I doubt this news myself as 4Kids has a habit of putting most of their shows on hiatus. Same thing happened to Kirby and Shaman King. Not to mention titles have been given for later episodes. But like you said, I'll wait and see.

The link to the term One Piece leads to a redirect to this exact page, though, I have not seen much of the anime nor manga so I am not sure on how I should go about defining it. --209.204.160.71 03:43, 18 May 2005 (UTC) Stupid logout, that edit was from me. --TheSock 03:44, 2005 May 18 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure they replaced Sanji's cigarettes with a lollipop.

Any name changes in the North American buthering? Shanks still Shanks

Microsnot 00:21, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)


WHERE is One Piece known as "Drake"? WhisperToMe 01:36, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC) NVM. I found out it was Greece. WhisperToMe 02:01, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Astrophil: I'm confused - how does One Piece hold a Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland flair? Peter Pan I don't get because Luffy ages normally - he does have a rogue band of friends though. Alice in Wonderland? Sure, it's a voyage through a strange fantasy world with vivid characters. It's more of an epic quest than those stories.

Peter Pan: Pirates


Alice in Wonderland: Grand Line.

Mybe I should make it spicific or delete that sentance

--Edwardadrian 00:45, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)Edwardadrian

Astrophil Oh the Peter Pan connection is pirates, I see. The theme I remember from Peter Pan is the always stay young bit, not so much the pirates, but that's just me. I don't think clarification could hurt. Have at it!

Is it my imagination or did 4Kids cut down this show so much that they had to combine episodes 11 & 12 into a single episode? Sweetfreek 02:49, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's not yourimagination. They were cut a lot. Brian 08:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The One Piece T. V. show is so strange...

I love the manga, but the anime is so strange...


The editing to make it "more appealing to kids" has something to do with it.--Kultz 03:08, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Of course.Manga OP>>>>>>>English Anime OP. Kaku 09:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

BTW, Japanese OP Anime rules, too.Kaku 02:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

One Piece Image Editing

I've recently uploaded a set of One Piece images depicting full-body pictures in high quality .PNG of the entire crew, and I must say that a great deal of hard work went into restoring, editing, and producing those images. I don't appreciate the hubris of a couple members here deliberately reverting back to poor-quality, shapshot based images. Don't deface Wikipedia anymore than it already is. If you have a problem with my images, please do not insult me by calling my hard work a "travesty," and instead adress me to my face. All of the flags here were done by me, with a steady hand and a couple of cheap JPEGs to use as models. Aside from Don Krieg (which is probably the worst of the bunch), I ask my flags to not be altered, either. I will revert all of the images back in due time, but not until people explain to me why they felt a snapshot was better than a full-body image reconstruction.

Drake Christopher Dragon 9:13, 30 SEP 2005 (UTC)


These keep getting changed for some reason. I thought most of them were pretty good for a while, but people come and change them with no explanation at all. -- STAREYe 19:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

The majority of these images have been deleted. Anyone know why? 20:00, 10 January 2006


I don't know, people just seem to keep messing with them. - STAREYe 20:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps people aren't putting in the appropriate copyright / domain information? Since Wikipedia eventually deletes all images that aren't properly sourced, I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case. --Julian Grybowski 00:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Well that has happened too, which I've been working on, but I was reffering to people changing the perfectly good images to something completely differnt for no apparent reason. - STAREYe 15:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

One Piece characters

Maybe I should create a One Piece minor characters article, which has information on the minor characters of One Piece. WhisperToMe 16:44, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And merge most of the character pages? Yes please :) Philip Nilsson 17:40, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

His name is ZORO!

Why on earth does Wikipedia list Roronoa Zoro's name as been Zolo? Zolo is the incorrect name given to him by the english dubbers, and the english version is not canon! The manga and original anime list his name as been Zoro, so that is what should count.

Edit: That little SNAFU has been fixed now. (Posted by a new user)

No, his name is "Zolo" in the English-language versions published in the US and Canada. We speak English, and we should follow the English-language versions published in the US and Canada. If Viz changes it back to "Zoro" in the English version (though I doubt that they will do that) or if an English-language version in Singapore ends up using "Zoro", then I will move it back. WhisperToMe 23:27, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've still got to disagree. What the English version says is insignificant. When Eiichiro Oda created One Piece he named his character Zoro, and that is all that should count. The Japanese version is the canon version, not the English. (posted by anon)

English Encyclopedia. Are you missing something? And the Viz OP manga does not have major plot edits in the USA. So it has to be canon. I found out that Odex's Singapore anime dub uses "Zoro", but most people who use the English Wikipedia are from the US, UK, and Australia. WhisperToMe 05:43, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, the Encyclopedia is in English, so what? That shouldn't mean anything, its just a technicality. If you look at the Sailor Moon pages you'll see that all the Japanese names have been preserved despite the fact that this is an English Encyclopedia. The page is about Eiichiro Oda's creation 'One Piece', and he named his character Zoro, not Zolo. So his wishes should be respected. The fact that the english translaters changed his name to Zolo for copyright reasons should be little more then a footnote.

No, the language means everything. Look at the Pokemon articles. They all use the English names because the people that speak the language are most familiar with those names, and ALL of the English-language adaptations use the English names (every single one of them) WhisperToMe 07:35, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

They don't! I just told you Sailor Moon doesn't. Which just goes to show you didn't bother to check before making that assumption.

But Sailor Moon is a special, special case. There are no more in-print, in production English versions of Sailor Moon. And even then, the uncut DVD's released by Geneon in the states can count as an English version. Also, what you made was an assumption: I myself was involved in the Sailor Moon naming dispute before it was settled. WhisperToMe 07:42, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Then what about Cardcaptor Sakura? They changed the title of that show for the English version to Cardcaptors, yet the Wikipedia site keeps the original. And then there is Macross as well. Did you go through and check every single anime page to make sure they only use names and titles from English adaptions? This is just my humble opinion, but the main page should mainly stick to canonical information. All the changes made in the English adaption should be placed in their own separate category, like the Sailor Moon and Cardcaptor Sakura website. It'd just be neater.

Here's what about Cardcaptor Sakura: the manga published by TOKYOPOP and the uncut release by Geneon. WhisperToMe 17:41, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

But on the Cardcaptor Sakura page, all of the information on the first and foremost comes from the Japanese versions, including names etc. The English adaptions are given their own section. Why shouldn't the same happen here?

The English adaptations thing can be written here too, but that doesn't mean we have to change naming conventions relating to the actual anime and manga. WhisperToMe 05:56, 27 Feb 2005


Well, I'm changing it back to Zoro and Its going to stay that way.

--Edwardadrian

Oh no it's not. You still have to discuss with me and other people about the naming. Believe me, I don't like "Zolo" either, but I feel Wikipedia is in a position to describe rather than proscribe, and since "Zolo" is used in the North American anime and manga, I feel Wikipedia should use it. WhisperToMe 02:54, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

My take on it: English Wikipedia was not made to be used only by North Americans or only English-speaking countries, it is the base of ALL the Wikipedias, but it doesn't mean that all the articles should start from its English version or that all the articles in other languages should have an English version. English is the main language of communication between people who speak different languages. The English Wikipedia is also a main source of knowledge to those who don't have the same article in their prefered languages. With that said, if there's a difference between names of one character, I believe the original name should be used all through the article and as an extra note it should be stated the name used in the country "C" is "N" instead of the original "n". Please take the English Wikipedia not as the North American Wikipedia or as English-speaking countries' Wikipedia, but as the World Wikipedia.

BTW, just as an extra info, I'm Brazilian and the name offically used here is Ronoroa Zoro. ren 01:36, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

But we tend to use names used in English-language editions. Look at the Pokemon article! WhisperToMe 03:53, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm new to this show, but so far this looks like one of those Freeza/Cooler things like with Dragonball Z. Sweetfreek 02:49, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have to agree with the above speaker when they say we should be using the original name, primarily because, as was said before, this isn't the North American Wikipedia, but the English Language Wikipedia. Regardless of what the Pokemon section does, this is the section for Eiichiro Oda's manga, in which the character is named "Zoro". Pokemon is a game series created by a company, which give the characters their English names. Therefore, the English names of the pokemon characters would be viable. However, this section refers to the creation of one man, who did NOT name the character "Zolo". Ergo, it is nonsensical to use the 4 Kids/Viz dub name changes as the absolute. Rather, the dub names should be parenthesized like the Japanese name is now. These characters had their names that Oda gave them, and since we are discussing HIS work, it only makes sense to use HIS names. Again, using Pokemon as your defense is incredibly flawed, because, again, that series was created by a company, which gave the characters their English names as well as their Japanese names. (anon)

We don't give higher consessions to something just because an individual created it. I'm afraid that the VIZ/4Kids name of Zolo is used everywhere in the Anglophone world except with fan circles and with Singaporeans. WhisperToMe 01:18, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

That's incorrect; it's used by the dubbing companies. It's is hardly the name used in the Anglophone world as a whole, and it would be highly erroneous to say so. By the nature of this section, Wikipedia is to give information on the series, One Piece, created by Eiichiro Oda. Being the writer, artist, and creator of the series, his word is the official, final one. Since we are chronicling his creation, logic dictates we should go by what he put down, rather than what a company changed it to for their own reasons. While I can understand parenthesizing the dub changes, there's no other logic beyond "the dubs use it" to back your decision, especially since you seem to be in an extreme minority here.--Lordshmeckie 02:23, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

"That's incorrect; " - Explain how it is "incorrect" here. The "dubbing companies" count here :) - We do not weigh them down because they are dubbing companies. We do not judge series. "creator of the series, his word is the official, final one. " No, it doesn't. It depends on what the English editions use, because we are the English Wikipedia. The Germans use "Lorenor Zorro", the Spanish "Rolonoa Zoro", the French "Zorro Roronoa", etc. We do not care about what the original author uses. WhisperToMe 03:03, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Names could change radically and immediately, with a change in American licensee. The fact that author Oda named the character "Zoro" to begin with will never change. Hence it is appropriate that a reference work defer to the one-and-only creator's choice, not the whims of the licensee of the moment.Bustter 23:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I care. More to the point, using the "Zoro" transcription carries a connotation of the character as a swordsman. This by itself is reason enough for us to favor it: it gives wikipedia users who read the article an instant way to infer the nature of the character. I fall squarely on the 'Zoro' side of the argument. Nandesuka 03:54, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

What we care about is Mr. Average Joe, not Mr. One Piece fan. Besides, read the opening paragraph of the article. WhisperToMe 05:04, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's nice that you know what "we" care about, but my point still stands. Average Joe has no idea who the hell "Zolo" is. But he does know who "Zorro" is, and Roronoa Zoro, as a name, is clearly an homage to Zorro. Using the Zolo transcription (without also providing Zoro, which we currently do) deprives Average Joe of that context. Nandesuka 05:32, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
"But he does know who "Zorro" is, and Roronoa Zoro, as a name, is clearly an homage to Zorro." You care too much about this, and it shows. 1. It's easy to recognize who it is, as only one letter in the name has been changed. 2. Most people who aren't on the 'net get to know One Piece by the English versions.

Let me make something clear - I like the name Zoro better than Zolo. But I feel that Wikipedia should not and will not make judgements about this, therefore Wikipedia ought to use Zolo. WhisperToMe 07:30, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Whoever said most people on the 'net know of One Piece through the English version is grossly incorrect. In fact, the most fans of the series you see active on the internet either got to know the series through the fansubs released long before any English version, or they have forsaken the dub upon viewing the Japanese originals (and I challenge you to find anyone who prefers the dub to the originals in the case of this particular series). Many people care about this because of accuracy; not only are the dub alterations not seen as canon by the vast majority of fans on the 'net, but again, it is not what the series creator named him; we even see the name spelled in English on his wanted poster! This doesn't just involve Zoro, but all the characters who've had their names altered. Are you saying we totally redo Smoker's page because his smoking and name were removed in the dub? This logic is so flawed everyone, save yourself, can see it. No one is asking Wikipedia to make judgements, simply to use the names Oda gave his characters, with their dubbed moniker added as an aside in parenthesis, or something along those lines. --Lordshmeckie 10:17, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

I have to agree with the majority of the ppl. Because some of us lives in the U.S., Zolo's name isn't right. There are probably some english countries that uses "Zoro" in Official versions of this anime. The first few volumes of the english manga uses Zoro. Like others said, the name is given by a dubbin company who simply wants to either change stuff for legal reasons or for the fun of it.

Someone said Sailormoon, so I think I should mention something about that. Because the Sailormoon is now license to another company, the dub names are no more. They now use the japanese names and the bios are back to their original japanese counterparts.

You know know, sooner or later, another company might have the license for this and make uncut eps of this in english, with the original names! As for other 4kids material and such, the japanese names are canon and not the kiddified american ones; they use the japanese names in the english manga. Besides, the One Piece is to EDUCATE people about the anime, not give it incorrect information that makes gives people a false assumption of the anime.

Making the entry accurate by including the names of the japanese and english is neccesary so that those who wants to learn more about the series can get accurate info. Heck, you guys can put Zolo(known in Japanese as Zolo) or (Known as Zoro throughout the rest of the world, or whatever.

That reminds me. I have to edit a Capcom character page(Maki) since some jerk keeps editing my accurate entry with his non accurate one; he keeps making this character's appearance canon, yet it is highly doubtful since the game port isn't made by Capcom.--Doomzaber 11:04, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

"Someone said Sailormoon, so I think I should mention something about that. Because the Sailormoon is now license to another company, the dub names are no more. They now use the japanese names and the bios are back to their original japanese counterparts. "

The Japanese were chosen because they are much, much, much more popular on the internet, and yes, the English licenses expired.

Still, even if 4Kids goes down with its adaptation, Viz will continue to publish its adaptation, and I don't see them reverting to Zoro unless "Zoro" appears in another dub. WhisperToMe 16:16, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmmmm..... I wonder what us westerners fans call the dbz characters since in mexico and japan, the main character is Son Goku. In the american version, they call him Goku. So I am wonderin is "Goku" is considered "right" like Pokemon or is it wrong. I have no idea. --69.236.85.129 11:01, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Mexico and Japan do not have English as a primary language, but...

The English article is at Son Goku because the English-language manga uses it. WhisperToMe 19:26, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that WhisperToMe's logic is too flawed to be as definite as he wants it to be. What are you going to do if Smoker is called Chaser in Viz's manga? He's changed so drastically by 4Kids that using it as the info Wiki goes with would constitute as misinformation. The problem with One Piece is that the company that dubs it changes the show so drastically that conforming the encyclopedia to the dub's information causes inaccuracies. the name "Zolo" being the least of them. Romanization is one thing, but we're talking about complete and total alterations.--Lordshmeckie 02:10, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

"The problem is that WhisperToMe's logic is too flawed to be as definite as he wants it to be. What are you going to do if Smoker is called Chaser in Viz's manga?" - We'd call him Chaser. "He's changed so drastically by 4Kids that using it as the info Wiki goes with would constitute as misinformation" - Not 4Kids, duke. Besides, it is not "misinformation" to include 4Kids' version since it is a version of One Piece, even if it is edited. All we do is we include both the original and 4Kids versions.

But I am actually going by VIZ, LLC's conventions. WhisperToMe 03:25, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps the most salient point would be that Zoro's wanted poster clearly romanizes his name as Zoro (this coming from the manga). Oda's use of english would (in my opinion) be the most correct. However there are precedents for names being translated through different cultres, eg. Christopher Columbus, but I think in this day and age, a proper name can be given regardless.

Viz/4kids have indeed translated it (to use that term loosely) as Zolo, however that would be shown to be incorrect with original artwork by the author himself showing it as Zoro. Because most American fans (if 6-11 year olds indeed use Wikipedia) know him as Zolo, a compromise would be to use Zolo throughout the article but have a footnote somewhere saying this is a mistranslation.

By the way, previous (or other) Wikipedia articles should be allowed as a persuasive point, because consistency is something that Wikipedians should shoot for, despite the fact it is actually authored by thousands of people. Paper encyclopedias, eg. Britannica, have style guidelines to ensure consistency, such as USA vs. U.S.A. and eg instead of e.g.

Short of some sort of decision by comittee, I would vote for precedent to be the deciding factor. Jongpil Yun 03:18, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

"Zolo" is no mistranslation. It was done on purpose to stave off lawsuits. WhisperToMe 03:24, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

This is just speculation. We don't know that it was changed for copyright purposes. If you know better, please post a referrence. It would be useful information for the actual wiki page. Indeed, I find it strange that a single name can be copyrighted. Can anyone copyright "sally?" Gunboat Diplomat 11:22, 30 July 2006

Although WhisperToMe is technically correct, I feel that as the manga artist not only wrote out Zoro's name several times in Roman text throughout One Piece, but also that it is considered canon by the majority of its fanbase, Zoro is the correct name to use. It was obviously intended to transliterate into that, just as "Arucard" and "Seras" were obviously meant to transliterate to "Alucard" and "Celes" in Hellsing. The ORIGINAL version is canon, and I feel that a note that the dub changed his name to "Zolo" is more than enough. LupusCanis 20:36, 23 November 2005 (GMT) (too lazy too look up the tag needed to show the time, or convert into different timezone, sorry)

So how about if it turns out 4kids has dropped One Piece for good? Calling him Zolo would be like saying that One Piece is a completely discontinued show.

We'd only change it back if VIZ started to call him Zoro (these conventions are based on VIZ Media's names). WhisperToMe 05:47, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry...but what 'we' are you talking about? You seem to be the only person who's protecting the name 'Zolo' over and over again. Also, does VIZ run Wikipedia or something? I'm just asking because you seem to be saying VIZ gets the final say in this. But I do agree with using 'Zoro' sence it's the ORIGINAL name! "Most people who aren't on the 'net get to know One Piece by the English versions." - If their not on the net, then why would they care if Wikipedia used Zoro instead of Zolo? If they can't see it, they can't get upset about it. And I also agree with the others who have been saying that Eiichiro Oda's creation should stay that way...as HIS creation with the names and such HE gave them. Besides, if your 'we' you keep talking about doesn't show up, I'm afraid your a bit outnumbered in this subject. D'Embee 07:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC?)

No, I'm not. New users have no say in the subject (suffrage is only granted after a certain amount of posts) :) - And the users who do have a say don't mind the current status quo. WhisperToMe 02:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Bull, Whisper. Everyone on Wikipedia's equal; you're not some omnipresent godling that has a divine right to force conventions on us. I should note, however, that I do agree with the policy of using Viz's translated names, controversial as they may be. This article was lead in the direction of the English anime/manga long ago; we were unfortunate to not have a faithful dub such that the Japanese terms could be used without criticism (unlike Naruto), but we're stuck with what happened. -DCD

Yo. From Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English):

If a native spelling uses different letters than the most common English spelling (eg, Wien vs. Vienna), only use the native spelling as an article title if it is more commonly used in English than the anglicized form.

Call me crazy, but I think that's good enough for a change back to Zoro, seeing how it's clearly more commonly used (try two Google searches if you don't believe that)--Cyberdude93 14:59, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

He's right. A Google search for "Zoro One Piece" turns up 87k results, while "Zolo One Piece" turns up 21,600. Good enough for me. - STAREYe 15:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

You have to set the "English" tag first. Now, the reason why "Zolo" is more common than "Zoro" on that internet is because the U.S. One Piece fanbase predates the 4Kids English version. BUT the whole point of this OP convention is to stick to what the English manga uses. It would be nice if they did switch back to "Zoro". WhisperToMe 15:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
First, I think you meant to say 'why "Zoro" is more common than "Zolo"', because otherwise what you said makes no sense. Secondly, if by 'English tag' you mean set Google to only return English results, "zoro" and "zoro one piece" still win. Thirdly, I think that Wikipedia guideline prevails in this case. Justifying why Zoro is more commonly used doesn't trump a Wikipedia guideline.--Cyberdude93 15:33, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Last time I checked, while the Google test can be useful, it's not an end-all to a dispute in all cases. I used the Google test argument for using an American/UK/Australia title for the dispute regarding "Fucking Amal" (Its US/UK/Australia title is different). - It didn't stop the people who wanted to use the original title. Also read Google_test#Google_bias WhisperToMe 17:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Assuming my undisputed correction is in fact what you meant to say, you do in fact agree that Zoro is more commonly used, right? The guideline makes no mention that newly introduced English terms have full priority (and they shouldn't), so seeing how the final decision is probably going to be made by you, if you're to adhere to Wikipedia's guideline and adhere to what you believe is more commonly used, then Zoro should be the title name, unless you're somehow disagreeing with your own opinion. Oh, and that last point on the Google bias front about Wikipedia mirror sites would make the Google test yield higher results for Zolo at the moment, so that's another point for Zoro.
And I'm stumped as to why - like in here - the majority disagreed with you in the Fucking Amal page, yet you're having your way here but not there :-)--Cyberdude93 17:52, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

The funny thing is that when I typed up Roronoa Zolo, Google suggested to me... "Did you mean Roronoa Zoro?" XD --Yokaiforte 00:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I would like to know which spelling they use in the Canadian and Australian versions well.--155.246.15.34 07:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The VIZ English manga is sold in Canada... and Australia and Canada get the 4Kids dub. WhisperToMe 20:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

So if the official spelling in the majority of the english world is Zolo, then shouldn't the english wiki state it as such with a note that Oda originally wrote it at "Zoro" in the japanese manga? I mean, I hate the 4kids version too, but I don't want the encylopedia changed because of that.--155.246.15.34 22:03, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Well what we're discussing is that very few know him as Zolo. The English dub is not very well known, and most English One Piece fans are watchers of the original Japanese. - STAREYe 23:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, the english One Piece is viewed by millions of people.--155.246.15.33 00:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, first of all, take a step back and look at yourselves here. You've argued for paragraphs over the name of a manga/anime character! Not that it's a bad manga, just saying. Anyway, the manga first appeared in English in Shonen Jump, and they use Zolo. SJ's editors would probably have a conniption if someone told them they'd used a mistranslated version of the character's name; there's no doubting that they checked and re-checked this with everyone in connection with the manga, especially Mr. Oda, so I think it's safe to say that Zolo is close enough to right that it doesn't matter. Wyrmfire 00:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)Wyrmfire

Oda himself has romanised Zoro's name as Zoro, among with most other characters. Toei have always been using Zoro, and I'm sure that Oda would have corrected them already seeing how over 250 episodes have aired. So no, your argument there doesn't hold truth.--Cyberdude93 17:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Cyberdude. I reiterate my concern that the "Zolo" romanization loses context that is crucial in helping English readers understanding the nature of the character. And I find the argument above that somehow some contributors opinions don't matter is insulting: please re-read WP:OWN. I'm officially throwing my support behind the "Zoro" romanization. It is the romanization used by the author, it is more useful to understanding the name of the character, and it is the more commonly used designation among readers of the manga (including the English manga) and viewers of the anime.
I would prefer to not edit war over this. Nandesuka 18:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Cyberdude - I know Oda does that already. That has NO bearing on names used in international versions: - Zoro is known as Lorenor Zorro in Germany - Zorro Roronoa in France, and Blackjack in Greece. Hell, Usopp is called "Pipo" in France. Sanji is "Sandy" in France and "Sunny" in Greece. Luffy's name is spelled "Ruffy" in Germany and some Scandinavian countries. In fact the Greek version messes with a whole bunch of names (Nami becomes Bonnie, Luffy becomes Drake, Usopp becomes Gus). WhisperToMe 22:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Nandesuka, you do not have consensus. 1. Guests and newly-registered users don't count.

2. You and Cyber are pro-Zoro. I and some other guy are pro-Zolo. That's 50% = NO Consensus. This must be changed back soon. WhisperToMe 23:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

The idea that anonymous editors do not "count" is as offensive as it is incorrect. There is a reason we allow anyone to edit Wikipedia. It is because we want them to edit and to participate. I suggest you re-familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. A strong argument forwarded by an anonymous user is better than a weak argument forwarded by a uesr with thousands of edits. I think the anons in this thread have made persuasive and compelling arguments, and I find your attempt to discount their opinions based on who they are, rather than on what they are saying, to be misguided in the extreme. I will file an article RfC so we can get more opinions from interested editors here, but "I am more equal than others" is not a terribly persuasive or civil argument. Nandesuka 00:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead.

And I am familiar. I see anonymous users get barred from AFD, Sysop Elections, etc. all the time. The anon users may bring up good points, BUT the users themselves have no stake. Ever heard of internet sock puppets? WhisperToMe 00:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

User accounts could be sock puppets just as easily as anons. Anonymous editors do count toward consensus, and I agree with Nandesuka that the strength of the argument is what matters. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, I include newly-registered accounts with anons too. There's no way to quantify anything from them. WhisperToMe 18:02, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


See my comments immediately below. — 0918BRIAN • 2006-03-6 01:43


Okay. I appologize for being rude, but shut up a minute. Eiichirou Oda made the series, correct? He has used English plenty of times quite well, and on Zoro's wanted poster his name is spelled with an 'R'. While one can make the assumption that this is because Japanese use 'R's for 'L's, this isn't always the case. Luffy's name is spelled on the Oda-drawn wanted posters as "LUFFY". Oda did some research, it would seem. Now, I AM annonymous, but I'm not some loser who has nothing to do with their time but argue such things as this. I just decided to help straighten some things out for you people. I read something a while ago that said: "VIZ doesn't have the content editing problems and therefore is cannon." There could be nothing further from the truth. Read it. They're leaving Whiskey peak right now. They aren't doing NEAR as much as 4Kids, but they are still changing the script some. One this was calling the Bomb Bomb fruit the Boom Boom fruit, but that's just minor. The thing is, a while ago, I knew nothing about the original version of ONE PIECE. But, I looked around and saw a lot of sites that did not waste their time on the Dub and American manga and therefore I learned that ONE PIECE was actually pretty good. You know, OP is the most popular shonen manga & anime in Japan...there's a good reason why it's not in America. It stinks in America. RORONOA ZORO. That is his name. What is next? Calling Franky 'Frankie'? We've seen it written as 'Franky' tons of times. What about Iceburg? Oda-sensei wrote it as such and that's what we call him, not 'iceberg', as it is technically in english. If we don't put our foot down at Zoro they'll change more. Franky, we know, will be hard to do in English because of his tendencies and his guns. Eneru will be impossible for 4Kids, because they'll say kids can't pronounce his name (they'll really cut him out because it's religious--though a false religion). Let me say this one more time: RORONOA ZORO. Buy a tankobon of ONE PIECE--unscanned and unmessed with--and see for yourself. Who cares about the english version? It's like watching STAR WARS in Aramaic...strange pointless, and there's no substitute for the original. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.42.52 (talk • contribs)

I think you need to take a minute to breathe, here. Calm down and put things into perspective. This is Wikipedia, and while there are places where you are free to go on rants, this isn't really one of them. Your point is valid, but the fervor with which you pursue it is more than a little irrational (and kind of frightening). Furthermore, I think you need to differentiate between outright censorship, and changes which have no effect on the plot. Not to mention the fact that you're replying to a topic that was settled months ago... --Julian Grybowski 00:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I would just like to pop in to say that I think the reason they changed it in the english version is to remove any "relation" to the Zoro we know from movies.

Most people can guess he's zoro if his name is zolo, and he's a crewmate of Luffy's. It's one letter off, not exactly hard. 69.169.92.216 01:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well most of the people can guess he's zolo if his name is zoro. This is suppose to be an Encyclopedia, an Encyclopedia should have FACTS not dubbed names, just as an exaple: Something moust of the people with a little culture know who George Washington is, if you look in any non-english encyclopedia ill bet you'll allways find him as George, altho his name in other lenguage could be different, expl. Jorge (spanish). then why dont you find his name in a spanish encyclopedia as Jorge Lavandoton, (Thats what George Washington is traduce to.), couse the encyclopedia tell the facts, and the fact its that he's name is George, not Jorge, as is a fact that is Zoro not Zolo. Sorry my English. (Yes you can flame me with go to your lenguage wiki, but i won't XD)

Consensus !

I have no clue what One Piece is, but I've looked at this debate. No percentage of anything is consensus. Consensus is not a vote. The Wikipedia community and its members are always changing, so to pretend to be able to enforce something because certain members had a vote at some time in the past is ridiculous. The only thing that matters is your rationale. If you have better rationale, sourced by better, more reliable references, it doesn't matter how many people go against you. My opinion is this: we are dealing with the English language Wikipedia, so we must deal with the Anglicized spellings of words. If the official English releases of this product have changed their original spelling of Zoro to Zolo, then the English Wikipedia article should list Zolo. The best solution, though, is to simply explain the whole situation in the article. But, if you want to actually name the article, I would go with the current official English spelling, which apparently is Zolo. Such an article would start "Zolo, originally known as Zoro", or something along those lines. — 0918BRIAN • 2006-03-4 00:19

  • Again, votes do not matter. Anyone who proposes a percentage or a vote should be ignored vehemently (if that's possible). Only rationale matters. Rationale makes a stable encyclopedia, not random votes by random groups of users at random times. As for anonymous users: if their rationale makes a point, then those rationale should be considered and discussed. That is the only way anonymous IPs come into the equation. — 0918BRIAN • 2006-03-4 00:19

It's both!!

It's actually both, or neither. The Japanese don't have 'L' (as the west know it) in their vocabulary, they have the Japanese 'R', which is kind of a cross between 'L' and 'R', so when things are translated with 'L' or 'R' in the name, it can come up as either, Like Kuririn is sometimes translated 'Krillin' or 'Luffy' to 'ruffy'. So, Eiichiro Oda didn't name him Zoro or Zolo, or named him both - however you want to look at it. However, if 'Zolo' is what he's known as in English, that's what it should be in the article, as it's just as correct. Sergeant Snopake & Mr Negotiator, 22:27, 20th of April 2006 (UTC)

Well, the Japanese One Piece site uses "Zoro", while the new U.S. printings use "Zolo" WhisperToMe 00:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
That's because it was translated as Zolo in the west. It's exactly the same as Zoro, it's just pronounciation. Sergeant Snopake 10:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
You guys don't get it, do you? (Well, except WhisperToMe). Oda and Toei have romanised it as Zoro. Oda has shown he can differentiate between R and L, so it is Zoro. Whatever attempt the author tries at converting something to another language, poor or not, shouldn't just be ignored. Whether or not Wikipedia should use Zoro is a different matter, but to say they're the same is just ignorance--Cyberdude93 10:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, it's like this: The Japanese don't like saying 'election' because it sounds like another word, because of the way they pronounce their Rs. So, if Election was a charecter in an anime, it could easily be translated with an R rather than an L when brought to the west. However, if people like you just learned to pronounce the Japanese 'R', it would be pronounced the same way, just written diferently, because it would be THE SAME NAME. Mr Negotiator 12:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
It's like colour and color. If you're pronouncing it correctly, It's the same. Sergeant Snopake 15:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh this is just bull now. Oda has clearly shown the ability to differentiate between English Ls and Rs. Are you saying that you're going to nullify the extra detail he adds because he's Japanese? Is it so hard for you to believe that some, if not many Japanese people can tell the difference, by learning English or otherwise? Doesn't that make you racist? And I CAN pronounce a Japanese R, don't know where the hell you got the idea I couldn't from.--Cyberdude93 17:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Please, try to remain civil. I meant no harm, and I never said that Oda could not differentiate between English L and R. Sergeant Snopake 22:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it just me or is the "R" in Zoro kind of distinct? Not like other anime I've seen. 58.105.132.61 09:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Licensees Change

The 4kids license of One Piece, according to their filings with the SEC, is good through August of 2009.

Since any licensee will deal with character names as they see fit, common sense dictates that characters should be identified according to the well-established names granted by their creator. It is clear that Oda's creations were well-known prior to the 4kids license, and will remain well-known upon its expiration in 3 more years. Bustter 18:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Would we be able to get a comparison between the number of Japanese viewers and the combined number of American, Canadian, British and Australian viewers? If the number of people viewing the english version equals or exceeds the people viewing the Japanese version, then he would technically be more widely known as Zolo.--71.254.53.233 07:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if you are familiar with Minky Momo. But she was known through most of the world, except in Japan, as "Gigi," for all the years that her several series spanned. Nowadays, however, she is known, with rare exceptions, as Minky Momo. The numbers don't matter -- when licenses die, the fake names die with them. Bustter 21:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

But that hasn't happened - yet. Although keep in mind that the VIZ manga exists and only has some of the 4Kids name changes. WhisperToMe 06:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

But you just gave me an example of the numbers mattering, specifically after the popularity of one name died down. Wikipedia doesn't predict the future of the popularity of things. Also, you can see several articles of people and characters, that refer to them as their more widely-known name rather then their original name. --71.255.17.21 06:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Minky Momo's "creator name" resurged simply because it is a "creator name," which lends it permanency. That's why I say numbers don't matter, because permanency, in a reference work, matters in a way that numbers do not.

Any convention that dictates using licensee names rather than creator names creates the occasion for multiple pointless revisions, as

A. The "creator version" is first imported by fans

B. The licensed manga is published in the west

C. A TV show or movie is licensed, possibly with names different from the manga

D. The license lapses

E. Another licensor emerges

Through all of this, the "creator name" is always correct, no matter the numbers. Licensee names, and appropriate redirects, can certainly be added or not, according to the will of the contributors; licensee changes are certainly relevant information, but they should never be used to replace known creator data. To globally replace "Minky Momo" (for instance) with "Gigi," and then years later get embroiled in a discussion as to whether it should be changed back, is ridiculous and totally unnecessary. An entry stating that "Sanji is a character that always sucks on a lollipop," with no mention of his cigarette addiction as oiginally conceived, would be just as wrong for the same reasons.

Bustter 02:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
However, there are pages all over wikipedia where this rule doesn't apply, which is where we are caught up.
Not being familiar with the specific instances to which you refer, I'm about to do some theorizing. THIS ISN'T CRITICISM, per se...I am about to put forward a theory about the basis for argument here, to elicit feedback, and perhaps suggest a "new course."

The wiki was designed by technically-inclined people, open-source software people, to whom the existing version of a work supplants previous creations. This makes great sense in terms of collectively-developed software -- no matter how ingenious the first germ of an idea may be, open-source development promotes positive enhancement; inferior branches of development die off without assistance.

The same does not hold true for products of the commercial art world; "improvements" are seldom made with the actual intention of improvement; inferior strains of the original work are not pruned with the same efficiency, as money, licensing and complex copyright issues severely impede the process.

It may be that many pages are infected with a technocratic misapprehension that such changes in a work of commercial art are "evolutionary" when in fact they are proprietary, culture-sensitive, and frequently offensive to those familiar with the original work. The fact that these pages (that you refer to; I am not familiar with specific instances) may have been subject to a blindered, technocratic view of how things "evolve" does not make a good argument for continuing the practice here.

If the wiki will be an encyclopedia to the masses, this technician's view of creative development needs to be applied only where it is appropriate, and that is not in works that have claims to "artistry."

If previous pages have been influenced by such a mind-set, those are the pages that need change. Bustter 20:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, Oda originally wanted to name his clown pirate "Boogie" the clown, but he changed it to "Buggy" due to copyright reasons in Japan. The same thing happened in America with Zoro. So why isn't Buggy listed as Boogie? That is the creator's version, his original intention, and by your explanation should be the name listed primarily in wikipedia.--71.255.20.18 07:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


You state yourself that Oda made this change, so where is the argument? I did not advocate sticking with the creator's first whim, rather his actual published work. Bustter 20:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I am saying that users who closely edit this page insist that Zoro shouldn't be primarily listed as Zolo in an english encyclopedia because of a rule of "The name will be listed as X because that's what the creator originally wanted". However, this rule clearly doesn't apply to nearly hundreds of pages, characters, and people in the english encyclopedia, leaving me to question the validity of it and why it applies to Zoro and no one else. The second cited reason is that Zoro is the more widely known name, which may or may not be true depending on the combined number of viewers in America, Canada, UK, Australia, and whatever other country uses the name Zolo.


Without a doubt the writers and editors of this page are fans of One Piece (the japanese version). This is a double edged sword, while fans are responsible bringing an incredible amount of much appreciated detail to some pages, their passions for their subjects can cause them to slip POV into the pages (which is why I believe the wiki page on Anime will never be good). In this case, I have a gut instinct that the fans/editors on this page insist on keeping Zoro as Zoro, out of an overall spite for the entire english dub and as a way to demean it. At least, this is the feeling I get when reading the previous long discussion on it. Also, the previous discussion seemed to have concluded with the decision that Zolo should be listed.--69.141.190.230 07:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I haven't seen anyone say that "Zolo" should not be noted as Zoro's name in licensed US products. It's appropriate that it be listed, I can't imagine anyone arguing the point. But "Zolo" should not replace "Zoro" as the common referent to the character, for several reasons. Chief among them is the fact that licensees change, possibly causing a need for pointless, arduous revisions (especially with such a highly-populated fictional world). Another reason is that anime has a global following, and anime fans worldwide communicate with one another on a more frequent basis than most, and there is every reason for this communication to expand rather than diminish in the future. Listing US licensed names to the exclusion of "global" names would be a disservice to US/UK users of the encyclopedia, creating more an impression of parochialism and ignorance than an impression of knowledge.
In my opinion, refusing to list information because it may change sometime in the future isn't a very good reason. 4kids has the licence until 2009, at that point they may or may not renew it. Viz however, will surely have it longer than that. Also, Zolo is not just the "US licensed" name, it is the official name for in every english-speaking country including the UK.--69.141.190.230 05:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Again, no one is "refusing to list information." The fact is that in "One Piece created by Eiichiro Oda," the character's name is Zoro. That statement is never wrong, in any latitude, longitude or calendar date. The same character, as licensed in the US and the UK, is named Zolo. Also valid info. I have never said either fact should be omitted. But when one is talking about "One Piece created by Eiichiro Oda," the character's name is Zoro; to say, in that context, that it is Zolo is a factual error.
"However, this rule clearly doesn't apply to nearly hundreds of pages, characters, and people in the english encyclopedia, leaving me to question the validity of it and why it applies to Zoro and no one else." I keep hearing about these "HUNDREDS of pages."
I've asked for examples before with none forthcoming. Let's hear some, please. Bustter 22:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Mark Twain is referred to by his more widely known pen name than his actual name. The Miami Gardens stadium is listed as Dolphin Stadium, despite the fact that it was origninally named Joe Robbie Stadium, after the Dolphin's owner Joe Robbie built the stadium using private funds and named it after himself. The name was changed to Pro Player Stadium and then Dolphin Stadium after he sold it to the CEO of Blockbuster. TD Banknorth Garden had 34 names since its construction, and it is listed as its current one. And then there is Ash Ketchum. Also, this article is primarily about the entire One Piece franchise, not just the parts that Oda created. So if Zoro were to be listed as Zolo, then the fact that in Japan the character is known as Zoro would of course be listed in its correct context.--69.141.190.230 03:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually the Singapore dub of the anime uses "Zoro"- But that's it as far as the Anglophone world goes. WhisperToMe 05:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't know if Singapore would be traditionally included as part of the english-speaking world, but good point.--69.141.190.230 05:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Removing a paragraph and various other problems

Because of its strong story, colorful characters and intense fights between bizarre characters, deep emotions, character depth, clever plot twists, and different plot flavors, through this One Piece has gained a level of popularity near that of Dragon Ball in Japan. Unlike Dragon Ball, it's an epic story of voyages across fantastic lands. Other manga that have recently gotten near (but not quite achieved) that level of popularity are InuYasha and Naruto.

The paragraph seems out of place in the article. I feel it needs a lot of editing and some parts need to be rewritten. I can't remember the tag used to signify that this article needs to be cleaned up. If anybody knows it off the top of their head go ahead and insert it. Otherwise I will look for it later and do it myself (of course this is assuming there are no major objections)

Merge "story arc" articles into this one.

Hi. I think having separate articles for "story arcs" is both fancrufty, and unlikely to help users find the information they need. I propose that we merge all of the separate story arc articles back here, and then voluntarily put them up for VFD. Comments? Nandesuka 16:33, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

As it stands, this is fine, but as the page gets longer, it may eventually need to be moved back to its own article (a header can remain here, however, pointing back to that article). --Julian Grybowski 12:24, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

How about a single article, One Piece Story Arcs? Nandesuka 12:52, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Templates for characters / story arcs?

I'm heavily involved in editing and improving the Dragon Ball-related articles (an unenviable job, I know), and while a lot of the information on those pages is dodgy and/or poorly written, one thing that the Dragon Ball pages have that the One Piece articles don't, is templates. These add both a professional look and a stylistic flair to articles, regardless of the quality of the page's content. So... anyone want to volunteer to modify the DB templates and create One Piece-themed images? (And once that's done, anyone want to help with implementing them?) --Julian Grybowski 21:51, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Oohh, I do like the look of those templates. I'll get started right away!Turk Ranma 21:18, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Split Japanese version and English adaptations?

It's just a thought of mine, but it might make for more coherent organization of this page if we separated the Japanese versions of the anime and manga from their English adaptations (to be put in an "English Adaptations" heading further down the page). If some industrious soul would like the job, go right ahead. Otherwise, I'll probably get to it eventually. --Julian Grybowski 21:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

It's a good idea to make an English-language adaptations section explaining the difference, but the names from VIZ, LLC's adaptation should still be used throughout the article. WhisperToMe 04:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. The character's name has been written in English by the artists of the original as "Zoro" - I feel that the original information should be used, as that was clearly the creator's prefered romanisation of the name. LupusCanis 20:39, 23 November 2005 (GMT)

What the author does oftentimes doesn't count. ('sides, Zoro is noted how many times?) WhisperToMe 22:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

The author created it. What they do counts. No matter what. Cody2526

Purists comment

By wikipedia's definition, a purist is "one who desires that a particular item remain true to its essence and free from adulterating or diluting influences". Also "Use of the term may be either pejorative or complimentary". So the original line read:

"One Piece purists (those who follow the original Japanese series) tend to frown upon the actions of 4Kids"

Which is essentially saying that people who don't want the series to be altered frown upon the editing that 4kids did. Which is a bit redundant, but accurate. The problem was that it defined purists as anyone who follows the japanese series. Changing it to:

"Those who follow the original Japanese series tend to frown upon..."

would create another generilization, as not everyone who follows the japanese series looks down on 4kids for doing what they did. So I changed the line to something more accurate:

"One Piece purists (mostly consisting of those who follow the original Japanese series) tend to frown upon the actions of 4Kids."

This shows that all purists desire One Piece to be unedited, and that not all purists (people who dislike the edits) follow the japanese series.

That helps a little, although it still implies that everyone who dislikes 4Kids' edits is a "purist," a derogatory term usually reserved for people who hate all dubs. I think this needs to be rephrased to something a little more unbiased, or taken out entirely (the second sentence could be rephrased to "The biggest criticism against the 4Kids adaptation of One Piece is that despite...").

The line is gone, and the second line was rewritten. --155.246.15.34 01:02, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Copies Sold

Looking around, I found this: http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=62865, which states that One Piece sold over 100 million copies, not 10 million (which was changed recently). Therefore, I am reverting the change. I assume that it would count, say, someone buying the first 2 volumes as 2 sales, which would explain the numbers, seeing as how there are many volumes out. MegaSlicer 22:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Ah, so it's the series that's sold 100 million copies, not the one volume. That makes a ton more sense. (That thread also explains the number confusion, too.) Well, guess I was in the wrong there. --Julian Grybowski 15:07, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Shipwright/Nico Robin Saga

The only name I've ever heard to describe this section is "Water 7", eg. the Water 7 arc. I vote to change it. Jongpil Yun 03:26, 24 October 2005 (UTC)


It also centers around the city of Water 7(Iceburg, anyone?).It should stay "Water 7". Kaku 09:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Voice Acting Comment

Personally, I'm not a fan of some of the voices used in the series (the english voices of Sanji and of Bon Clay are dreadful to say the least), but is that truly a notable issue in this encyclopedia of the series? For instance, what if 4Kids did a wonderful job on the series (i.e. no huge edits, no changed lines of dialogue, no missing arcs) save for some characters having ear-achingly bad voices? Would we have a criticism section on this article to focus on the voice issue? Probably not, since this isn't a true fact-based critcism, it's in the eye of the beholder.

I just wanted to know what others thought of this issue 66.109.114.13 00:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I absolutely agree. I actually gagged the first time I heard Luffy's voice on the 4Kids show; he sounds like an eight year old with a sore throat, but in the manga, it indicates clearly that he's a young man (Does it ever actually say his age anywhere?). I think 4Kids could definitely have done a better job on selecting voiceover artists for the characters of the One Piece anime. Wyrmfire 02:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Oda provided ages some time ago. I don't know if these ages have changed at all. I was surprised to learn that everyone except Robin is a teen.

Luffy - 17

Zoro - 19

Nami - 18

Usopp - 17

Sanji - 19

Chopper - 15

Robin -28

Bustter 02:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Blackbeard

Could someone please provide the air date of the first episode to reference Blackbeard? Thanks. --Dan East 02:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Gan Forr Changed to Gun Fall

I have recently changed all instances of Gan Forr to Gun Fall on as many pages as I could find. Gun Fall is the original name of the character, and Gan Forr was the name that Null translations used because they did not know how to properly romanize his name (His name was written in english until Skypiea was nearly over). This would be the same as with Galley-la Company (not Gorilla..).

-therealssjlink

Somebody apparently doesn't like the word 'Gun' and is changing it to 'Gan'. This is not correct and should not be changed unless you have a better explanation than Eiichiro Oda actually wrting it out as 'Gun Fall'. The name is probably a nick name anyway so people should not complain and say things like 'Why would anyone have that as a name?'.

-therealssjlink

At least on the Japanese anime, the first word is clearly pronounced "gan", not "gun". Nandesuka 01:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
It sounds like you need a lesson in Japanese phonology. :-) --Julian Grybowski 02:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
In fact, it's clearly 'Gan' (considering Japanese phonology). 'Gan' can also be used as a romanization that sounds the same as the english 'Gun'. Our old translations are not canon; they were made from chinese versions of the manga. We are using 'Gan Fall' in our retranslations.
-Protected (Null)

Romanizations

There's a number of split arguments along this line, as well as various editing battles over many pages, regarding the proper romantizations of names. This issue *must* be solved in due time, and a standard must be established for which we must call the names. I would rather not have someone edit this page saying "oh, we already have that" because it's arsinine; as link mentioned above, people use romantizations based off of Null translations, Arlong Park translators (Stephen, Ocean, ooshi) or their own impressions. We must firmly agree, in HERE, on proper names for characters, and furthermore, establish whether the manga or Anime should hold prime canon when deciding name romanziation. I am almost certain Viz will keep Smoker's name "Major Smoker", rather than "Captain Chaser", but there will undoubtedly be a huge controversy here because people are keen on having the Anime, which is SECOND to the manga, as canon. C'mon, people, let's get things together.

-DCD

We have already decided on a style, DCD. We are using VIZ Media's conventions. WhisperToMe 19:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


That doesn't seem to necessarily be true. People will use VIZ Media's translations if they were original and not influenced by other organizations such as 4KIDs. -Therealssjlink

Besides, Smoker's a Captain in the Navy. Regardless of Viz's name choice, they wouldn't give him an Army rank. --Julian Grybowski 00:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not like "Supreme Admiral" is a real Naval rank, either. Oda can uses whatever the heck he wants, and in the case of Smoker, he attempted a double parody by giving him the title of "Major". -DCD

No he didn't. The rank of taisa is "Captain" in Naval terminology, and "Colonel" within an Army context. Nowhere does it mean "major." Just because a fan-given name is popular doesn't mean it's right, and in this case it's flat-out wrong. Besides, gensui isn't' "Supreme Admiral," but "Fleet Admiral" (which exists, but only during wartime). Don't try to act like you know what you're talking about when you neither understand the Japanese language nor know anything about the field in question. Please and thank you. --Julian Grybowski 03:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey, hey. That was quite offensive. I may not be able to read Japanese (hence know better), but you need not be quite so rude in telling me so. There's still a great deal of false information being circulated around the internet as of late, and if my memory doesn't fail, a great deal of it originated from Wiki in the first place. -DCD

So, is this article using VIZ's conventions or not?--71.255.31.49 08:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Franky?

Um, not to intrude, but, it's not been confirmed that Franky is a crew member yet. There was only one color spread with him listed as such, and the reason is very ambiguous.

--He can be a temporary like Vivi or Mr.2.

If we really MUST list it under the Straw Hat crew, may I possibly suggest that we mention that it is purely speculative in parentheses right beside his name? 68.70.136.127 18:10, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Name: Eneru VS Enel

I've seen in only a few places his name actually listed in romaji as "Enel" (Anime News Network/ One Piece Grand Battle: Rush! come to mind), while I have never seen his name written as "Eneru" (except in Wikipedia, of course.) So I just wanted to make sure that there is indeed a final vote on the intended spelling of his name. Turk Ranma 18:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

The name is as of now officially "Eneru" because that is how it's pronounced in the Japanese Anime. "Enel" and "Ener" are incorrect simply because we have no English Viz romantization yet. 20:00, 10 January 2006.

I have changed it back to Enel, I had just bought the game Fighting For One Piece and every characters name is written in english, it it spelled Enel. That should stop all discussion.


At least put "Eneru|Enel".Otherwise it goes to a disambiguation page. Kaku 09:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Enel should be correct. Null used Eneru in the old Sky Piea scanlations, but we're using Enel in the rescanlations. Kaizoku-fansubs also uses Enel in their fansubs. Both words are romanizations for the same spoken japanese, so there is no argument in favor of Eneru... -Protected (Null)

*Ener (Eneru to be pronounced in the Japanese anime)<!--His name is eneR with an R. You american idiot.  -->

Okay, this is just getting stupid now. Viz and 4kids haven't gotten to him yet, so as far as I can tell, the only romanisation of his name is in "One Piece Grand Battle: Rush!". Japanese supposedly doesn't distinguish between L and R, so Enel = Ener, hence the only official material there is so far should stick.

And I bet 4kids will choose Enel anyway. They only favored Rs with Hililuk/Hiriluk/etc.--Cyberdude93 18:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

If they took Trace instead of Ace, why do you think they'll get Eneru/Enel/Ener right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeSchlam2 (talk • contribs)

I think Ace is also someone else in one of their other shows or something, can't remember all the details. Not saying it wasn't a stupid idea, but Enel/Eneru/Ener doesn't sound like a snake, playing card, name owned by some huge American company, or anything that could possibly incur 4kids' wrath. So they're probably not going to drastically change the name or anything stupid. --Cyberdude93 17:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

In the One Piece fighting game "Grand adventure" in the US his name is pronounced eneru. So I think this is the spelling that should be used-Greg233 21:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Themes

We should add a Themes section to the OP article; there's one for Dragonball and I think there's one for Fullmetal Alchemist, as well. I may need to check. I say this because the themes, in harmony with the character development, are the primary driving force behind the fan base of OP. For a Shounen series, I highly doubt OP would get much acclaim for the details of the fights; the overtone themes are what differentiate OP as a "deep" series in comparison to something like, say, Yu Yu Hakusho.

However, we should really discuss the themes present here before creating a section based on them. Any imput is welcome. Here are my suggestions:

[*] Romantic Pirates v. Historical Pirates [*] Importance of Nakama (friends whom are virtually family) [*] Tragic Histories [*] Idealistic Youth v. Realistic Adults [*] Objective Justice v. Subjective Justice

An additional note that the "Importance of Nakama" and "Romantic Pirates v. Historical Pirates" are the primary themes of OP, with almost everything else as a derivative.

-DCD

Why did 4kids skipped about 30+ episodes?

Why did 4kids skipped about 30+ episodes?--—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.25.132.168 (talk • contribs)


  • Skip. Why don't you read one of the websites dedicated to this fact? - STAREYe 02:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Excessive Info

Does anyone else think the info on some of the characters is rather exsessive? Particularly with things about the latest story arc where people are adding new info every chapter. Plus lately people have been listing every attack by each character, which also doesn't seem nessisary to me. I posted something about this on some of the character talk pages, and done some summarizing, but I thought it might receive more attention here. - STAREYe 18:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

There nothing wrong with a little info on the attacks, makes the pages more interesting. Its not hurting anything. I've also been checking on the character info, ever since they been shorten down, they're looking alright. Besides the Naruto pages are a LOT more excessive compared to this.

Right, maybe its not technically professional.....but its not like it hurts anything. Some people actually want very in depth info when using wikipedia. Not just quick lil summaries -Zephos

Can someone verify if One Piece is *REALLY* in HD?

I'm sorry, but I've seen too many Americans (call me racist, but it's my observation) call simple 16:9 widescreen "HDTV" to believe right off the bat it's in HD. Hell many One Piece AVIs (*cough cough*) are labelled HDTV but are of a vertical resolution of 480 pixels or less, which is SDTV or worse.

Without any facts, I'd guess that at best, One Piece is 24fps telecined to 480p60, which is SDTV put into an EDTV stream. In essence, that's no extra data.

So I guess this the long way of saying Citation Needed. Give me proof then I'll shut up. —This unsigned comment was added by Cyberdude93 (talk • contribs) .


It really depends on the encoding for the AVIs. Usually computers show high definition quite well, but the problem arise when you are viewing it on the Television. (Guille2015 21:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC))
Not the point. For the article to indicate that the program is broadcast high-def, we need to know that it is. Whether or not it appears to be high-def in bootlegs is immaterial. Currently, I can find no reference to high-def in the article, which is as it should be, imo.

HD out, and character eyecatch error

My mistake (see directly above), it IS in there, or has been put back. I have searched both fuji tv's site and toho animation's site for 高い定義テレビ (high definition television) OR HDTV AND ワンピース (One Piece)...ZERO HITS. I am removing this reference. It's ridiculous to think that a made-for-TV animation program is going to create a huge budgetary problem for itself by producing in high-def, anyway. The same graph mentions that individual character eye-catches were introduced after 207 episodes, and this is equally ridiculous -- the character-specific eyecatches have been there from the start -- Vivi even had one with her big duck, it seems that this guy was watching fansubs that omitted them until 207. Removing both of these statements...Others please see that they stay out, thanks. Bustter 19:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

About the name "World Government Saga"

I'm sorry, but i don't realy think that this the correct name for that part of the story. Every event in these arcs originated from Nico Robin, so I think that the correct name would be Nico Robin Saga. To be more precise I'd like to separate Davy Back Fight, Water Seven and Enies Lobby, into three separate sagas, each one related to the previous, but anyway separated. Do you agree? Or at least, having DBF alone and W7 and EL only joined in Nico Robin Saga. I think because the World Government would play a major role after those events, so it is worthless to call now this arcs WG Saga. Cuttyflam

I agree that the Davy Back Fight shouldn't be included with the other two, as it is not really related to anything. W7 and EL should definitely be put together though, as they are pratically the same arc. Perhaps it could be renamed CP9 saga? 24.91.120.11 16:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the Davy Back Fight should be included. The DBF arc is where Aokiji met the mugiwara and confirmed that Robin was traveling with them, so he could tell the CP9 which set up most of the plot for the saga. - STAREYe 15:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

could someone make articles for the one piece movies —This unsigned comment was added by 68.108.216.244 (talk • contribs) .

Shanks

I noticed a while ago he was removed from his page. Also his name is removed from Luffy's expo page. Since he is the real reason for Luffy becoming a pirate in the first place, I think he should have a link to his info page. Shanks also plays a large part in the background of the One Piece world even if you only seem small glimpses of him.

Piracy games

I've put all the one piece games I could find in the list of piracy computer and video games. Please veryfy/expand it! Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 02:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Shortening the One Piece main article

I think that the One Piece main article is far too long and could be seperated into sub-articles, which will have a link from the main article. I wanted to add to the cast of other characters some article (Shanks, Whitebeard, ...) but when I tried editing I saw that it was already in there.

All these didn't show in the article.

Since I'm quite new to this, and it is quite a major change, I'd liked to discuss the idea first. (Kurigiri 20:46, 11 May 2006 (UTC))

Attacks Deleted?

I've noticed that all of the characters attacks have been deleted. Is there are reason behind this, or is it some kind of prank? -SX

There is a reason, check Talk:Roronoa Zoro. Kurigiri 07:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, yes, that's nice and all, but why was the wikibooks section deleted? There's nothing there at all! -SX

Well, I managed to recreate the entire article. 5-21-06 -SX

Is One Piece banned from Google?

Not that I seriously care about this enormus trash heap some call an article, but it appears the "One Piece" main page (English) is content filtered out of all Google searchers, or at least, I couldn't find it with various key words. This phenomenon is not unobserved (see: talk of Unencyclopedia), but I do wonder why Google would bother when the English One Piece entry is #6 on Yahoo. Could it be...4Kids is paying off Google and doesn't want people to notice the "criticisms and contorversy" section so blatantly promoted on the main page? Terek 00:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Here's a search for One Piece Wikipedia on Google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=One+Piece+Wikipedia&btnG=Search

WhisperToMe 01:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

And Terek, if you say this article is a "trash heap", tell us why you think so. WhisperToMe 01:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I see you jumped the gun, WhisperToMe. Why is only the "category: One Piece" listed, but not the main page? Look at Yahoo's #6 hit, or search "english one piece wikipedia" on Google and notice how the minor characters list gets a second hit, right below "chess piece".
Also, this article is vile for a number of reasons, not limited to 1. blatant plagiarism off of Arlong Park, 2. poor grammar, punctuation, spelling, 3. waay too much speculation, 4. biased opinions and suggestive language, and 5. overuse of Anime screenshots, thus violating Wikipedia mandates because only one screenshot is permitted per article page. Honestly, I haven't seen so much spam since Ronald Reagan handed out Blue Ribbons at the Iowa State Fair. Terek 04:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Show me the relevant pages of Arlong Park that are being plagiarized. Also show me the Wikipedia policy page that states "only one screenshot per article". WhisperToMe 23:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
When selecting the licensing for a file in the Wikipedia database through the "upload file" feature, accessed through the hyperlink directly to the right of you in the Wiki Toolbox, a grey information category designating subsections for screenshots clearly notes "one per article".
In regard to stolen material, all of the Anime episode summaries[1] are direct copies or slight modifications of summaries provided by AP member Mumbo [2]. Furthermore, all "clip-edit" and "dialogue-edit" sections of the chapter summaries are taken from Cinder's comprehensive One Piece guide [3] which was used with permission from Cinder on Arlong Park.Terek 07:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I do not see any Anime episode sumaries in One Piece Episode Guide article which is just a list of the names of each episode as presented in Anime News Network. When clicking on the link, then that takes you to an episode guide, which I think is too much information for Wikipedia. The list is fine, but the summaries either have to go or be modified, IMO --Guille2015 15:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

The Will of D

I am curious to know why is D considered the family name? I think it is a family name though, but for the sake of the wiki article, we should be certain of what is being said.

On another note, MONTBLANC NORLAND!!! is not a D. That was just a joke in one of the forums of Kaizoku Fansubs. [4] Although, it would have made lots of sense that Norland be part of the D family. There is still a chance for Oda to state this, but since he hasn't stated it, then we cannot assume it so. --Guille2015 02:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


Interresting. First can you please tell us in which episode this is, and which fansub subbed the episode you are refering. I dont like the Skypea arc to much, so it will be a pain for me to go through the entire are just to find a name. I do like the Norland part a lot, and i dont think they mention the D there either. Anyways, I am well aware of the "Big Brother" statement: "aniki" like Zoro is called by those two other Bounty hunters (i forgot thier names). Regardless, Luffy doesn not call Ace as "Aniki" he calles him Niichan (brother). Besides, everyone reacts and asks Luffy about his brother, and everyone in the Strawhat pirates ask and are in Awe that Luffy has a Brother. This case, not refered to as the honorary "Big Brother". Ace might be just a Half brother, or perhaps step brother, but they are Brothers!!!--Guille2015 01:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


I apologize, I never read ANY topics like that and my mind truly was putting in a D every time the name was said in the anime, like when he was introducing himself and stuff. I truly can't explain it, besides that I was wrong. I didn't want to watch the episodes again so I just checked the manga.... But yeah, my mind was inserting the D by itself. I apologize a great deal, because when you really think you hear it it just seems like it should be obvious.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.96.153.166 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 12 June 2006

You can delete your own post, Venscale, but please refrain from deleting other people's posts!!!!--Guille2015 22:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't delete your post, Guille2015. If you compare my revision to yours right before, you'll notice that all I did was add stuff. Now if you compare my revision with the one after mines, you'll notice that the user who deleted your post (and mine) is the one who started this "The Will of D" section. Venscale 03:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Terms page moved

Okay people, This page is waaaaaaaay too long. I've tried to shorten it slightly by moving the Terms section to its own page. At the same time I've expanded it so its now in general terms, mysteries, places and animals.

Really, this page needs shortening more, terms is just a starter. The front page should be a quick summary from which other pages link to... characters infos... Anime/manga infos... they should be linked but not listed here with a brief summery (not a full length explanation). Someone needs to change this... Its too much infomation to take in at once!

Also I've been fixing up some of the other pages linked to One Piece, hope everyone is alright with them, they can change them otherwise. I've patched up Red-Haired shanks page so it looks more tidy + professional, Expanded the Sea King page, and did up the 5 Elder Stars/World Goverment page. There are a few others I've done things to, but only minor stuff. As I said, if anyone disagrees with the changes they can alter them to how they think they should be. --Angel Emfrbl 12:19, 14 June 2006 (GMT)

Can anyone actualy prove this?

Quote (in regards to the dub): "Overall, people who have seen the original prefer it more."

Yes. Visit any One Piece forum... You'll SEE peoples thoughts and opinions and find, yes, the majority of peeps do prefer the orginal overall. Because the 4Kids verison is £$%&!!! (insert imagination here on what that translates to! lol )! Angel Emfrbl 15:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, go... uh, anywhere, and ask.

Yes, but to have this information in an encyclopedia it needs to be from a reputable source, currently there is no source information whatsoever.
I knew a site a while ago that gave a professional view on 4Kids translations... I've lost it now. I found these sights though. I wish I could find better... But this should confirm most of what is said in one form or another. I'll look for better later. Angel Emfrbl 09:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

No license on pictures

A common reaccuring thing on all the One Piece pages is this - people are adding pictures to the pages WITHOUT license info... If you don't know it, find a picture on another one piece related page and copy + paste it (wikipedia picture pages can be edited too) onto the related pictures own page. If you don't, the picture gets removed after 7 or so days.

I keep seeing old 'removed image' messages here and there on the pages from past removed images and people are still doing this... One example I found, can't remember which of the two it was, was on either the Whitebeard pirates page or Whitebeard's own page. We now don't have a ref to his flag anywhere. I keep adding the licensing info whenever i see a picture without one, but I can't keep an eye on every one pice related page nor do I want to. Can everyone PLEASE be careful with pictures. Angel Emfrbl 21:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Pirate flags a no-go?

And since I mentioned the subject of flags, can someone get pictures of the crew flags for their pages? Just wondering because it seems silly we either don't have a page for the flags or their not on their owners wikipedia page... It might save us some time if we stick them on the One Piece terms page... I'm not too sure on that though. Angel Emfrbl 21:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Changing the "One Piece Characters" thing

v • d • e
One Piece by Eiichiro Oda
Franchise
Characters
Straw Hat crew
Main antagonists
Other characters
Organizations
Pirate crews
Other organizations
Related articles


Personally, I don't like how this has been set up. For example, Navy is listed in miscellaneous as opposed to groups; Smoker and Ao Kiji are listed, as opposed to just being under "Navy"; Gan Fall is listed when he is only a minor character; and several pages, such as "One Piece Terms", "Devil Fruits" and "One Piece ablilities" aren't listed. Exactly how does one go about changing it? Sigmasonic X 04:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I have another thing to add to your point... Why do we have that template on the same page as a list of characters? The template lists characters in it just the same as the list of characters. Is it nessacary for two lists of characters? I think not. Well, I'm not gonna touch this despite I've pointed it out, I'm just raising the point. Someone else can decide if its important enough. Angel Emfrbl 20:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
My thought are ditto, although Smoker and Aokiji having their own section should remain since they've played important roles in the storyline... Though it could get out of hand if other marines begin playing more important roles. Also, should the sotryline Arcs also be seperate? I've noticed that if you click on the links on this one, you have trouble getting back to the rest of wikipedias one Piece pages via its links. In other words, there are no links on it BACK to the main One Piece info pages. Angel Emfrbl 14:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
v • d • e
One Piece by Eiichiro Oda
Franchise
Characters
Straw Hat crew
Main antagonists
Other characters
Organizations
Pirate crews
Other organizations
Related articles


I linked the words One Piece in the arc listing to go back to the main article. Also, I think Smoker and Aokiji should be listed under the World Government section, but I didn't want to change that without checking what other people thought first. 24.91.120.11 16:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Censorship in the Korean Version

Are they any edits made in the Korean Version of One Piece--89.49.169.142 12:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Nefeltari Vivi

The English manga used "Nefeltari Vivi" to refer to her. Which name did Oda intend? Did he intend Nefertari or Nefeltari? WhisperToMe 16:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

You need to ask that question? Nefertari of course. Angel Emfrbl 21:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

One Piece Media Page

I think It'd be better to write a new page on One Piece Media than to keep the list of the songs the, ovas and the movies on the same page, to keep it more readable, just like Naruto or Bleach have. Cuttyflam 14:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I thought the same thing when I first saw this page, however, I wasn't sure how to handle all the access information here. It needs to be done carefully, we have a lot of info to transfer here. Angel Emfrbl 21:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Character templates

Okay something I just noticed. We now have info spots for Blood types, height etc... Not really needed. There isn't enough info to fill all those spots. I don't recall Oda ever mentioning what Luffy's blood type is even. Also... Can someone put the Japanese text on this page for Shanks' name and his Name in Romaji (Hepburn) section. Heres the link to make things easier to find. Red-Haired Shanks. I'd add it myself but I don't know this information. Thanks in advance. Angel Emfrbl 21:53, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I see whats going on now with the characters templates, I retract my statement... But do we really need 'Blood type?'. Oda has never mentioned anyones bloodtype, so that part isn't needed. Angel Emfrbl 10:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I also think that blood information is useless, since Oda nver stated about it, even in the Data Books. Cuttyflam 11:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Urgent clean up

One Piece Grand Battle! I need some opinions and help in sorting out this page. Its a mess and I don't even know where to begin. Also, there is no link from this page or a relating page directly to this one... I'm not sure how you link in the One Piece games, but there is differently more then this one and we need to add info on them. Angel Emfrbl 10:39, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Mr. 2's Censorship

I commented on Mr. 2 changing from a flamboyant homosexual cross-dresser to a texan.

Someone messed up

We seem to have had a mess up on the 'other' section on the characters... We taking that apart for fun? We now have buggy links on that. And where is Shanks and the other missing ones? Come on everyone, work together! Angel Emfrbl 08:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Media pages started

Okay, we seem to have a conflict here between peeps on what this page should look like... I'm going to START to pull this page apart and create a media page. I have no idea how this will work out, but bare with it. Angel Emfrbl 08:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Right I've set up a working idea for how to lay out the One Piece media related pages, but the pages are not exactly Wikipedia fit right now. Its gonna take a lot of thinking, organising and work to bring them up to standards. If anyone has other ideas on how it should be laid out I'm open to suggestions... We need to sort this out so if you can do better then be my guest.
If no one likes it then we can at least use it to sort out the data until we're happy we've got what is needed here. Angel Emfrbl 08:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Template ideas

Those story template ideas we have... They are rubbish. Can we remove them and create a better one with links to ALL the One Piece related pages?

heres how the Naruto page is laid out:

v • d • e
Naruto by Masashi Kishimoto
Franchise
Characters
Movies
Video games
Other

And another idea I randomly found:

v • d • e
Mortal Kombat series
Fighting games
Adventure games
Information
Film/TV
Other

Its something that beens bugging me... I don't know how to do templates otherwise I'd do one myself. Angel Emfrbl 08:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay that last one, the Mortal Kombat one I've taken and adapted it (yes sorry about the horrible colours, that can change later!). I've never tried a template before so its not the best... If you want to improve it heres the link: Template:One Piece general
v • d • e
One Piece by Eiichiro Oda
Franchise
Characters
Straw Hat crew
Main antagonists
Other characters
Organizations
Pirate crews
Other organizations
Related articles


Here is the working progress, I actually choose this because you can hide it, unlike the NAruto one I suggested here. I'm still working on this remember so I haven't added the Story arc template one yet. My aim is to link ALL One Piece related pages to this one way or another. Angel Emfrbl 10:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Finished that general template... Its a start and something that can be adapted later on... But at least now we can see all the One Piece pages and t5heir all connected together for easy navigation... We've got no excuse now for not bringing these pages up to scratch. Inicidently, you can now see that the whole entire One Piece related pages are in need of a lot of urgent updating... Like REALLY bad updating. Angel Emfrbl 13:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
You had a very good idea! I'm doing some changes, feel free to discuss and improve to make the template better. Cuttyflam 10:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Reverted it back... No offence intend but your way looked sloppy and dam aweful... Plus we had a HUGE template which I was trying to avoid. I had to scroll the page to see all the links. Angel Emfrbl 12:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

One Piece Games

Can someone set up the page for the One Piece games? I only know one and there is more then that out there. I can't link to them until we have more info on them. One Piece Grand Battle! Angel Emfrbl 12:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Where's Dub Piece?

I used to read that article every so often, but it appears to be gone now. What happened to it? -- A WikiGuest

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dub_Piece - It was deleted. WhisperToMe 03:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Not suprising that broke wikipedias advertising rules. Angel Emfrbl 06:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Quotes

Could everyone please add more quotes here? Sigmasonic X 01:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Attack of the Speculations

Okay today I've removed speculation and rumours... And £$%£ like that. I'm having to check the One Piece pages daily to make sure peeps are screwing them up.

Pages I've corrected today:

Now I don't mind doing this at all... But I shouldn't have to look through the pages everyday to correct information that has been posted by random peeps who are posting either a rumour or have not double checked their stuff. I've also noted this much: I've now removed speculated crew memebrs + their bounties (which are complete 5%&% so none of those characters have had bounties posted) from Gold Roger's page 3 times in the last WEEK. Right now I have someone insist Dragon is a warlord when he is a revolotuionary on the 7 warlords page and I'm fighting a loosing battle to stop them from placing it there.

Mostly, all this is the work of IP adress users who haven't signed up to Wikipedia. Angel Emfrbl 07:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Right I've won the war with whomever it was on the 7 Warlords page. I've had to leave a footnote about placing speculations on that page. Incidently I've resulted to placing such notes on several One Piece related pages. This is not good having all those but they seem to hault speculations and rumours at least for a while. Angel Emfrbl 08:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
More invisible notes inserted on blackbeards, mihawks and Shanks page... To ask people not to post rumoured bounties... I'm STILL wondering where these amounts are coming from. Angel Emfrbl 21:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Watch out! Deletion preposed on articles

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Piece Games I set up our games page and began to work on it... Got stuffed on what to do so waited for everyone to voice their opinion. This guy comes along and now half our pages are being purposed to be deleted. Peeps voice your opinion now or we'll loose those pages! >_<' Gah! This guy has nothing to do with One Piece at all as well. Angel Emfrbl 12:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Right I'm trying to save those pages right now. I've put reasons for keep on ALL the purposed deleted pages I can find. Lets not let all our hard efforts be just deleted now. If anyone can think of better reasons to save those pages then the ones I've listed, don'tbe hesitated to change them PLEASE! Angel Emfrbl 12:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
One Piece abilities Can't think up a reason to save that page... Need help with that one. Angel Emfrbl 12:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

References on Pages

Okay, I'm tackling this starting Monday. We don't reference our sources by listing the Manga, anime, SBS etc we got it from. Starting this weekend I'm working on ways of getting that onto each page. Everyone is welcome to debate how this should be handle. For a example page, I'm gonna start with the Will of D page because thats the most splattered bits of info page we have.

Why am I doing this? So we have good sound pages (at last) that we can confirm information on just by looking up chapters. And because of idiots on certain pages who are right now screwing them up with their 'clever' thinking by scrapping whole sections of information to right who sucks what part of the body... (Yeah complete idiots I add). So, for the sake of being able to have something to look up for repairs to the data, I'm getting references on those pages even if its the last thing I do on Wikipedia! Angel Emfrbl 16:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Buster Call

what is a A Buter Call?

You really want to know?... Angel Emfrbl 21:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Concerning "Minor Characters" and others

I feel that the "Minor Characters" and the Pirate Crews articles should be changed up a bit. Since the "Cipher Pol" article, etc., include the members of their organization, I feel that each pirate crew should include the information on their crew mates that would normally be in the "Minor Characters" section. For example, the article on "Buggy's Band of Pirates" would take information on Mohji, Cabaji, and Alvida from "Minor Characters", and place it in there instead. However, the captain's bios would remain seperate for now. Sigmasonic X 16:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Angel Emfrbl votes this go ahead. I'd offer some opinions but I'm in full agreement. This is a great idea! Angel Emfrbl 18:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, I think that there should be a general article for locations in One Piece, as opposed to seperate articles for each of the Blues, though the Grand Line article has enough unique information to stay by itself, IMO. To clarify, I mean that while information on the magnetic fields and stuff would remain, the locations would be moved to this general location page. Anyone agree? Sigmasonic X 16:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

On that note, more factions articles should be made. I'm currently making one for the "Wapol Pirates", but some don't fit the pirate crew mold. For example, I think articles should be made for the Shandian Warriors, Galley-La, and Franky Family. This would be a great help if the first suggestion was agreed upon. Sigmasonic X 16:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Again, this I'll agree on for the go ahead. If you want to do that, I say "yes". I off my support and help if required. Hmm... I think you'll have to adjust the standard pirate page where accordingly to suit the siturations... Thats all that can be done. BTW, when I've done finishing the refs on each page I'll see if I can grab flag pictures for the pirate crew pages. Angel Emfrbl 18:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I've actually been thinking about starting a Galley-La article for a while now, since the Cipher Pol one is much more stable and Galley-La is referenced everywhere... So, I just started writing that up, once I get it nicer I'll start it up, so that should help with a few characters on the minor characters page (well... I guess maybe only three, but still. XD) as well as just being a good reference... So, basically, don't worry about them, I've got it under control. ^_^ Murasaki Seiko 05:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay, it's done. Galley-La Company Murasaki Seiko 04:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've tested the minor characters thing out. See for yourself. I personally think it looks great. Sigmasonic X 06:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Great but don't forget with that page Ace is a travelling companion at the mo too! This is great so far. It looks like this might just be the answer to our Minor characters page prob. Angel Emfrbl 21:45, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Very good job and idea! Let's keep the crews together!--Cuttyflam 13:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I'll be working on a general One Piece locations article before I tackle the creation of other organization articles, so feel free to work on them. Sigmasonic X 07:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm done. What do you think? Sigmasonic X 02:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

We need a few more faction pages, like the Baratie Cooks, the Arabasta Kingdom, the Elbaf Giants and Tom's Workers; maybe even one for the Arabasta rebels and the Ohara Archiologists. I would have done it myself, but I have about 3 tests nexk week, so I don't have any time to spare right now. Kurigiri 13:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Referencing - We need you!

Okay I'm not gonna list EVERY one Piece page I've finished doing, but heres an example. Red-Haired Shanks. Why reference whats written?: So everyone can see where the data came from. Without a ref, a wikipedia page isn't very encyclipedic (yeah and my spelling ain't dictionary worthy either). It also helps prove the difference between facts from the anime and rumours/speculations which have floated the One Piece areas recently. From now on, everyone must do their best to reference their info - no excuses.

What we don't need is every episode listed a character appears in... Only important stuff, like SBS questions, history and important things like that. Whats not worth referencing is stuff like Age, birthday and height... Etc, basically stuff that appears in the characters profile template. Reason being is things will just get too messy, so at least for now leave that be.

Okay I'm goona explain how I've set out refs on the One Piece pages, copy and paste and edit these accordingly.If anyone doesn't like this format, feel free to change it.

In the case of SBS questions you must state it was a SBS question with a link to the SBS thingy on the One Piece Terms page. This is for those who don't know what the SBS is. Also, don't forget to say which volume and chapter it is from. Here is an example of a SBS related reference:

[1].

Normally, this is how the refs will be set out, however this time if possible list also where the reference is compared to the anime as well as manga. If the ref includes more then one manga chapter or volume, write it:

[2]

That is all. To everyone helping with this - in advance, thanks! In the meantime, if you see any pages with SOURCE, ANIME, MANGA, and SBS, don't worry, leave those to me, they were my place holders while I figured out how to set this up.

Oh and don't forget to put this at the bottom of the page if it doesn't have it:

References

  1. ^ SBS questions: One Piece Manga - Vol.4 - Chapter 28, Fan question: Is Zoro named after François l'Ollonais?
  2. ^ One Piece - Episode 45 and One Piece manga - Vol.11 - Chapter 96, Mihawk brings news to Shanks

If you don't the refs links will work but you won't have a list for them! Angel Emfrbl 18:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


Unfinished work

Okay I'm gonna create a small list of queries here:

  1. Eiichiro Oda - Listed as a stub. Can anyone expand on this page or lay it out better? I think it needs to be set out better with a profile template included or something. Others may disagree.
  2. The Will of D - This was norminated for merger with the One Piece terms page while I was still setting it up. Now its complete, while we no longer need that there it cannot be removed yet - only TWO people have discussed it being merged... The person who suggested the merger and myself. We need a final 'yesy or 'no' to end the problem.
  3. Captain Kuro - Tagged for over a month now for clean up. Trouble was, what needed cleaning up isn't spoken anywhere nor any details of things that could be done. Someone either needs to try and spot why it was tagged and ammend it or just remove that tagg.
  4. One Piece Grand Battle! - I tagged this because the state it was in when I first saw it about a week or so ago. Its not complete yet, hence why the tag is there. I need a second person to look at that page and see what they can do. Previously I removed a load of junk info from that page because it was useless (and confusing) trivia.
  5. One Piece Music lists The deletetion debate is over - we won.
  6. Devil Fruit - This is a on and off thing no one has discussed even though its tagged... "This article or section seems not to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia entry".

Weapons?

What page are those "weapons" on? The ones that can destroy an entire island, etc recorded in history that Nico is learning about. --69.204.179.124 19:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

One Piece terms Try here. Angel Emfrbl 20:18, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Soccer King

I fix the Soccer King Page a little do you think its fix?

Steam punk?

Shouldn't it be fantasy steam punk? I dunno, so I wont change it, just brought it up. --Kewangji 17:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


Steampunk shouldn't be there at all.

Den Den Mushi arn't an adaptation of technology, they are animals that can send soundwaves the people in one piece use for communication

the only instances of "steampunk" I've seen are:

Wapol's ship "Scuba" suits made of barrels and rubber tubes.

only other thing that seems technological are dials, but like den den mushi they arn't inventions. steampunk is defined as inventions at a time earlier than their true creation, using the technology at that time to make it work. While it does contain steampunk moments, a few moments doesn't define anything.It is exactly like saying animals are dirty because your friends dog tracked mud in the house once or twice.

Leave it without steampunk.

One Piece is a steampunk manga. By the Wikipedia definition, It concerns works set in the past, or a world resembling the past, in which modern technological paradigms occurred earlier in history, but were accomplished via the science already present in that time period. The presence of cola, refrigerators, trains, street lights, electricity, machine guns and chemical gas are all indicative of this. While the Den Den Mushi are living creatures, they are connected to radio transceivers. Since there isn't any evidence that One Piece *isn't* a steampunk manga, I'm putting the term back; I'll also label Ghost in the Shell cyberpunk, if it has not already been done so. 68.189.82.81 00:52, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not that there's evidence agaisnt it, but not enough FOR it. I think that a better term would be steampunk "style" if we absolutely need steampunk.

No one signs comments here!? One Piece is definitely steampunk. Dekimasu 02:07, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not gonna get too involved with this but here are my thoughts - steampunk it is not... Hints of Steampunk, now that it is. Angel Emfrbl 06:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Combine Articles?

I've suggested merging several Baroque Works members' articles into the main Baroque Works page and several Shichibukai into the main Seven Warlords of the Sea article. Go to Talk:Baroque Works and Talk:Seven Warlords of the Sea to discuss. Sigmasonic X 06:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Separate article

I've suggested that the animals section on the One Piece terms page be given their own page. Reason for this: To make the One Piece terms more like a One Piece Terms page and to limit the size of that page much in the same manner as the One Piece minor characters page has been seperate now. Angel Emfrbl 09:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

To add to that... I'm gonna set up a timeline page. The basics I'm setting up today, however I'd appricate any help with setting it up. Angel Emfrbl 18:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Unorthodox and other things

We can't say if Straw Hats are orthodox or unorthodox. In general we must trying to avoid adjectives, see the "steampunk" discussion, that often are misleading. They're f***ing pirates and that's it, un! (My Deidara side coming out! :P). I remove also the note abpout Oda being Watsuki assistant: better to say in his own article.

Plus I read about twentieth century romanticism and so on: I strongly suggest to remove it.

Cuttyflam 07:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Specualtions

Strickly speaking speculations shouldn't be on wikipedia pages so I've been removing most of the speculations. There are some I've allowed, but rewritten into 'theories' (which is far more acceptable on wikipedia), which also include reason for and against the theory. Basically, to help determine some things which are fact and some that aren't. A lot of speculations I've removed were like 'Shanks is speculated to be a D because he acts just like them' with no supporting reason behind them, also they lacked the words 'but this is unproven thus far' or something like that. This I've now added back because its a common speculation, but I've rewritten it as well into a theory.

Others, like with the Straw Hats page I've had to create sections to show what IS and help prevent speculations (new member clues section). Some wikipedia pages people accept speculations (like the Naruto pages apparently).

All this aside, I want to discuss speculations as a whole here. Since they are always creepying onto the One Piece pages I'm asking - should we go ahead and let these (often rumoured based or weak sourced) speculations on the pages... Or should things stay as they are, either being rewritten into 'theories/rumour squashers' or just removed. My main question is this though: How does everyone feel about how should speculations are handled, how can it be improved. I think my opinion is pretty clear by now, which why I'm asking everyone else. Angel Emfrbl 19:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Let's keep the speculations out of the pages. We don't need another old Akatsuki_Naruto page full of a bunch of b******t!Cuttyflam 19:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I know about that page, I had an small argument over speculations and he brought that page up. I got insulted for saying speculations aren't part of wikipedia [[5]], which is correct. -_-'
Anyway all that aside, take a look at the Will of D 'theories' section. That pretty much a speculations bit where I've just clump a load of common speculations together to say 'they aren't confirmed'. If you don't like it on that page I can easily remove (it's a piece of cake) it. As I said, I'm currently keeping all this junk together for easy erasing, even I'm wary of having ti there. Angel Emfrbl 20:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Opening Quotes?

If you noticed on Openings 1-4 in the Japanese version, there's an opening quote at the start of each episode. Maybe we can add them to the anime guide or something? RedEyesMetal 12:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

They're already in the One Piece section of Wikiquotes (see bottom of the main page). Sigmasonic X 04:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Heads up

I am not sure how useful this link is to yall, but here you go. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Bug???

Does anyone know whats wrong with the refs? They have 'ab' selectables on each refs when there is only one ref per no. They disappear when you remove and add them again. So far, the Will of D and Minor Characters pages have had their refs turn like this. I haven't checked other pages. Angel Emfrbl 12:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

It happens also to me, when referring to a same chapter or SBS. You must simply ut a different name in <put_another_different_name_here>Cuttyflam 09:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Ah but this is happening even when you have unique names. In fact thats why I brought it up here... Because it is happening. If you click on 'a' whenever it comes up it doesn't take you anywhere... the second letter 'b' takes you to the reference. Why this blank ref 'a' is appearing I don't know. I'll put a example up here next time I see it. Angel Emfrbl 16:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Try purging the cache, that sometimes works. It's a server bug. --tjstrf 05:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Next Epsiode

Does anyone know the release date of the next episode?(it's 13 days since the last) New Babylon

This isn't a One Piece message board. Try asking at one. --Julian Grybowski 20:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
So if I ask whether or not the release date of an episode has been made public,I have to talk on a "message board"? New Babylon
Yes. This page exists only for discussing changes to the One Piece article, as it says at the top. Discussions held here relate to the content therein; it isn't a question-and-answer service. --Julian Grybowski 23:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
All I wanted to say is to emphasize that someone should probably add the date if they knew it,but I didn't wan't to sound bossy.New Babylon


Poneglyphs article

How about starting one(or add it to the general)? The things leed slowly to One Piece being the key of the Poneglyphs mistery and also "the past". Ok, I may be waaaaay of the road, but the Poneglyphs are important enough with or without my guess :) --SayanMk 14:23, September 2006

Neglected pages

Okay its obivous we all love to work on the character pages because every day I log onto wikipedia and see there are edits to them somewhere... But what about the OTHER One Piece Wikipedia pages??? They are below standard and need work badly, many have notices stating this that have been up there for a while. Generally, the non-character pages such as these are all neglected. The edits that are done to them are also few and far between.

For now, lets focus less on characters and more on other pages, starting with the List of One Piece episodes as most of the pages linked to that are below standard. I suggest we start by working out a page format such as 'New characters introduce', 'Story', 'Changes from manga to anime', etc... You get the idea. I would love to see all these pages brought up to standard as out of ALL the english Wikipedia One Piece pages they are the ones that are the most overdue changes. Some of them haven't been touched in several months. Angel Emfrbl 20:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Removing unoffical links

Okay... Its a problem. People are too tempted to add their own site ads to that list. So I'm removing it. We should link only to offical sources anyway and HOPEFULLY it will stop people advertising forums and stuff on this page. Angel Emfrbl 20:10, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay I'm trying it for a week to see what happens. Angel Emfrbl 20:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Eperiment is over... Result = no fanstuff posted on wikipedia. However we did get a case of fansubs being posted which is illegal and can't be allowed. So my experiment failed. It doesn't matter how we put it... Their gonna sneek on no matter what. Angel Emfrbl 18:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Convention changes

I am going to say this now: Except for Roronoa Zoro, I vehemently oppose any changes from official English-language versions to naming used by a hardcore fanbase - Some conventions ARE supported by the Japanese versions, and some are not.

I immediately ask for the following changes to be reverted:

  • "Berries" to "Belli"

WhisperToMe 00:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, even with all of the variations on the romanisation of "ベリー", Oda has never written is as "Berries".

And the relevent results of any one of these out numbers the relevent results for "Berries" several times over. Read the arguement I put up in the "One Piece terms" talk page, and almost all of the One Piece articals use the original versions. (Justyn 03:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

Well, Japanese doesn't change the word for plural, does it? (Remember "Samurai" can refer to multiple samurai) "Berry" in Japanese could be intended to mean "Berries." WhisperToMe 05:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
He's written it as Berry and as Belly, but certainly never as "Belli." "Belli" definitely shouldn't be what we use. --Julian Grybowski 15:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm just noting that it's very odd that "Belli" would be the term most recognized by fans, since as far as I know, no fansubs/translaters use the name "Belli". They usually translate that as either "Beli" or "Beri". And of course, there's the English adaptations that use "Berry". The Splendiferous Gegiford 16:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Can we PLEASE stop arguing over names! Geg (this applies to you too WhisperToMe) ever since you started editing the One Piece pages all we've been doing is arguing over names we've argued over before. LEAVE ALONE! Forget them! there are MORE important thing to worry about on these pages. We have a heap of Story arc and episode related stuff untouched for weeks not to mention other pages on top of that. Forget arguing over these things... Put your effort into making the pages better, not over Zoro Vs Zolo, Shichibukai Vs warlord or whatever. When the pages are up to scratch THEN we can sort things like this out. Until then, all we are doing is wasting time and effort.
I don't want to hear anymore about this (We've been arguing over names for over two weeks if anyone cares). End it now! (Or at least put it off for a month so we can have a break from this!). Angel Emfrbl 18:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, I did this because several people were changing them now. I wouldn't have started this if the people didn't change anything. Here's a deal: We will put this off if ALL changed names are changed BACK to exactly the way they were (I.E. everything except for Zoro) WhisperToMe 21:05, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Most of the frequent editors of the One Piece use the japanese terms, but if it upsets you so, I have NO objections to re-opening the discussion on what Wikipedia should use for the name of the currency. but the matters of Going Merry, Shichibukai, Loguetown, and the names of Devil Fruits are settled. But if you want to re-open the Shichibukai and Going Merry ones go ahead, you still have to overcome the evidence that I put up. But we realy should start working on episode and arc summeries based on the information given by Oda, not 4kids, not Viz, Eiichiro Oda: the author of One Piece. (Justyn 23:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

Anons don't count. Should the anons who screw around with the naming know about audience and style have power? No. On Wikipedia we exclude anonymous and newly-signed users from participating in the Articles for deletion and several other processes. We do this because it is unfair for one side to invite all of their (non-Wikipedian) friends over, or to sockpuppet as multiple users and pretend there is an actual consensus. I still demand a complete reversal of the changes you made in order for the issue to be dropped. WhisperToMe 04:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
"But we realy should start working on episode and arc summeries based on the information given by Oda, not 4kids, not Viz, Eiichiro Oda: the author of One Piece." - The underlying factor is that you want to make your changes because it's the Japanese version. Well, there was a time when I moved Mega Man to Rockman... and Super Nintendo to Super Famicom. All of that stuff was reverted (except for Sega Megadrive) - This Wikipedia caters to official versions and to the general masses and official versions. Pokemon isn't Pocket Monsters here. BUT, in terms of information, ALL THREE (Original Japanese, VIZ, and 4Kids) are reflected and represented here, with differences noted. That, my friend, is encyclopedic :) WhisperToMe 04:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
The order we should be doing things in is:
  • Offical English verison
  • Viz verison
  • Notes on changes from Japanese verison.
Reguardless of what we want... Reguardless of the fact the 4Kids verison is *$%&^*... This is the order we're suppose to be doing things in.
At the moment... We're just keeping Japanese terms and such it seems to make certain editors *happy* it seems, thats fine with me since I don't care what names are used so long as we all know the difference. As I've said before, it doesn't matter what some names are. I keep saying it, we're spending TOO MUCH time editing names. If the name isn't what you want it to be, get over it and move onto something else. I would like us to go one week at least without a name change, and to see a dozen improvments to pages that are below standards. Angel Emfrbl 08:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
(To WhisperToMe) The Nintendo evidence you cited is erelivent, Nintendo owns all of those, and Nintendo changed the name of Nintento's Japanese name "Rockman" to "Megaman". Nintendo changed the name of Nintendo's "Famicon" and "Super Famicon" systems to "Nintendo Entertainment System", and "Super Nintendo Entertainment System".
I want to make the changes not because the are the Japanese version, but because they are what Oda wrote, I'm not saying that 4kids' and Viz's changes should not be noted, I'm saying that we should give the highest weight to what Oda put down, with the differences noted somewhere. I should have said "But we realy should start working on episode and arc summeries based on the information given by Oda, noting the changes made by 4kids and Viz in somewhere like a 'changes' section."
On your first post; What anonymous people are you speaking of? And there is the massive fact that to me, looks a scare tactic that you are using in order for me to give up and give in to your cause, that is crumbling all around you. The fact is that most of the named editors of the One Piece section agree with me for most of these matters. Who are the named editors who have spoken up to say to use the dub names: You and Geg.
"What anonymous people are you speaking of?" 1. See Anonymous - I can find specific instances of this happening, if you like. But, in general, accounts with less than, say, 5,000-10,000 edits are in the same book as anonymous. Anonymous users may make suggestions, but when consensus is calculated, they don't count. - "I want to make the changes not because the are the Japanese version" - And this is the "English" encyclopedia :) "Who are the named editors who have spoken up to say to use the dub names: You and Geg. " - Let me add Julian to the list.
"
He's written it as Berry and as Belly, but certainly never as "Belli." "Belli" definitely shouldn't be what we use. --Julian Grybowski 15:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)"
Here ya go. Even if he doesn't explicitly say "I support the dub names", he let them stay when he has edited these articles. And, not only that, he says that Oda has used "Berry" - Which means that Wikipedia may as well use that :) WhisperToMe 20:10, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
(To Angel Emfrbl) I'll start working on the sub-standard pages as I find them. But I can only give so much information, but I know a guy who is published author (not big-time, a short story in a magazine.), and I can see if he can help by chaging the way some of the pages are written to make them more professional. And I want to base on the Orignal version because the official english version has some suddle differences then the Original version, and these changes, small as they are, majorly change the meaning. And there are also some VERY large changes. (Justyn 08:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC))
I think I'll go around at some point in the next few days and write a list of things we need to do. In some cases, things at the point where little can be done to them for now. Others, we have too much to do. These were the things we've ignored. I try and get everyone to pay a part in improving things, but we get caught up in these little circles of arguments that go nowhere too often. Even when I beg everyone to end it, ignore it or leave alone, we still go on and on. Not good. Angel Emfrbl 09:05, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia, where dispute resolution over small details happens 24/7. WhisperToMe 20:10, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I just put a buch of work into One Piece timeline. (Justyn 09:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC))

Apparently Justyn was confused about the "official"ness of the name changes...

  • VIZ Media is half-owned by Shueisha (the other half goes to Shogakukan)
  • Shueisha paid VIZ Media money to produce the English-language editions of One Piece
  • Shueisha green-lighted the name changes done by VIZ Media
  • In 4Kids' case, Toei paid them money to produce dub piece, so...

WhisperToMe 20:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

You have a bit of that backwards, 4kids paid Toei to allow them to make the dub. And show me where Shueisha said that they endorse the changes please. (Justyn 21:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC))
If VIZ is half-owned by Shueisha (See [6]), I guess I shouldn't need to show you that Shueisha "endorses" the changes; it's a given that a child company generally makes decisions with the approval of the parent company. WhisperToMe 22:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

From Parent company: "A holding company or parent company is a company that owns enough voting stock in another firm to control management and operations by influencing or electing its board of directors."

If Shueisha did not like what VIZ is doing, Shueisha could easily intervene. (Also see [7]) WhisperToMe 22:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I have to say this, a given does not make it so, a given is just that it happens so often, that it is almost asure to occur again. And Shuesha not caring and supporting are two different things. Here, it honestly looks like Shuesha does not care, or does not know.
A child company does not have to run everything by the parent company, they are self governing, it's just that the parent company has a very large say.

I also looked up a part in the Anime that had the paper currency in it:

Image:Belly text isolated.png

Of course, for Berries Vs Belli/Beli/Belly/Berri/Beri/Berry, we can always just kill the arguement and use the most literal romanisation of the kana; "Berī" or just Beri. (Justyn 00:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC))

I also found Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(Japan-related_articles)#Conclusion_to_the_Fictional_characters_discussion - Similar issue with Hunter x Hunter - See how it concluded. WhisperToMe 01:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I read the talk page for Hunter x Hunter, everyone who was talking pretty much supported the changes, noone disagreed with them, in other words: concensus. It does not look like most of the frequent editors disagreed with the name changes, with one person saying to change the names. (Justyn 05:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC))
Now, I have a question: Which frequent editors here (beside yourself) support using all of the Japanese names on One Piece articles? WhisperToMe 15:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Basicly we would need to actualy have the people post, but based on information that I have gathered, (This is my opinion, like I said, people need to say what they think) here are the people that I see supporting the original names:

CalicoD.Sparrow
Julian Grybowski
Ore

Neutral, or does not care: Angel Emfrbl

Seemingly supports the changed names reguardless of guidelines: WhisperToMe
(Justyn 17:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC))

Calico seems to have just signed up. Julian hasn't said a whole lot, so I guess we should hear his opinion straight from him. WhisperToMe 23:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I have singned up since July, it is only until recently that I have decided to participate more due to several changes being made for the dub. I'm realitively new so I don't know much about the rules and regulations.CalicoD.Sparrow 00:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, since I'm put in the pedastal up there, I will give my opinions. I personally do not like what 4kids is doing that is true and it would seem that it has clouded some of my judgements. Some of my posts look more like there putting more fire than helping anything. I am sorry. I will give my opinions on cerain issues right here.

  • Devil Fruits - Aside from the current arguments presented in the Devil Fruit talk page. I would wish to add that none of the dubbed fruits are actually called Devil Fruits. To use Cursed Fruit names when the parent page is called Devil fruits is inconsistant. You can change the "no mi" part of their names to fruit if you want. 4kids, Viz, and fans all use that.
  • Shichibukai - The name has been used for some time now since it was invented so it should have presidence over the English version. How many times since the English version of Shichibukai was created has it been used whereas current chapters will all be using them. The English version is also relitively new when you think about it. To change names that have long been establised everytime 4kids and Viz pops up with their versions only causes confusion. What would happen if Wiper's tribe is called or spelt something else? The dubbed versions would only cause confusion since many of the dubbed names only come to spotlight when somebody mentions them. You can have the dubbed names but they shouldn't preside over what is long been established.
1. Don't worry about "Devil Fruits" - the English-language manga still uses Devil Fruits, so consider that "safe." "To use Cursed Fruit names when the parent page is called Devil fruits is inconsistant." - Again, the English language manga uses Devil Fruits but also uses "Gum Gum Fruit", etc.
2. "To change names that have long been establised everytime 4kids and Viz pops up with their versions only causes confusion." - Certainly the names are long-established in the fan communities on the internet. But I can't gauge whether the fan communities make up most of the One Piece fanbase in the Anglosphere or the internet Anglosphere. A lot of series such as Yu-Gi-Oh! GX have had even worse fates. WhisperToMe 01:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

WhisperToMe 01:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Its true that there is no way on knowing who uses what in the Anglosphere however there two points that I think might support the fan names.
  • Time - When a term is coined by one convention it creates a precentage. That precentage grows as time passes and is even presented out of the fan circles. After a time, there is a another convention that creates a percentage. Depending on time passed, the first convention may have more percentage than the second. One Piece is like that since it was years before Viz or 4kids. With Yu-gi-oh there was little to no time between the conventions so that's another matter.
  • Material - Most of the material presented about One Piece is currently derived and updated from fans and the original. Some of them are shakey and such but some of them hit it. 4kids and Viz however dont have as much material to source. When an entry about Zoro is entered it will be about where he is currently now based on the original and not where he is based on 4kids and Viz. If they had at least an reasonable amount of material to source they could be considered an equal percentage in the naming scheme known.
This is an assumption but one based on facts on the subject.CalicoD.Sparrow 13:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Now they're going around changing "belli" to "belly" because it was written as that in the anime a few times. And that's just about the dumbest thing I've seen them do so far. There's no rule in Wikipedia stating "If Oda did it, it's okay." Honestly, no one uses "Belly" to talk about the currency for the series. The Splendiferous Gegiford 14:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Your right! They use 'Beli' instead... Angel Emfrbl 16:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Things to do

Okay here we go:

  • Eiichiro_Oda - Just want to know is this all the info we have on him?
  • Romance Dawn - Someone had a go at this page... Did a nice job, but never finished it.
  • One Piece media and release information - I'd like this to be put into a table... But this is a lot of work no? There is a long, long list of things here... And a clear format. I think the main problem with this page is the orginaisation of the page, rather then its layout. there is a This page is 48 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable; see article size on it if you go to Edit. We need to ask some questions about this page... Like what do we really need here. Pictures are printed twice... Is this really needed? Generally though, it can be left alone without the need for much editing.
  • List of One Piece episodes Not as big as the previous page mention. But its not the list I've brought up this for. Its the fact we have links off this page to others but they are either imcomplete or not there. Do we need a short description of each episode linking off this page even? Again there are many questions to be asked about this page.
  • List of One Piece music - Generally... Its an incomplete.
  • List of One Piece games - There isn't much that can be done to this page... Aside from setting up pages for all the games.
  • List of One Piece story arcs - Fine for now. Not a lot you can do with it, however the pages linking off it are in a state. Work on those pages: Desperate
  • English Adaptions: Geneally... Both the Manga and Anime pages are difficult to write on without adding critism. I think, part of me opts for a merger of these tow pages and then moving them up with the 'One Piece Media' topics section on our template. These pages are high on our list of work.
  • Character pages, Factions, etc... Generally below standard. we are still arging over standisation of names. These pages need a rethink mostly.
  • Other related articles: Generally a bit of everything. There isn't much you can do with 'One Piece Terms' or animals... Mostly these pages are loose odds that are at the point where they have no place anywhere else or carry small information purposes. Devil Fruits is fine now, I'd like all those pages to be like that page. Attacks page I'll sort out myself next.
  • Lack of references on pages. I add them when I find them... But aside from the odd one here and there nobody is adding them. We don't even add them for 'Recent Chapters' on each character/Faction page.

Episode summeries

I think that we should move the episode summeries the Original names, and use the facts as they where presented in the original, pointing out the changes made, after all, look at how many episodes 4kids skipped, altered, meshed together, Et Cetera, Et Cetera. And because 4kids altered so many episodes, I do not believe them a reliable source. I already brought this up here. (Justyn 23:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC))

As much as I support the original and despise the dub as much as you Justyn, I think this is going a bit too far. Heck, I thought the standardization of the word belli which is completely diverse among fans was far but this takes the cake. I don't like the dub but making all these info in wikipedia seems a bit too time consuming. There's already a website that's already devoted to this. I don't want to waste the creator's hard work and tolerance for bad dubbing by making our own. To be fair, let's just delete all those summeries, they're all hopelessly devoted to 4kids anyway. Besides we'll have to be forced to make alot of episode summeries to accompany them (they're very lonely looking alone). That's 104 episodes we have to summerized and if we were to be equal, we have also to do the Original Japanese ones. That's 280 and if we add them all up that's 384 episode summeries!! Worse yet, this is not counting the ones that have yet to be made. Lets keep the episode list and not the summeries. The story arc pages can serve as the summary of the episodes.CalicoD.Sparrow 12:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the currency thing was not one of my finer moments, but, redoing episode summeries is a bit different, mainly, as it's not that hard to do. In fact, with a little stick-to-it-ness, we can turn the episode summeries that are so close to hopelessly devoted to 4kids, into completely accurate reditions of the original story. I'm actualy working on them, at the very least, to change the names to the accurate ones, and to make the most minor changes to move them away from the dub. (Justyn 14:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC))

List of Plot Holes created by Toei/4Kids

Adding to the anime section, could there be a list of plotholes in the series created by Toei and/or 4Kids? Just a suggestion RedEyesMetal 16:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Angel Emfrbl 17:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
That depends... depending on whether it had any source, it might be a WP:NOR violation. --tjstrf 18:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
An episode of a TV show can count as a source. Judging by hundreds of other articles, it's okay to say X happened which contradicts Y. But if you're doing anything significantly complex (i.e. they said X, which vaguely implies Y, which probably contradicts Z), that'd be original research--Cyberdude93 18:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
"An episode of a TV show can count as a source. Judging by hundreds of other articles, it's okay to say X happened which contradicts Y". Yes I agree that is the best way to handle it, you've raised a point about orginal research - it has to be handled with upmost care. there are websites out there which do point out every little piece of change anyway. Angel Emfrbl 15:28, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

One Piece attacks

This article is up for deletion, we should make it more professional, set down some guidelines for what is needed for a character's attack to be listed there instead of on thier page, and cite what chapter/episode the attack is first used in. I believe that this should be our top priority.

And I think it's time to archive the talk page. (Justyn 05:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC))

Indeed. It is time (This sounds really newbie but... Question: How do you do that exactly? :O ). Guildlines would make it easier. Don't forget, that page is next on the list to be tablified (if that is even possible). Angel Emfrbl 06:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
In hopes to save at least some of the attacks, can I propose the rule that "characters with five or more attack rule should be placed there" be lifted on some characters. At least do this for characters that have realitively small looking attack lists like Kuro's (I don't think his video game moves take up space) and small looking attack lists that look like they are not going to be updated any time soon like Vivi's, Aokiji's and some of the Cp9.CalicoD.Sparrow 06:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay, first, we should make a table, then, cite what chapter/episode a move was first used in, then we should worry about re-wording the article to an out-universe style. The first two are more important, make sure we get the facts streight, then worry about wording. (Justyn 08:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC))
We have to deal with a problem reguarding size of that page. I would suggest splitting into two pages, main characters + minor. Or have Main characters have their own page and minors one page. Until we sort the size problem out, tables are not a option because the page data would increase even further. Angel Emfrbl 15:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm putting the small looking attack lists to their pages for their safety regardless of number to be on the safe side. You can delete them if the attack page is saved.CalicoD.Sparrow 14:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey who deleted the Attack page?! The discussion for it was not resolved!
User:Aaron Brenneman, and it was resolved... -ish. We can't just keep them open forever, and he did the best he could. I recommend you take the close to WP:DRV and argue over it there if you really want to. That was one of those lovely hell-closes we get where the discussion turns into a giant argument. --tjstrf 03:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
We all had good intentions... Everyone editing the One Piece wikipages wanted it kept. Trouble was, we were little candles burning in the wind. I have a questions - should we keep attacks on all pages at all now? This puts us in an akward spot having them there when the mass load was deleted. I'm also worried about some of our pther pages... We need to look at other pages now and consider how we can avoid this in the future. Angel Emfrbl 06:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Have you considered giving more general descriptions? e.g. rather than listing every single move Luffy's done, describe the types of moves he uses in a general sense and the gears in detail on his character page. --tjstrf 18:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

One Piece attack solution

Okay, since I feel like I've hit a solution with at least one character with Franky Schematics, this is how I think the One Piece attacks can be in Wikipedia. Don't make an article that lists attacks, make a article about where the attack style is coming from. Focus on where the attack style is coming and it won't look like listcruft at least. Here is how I think it should go:

  • Fighting Style pages- For characters such as Zoro and Sanji who use fighting styles, put their attack lists on pages that are about their fighting styles. The focus of these pages would be about the fictional fighting style and not the attacks themselves. Say that the attacks are the techniques that can performed by the charcter. Of course this would require a History or something of the style and alot of summaries for each variation such as the difference between one sword and two techniques but I think that it will work that way. There are pages on wikipedia about fictional fighting styles I believe. Speaking of which, I think the Rokushi section of Cp9 looks like its prime and ready for its own page.
  • Weapon pages- For characters such as Nami and Usopp who use mainly weapons, put their attack lists on pages that focus on their weapons or lists them. The focus of these pages would be about the weapons and not the attacks. Say the attacks are what the user is capable of doing with the weapon. Of course this would require alot of details on the weapon themselves but it would work. There are alot pages in wikipedia that are about fictional weapons so I think they have grounds.
  • Devil Fruit pages- For characters that use Devil fruits mainly such as Luffy, put their attack lists on a page that details the powers and effects of their Devil Fruit. Say that the attacks are what the user can do with the Devil Fruit and it might work that way. It would probably work in a similar way to the weapon pages.
  • Character Part 2 pages- For characters that use completely different and multiple techniques such as Foxy, put their attack lists on pages that basically serves as a 2nd complimentary page to their main page. Say the purpose of the page details aspects that wouldn't normally fit in their own page. For Foxy, you can make a page mainly focuses on the details of the various cheating aspects he has such as use of the various DBF rule loopholes and giant robots. This would include the attacks naturally since its part of the purpose of the page. Of course these types of pages are the hardest and require alot of creative reworking but I think they may work that way.

I know I'm just throwing ideas around and I'm not that experienced Wikipedian plus all of those pages require alot of time and work but I really think I have something here. The attacks are an integral part of the story and losing them is too great of a lose. We just have to exploit the loop holes here and there to make them exist.CalicoD.Sparrow 10:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll be able to help you next weekend, until then I'm booked due to university Sparrow. I'm disappointed too we lost the attacks page as a lot of other editors here like to have it. I'm still miffed my comment about 'it is work in progress' was mocked somewhat... When it was the truth... We WERE working on it. My only thing I can add to it is that some characters like Sanji are not so clear as to how to label them. I can only think 'combo tree style' when it comes to some of the moves for him. We also need to get about 2 or 3 pictures of the simplier moves onto each page. We can possibly loose one-off moves (unless they were vitual to the story) as well.
Another note, this also should leave us with no massive page of text only that goes about the wikipedia recommended limit. Which makes me very happy.  :D
BTW how do we handle Games percific moves? I'm against them since they are not canon, but there are one or two people who like to see them? Plus it would make them no different to the pokemon moves I guess. Angel Emfrbl 14:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
I really don't know how to do make some of the moves more organized but I think there's a way.Also can you get more people to do these pages. I'm having a hard time just making the Franky Schematic page look acceptable. Plus I may not have alot of free time.
The one-off moves, keep them. Just say something like Attacks that can be allowed: or Moves that can be performed:. Some of those moves may pop up later more frequently in the manga. Also some of them are really vital to story.
The game moves...I really don't know. They're better off in a gameguide than in an encyclopedia. If there is a place for them then its on their own game pages. The pages that I am proposing should contain techniques that should be related to either the manga or the anime. Some of those moves also defy the logic of the pages. I mean if I'm correct there was a move Usopp did in a game which had him do a magic bag of tricks. What is up with that? I really don't think we need those.CalicoD.Sparrow 15:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Actually, all he does is drop a load of crap on people from inside his bag. XD But on topic with the discussion, I do agree that game moves are a silly addition, but mostly just because there's so many of them. Many of Zoro's are just random slashes that they named so you could look it up on your attack list. XD Chopper has a lot of random punches, Luffy's got some random stuff... None of them are real attacks.
Also, I do agree that rokushiki could very easily have its own page (I know it already does on at least one of the other language Wikipedias), but I'd like to handle that one myself. It'll give me a chance to rewrite them all as well, and find good temporary pictures. I've got a way I want it set up eventually, but I can't yet, as we don't have any pics of Jyabu, Kuma, or Fuku using rokushiki... But for now, I'd like to handle the initial page and whatnot, if that's alright with everyone. ^^ Murasaki Seiko 22:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Battle Guide

There've been many battles in the series. So I was wondering if we showed put up a battle guide page. If we did do one I would put it in a layout like this:

Character vs. Character

Winner: the winning character

Occured in: Manga - manga chapter(s) & Anime - anime episode(s).

Description: What happened in the battle.

Conanfan1412 18:04, 07 October 2006 (UTC)

Thats pretty much own research. Plus, it has ben featured on character pages before and removed later. Its listcruft unfortuntly and cannot be accepted therefore. I'm actually trying to find ways of getting rid of that kind of thing. Angel Emfrbl 16:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Character bios?

Shouldn't the character bios be linked off a Table of Contents heading on the main page? I'd expect any entry about a comic or TV series to have TOC links to characters and episode guides. Mongoose22 04:31, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

They are, look at the orange thing at the bottom of the page. (Justyn 19:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC))

Wiki bug

The Will of D as of this entry the references are not showing up on this page? Anyone know whats up with that? Angel Emfrbl 17:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Never mind I found the prob... Someone broke the coding up by adding a space in it. Angel Emfrbl 19:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

One Piece Wikia

As you may have realized, the attack list has been moved to a seperate One Piece Wikia (I'm not linking to the main page, since it looks like, well, crap right now XD). I'm thinking that this wikia can solve many problems people have been having. Think about it, here we can greatly expand on the attack descriptions (when they were used, who they were used on, deeper analizing, etc.) like many users have wanted, we can clean up several articles by moving the information here, we can offer episode summaries, and more! The possibilities are limitless! The problem arrives, however, in what belongs there and what should stay on Wikipedia, or whether we should even pay attention to this. For example, the character pages would pretty much be the same as what is on the main Wikipedia pages. The way I see it, the following information should be restricted to the wikia:

  • Episode and chapter lists, with brief summaries of each. Volume lists would have longer summaries, but would still be listed on the wikia.
  • Attack lists
  • Information about characters that some may consider "cruft". Not sure what would constitute as this, but whatever.
  • Story arc synopses. The way I see it, the One Piece Story Arc page should feature more detailed summaries of the arcs, while what is currently in the pages for the arcs (like Enies Lobby arc) would be moved to the wikia.

I'll see if I can think of some more uses later. Sigmasonic X 00:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd just like to say now that, although I think having this other wiki is a great idea, I don't think it should be linked like it is. We should get it to a decent quality ASAP, remove the attack link from the OP template, and then simply link to the entire wiki from this page here. I think it taseems a lot more professional that way...
And I agree that it shouldn't just be copy-paste stuff, like it seems to be now. XD I looked and saw... Rob Lucci (a copy-paste of his Galley-La and CP9 sections), rokushiki (a copy-paste of the rokushiki section of the CP9 page), Luffy (again, a copy-paste), and then... Zoro was, essentially, crap, and then... that's it, really. :/ So, yeah. Do something different with it, more detailed lists, more info on characters, more trivia/speculations, fansub groups, something. Just... not the same info as here. If that's all it is, then what's the point, other than having the attack page?
That's just my two cents. ^^ Murasaki Seiko 08:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Bounties page... Will of D... Story Arcs... Individual characters pages (really we can get away with one page of very brief summeries of who is who on each crew if we tried). All I can think should go somewhere safer. Animals, term, Devil Fruits, timeline are supporting articles to the main one. Those can stay for now to be moved later if threatened. Angel Emfrbl 19:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on adding the arc list to the wikia. Once I'm done, I'm planning on changing the page here to a series of summaries of the arcs without any seperate pages for the arcs themselves, instead offering a link to the wikia Arc List for further details. Of course, I won't do that until others agree with that idea. Sigmasonic X 05:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that's fine, as long as it's simply a link at the bottom of the page. Murasaki Seiko 07:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know, this is the format I have in mind: User:Sigmasonic X/Arcs, except with all of the arcs included. Along with a plot summary, it also gives a more "out-of-universe" perspective. Sigmasonic X 07:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be for the best for all discussions concerning the wikia to move to the wikia talk page? Sigmasonic X 07:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!

Several of us here belong to Arlong Park... Its against their rules to post spoilers outside their spoiler topic! Now I'm gonna give everyone here the warning because I don't want it to result in any of us being banned from there, don't post spoilers BEFORE Wednesday/Thursday. When the scanalations and so forth hit the net, THEN its safe to post them, as Arlong Park's rules don't cover them.

From now on, if I see anyone stepping over this dangerous line, its a instant revert... I expect everyone to do the same. Its not to hard to wait until Wednesday when scanalations and translations come out and its no longer a 'Arlong Park' spoiler.

Got it? Angel Emfrbl 21:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Looking through your edit history, it seems you're referring to them as "Arlong Park spoilers"... wtf? One forum's rules do not apply to the whole internet. If you think it's because it first appeared on Arlong Park, you're wrong. Most of the spoilers tend to originate at www.mangahelpers.com and spread out from there. I originally found out these spoilers via the Narutofan forums. Sorry, but Arlong Park's forum rules do not control the internet. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
You can't do a simple thing as wait one day so we know its correct? Thats stupid. That why I'm mainyl posting this note everywhere. I know where the info comes from... *sigh* It seems its above everyone to wait one day.
Wikipedia is for spoilers anyway. That's why we have the spoiler tag. Also - as Geg said, Wikipedia is governed by its own rules. WhisperToMe 22:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't care, I just said 'Arlong Park' for genealisation... Its also to avoid some of us getting into trouble... We are not a spoiler site, we are an encyclopedia, we don't know if the info is correct yet, its too early. We aim for correctness right? I've asked everyone to wait one day, if its too much to ask for, then seriously, you need help. Wednesday, got it everyone? Its tempting but don't do it. Angel Emfrbl 22:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
If the information can be proved (i.e. if the episode is visible, floating around), then it's okay to post. See Wikipedia:Verifiability. I don't see a reason why Wikipedia should follow this Wednesday rule. WhisperToMe 22:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
We know the info is correct. When The Touch posts something on mangahelpers, it's correct. Hell, last week a huge spoiler in the Naruto manga got out early Wednesday morning, and was added to Wikipedia right after that. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
In that case, I'm siding with Geg. WhisperToMe 22:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I asked... I pleaded... I get nothing back. It seems my plea has fallen on two sets of deaf ears. Look, I'm not going to go into a long argument here. I've tried to stop this thing, I get slashed for doing it it seems. Its in everyone's good intereasts... Yet I get problems. Angel Emfrbl 22:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Correction... Three sets of deaf ears. Aye... I really didn't expect this hassle from you guys and everyone else. It really seems we can't wait until the correct info is out and we want to post info that may be incorrect. Angel Emfrbl 22:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
We have:
  1. Information given by The Touch, who provides accurate spoiler info for One Piece, Naruto, and others week after week.
  2. A spoiler picture with Dragon on it.
  3. From reading the katakana, I can personally verify that the picture does in fact say "Monkey D. Dragon" on it, as well as the kanji for "Father".
The spoiler isn't incorrect. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

We're not going to "get in trouble" for posting spoilers. Arlong Park forums or whatever have no jurisdiction over Wikipedia. --tjstrf Now on editor review! 22:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay... Do what ever you all want... I'm past caring now... Out of all the months I've been editing on wikipedia, this is my most disappointing. Okay I do know the info is correct too, I've been to mangahelpers (hell I visit there everyday) I'm a member on Arlong Park. I just wanted everyone this time to think about dropping spoilers in on Wikipedia so early... Never mind, forget it. You guys don't seem to care. Which disappoints me the biggest thing of all. Its all against me when I'm trying to avoid some incorectness... I can see where it is going.

*sigh* Angel Emfrbl 22:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I can sympathize with the wish to be accurate, however, Wikipedia contains spoilers. You can argue against predictions of unpublished content, but once the spoilers are out it counts as being published in my book, at least enough for a basic outlining of the info. --tjstrf Now on editor review! 22:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Spoilers are not reliable information. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
"Spoilers are not reliable information. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)" - One word: Huh? WhisperToMe 23:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Naughty Whisp. Behave. Lol. I don't see why everyone is making the fuss over this. I guess I never will. Wow this is a populaur discussion, I can't even get what I want to say in as everyone is editing this page. I opened up a can of worms and let them loose somewhat. :O Angel Emfrbl
I couldn't understand Griswold's reasoning behind his post, so I replied the way I did. WhisperToMe 23:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
As long as they contain some sort of confirmation other than just the spoilers(picture, ect.), they're fine. Nemu 23:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Since When Wikipedia follows other rules other than it's own defined set of rules?

Since when Wikipedia has to follow other people's rules regarding spoilers? I know it's frustrating for some people, but they need to learn to read where there is a tag stating Spoiler in the articles. Stop blaming other people other than yourself if you get spoiled. If you don't want to be spoiled, then go out with your gf, family, relatives and come back when the spoiler becomes not-spoiler. It's frustrating when you are at other place (Wikipedia), then other people starts coming in and shouting "This is against the rules!", and already defined by Wikipedia, there are a set of rules that are different from the other places. For god sakes, there are a tons of similiar spoilers that came out, and it did not came from Arlong Park only. There are other forums, blog, website out there with said similiar spoilers. Kljs 06:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

We come to read spoilers

Almost all the people who watch the subs from Kaizoku Fansubs come here, to Wikipedia, to get the spoilers. Wiki is one of the only places that we can get almost 100% correct spoiler info, since so many people post it. People who come here to read about one piece shouldn't be looking so far ahead if they don't want spoilers, it's not our fault, or the people who edit in the spoilers. Honestly, if people really care THAT much, then just put a disclamer (small one) at the top of the main [One Piece] page saying "contains all spoilers". It's that simple. If people complain saying they only go to the character page, they know that wiki has a spoiler alert anyway. BTW in case anyone doesn't know about Kaizoku, it's a channel of 700+ people.

Discussion is over

Why do I see two other replies when the discussion is over?  :

  • I've had Arlong Park on the brain yesturday it seems.
  • I live in the UK... It was past 11 O'clock, I wasn't thinking right. It was late. I've woken up this morning and remember when a dumb thing I did last night. (Hell, I don't drink or take drugs otherwise I'd blame it on that).
  • I've been outnumbered and proven wrong on this and to be honest... I don't even though what I was getting at anymore.
  • I used Arlong Park when I was meant to be generalising it seems anyway.
  • I guess I was shocked how fast it went up, normally we wait until Wednesday, which is the day we all get confirmation we aren't being duped. We did it last week, why didn't we do it this week? Probably due to excitement.

So give it a rest everyone and get back to normal. No more discussing it. i think for everyone's benefit (well mine because I can't figure out why I made a fuss) if we leave it as it is. Angel Emfrbl 06:34, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

SBS questions

I'm just wondering, but it'd be really awesome and convieniet if someone could put all the SBS questions into one page. Just list each questions by chapter and then anwsers under them. Only questions that have been mentioned in Wiki is fine by me, feel free to add more if you want. I just think it'd be a good idea to put all the questions into one page instead of individually looking for them.

Well its more or less fancruft. I think if its up on the One Piece wikia its okay... But here. We have enough pages that are close to 'fancruft'. Angel Emfrbl 06:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Current arc developments and reformats here

A few things to bring up. In light of the more recent chapters, especially with the big revelation in chapter 432 (you can look up spoilers on any big forum), do you think it's safe to say that the Enies Lobby arc, as well as the current main saga, ended with chapter 430? Also, I think the World Government Saga should be renamed to something more fitting like the CP9 arc. It's very obvious that the World Government is going to have more roles later on in the story. If we are going to call these more recent chapters a new arc, the best thing to do is to just refer to it as the Current arc and the Current saga (similarly to what Naruto is doing now) until a definitive plot is revealed. The Splendiferous Gegiford 20:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Seconded for the current arc/saga thing, but generaly the Grandline arcs are named after the islands, with the East Blue arcs being named after the antagonist (with the exeption of the Loguetown and Baratie arcs, with followed the Grandline arc naming pattern) so the ending/ending arc would be the Enies Lobby arc. (Justyn 06:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC))
Oops, I meant to say changing the name of the saga to "CP9 Saga", not "CP9 arc". Like I said, it's obvious the World Government is going to have more to do with the story in the future. The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
K then, I went ahead and did it. I started a new section here so it can be expanded upon later. The Splendiferous Gegiford 23:54, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

"Navy"

Who does this article continue to refer to the "Navy" when they're called marines in the original? (as can be seen in the English word on their uniforms) Ken Arromdee

Kaigun = Navy in Japanese - They are called the "Kaigun", NOT "Marines" in the Japanese version. See Navy (One Piece) WhisperToMe 21:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
You forgot to mention, Marines is some countries way of saying 'Navy'. Which is why Oda is using it. Its just not our way of saying 'Navy'. Angel Emfrbl 09:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Character images

Every time I visit the One Piece pages on wikipedia the screenshots of the main characters on their pages have been changed again. Is there a reason we can't just find a good screenshot of each of them, and leave them that way? I don't know, it just seems sometimes some of them just aren't very good pictures, or they'll have have pictures that sort of "match" (i.e. came from the same theme song or something like that) but then someone will change half of them for no reason at all. - STAREYe 17:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Spoilers (again)

I'm trying to work out what I said last time about spoilers... As I said, last time I posted late at night so I don't even understand what I was stating. But whatever it was seems to be coming true from what I'm gathering. I know you guys are gonna lecture me like last time, but we REALLY need to discuss this probabely and not just say 'yeah sure whatever' this time.

    • The spoilers for 434 are in deed out but their very early translations with a on-line translator... They are not confirmed.
    • People last week jumped the gun when that fake spoiler was out, several of us had to go around and removed/change them.

I'm gonna bring this up again, but unlike the last time (I really don't know why I was like that last time O.o' That wasn';t really me at all), I've removed them but I'm not gonna complain too much. But I'm gonna say this though, we need to be careful about some of the spoilers coming out from mangahelpers, people are jumping at the early translations way too fast.

For those of you that don't know how mangahelpers work:

  • somepoint between tuesday or wednesday (sometimes even as early as Monday) photoshots and a short summery come out (this is usually when the fake spoilers appears also).
  • Wednesday/Thursday proper scans and script come up.
  • By Friday the correct translation is up. Usually its up on thursday.

On wikipedia anyone can add them... But we should all keep an eye out on the new spoilers, there isn't anything confirmed true right now so we need to wait until the confirmed stuff comes out. Remove any spoilers for now, or change them when the real stuff comes up.

This is beginning to become a serious problem, if not now then in the future. I know what the spoilers standards on wikipedia are, but things are beginning to lean in the direction of just plain stupid. Angel Emfrbl 21:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Some good news about the lastest spoiler... Its *seems* to be real this time, however everyone should still be cautious about it. Angel Emfrbl 22:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I have seen articles like mihawk can cut elements and lucky roux being the fastest man, people claiming they are from the red data book... You really believe that hoax?!

I don't since I've seen people on forums point out they aren't in it. Who added them anyway? they should be referenced. Angel Emfrbl 22:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
ahhh i don't know .. the lucky roux fastest thingy was removed. But mihawk can cut through element is certainly not in the data book, he cant or rather it isnt mentioned, thats why people are speculating whether his sword has seastone embedded in it.