Talk:List of One Piece characters/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Splitting the page

Articles

Why there is no article for other straw hat crew members? --2001:1970:5E94:6900:85E9:B68B:387C:67A7 (talk) 05:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Ficitional characters need to pass notability guidelines to have articles. By this compare articles that have real world information in the form of creation and reception sections provided by reliable sources.Tintor2 (talk) 16:10, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Tintor2 By this standards why characters like sanji, usop, rubin and other strawhats members can’t pass notability, and characters like zoro and nami pass this and had their articles --2001:1970:5E94:6900:95D8:4BBF:170D:17FA (talk) 02:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

They do have their sections of how they were received by the media even if they aren't as big as Luffy's reception.Tintor2 (talk) 03:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Other characters like Sanji also have big reception and popularity, so what difference? and also they many versions on other languages --2001:1970:5E94:6900:C568:EC47:68F7:3996 (talk) 02:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@2001:1970:5E94:6900:C568:EC47:68F7:3996:There is nothing in this list. Also Other stuff. If you wish to create an article, then the best thing is becoming a user and write in a sandbox while reading the rules of how WP:Notability works.Tintor2 (talk) 19:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

List of pirates

To decrease the size of the page, perhaps a good option would be to create a page titled "List of pirates in One Piece" or "List of One Piece pirates", since those who occupy the page the most are the pirates. Adding the pirates of the series, with the exception of the protagonists (who would most appropriately stay on this page), in the sections "Four Emperors", "Seven Warlords of the Sea" and "Other pirates". --BrookTheHumming (talk) 00:49, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

I fear that might count as WP:Fancruft. Considering how long is this series I'm surprised few Straw Hats have their own article as a result of the reviews they might have to pass notability guidelines kinda like List of Dragon Ball characters has articles for several of the leads. That might be the easiest way to decrease the page's length.Tintor2 (talk) 00:55, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

If we go with sorting pirate crews to another page, I suggest that the more recurring pirate crews be split off into their own pages like the Beast Pirates, the Blackbeard Pirates, Buggy's Band of Pirates, and the Foxy Pirates to name some examples. Any objections? --Rtkat3 (talk) 22:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

If they can show their notability, they can but nobody addressed them. In fact the few One Piece character articles are lacking third party sources that discuss the notability.Tintor2 (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

This is a good proposal to reduce the size of the page, which is unwieldy. Speaking of fancruft, the Yamato entry used baseless speculation about Yamato’s motives and used feminine pronouns despite the Japanese, English, and Spanish versions of the series exclusively using masculine pronouns to refer to Yamato so I have changed the pronouns to reflect the official usage. Plumber (talk) 00:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

I think splitting the significant pirate crews into their own pages is certainly a good idea. One Piece definitely passes the Notability guidelines for more character pages. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. There is a neutral point of view imbalance that needs to be corrected. In a section below I suggested the entire Straw Hats, Roger, Buggy, Ace, Akainu, Trafalgar Law, and five Four Emperors get their own pages. But I agree with BrookTheHumming and Rtat3 that the significant crews should get their own section. It would make sense to do something like this:

1. List of pirates in One Piece
   1. Roger Pirates section, with a link to Roger Pirates article
   2. Four Emperors section, with a link to Four Emperors page and their crew articles
   3. Seven Warlords of the sea section, with a link to Seven Warlords of the Sea article
   4. Other pirates sections, like the Foxy Pirates
2. Roger Pirates article
   1. Roger’s article and section
   2. Rayleigh section
   3. Oden section
   4. Shanks and Buggy sections/redirects to their articles
3. Four Emperors article
   1. Whitebeard Pirates article
      1. Oden section/redirect to Roger Pirates
      2. Marshall D. Teach / Blackbeard section/redirect to Blackbeard Pirates
      3. Portgas D. Ace section and link to Ace’s article
   2. Red-Haired Pirates article
      1. Red-Haired Shanks section and links to his article
      2. Yassopp section
   3. Blackbeard Pirates article
      1. Marshall D. Teach article
      2. Ten Titanic Captains sections
      3. Kuzan section
   4. Animal Kingdom / Beast Pirates article
      1. Kaido article
      2. King section
   5. Big Mom Pirates article
      1. Big Mom article
      2. Katakuri section
      3. Pudding section
      4. Perospero section
4. Seven Warlords of the Sea article
   1. Buggy Pirates article
      1. Buggy the Clown Page
   2. Mihawk section
   3. Sun Pirates article
      1. Jimbei article
      2. Fisher Tiger section
      3. Arlong section
   4. Baroque Works article
      1. Crocodile article
      2. Bon-clay article or section
   5. Doflamingo article
   6. Gecko Moria article or section
   7. Trafalgar Law article
5. List of World Government characters in One Piece:
   1. Marines section:
      1. Akainu page
      2. Smoker page
      3. Monkey D. Garp page
   2. Cipher Pol Section
      1. Spandam section
      2. Rob Lucci section
6. List of One Piece characters by location
   1. The rest of the characters

I think Smoker and Garp deserve their own pages. I do not think the Foxy Pirates qualify for their own page, but I do believe they should be a on a separate page for pirates. But I do think Crocodile and Doflamingo qualify for their own pages, perhaps Gecko Moria should have a page as well. I’ve continued this discussion below for further ease. --Plumber (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Page restructuring

I have noticed that there are anchors in the headings detailing some of the characters listed there. I was wondering if we can have the anchors placed before the character names so that the anchors can take the players there. How the anchors are feels like a big mess. Right? Also, should we have the members of the Pirates, the Navy, and other characters bulleted with their voice actor information added as well if it would help out the former? I'm just making a suggestion here. --Rtkat3 (talk) 21:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that’s a good idea. I increased the table of contents but that only underlines how this page needs to be split up into more manageable sections. --Plumber (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

NPOV & Notability: Several Characters Need their Own Pages

There are several characters here who definitely merit their own pages based on Wikipedia Notability guidelines. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. But unlike those franchises on Wikipedia, only Luffy, Zoro, Nami, Sanji, and Robin have their own character pages. This is a severe imbalance of neutral point of view standards. I would suggest the entire Straw Hat Pirates, Roger, Buggy the Clown, Ace, Akainu, Trafalgar Law, and the five Four Emperors get their own pages as a starting point. --Plumber (talk) 05:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Then be bold, write sandboxes with real world information especially with positive and negative commentary. Just because a series is popular doesn't mean the characters are Tintor2 (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

For sure, starting off by restoring the Straw Hat Pirates pages and Shanks since they are in the intro to every volume. We can work from there. --Plumber (talk) 21:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Plumber: Reverted edits. The characters feel more like actually copypasted sections with refs included. Notability is not about the popularity of the series but more about how the media received the characters. See the recent GA Yuta Okkotsu which has a lot of commentary about how the character was created and received by the media after working on it in a sandbox. The articles you created lacked this type of information need to pass the actual notability guidelines.Tintor2 (talk) 23:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I didn’t create the articles from scratch, aside from Jimbei. I restored them to how they were before around 2008 or so, so of course there is room for improvement. But that is no need to redirect the pages altogether after encouraging me to be bold. Why not add a source or two yourself instead of reverting everything? --Plumber (talk) 23:25, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

When I said be bold, I also said write first in your sandbox. The "articles" still completely fail notability so they shouldn't just be used like this.Tintor2 (talk) 23:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I think that these articles definitely needs better source and improves in their overall structures. I'm sure that there must be various reliable websites that, at least, can improve the reception of section of the characters, but, for example, what does make this website a reliable source? It doesn't seem more than a self-published website and the other sources are mostly citing the own manga, not that that is intrinsically bad, but more secondary sources are definitely needed. I agree with Tintor2. The articles need a lot of improvements before moving them to mainspace. The fact that the series is popular doesn't mean that automatically any article about their characters should be created and kept regardless of their awful shape. - Xexerss (talk) 05:22, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

I completely agree the articles need to be improved. However we need to start somewhere — I am using the Luffy, Zoro, Nami, Sanji, Robin and Yuta Okkotsu pages as a model. --Plumber (talk) 22:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

@Plumber: You keep dodging the point I made twice. We first make a sandbox until it is suitable for an appropiate article. See Wikipedia:Drafts among other guidelines. We first make drafts of character article until it is approved. These two characters were so rushed that had to be reverted. Second, while Chopper seems to pass guidelines the writing is quite lazy as it's just filled with rather than paragraphing. You also copypasted the entire information from the section, citation style included rather than using proper references. The whole abilities, personalities and descrtiption are not suitable at all in Wikipedia considering it's pretty much WP:fancruft. Shanks is pretty much worse than Chopper as it uses one single third party source three times so I don't think it passes such guidelines. Don't make more reverts until checking the guidelines and reaching a consensus.Tintor2 (talk) 22:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the link to Wikipedia:Drafts, it is most helpful — you may remember it is also voluntary. Your point on Chopper is unclear, I am not sure what “filled with rather than paragraphing” means, but it was already mentioned the other Straw Hat pages were used as a model. Feel free to improve those pages for any fancruft violations. As for consensus, multiple editors are improving the Shanks article while only you are reverting it. @Yujoong: made a point to reach out to me and said they would keep working on it. I agree with you that there needs to be more sources on Shanks’ critical reception. --Plumber (talk) 23:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Guys, for the last time. Read before editing. The guideline Wikipedia:Consensus explains this is not voting but applying to the guidelines. You are only being annoying when attacking other users rather than attempting to constructive. I already told another user how notability works and he just ignored me.Tintor2 (talk) 02:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Proposal for splitting the page

This comes from above discussions but I’ve moved it here for ease of access. To reiterate, One Piece definitely passes the Notability guidelines for more character pages. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. This is a neutral point of view imbalance that needs to be corrected by creating pages for more significant characters and I agree with the IP address in 2020, @BrookTheHumming:, @Rtkat3: that the Straw Hats should get their pages as well as other significant characters, and important crews should get their own section. Here is an above proposal formatted more clearly:

List of pirates in One Piece
Roger Pirates section, with a link to Roger Pirates article Four Emperors section, with a link to Four Emperors article and their crew articles Seven Warlords of the sea section, with a link to Seven Warlords of the Sea article Other pirates sections, like the Foxy Pirates

Straw Hat Pirates
Links to the articles of each crew member Section on the crew and their relationships Going Merry section Thousand Sunny section

Roger Pirates
Gold D. Roger article Rayleigh section Oden section Shanks and Buggy sections/redirects to their articles

Four Emperors (One Piece)

Whitebeard Pirates article Whitebeard article Marco section Oden section/redirect to Roger Pirates Ace article Marco section Marshall D. Teach redirect to below: Blackbeard Pirates (One Piece) Blackbeard / Teach article Kuzan section Ten Titanic Captains section Red-Haired Pirates article Red-Haired Shanks article Ben Beckmann section Lucky Roux section Yassopp section Animal Kingdom Pirates article Kaido article King section Queen section Jack section Doflamingo redirect Big Mom Pirates article Big Mom article Katakuri section Pudding section Perospero section Brulee section

Seven Warlords of the Sea

Buggy Pirates article Buggy the Clown Page Mihawk section Sun Pirates article Jimbei article Fisher Tiger section Arlong section Hatchan section Baroque Works article Crocodile article Bon-clay article Donquixote Pirates Donquixote Doflamingo article Donquixote Rosinante section Kuma section and redirect to World Government#Revolutionary Army) Thriller Bark Pirates article or section Gecko Moria article or section Blackbeard Pirates redirect Amazon Lily Pirates section Boa Hancock section Heart Pirates section Trafalgar Law article Edward Weevil section

World Government (One Piece)
World Nobles section: Five Elder Stars section Marines section: Akainu page Smoker page Monkey D. Garp page or section Koby page or section Cipher Pol Section Spandam section Rob Lucci section Kaku section Stussy section Seven Warlords of the Sea Redirect to Seven Warlords article Revolutionary Army Monkey D. Dragon Sabo Kuma Member nations Redirects to the below:

List of One Piece characters by location
East Blue Paradise Alabasta Skypiea Water Seven New World Minks Other locations North Blue West Blue South Blue Moon

What’s the consensus here? --Plumber (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

The consensus is that if you can make each of the characters/locations show WP:GNG using independent and reliable sources, then you can create an article about it. If you can't, then you shouldn't create an article for it. WP:OSE is a poor argument, just because other series have more sales doesn't, necessarily make their characters any more or less notable. Link20XX (talk) 02:16, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

I am letting you know that @Plumber makes an excellent point in splitting the pages because it is getting too long. It might take us awhile to find notability to warrant the individual pages for the characters. I am in support of Plumber's idea. Rtkat3 (talk) 02:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Link20XX for alerting us to GNG; the characters in the above proposal pass that bar. There should be articles for characters like Crocodile and Bon Clay. But of course there is a limit — I do not think the Foxy Pirates merit their own article so that's why I put them on the list of articles. --Plumber (talk) 02:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Creating another article for the list is the same as creating another one for a single character. If I were to create something, I would search for the Straw Hats or other characters who are often the focus on the main narrative. For example, the only time I created several article for a series that is not as popular as One Piece but is still has content to expand was with List of D.Gray-man characters some years ago. I searched for both manga reviews and anime dvd/blu-rays in order to obtain content enough for seven of its most mentioned characters in reviews and worked on them in my sandboxes. As soon as I noticed the sandbox was fitting for the articles, I made them into Kanda, Lenalee, the Earl, Lavi, Cross and Nea. The series only has twenty seven volumes but there was enough commentary for writers to create articles. Same with creation commetary from the author and actors.Tintor2 (talk) 02:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

@Plumber: While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I don't think you properly understand what significant coverage is for fictional characters. Looking at your Tony Tony Chopper article, this, this, this, and this are all list articles or listicles, and only provide two short paragraphs about the character, which is not significant coverage. The IGN review is not significant coverage either, it only mentions the character briefly. For some good examples of significant coverage for fictional characters, see [1] for Toma Kamijo, [2] for Tohru Honda, and [3] for Katsuki Bakugo. Link20XX (talk) 02:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your feedback and the examples. I greatly appreciate it! --Plumber (talk) 03:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

So here’s a road map for expanding the amount of One Piece articles:

1. Split this page into multiple crew pages, as outline above
2. Improve those crew pages with more details and references
3. As those crew pages become more detailed, create character articles for those according to WP:GNG, WP:SIGCOV, and WP:NPOV.

Thoughts? --Plumber (talk)

• Hard no to #3. Your recent creations and edits suggest that you either don't understand how WP:GNG, WP:SIGCOV, and WP:NPOV should be applied to content editing on Wikipedia, or you don't care judging from your reaction when other experienced editors like Tintor2 have stepped in to intervene. You've been on Wikipedia since 2008, so I'd expect you to be a somewhat competent editor who don't need guidance about what content is appropriate or inappropriate for Wikipedia. Any editors who have interacted with me will have the impression that I am far from a deletionist by heart (Rtkat3 can definitely vouch for that), but even I see merit in an AfD about Red-Haired Shanks, a character that clearly has no significant coverage from reliable and independent secondary sources, nothing published by Shueisha in other words, that specifically talk about them in more then passing mentions. With the exception of Monkey D. Luffy, virtually every One Piece character article I've perused probably should be redirected back into this list article: they are all stuffed full of irrelevant in-universe cruft and have generally awful reception sections. You might be aware that many of these were in fact merged a long time ago per community consensus, and your edits have not demonstrated that the issues which justified the mergers have been rectified. I am aware that a live action One Piece adaptation is on the way, but sources that talk about the characters in detail from an out of universe perspective within the context of that adaptation don't yet exist. Also, please read WP:IDHT: If the community spends more time cleaning up editors' mistakes and educating them about policies and guidelines than it considers necessary, sanctions may have to be imposed. You are now walking a fine line in testing the patience of other editors who give their time to contribute to Wikipedia. Haleth (talk) 22:22, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
• Thanks for the input. Let me clarify the third point based on this response — it would be only after the split crew articles become detailed enough that a new character article could be justified according to the above guidelines. --Plumber (talk) 23:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Splitting, pages over 100 kB "Almost certainly should be divided." An analysis finds this page is 206.58 kB, more than double that! Clearly this page should be divided, it's just how.
A TL;DR of my above proposal is to split this article into these constituent parts:

1. List of pirates in One Piece (per @BrookTheHumming:)
2. Straw Hat Pirates
3. Roger Pirates
4. Four Emperors (One Piece)
   1. Whitebeard Pirates
   2. Big Mom Pirates
   3. Animal Kingdom Pirates
   4. Blackbeard Pirates
5. Seven Warlords of the Sea
6. World Government (One Piece)
   1. Marines (One Piece)
   2. Cipher Pol (One Piece)
   3. Revolutionary Army (One Piece)
7. List of One Piece characters by location

That's it, now time to see what the consensus is. --Plumber (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

• Comment From all those, curiously, I think Straw Hat Pirates are the easiest to make since they are the most discussed in reviews I read since they are protagonists of the series. I guess a notable size like the ones of Red Ribbon Army or Organization XIII might serve as examples to follow.Tintor2 (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Yes, it's rather odd there isn't a Straw Hat Pirates page already. Those pages are good guidelines to follow, the Red Ribbon Army in particular could serve as a good model for the Four Emperors page and Seven Warlords of the Sea page. Both the Red Ribbon Army and Organization XIII also serve as a good model for the World Government Page as well. --Plumber (talk) 00:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Again, you are incorrect. The size guideline's criteria for determining whether a page should be split refers to readable prose, please read WP:SIZESPLIT carefully. The information you cherry picked from the analysis includes all HTML code, which unsurprisingly comes to 206.58kb but is not the correct data for reference. The text only prose size for this article is currently at 114kb, or about 121,417 characters according to the linked analysis. While that is still not an indicator of ideal size, I should emphasize two things and I will quote directly from the guidelines: 1) These guidelines apply somewhat less to disambiguation pages and naturally do not apply to redirects. They also apply less strongly to list articles, especially if splitting them would require breaking up a sortable table; 2) Consideration must be given to size, notability and potential neutrality issues before proposing or carrying out a split. Since the guideline is clear that concern about size is a less important consideration for list articles, there is no urgent need to address the issue of size. There is also another solution for an overly large list article: by trimming down trivial content as opposed to splitting, and I haven't seen any compelling argument which suggest otherwise.

Since Red Ribbon Army is brought up, I should clarify and explain a few things. I recreated that article because the concept has been a long-running villainous element that is still relevant in the Dragon Ball mythos up to the present day. I purposely cut and pasted a large section of the List of Dragon Ball characters as is to Red Ribbon Army as a way to resolve size issues for that page. The thing is that the vast majority of character pages who are associated with the organization have isolated pieces of significant coverage here and there, but they don't have quite enough aggregated coverage to justify the existence of a standalone article except for maybe Android 18 and Cell. I also suggested a new article that specifically deal with a List of Dragon Ball Super characters as a solution to prevent the main list from growing too large (it is currently at 104kb, a status quo which is the borderline of what the guideline is comfortable with), but that proposal has received no supporting consensus so far.

The issue we're dealing with here is that even if a split is warranted for List of One Piece characters, the new article should be itself a list article as an extension of that split: we could end up with List of One Piece characters organized by alphabetical order or parts (Part 1 and Part 2). Or we could have a page about the Straw Hat Pirates, which covers the entirety of the protagonist cast, as suggested by Tintor2. If there is support for the proposal to recreate Straw Hat Pirates (personally, I like the idea) and shore it up with independent and reliable secondary sources, then I should point out that there is a caveat. Should Straw Hat Pirates be created, then the vast majority of the currently existing One Piece characters, with the exception of Luffy because the character clearly is iconic in pop culture, should be merged and redirected there, because: 1) individually, almost all of them fall short of significant coverage as required by WP:GNG and so standalone articles about them should not exist in mainspace; 2) the pages in question would just exist as content forks of Straw Hat Pirates. @Plumber, are you willing to accept that outcome? Haleth (talk) 00:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

The Straw Hats are notable enough to have their own pages as well as an organizational page dedicated to them, in my view. Please assume good faith when interacting with other editors, thank you. I greatly appreciate your clarification of the page’s true size and thank you for that as well. --Plumber (talk) 01:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I think I am being stern with you, but I am still assuming good faith because I have not made any direct personal attacks at your person. Per WP:CIR, I am somewhat annoyed that I have to correct you on factual information about what the guidelines actually say, considering that you are not an editor who has recently joined Wikipedia. At the end of the day, community consensus will determine whether your proposals and views about the fictional aspects of the One Piece topic area will be accepted, and in turn, you must accept and respect consensus unless you have clear evidence that decisively refutes said consensus. And if I wasn't being clear on my position before, I oppose the notion or proposal that several characters need their own pages, but I am amiable to a Straw Hat Pirates page that incorporates the contents of several One Piece character pages which ought to be redirected to Straw Hat Pirates. Haleth (talk) 01:33, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to say, but I agree with Haleth. Looking at the articles for the Straw Hat Pirates (Monkey D. Luffy, Roronoa Zoro, Nami (One Piece), Usopp, Tony Tony Chopper, Sanji (One Piece), and Nico Robin), I would say all of them except for Luffy fail GNG, at least in their present conditions, since they all suffer from their reception sections being solely dependent on listicles and brief mentions in reviews of the main series. That being said, I support the idea of making a page for the Straw Hat Pirates, especially if sources discussing the pirates can be found. Link20XX (talk) 01:44, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

This proposal is focused on splitting this List page which is over 100 kb of prose into constituent pages. Let's not get distracted here. Two are in favor of this proposal:

1. List of pirates in One Piece (per @BrookTheHumming:)
2. Straw Hat Pirates
3. Roger Pirates
4. Four Emperors (One Piece)
5. Seven Warlords of the Sea
6. World Government (One Piece)
7. List of One Piece characters by location

Two more favor the split in regard for a page for the Straw Hats specifically, but have not commented on the other articles. --Plumber (talk) 02:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Leaning Oppose of creating several character articles, unless they're noteworthy and don't rely heavily on listicles. BloatedBun (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I imagine something like this:
List of One Piece characters

1. Straw Hat Pirates
2. Other pirates (Main article: List of One Piece pirates)
3. World Government
4. East Blue Inhabitants
5. Grand Line Inhabitants
6. Other characters, groups and organizations

List of One Piece pirates

1. Worst Generation (Including a section of the Straw Hat Pirates, but with a redirect to the List of One Piece characters page)
2. Four Emperors
3. Seven Warlords of the Sea
4. East Blue pirates
5. Grand Line pirates
6. Other pirates

BrookTheHumming (talk) 14:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes that’s a great outline. I do think the Straw Hats, Four Emperors, and World Government should have their own pages as they are the main protagonists and antagonists of the story. If the Seven Warlords do not get their own page, I also agree there should be a Seven Warlords section on a List of One Piece pirates; removing it caused a lot of clutter on this page. Plumber (talk) 21:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I too am in agreement with the suggestions on the formatting of the character pages proposed by @BrookTheHumming and @Plumber. Rtkat3 (talk) 02:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Great, we should update the Active Consensus sub-section soon then. --Plumber (talk) 21:45, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Once an official consensus is added, we should work on finding a way to list which character is voiced by which actor for each of the pirate crews and other known groupings. --Rtkat3 (talk) 17:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

@Haleth: About the Straw Hats, there are free pictures in wikicommons about Merry that could be used as some sort of context section if the article is created.Tintor2 (talk) 22:14, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Here is an update. I have sorted the locations on the page by their respectful oceans. Other split section tags have been added so that we can see if more people will voice their opinions in this ongoing section-splitting discussion. --Rtkat3 (talk) 01:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Reorganizing and Categorizing Characters and Groups by Roles

I'm been thinking of restructuring in this page by having characters and groups fall under ether the Straw Hat Pirates (protagonists), supporting characters (Straw Hats' allies and others), and antagonists. My problem is that people who are not very familiar with One Piece may know that the main cast makes up the Straw Hats, but not necessarily know or remember what roles other characters and groups fall into. Plus, I don't really see the point alphabetize the index since no other battle Shonen manga/anime does this especially the big ones.--ExplorerX19 (talk) 06:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Here here's how it would be done. It's some stuff are missing and its only rough draft.

List of One Piece characters

• Straw Hat Pirates
• Straw Hats' Allies
  • Straw Hat Grand Fleet
  • Revolutionary Army
  • East Blue
  • Grand Line
    • Paradise
  • Kuga Tribe
    • Kuja Pirates
    • Other Members
    • New World
  • Others
• Other Supporting Characters
  • Roger Pirates
  • Red Hair Pirates
  • Whitebeard Pirates
• Antagonists
  • World Government
  • Imu
  • Five Elders
  • Employees
  • Cipher Pol
  • Navy
  • Seven Warlords of the See
  • Seraphim
  • Blackbeard Pirates
  • Buggy's Band of Pirates/Cross Guild
  • Black Cat Pirates
  • Pirate Armada
  • Arlong Pirates
  • Baroque Works
  • Wapol Pirates
  • Bellamy
  • God's Army
  • Foxy Pirates
  • Thriller Bark Pirates
  • Caribou Pirates
  • New Fishman Pirates ExplorerX19 (talk) 07:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2023

auhority = authority 2603:8000:D300:D0F:AD67:3F25:9890:86C9 (talk) 03:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:37, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Pirates

i am Available pirates 41.116.173.167 (talk) 10:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2023

In Yasopps page, add that he is played by Stevel Marc in the One Piece Live Action adaptation series. GalactiicGalaxyy123 (talk) 22:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2024

0v0v0v0v0 (talk) 16:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC) Luffy had a Mythical Zoan Devil fruit, the Human-Human Fruit Model:Nika

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 19:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

"The One Piece is real!" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect The One Piece is real! has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 20 § The One Piece is real! until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 07:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)