Talk:One Piece/Archive 2

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)

From the 1st Jan everyone is going to be working towards making it different. Just look round it, you will see there is much talk about it. Its slowly already becoming far less a copy and paste site then anything. Our progress is slow due to lack of editors, we're getting there even with half of dozen editors only. Angel Emfrbl 07:20, 24 December 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.

1. • 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.

Help for List of One Piece episodes

List of One Piece episodes needs your help. Thanks, Peregrinefisher 07:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Picture overboard

Okay I agree there should be pictures on pages... But recently we've go completely overboard! Now every picture is registered as 'free usage' on wikipedia in one copywrite format or another. It looks bad to have 30+ 'free' images on any wikipedia page. There shouldn't be more then 6 or so pictures on a page, unless they are supporting something. While in some cases it was unavoidable and a picture needed to backup a set of text (The devil fruit page for example), some of the character pictures really are not needed.

Pages are just getting clogged up... Take the minor characters page, we have pictures for characters that have 2 lines of text. We are not a fansite, we're a encyclopedia site, we don't need a picture for every character. Things were better before we crammed so many pictures on that page. Same with the navy/marines page... Other pages such as pirate crews, well there is only about 6 pictures at the most so we can get away with it there. And all the pictures such as flag + ship support the page.

Lets consider a things in future reguarding pictures:

• Does this character really need a picture at all? (1 or 2 paragraph characters don't really need them).
• Pictures should be used to support the text really.
• Is it gonna cause a layout problem with other pictures on the page + result in overlapping pictures?
• Are there already too many pictures on the page?

Lets act smart here and seriously consider things through before we submit pictures... I like pictures too, but some of us aren't thinking before they submit. Angel Emfrbl 14:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Although I see where you're coming from, this isn't a print encyclopedia where space is precious, it's an online encyclopedia where space is quite cheap. As far as I've read the rules, there is nothing against having lots of pics, it just recommends against cramming the article with them (this goes towards those 1/2 liners with pics). In these cases, either better spacing, or moving the image to the talk page is recommended until such time as enough text is available to support the image. Now, if you see image with improper sourcing and such, then those need to go (or be properly sourced), but as is I don't really see this as being a serious issue. Derekloffin 22:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah but I've seen pages get in the past on wikipedia pointed at for having so many pictures and its been one of the factors for the pages deletation. Seriously, I know its not a print encyclopedia, and sourcing and all... But we really don't need that many pictures on a page.

Why I'm worried because suddenly *boom* we have several pages where the pictures are all over them. Why do we need these many pictures anyway? Angel Emfrbl 22:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Concerning Overall Spoilers

There's a topic about early chapter spoilers, but this is about what I think is a more important issue--spoilers for people who haven't read/watched One Piece or have just started. How do you think people are going to react when they have just reached the part when the crew enters the Grand Line and when coming to this page to find out whether or not Apis was filler, scrolls down to the table at the bottom to find a link to an arc overview, and BAM, finds out that Dragon and Garp are related to Luffy and that both Robin and Franky join the crew. I really think something should be done about this, but I'm not sure what. The thing with Dragon and Garp is easily solvable by simply renaming their articles on the table as "Garp" and "Dragon", but the situation with the Straw Hats is more difficult. Could it be possible to make it to that the links to Robin and Franky's (and maybe Chopper's) pages aren't visible until a "show Grand Line crewmembers" or whatever button is clicked? Or perhaps make it so that you would have to highlight their names in order to clearly see them? Sigmasonic X 03:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I would say that we shouldn't need to go that far to protect people. One of the main disclaimers is that the site contains spoilers. I guess renaming Garp or Dragon would be fine, but to censor the Straw Hat members is pretty pointless. Nemu 03:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree, a spoiler template is enough, so long as its on the page then its the fault of the reader for reading the page if they are spoilt.

Is a awful lot of work to protect people from spoilers, do you have time to set this up Sigmasonic X? I know I don't right now. Its the thought that counts and I'm glad someone else is noting the dangers of spoilers instead of just me for once. Though... I suppose we could do this sort of thing for 'recent chapters' info... That wouldn't be a such a big problem I think as only a few of the many One Piece pages will be touched on. Angel Emfrbl 07:47, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Unsolved issue

Okay its been up for I think about 2 months now... Can we solve the suggestion that the Anime adaptions Anime/Manga sections should be merged together into one article?

Also another problem, our minor characters page is 'oversized again'. Anyone got any ideas on how to reduce that done in size once more? I have none myself. Angel Emfrbl 08:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Uhm, yes! let's split the characters by arcs: Zeff and the cooks, Skypiea people and so on!Cuttyflam 21:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Or by alphabetic pages.(Justyn 21:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

Merry Go

Hey, kids! I found out that contested moves MUST go through Wikipedia:Requested_moves, so I decided to move the article back. Of course, those of you who want it at Going Merry MUST file a request for move at Wikipedia:Requested_moves. WhisperToMe 19:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to point out orginally it was the Going Merry... It got changed to Merry Go... And back again... And back once more. Angel Emfrbl 21:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

The first time it went from Going Merry to Merry Go, it was unopposed, though. Either way, we should file a move request to determine where the article is :) WhisperToMe 21:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I really don't mean to sound rude... This is stupid, just leave it were it was. Look at the logs, you'll see it orginally was Going Merry. Why was it changed in the first place I ask? This is almost as bad as Zoro/Zolo. Back and forth, back and forth. We don't need to keep doing things like this its a COMPLETE waste of time when we could be doing other stuff. Besides that, theres little chance of getting a discussion these days as most editors are non-registered IP users.

Lets just keep it Going Merry and leave it at that, screw requests as it should never have been changed in that case from Going Merry to Merry Go! Besides, Going Merry is the more epopualur of the two names. Angel Emfrbl 21:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay slight error there... Merry Go was the orginal name... But still we have Japanese names for everything else, why not here? Angel Emfrbl 21:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

In case anyone is intereasted:

(You have a very intereasting history with this page whisper...)

Merry Go log:

• 20:13, 23 November 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) restored "Merry Go" (119 revisions restored)
• 20:12, 23 November 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Merry Go" (deleted to make way for move)
• 06:15, 31 August 2006 Hydragon (Talk | contribs) moved Merry Go to Going Merry over redirect (Most other One Piece-related articles use the original Japanese name. The others ought to be changed too.) (revert)
• 05:16, 26 August 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) restored "Merry Go" (90 revisions restored)
• 05:16, 26 August 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Merry Go" (Deleted to make way for move.)
• 06:03, 27 February 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) restored "Merry Go"
• 06:03, 27 February 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Merry Go" (Deleted to make way for move.)

Going Merry:

• 20:12, 23 November 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) moved Going Merry to Merry Go (This was moved without a move request, so I am moving it back. If you wish for this to be moved, please use Wikipedia:Requested_moves and request the move) (revert)
• 05:40, 6 September 2006 Geg (Talk | contribs) moved Going Merry to Merry Go over redirect (the only "Japanese name" article is Zoro, and that was only done because of whiny fanboys) (revert)
• 05:16, 26 August 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) moved Going Merry to Merry Go (Who is doing this?) (revert)
• 06:03, 27 February 2006 WhisperToMe (Talk | contribs) moved Going Merry to Merry Go (revert)

Yeah support my statement: its like a yo-yo. So are we heading down another Zolo/Zoro like dispute or what? Keep it as Going Merry, it just makes life easier! Angel Emfrbl 21:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is never easy ;) - It's not that hard to file a move request, though.

BTW, A LOT of the moves were against newly-registered and unknown users, etc. WhisperToMe 21:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Lol. I can see that the logs are very intereasting for this page. Its amazing the things that page has gone through!  ;)

It would cut our job in half if the IP users all signed up and got some experienced editing in. They'd have a lot more pull in a discussion and experience of editing behind them. As well as a *feel* of just how fustrating Wikipedia can be. After only being here for a handful of months, I'm suprised if we get one day without a vandal or stupid edit here.

I must admit... I didn't know about the move request thing until today. Thats embarressing since I thought by now I had grasped everything about wikipedia (I spent a lot of time reading thorugh their rules and help pages). Angel Emfrbl 21:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course, all the IP users can't simply get accounts en masse just for this debate and try to influence the decision - It would be seen as votestacking and/or sockpuppetry. WhisperToMe 08:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah that can be a good and bad thing. Its not that difficult though to sign up and then get in some wikipedia editing experience. Once they do that, there is nothing against them doing anything on wikipedia. And at least we can get to know them as a 'Wikipedia face' instead of just a random IP number. Angel Emfrbl 08:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Now, if someone was going to go around telling people about the dispute, he or she should try to tell ALL interested OP editors, since only telling people on one side of the issue may look like vote stacking. WhisperToMe 08:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I think our last page that was deleted suffered partly from that... We had people who had nothing to do with One Piece fandom putting up requests who weren't willing to talk abotu why the attacks page existed... I can see where they were coming from and they had every right to have their say... But none of them would listen to us, none of them knew much about One Piece, and most of all that debate went on for so much longer then needed. We got seriously ganged up in the end because it went on for so long more and more people just kept coming in from outside the One Piece wikipedia pages scope.

It was like watching two trains speeding towards each other seeing the number of other people around wikipedia replying... Quite off putting and frightening in some sense too. I hadn't experienced such a big debate over a page until then. And it was all one sides - delete it all the way to hell. O.o'

One the one hand, having just us debating gets a closed discussion... But at least we knew what we were trying to do with that page. And worst the other wikipedians replying didn't even want to let us attempt to inprove that page, as a few pleaded to them. They just wanted to see it go. Angel Emfrbl 17:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The thing is, though, is that the page states that contested moves should go to that move request place. If it's UNCONTESTED, that's a different matter. WhisperToMe 22:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Manga/Anime Differences

Should there be an article for the differences between the manga and anime? In case there are people who've only seen one of the versions. Conanfan1412 02:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Sadly, that counts as our own obsevations. Apparently we can't do that sort of thing. I know from trying it out once. We can however link to sites that supply it. Angel Emfrbl 08:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, what links are there? I don't know any websites that provide those links. Conanfan1412 14:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Character Attacks

Do we really need them? I mean, they don't contribute to anything. They were moved into an article of their own in wikibooks, got back to the character articles, got their own own article on wikipedia, and it got deleted, so they got back to the character articles. It's just basic trivia, meaning it's trivial. Can't we just delete it and get it over with? Kurigiri 17:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Some pages are now over the recommended size since they went in. They were removed orginally due to the size of them. We really don't need them... We've already lost them twice (once on character pages, once on their own attack page). We set up this site to house such things:

http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

They simply have no place on wikipedia. I'm gonna removed them (again) tomorrow if someone else doesn't! Its stupid putting back on a page something that was removed 4 months ago. They supply no usefulness whats so ever to the pages they are on. Angel Emfrbl 17:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll wait until tommorrow as well. If there won't be any reasonable objections until then, I'll help delete it, Angel Emfrbl. 17:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe I deleted all of it. If you find anything still there, as minor as it can get, please delete it. Took me about an hour to "travel" all of the character article. Kurigiri 09:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

We've had that discussion before. Stop reverting the attacks in, Belgium EO! If you want the attacks to stay, then state your point clearly: Why should it stay?! Kurigiri 06:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Because, my dear colleagues, we are here to cover the essential elements of One Piece. Attacks are used in almost every episode, thus, they are essential. And sorry for treating this like a battlefield. I must admit that was definitely uncalled for. I will be re-adding the attacks. Comments? Questions? Death threats? Add them here. Belgium EO 15:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

If you are truly sorry for creating a battlefield, then why are you readding them? If you were truthly sorry, you'd listen to us and not try to create a warzone on wikipedia by leaving things alone. There are several editors against this and so far just you for it. If we were to enter a formal discussion right here, right now, you'd loose. Most of wikipedia itself is apposed to this kind fo thing as a general rule. There are places, as we've pointed out, for this kind of thing, but not here. Please stop wasting time, stop reverting to the attacks! Angel Emfrbl 16:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

These are very unneeded. We should be describing the characters' general fighting styles. Any really notable attacks can be mentioned in text. Otherwise, the attacks should be saved for a specialized wiki(I think they were moved to a One Piece one) as they are generally cruft. Nemu 16:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

We're not covering the essential elements, as you described it, of One Piece. We are writing an encyclopedic value of the series and it's related. Since the attacks used in the series cannot be written in any other way then pure trivia (meaning, as I said before, trivial), it can and should be deleted. Again, as said before, the only place it has on the wikimedia project is Wikibooks (but surely not on wikipedia). We tried that and it got deleted again.

Also, could you please not do anything until this discussion is settelled? It's insulting. Kurigiri 16:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Fine, fine. But would it hurt to allow a link to the One Piece wiki page or is that too "trival"? Retro7

I don't think that these pieces of chracter information are "trivial" as you put it. And, from what I remember from conversations (this happened before I joined), the attacks were all moved onto one page in order to have them in one place and to reduce space used on the individual chacacters' pages. This was one of the "crufters" victories, it was not deleted because of triviality, but by lack of sources. I vote to have the attacks put in the pages, but in a box that can be hidden when the page is first opened, and has to be opened manualy... how do you make it so the box starts off as hidden? Or incorperate all the text below it into the box? (Justyn 01:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)) (see botom of page for my idea... or someone can fix it, and move it here.)

You people have nothing better to do than deleting VALID AND REAL information about One Pice? If you don't want to all the attacks have their own page, fine, but they can't be in aniway in Wikipedia just because some people doesn't care? Until you came, no one was complaining. I am sorry if I sounded too agressive, but I USED to check pretty frecuenly the attacks list page, until it was delete it --200.77.66.122 22:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

Thats not the problem, the problem is wikipedia won't allow attacks on the pages. We get so many problems from others if we have them. Which is why we set up the Wikia to house them instead (how many times are we going to say all this?). They are valid, they are real, but their not for Wikipedia. Angel Emfrbl 08:13, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Naruto can have its own jutsu list but One Piece can't have an attacks page? Where's the logic in that? Gune 00:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Will people stop comparing these pages to the Naruto ones! Listen, the Naruto pages often break rules (like have speculations on their pages) and therefore none of us should be even thinking about using them as examples.

Lets go over the situation yet again with attacks shall we? We *HAD* an attacks page which was lost when thte greater wikipedia community decided we didn't need it. Most characters in One Piece use an attack once and then its never used again. We end up with lots of "fancruft" (as other wikipedians put it) on the pages. The attacks we did have were moved to the Wikia: here

In a nutshell, there should be no attacks on a wikipedia page period. Exceptions are made to things like Pokemon, but then again most pokemon have attacks that are set in stone and used often enough to say that its okay to have them uncontested. Generally One Piece attacks are once seen and forgotten making them different to the pokemon ones. Angel Emfrbl 07:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

The biggest difference between the cases is that in One Piece the only attacks with any storyline importance are the special forms like Diable Jambe or Gear 2 and the general information on the devil fruits. For Naruto, a strong case can be made that without the attack pages you couldn't make sense out of the other pages. For One Piece... well, it really doesn't matter if Zoro used a 72 pound cannon or a 36 pound cannon or a 985.43 poundo hou.--tjstrf talk 09:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

They should have their own page because it gives an idea of who the character is and their own strengths. A lot of attacks Luffy uses are used more than one like Pistol and Bazooka. If the attacks were organized and had a little neat description next to them there would be no harm in having that page.Gune 23:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

No! I do not want to see the repeatation of the past happening again. When we lost that page before it made everyone feel uneasy. Please stop going on about it Gune, we've explain now several times we can't have it, there is nothing left to discuss. Wikipedia won't allow it... Hell if Wikipedia can call up Dragonball attacks pages (which I've also seen put up for deletetion) and barely win when thats has a stronger following, then what chance do we have of trying to keep it? If it wasn't for its strong following, it wouldn't have won. We don't have that kind of follwing on wikipedia, as we've learnt from the past. Angel Emfrbl 07:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no harm in having the page. There is no point to deleting it. Like I said it gives an idea about the characters strengths and abilities. Why would Wikipedia delete those pages? All the Naruto jutsu pages would have been deleted by now if it truly mattered.Gune 22:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Enough asking. How many times are we going to tell you? NO! We've had them before, they were put for deleteation, we lost them and we can't have them back. Stop asking. Its simple - we're not allowed them. They are unencyclopedic. I didn't say we couldn't have them - the greater wikipedia community doesn't like them, no matter what we want we can't have them. 'End of discussion. Now lets hear no more about it, you've been told why we can't have them by several people now Gune. Angel Emfrbl 08:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

One Piece media and release information

It's not even rated. Which is a shame, because it's a great list. But that's not the point. I just thought that we could re-design it, like List of Fullmetal Alchemist episodes (a featured article). As I said in that talkpage, the idea is basiclly the same, only diffrence being the air date. With a little work, we could make another FA for the Anime and Manga Project (which only has 4 FAs)! Opinions? Kurigiri 19:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, forget I even said anything. Kurigiri 20:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Use of the word "nakama"

I'm noticing a lot of use of this Japanese word in One Piece-related articles, which might confuse someone who doesn't know what it means (ie. someone who hasn't seen fansubs). I think something should be done about that. Danny Lilithborne 03:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

There was a meaning to it on the One Piece terms page once, however it was removed due someone (and I agree to some levels) thinking it was uneeded. But I see your point for someone doesn't know its meaning it is confusing, nakama itself has many meanings even at that. Its being used in One Piece to mean 'crew' more or less. If we really want to keep that word, we either need to put it in the One Piece terms page and link every instance of nakama to it so someone can find out what it means... Or just remove it and write 'crewmate'. Angel Emfrbl 07:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

'Nakama' is used in One Piece to a far deeper meaning than 'crew'. The word means something like "member of a 'fellowship'" and One Piece heavily emphasises the word as meaning a close relationship (ie. one which is not a business relationship) between a group of people - this is a meaning which far surpasses the word 'crew'. Even as a literal translation, 'crew' isn't an adequate explanation (not even sure 'crew' is one of the literal meanings). Therian 05:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Other language refs

Okay we all should know by now we are only dealing with the English and Japanese verisons of the series. I forgot to mention this a few days ago when it happened, but its something that isn't uncommon and slips in every now and again....

... So I'm going to mention it.

Okay we are dealing with only those two languages right? Why is it things like "Miss Valetine's days' name is Miss Halloween in the german dub" keep slipping into the articles every so often. My view is they can't stay:

• They are not from either the English nor Japanese dub which are the only dubs we should concern ourselves with
• If we allow one other dubs info on the pages we might as well put the other 30+ other dubs there too.
• It is useless to the articles content anyway
• Only someone who speaks or knows german can confirm it so the vast majority of fans can't confirm the info.

My German is much more advanced then my Japanese to the point where I can read german and understand much of the info being blasted at me... So I COULD confirm this for us... But I don't think its worth it because the other 3 points raised here. Can we all keep an eye out, the BAroque Works agents have had other dub names inserted in a few times since July. Its not a major problem but it does happen.

Another common one that gets put back in every so often is the Don Krieg thing about the german dub changing his name. While its probably true we only need to know his names meaning. As I said, I can confirm the German stuff for us including that too, but I don't think its worth it... Besides, how do we know thats why his name was changed? I hope everyone agrees with me. Angel Emfrbl 08:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Is once slipped onto the pages... Here it is again (twice now)...

Miss All-Sunday = Miss Bloody Sunday in the german dub.

We really don't need this info on the pages! Man I've removed this once already. Angel Emfrbl 21:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Crackdown on popular fan names

Hey, guys. When someone moved Hawkeye Mihawk to Juraquille Mihawk, I just KNEW I had to move it back.

AFAIK, Oda never uses Juraquille (In Roman text), and Juraquille is just a popular fan name for the character. See Wikipedia:Google test

"Further judgment: the Google test checks popular usage, not correctness. For example, a search for the incorrect Charles Windsor gives 10 times more results than the correct Charles Mountbatten-Windsor."

We use correct names. "Juraquille" is Engrish or is otherwise inaccurate. Now, if someone proves to me that Oda intended his name to be Juraquille (spelled EXACTLY THAT WAY in Roman characters), I may withdraw my case... albiet...

With the exception of Zoro, NONE of the One Piece-related moves were supported by formal move requests and polls. WhisperToMe 05:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Isn't his name Dracule? No opposition to this move, Juraquille is just as engrishy as the hated Zolo. --tjstrf talk 05:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I know that he's Dracule in the English-language versions. The katakana for his name is Jurakyūru Mihōku - But that doesn't mean Oda intended for his name to be "Juraquille"... After all, katakana is dependent on pronunciation, NOT spelling. Zolo was chosen probably because "Zoro" looked/sounded too much like "Zorro" WhisperToMe 06:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

"There is some dispute as to Mihawk's name. His name has never been spelled in English by Eiichiro Oda, and Japanese phonetics make it difficult to determine whether his name is "Dracule" or "Juraquille". Most fans prefer "Juraquille", partially because they feel "Dracule" sounds awkward, and partially because of the way Mihawk pronounces it (ju-ra-kyu-ru). However both VIZ and 4Kids chose to use Dracule for his name."

Don't use Juraquille guys - It's unofficial. WhisperToMe 06:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, 99% of the names that have yet to appear in the english version are "unofficial" as well. And, how do we know that Oda intended for the name to be "Dracule" instead of "Juraquille"? (Justyn 07:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC))

• We don't. But while he doesn't say, VIZ Media and 4Kids do specify; both use "Dracule" - You could also look at local French/German/etc. adaptations and see what they use WhisperToMe 07:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Translators can use any words that they want, for instance, the english version calls the Shichibukai the "Seven Warlords of the Sea" and the German version calls them the "Seven Samurai"; and, the German version changed Hatchan into a female. (Justyn 07:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC))

• "How do we know that Oda intended for the name to be 'Dracule'"

Vampire character theme, sleeps in a coffin. There is no question whatsoever of the authorial intent here. Like Arukard/Alucard, it simply comes down to whether we recognize the author's intent in the reference, or insist on using Engrish to be "more Japanese" about it when it was an error in the first place. --tjstrf talk 07:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain how "Juraquille" is Engrish? (Justyn 10:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC))

I might as well say it here...

... Listen we have no solid visual evidience for one verison of the name, but PLENTY for Dracule. Without evidence to back up the so-called 'fan version' of the name, it can't stand. So whether we like it or not, Dracule is the onyl name we can use until we get our wish and see what spelling Oda uses. Angel Emfrbl 14:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, can I ask what it is? (Justyn 18:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC))

The solid visual evidience? That would be the 4Kids version. As I said, we have nothing outside of that, not even from Oda. Until we get it, we can only go by what we have. Angel Emfrbl 20:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

VIZ also uses "Dracule," BTW. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WhisperToMe (talk • contribs) 22:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ps2_one_rush/chara.html = Off topic, but apparently this spells Bon Clay as "Bon Cray"... WhisperToMe 17:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

And Oda himself has clearly spelled it as "Bon Kurei" but "Bon Clay" is used here... wait... why is "Bon Clay" used here? (Justyn 18:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC))

That's a good question in No. 2's case. As for solid visual evidence, I already pointed out that his character is vampire modeled. As I said, using Juraquille instead of Dracule for his name is like calling Alucard Arukardo. For something closer to home, would you refer to Doflamingo as "Dofuramingo"? --tjstrf talk 20:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

There is a difference between the Doflamingo/Alucard thing and using a different, more widely exepted, version of his name. Both versions are written with the katakana "ジュラキュール", therefor making them both correct. And the things with Alucard and Doflamingo, those are closer to just using the romaji, but they are technicaly "correct" as they would use the proper katakana: "アーカード, Ākādo" for Alucard, and "ドフラミンゴ, Dofuramingo" for Doflamingo. And I never cought the vampire thing with Mihawk, I just though that is was a gothic design. (Justyn 23:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC))

The only way that I will ever be convinced that it is okay to keep "Juraquille" is if the One Piece Grand Battle or any other canon source spells his name that way. WhisperToMe 00:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Overall article review

We have alot of articles. I mean, a few months back we had.. 10? So I'd like to do an overall, quick review. But let's just keep on the "related" articles, not the characters or anything else.

One Piece minor characters - could use some re-styling. looks awful, but it only looks awful.
One Piece filler characters - same idea, only worse.
List of One Piece animals - major expansion and styling is needed.
List of One Piece locations - this one too.
One Piece timeline - Although I'm not sure if wikipedia is the place for this, the article needs some expansion on styling aswell.
The Grand Line - is okay, no major changes needed, as far as I can see.
now get ready for the worst..
One Piece terms - looks amazingly crappy. Major restyling needed.
Swords in One Piece - practicly has no informations. article is extremly not viewer-friendly, and could be mixed with existing articles easily.

Those are the bad articles. Some are okay, some aren't.
The good articles are great, though.
List of One Piece bounties - been a long time since I've opened that list, and it came a long way. not anything thanks to me, though. lol.
Devil Fruit - I've been thinking of nominating it to a GA. Great article, period.
The Will of D - Same thing, but I don't think it's ready for GA yet. Devil Fruit is.
One Piece media and release information - Could get some work, but it's a very good list. maybe a table.
List of One Piece episodes - came a long way aswell, could get some work, but it's on it's way to re-class. if anyone works on it.

Of course it's nowhere near all of our articles, but just showing the main idea. I think we should focus on re-classing Devil Fruit and One Piece media and release information, then take care of the "not so good" articles. Opinions? Kurigiri 22:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... On theTimeline... Well I've SEEN other articles use a timeline, Mortal Kombat has a stand alone too, but its text not list based, we COULD go into deeper info like that one... [p[War of the worlds]] lumped its timeline for events of the landing in its main article, however there is onyl a couple of dates to record there. Just a few examples... I can't remember the others I've seen around. War of the Worlds also listed plot holes, but our storyline is on going so likely those might be filled in in our case. Angel Emfrbl 22:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

OP doesn't "use" time that much in the story. We don't even know how long have they been sailing, we just know what already happened prior to the story. Maybe, in the near(?)-future, when we'll discover what happened to that ancient kingdoms with the poneglyphs, but it isn't very useful as it is, and I can't think of a way of improving it.

Also, I meant "what do you think about re-classing Devil Fruit and One Piece media and release information". Didn't get an answer on that one, Angel. Kurigiri 12:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I was hoping the others would say something first then give an opinion on the reclass. But alas they have not... My mind is blank on the matter. I really have no comments on it, other then 'go for it'. Angel Emfrbl 15:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Idea for attack box

Post in the original section, all text will be incorperated into this box if it is typed below it... (Justyn 01:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC))

random character's attacks

|-

|Insert random character's attacks here||

|}

BANZAI!

I edited the information about the release of One Piece in Germany, because it was not correct. The magazin "Banzai!" was published by Carlsen-Verlag but never really showed One Piece for the simple reason that Carlsen was already releasing Mangas. It just had parts of One Piece Red and One Piece Blue and the original scrap with a slight different story.

If somebody could please paste this link, so if you click on Carlsen-Verlag it leads to the original page, please do so!

http://www.carlsen.de/

(172.180.181.138 11:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Just@Fan 13:34 MET 1.5.2007172.180.181.138 11:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Cutting out Pages

We have too many articles, so cut them down some are being merged:

• Monkey D. Dragon back with List of minor characters in One Piece. Lets be honest... Look at that page. There isn't enough info there to warrent him having a page. He can be summed up in 2 or 3 paragraphs. He shouldn't have been given a page here, just because he is Luffy's father, doesn't instantly mean he needs a page as someone said.
• Monkey D. Garp merge back with our navy page... again didn't need it.
• Hawkeye Mihawk Redirect to Shichibukai page. That page does the job just fine already listing what you need for wikipedia.
• Sir Crocodile merge with Baroque Works. Again, like Mihawk he can be simplfied down to 2 or 3 paragrahs.
• Axe-Hand Morgan merge with Navy page.

These changes will take place next place next Wednesday. Everyone has a chance to voice an opinion here. This isn't the Wikia and I've been trying to cut the articles down for months (last Spetember we mentioned the number we had and did nothing). We've got too many in-universe pages, its time we stop holding onto them and let them go. Lets also NOT create pages for character as soon as they appear. Characters like Dragon shouldn't have been given one.

If anyone else has some pages they'd like to be dropped, say so now or forever rest your peace. If you think they shouldn't be merged, say so and give a reason for it. Now I don't want to see responses like "because I said so" or "because he is important", I want good clean solid reasons for not merging with suitable arguments. Angel Emfrbl 07:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I have to disagree on some parts here, but I agree on others:

• Characters that are just appearing should be put on the appropriate minor characters page.

• Morgan's page is on the brink, but I think that it should be left as is; there are pages for characters with almost no information on them, and they still have pages for the sole reason that the entire rest of the group that they are a part of has pages.

• Garp, Dragon, Crocodile, Mihawk all have equil or greater amounts of information on their pages than Arlong. Does that mean that the page on Arlong should be merged? (Justyn 22:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC))

I did an experiment with Mihawk's page to see how that goes. And so far, its doing just fine as it is, but its not been 24 hours yet so hard to judge a reaction. It's not a problem to cut them down though, that I have proven by doing so. As for Arlong, who can you merge him with? He split away from Jimbei group and Jimbei's group hasn't even featured yet. Just the fact he SPLIT means we can't assoicate him with Jinbei anyway. So in the case of Arlong, other then merging his info with his crews page, there isn't anything we can do with him.

Justyn, I know what your getting at, but a lot of people on Wikipedia don't like too many in-universe pages. I'm trying to get the number cut down, but retain as much info as possible in the process. On the one hand, I see what you mean, on the other hand I don't see a problem. Other pages have merged character pages together, you loose a page but you strengthen others if handled right (the characters end up supporting each other). Plus its easier to handle one page then 50 seperate ones.

Anyway... Aside from the Mihawk experiment, this is all I will do until next week. Angel Emfrbl 07:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Adding to the comment on Morgan, orginally he DID have a info bit on the Marines page. It was enough to surpass as well... So Morgan isn't a problem. Arlong I did think about but left due to the next arc might mention some more info about him, so I thought "sit on it" befroe we take any actions. Otherwise I'd put his page up for merger.

Dragon can be summed up in about a dozen sentances:

"Dragon is the leader of the Revolutionaries in the anime and manga "One Piece". He is also Luffy father and Garp's son. He is considered the world's worst criminal due to his leadership of the revoloutionaries and has been responisible for the fall of many countries across the world.

He first appeared to save his son, Luffy, from the hands of Captain Smoker of the Navy. His was mentioned in the flashback of the meeting at (whatever the home of the 5 elder stars is) as a threat to the world. Recently, his group over threw (whatever that place was called). He comments o n how he will met his son for the first time soon."

Okay not my best writing. But I've put a point across. In two paragraphs I've summed up Dragon and it wasn't hard. We won't see him for a while... So it doesn't matter if we merge him back and then split him later when and if he becomes important to the storyline. the same can be done with Kuro's page, so we can merge him with his crew page. It actually looks better if their together on the same page with their crew then seperate.

Anyway I also won't merge the following:

• Blackbeard - from his devlopment, we can safly say he will be important later on.
• Smoker - already had a major important role. While it is possible to limit his info, I don't want to do it simply because of this role. He has a certified that he will reappear
• Ace - same reason as BB.
• Any Straw Hat page - main character definately need a seperate page.
• Aokiji - Same as Smoker.
• After Enel's adventure on the moon... We can say he is done and a merger is possible. But for now leave him while his side arc is playing out.
• Buggy, same reason as BB and Ace... Plus he was Oda's fav. villian, don't know if he still is. He keeps popping up again at the end of arcs in one way or another. Angel Emfrbl 07:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Anyone else can be considered for merger on the basis of their either a long way off another siting and can be merged temp. until they come out again. I'm not looking to do a major overhaul of everyone though. Only the ones listed above are ones I'm looking to merge for now. Angel Emfrbl 07:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I have to ask: Have any complaints been received by you about these articles that CAN* be summed up in around two paragraphs? _{Please note that Luffy can be summed up in around two paragraphs.} (Justyn 21:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC))

Talking many months ago... Most of those that talk leave wikipedia before anything is done. Luffy is different since he is a main character there is a lot of things we can write about. I find it hard to believe I'm getting hasle from you Justyn of all people. You've been around, yet you seem unaware at times of those odd comments that get passed around in the background of wikipedia concerning the OP pages.

I see simulair remarks every time a page is deleted, and while I admit over time the comments outside these deletaetion crisises have died, many of the same problems remain in the OP articles and haven't been touched IN MONTHS. All I want to do is clear a backlog of things we should have done months ago but didn't do because the people involved left or stopped hanging around the OP pages. I'm also finding hard to understand why your taking such a dominate vote against it, your just turning round and saying "no" without thinking about.

Anyway... We still have a few days before I try this out... With only you and I talking here, its getting into an argument. In the past 3 months most of those around here have disappeared. I was once thinking we could open up a One Piece project, but we got the Wikia and then "Poof" everyone disappeared. We created a wikia to house a greater OP database then here... Then we could keep this to a minium. There are only 5 characters up for mergeing, its no big deal these ones. One is being tested, no one has complained so far about it...

We're really truly treating our pages as little tiny flowers that need to be looked after carefully, never experimenting to see what would happen if we pruned them or planted them elsewhere. Angel Emfrbl 23:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I myself am simply opposed to wonton deletion of information (something that happens all the time in the webcomics section, albeit in a more extreme form), I would not be opposed to the mergers if the information were to be kept intact. However, I think that all of the major villans should have their own pages, just so that people do not have to look at a table of contents to find a somewhat major character. And I probably should have mentioned that part of this was playing Devil's Advocate, *embaresed laughter*. Plus there is the fact that my senior year of high schools is ending soon; and my school does the senior project. That and the facts that I just spent a few days getting current with Bleach, and am planning out a manga series I plan to eventualy get published means that what time I do have has gone into Wikipedia in some form, or some manner of unwinding. (Justyn 02:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

Oops, I forgot about this. Pretty much anyone that you didn't mention in that keep list needs to be merged. Their role in the whole of OP is minimal (East Blue pirates besides Buggy, Wapol, Foxy), or they're just not fleshed out enough to bother with (Mr. 2, Garp, Whitebeard). As you stated, true expansion can take place on the wiki. TTN 23:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... I'm going to oppose this with every bit of time and energy that school doesn't sap out of me. (Justyn 02:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

Why? Wikipedia should not be a place for such detailed information on characters when they do not have any possible out of universe information besides Oda's random answers to the SBS questions. That is the job of the OP wiki. TTN 02:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Tell that to the frequent editors of the Naruto articles. And the simple matter of why I oppose you is one that has been around for millenia: our views conflict. (Justyn 03:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

The Naruto pages break the wikipedia basic rules so many times and they continue on as if it doesn't matter. Like speculations... When wikipedia is a place for facts not speculations (that aren't usually even referenced). I'd like the OP pages to be different - kept within the rules and guidelines of wikipedia. How can desiring not to have too many in-universe pages here a problem? We have the Wikia, it was set up to house advanced info... So long as we link between wikipedias simple text and the Wikias advance detailing, there is no problem here. Angel Emfrbl 05:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

(Resetting line) Another reason that I oppose this is becuase if we give in and merge all these pages, it will set a deadly precident: if we allow these pages to be destroyed because someone thinks that information that did not happen on earth is not relevent information for Wikipedia, than many articles, thousands of articles, FEATURED ARTICLES will be deleted. If just by standing up to one person I can kill what could potentialy be the most gargantuan Wikipedia purge ever, Wikipedia's own Black Death, I can and WILL do it in a heartbeat. (Justyn 00:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC))

There doesn't need to be a precedent. We have WP:FICT to do that for us. Only articles that don't have the possibility to fit it are being removed. You're acting quite paranoid to think actual articles will be removed. These are articles for the fans, so they belong on Wikia; it's as simple as that. TTN 01:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Paranoia or not, I've seen shit like that happen on a smaller scale. Multiple times. Every year, some self-rightious admin goes around some section and starts nuking pages without telling anyone. The most notable ones come from the webcomics section, whole articles have been written about the webcomic purges that go on. And I am not saying that you will go around deleting pages, but someone will see this, and using the fact that it worked, would do it to another section, then if it worked there (and it probably would, there are a shit load of control-freak deletionists here), that person would apply it to another group of articles, and other people would join: and it would just snowball from there, and many competent editors, looking at a black death level purge, would never join. Old editors would get so pissed that they would leave, never to return. And that is something that could turn Wikipedia into another Nupedia. And honestly, how often do you go "It's not on Wikipedia, so I'll look on a specialist Wikia that may or may not exist"; and why would you expect anyone else to? (Justyn 02:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC))

I think you are over acting here Justyn. Avatar: Legend of Aang merged some of its characters together and that turned out fine. And the difference here is that I'm DISCUSSING possible changes. This isn't some MOD going around forcing change, this is a bunch of people discussing possible changes. Techincally speaking we shouldn't have any characters on here, but we don't and I don't want us to go to that extreme. And I'm not looking to merge ALL of the articles, only a few.

I was hoping for some feed back on which articles could and could not be merged, so we have a stronger set of articles and that everyone is together with their groups... But All I've got from you is "Don't do it!!!" which saddens me. We have Several wikipedia techincal pageson our side supporting this and you are not even considering this a good thing, your just condemming it to hell and saying it won't work.

Well, so far I see nothing wrong with Mihawk's page loss. The experiment has proven to be just fine there. I'm not saying that this will work out with all of th em, but how we will know unless we try it. And besides... We can redo the pages again if we need to in future. Its not a big thing. Hell we can just copy + edit from the wikia if need be. Angel Emfrbl 15:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

As I pointed out (not at the start), I am not only partialy playing devil's advocate (taking a stance for the sake of an argument, this kind of potentialy precident setting change can't pass with just a whimper and without a full discussion), but am looking at the absolute worst case scenario (someone sees the hyper-condensation of pages, and decides that all pages on fictional characters should be hyper-condenced, then goes on a hacking spree, deletionists join in, and all hell breaks loose).

And there is also the fact that as long as the pages are written in an out-of-universe manner, there is not upwards limit of content: no need to get rid of anything. Honestly, as far as Wikipedia is concerned, as long as the information is presented in an out-of-universe manner, it can even be a featured article. (Justyn 16:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC))

Well, in that case the safest beat is to merge one person on the list a week with other articles. That way we don't get too involved with a mass move. I'll do Dragon's today, as he is my main concern here. Angel Emfrbl 08:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You don't have to be that slow. His paranoia is completely unfounded. If anyone tries to cut all character pages because some are merged, they'll be quickly reverted. The only time anything like that would even start is if a disgruntled fan were to say "why don't OP characters get pages if X get pages? I'm going to go redirect all of those..." I'm sure that user would be quickly stopped. TTN 10:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You raise points both of you. Okay, if you want to merge the articles, be my guest, leave me to merge the ones I want to merge. We'll see how it goes, but keep in mind everything Justyn raised. If things go smoothly, everything stays. Keep an eye out for anyone reverting back without a good reason. I don't mind people reverting at all - I just want see a well constructed reason for a character not being merged. If their reasons are good, fine then unmerge that character and keep the page. In the meanwhile lets set something up here to sort the characters and let everyone know the basics of whats going on here. Anyone you disagree with TTN, state here. Angel Emfrbl 12:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Keep

• Blackbeard - from his devlopment, we can safly say he will be important later on.
• Smoker - already had a major important role. While it is possible to limit his info, I don't want to do it simply because of this role. He has a certified that he will reappear
• Ace - same reason as BB.
• Any Straw Hat page - main character definately need a seperate page.
• Aokiji - Same as Smoker.
• After Enel's adventure on the moon... We can say he is done and a merger is possible. But for now leave him while his side arc is playing out.
• Buggy, same reason as BB and Ace... Plus he was Oda's fav. villian, don't know if he still is. He keeps popping up again at the end of arcs in one way or another.

Merge

• Monkey D. Dragon back with List of minor characters in One Piece. Lets be honest... Look at that page. There isn't enough info there to warrent him having a page. He can be summed up in 2 or 3 paragraphs. He shouldn't have been given a page here, just because he is Luffy's father, doesn't instantly mean he needs a page as someone said. Done.
• Monkey D. Garp merge back with our navy page... again didn't need it. Done
• Hawkeye Mihawk Redirect to Shichibukai page. That page does the job just fine already listing what you need for wikipedia. Done.
• Sir Crocodile merge with Baroque Works. Again, like Mihawk he can be simplfied down to 2 or 3 paragrahs. Done
• Axe-Hand Morgan merge with Navy page. Done
• Arlong to Arlong Pirates.
• Bellamy the Hyena to Bellamy Pirates. Done
• Mr. 2 Bon Clay to Baroque Works. Done
• Nefertari Vivi to the Straw Hat Pirates or the minor character list. There doesn't seem to be a good place for her.
• Paulie (One Piece) to Galley-La Company. Done
• Captain Kuro to Black Cat pirates. Done
• Don Krieg to Don Krieg's Pirate Armada. Done
• Wapol to Wapol Pirates. Done with a Don
• Foxy the Silver Fox to Foxy's pirate crew. Done
• Whitebeard to Whitebeard Pirates. Done
• Gold Roger to somewhere.

Comments

If you disagree with anything here, paste the comment here with reasons for merge or not merge. Angel Emfrbl 12:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Enel should just be merged now. The side story really has little significance, and he is at the same level as Croc in importance (perhaps a little lower). I would go for Akoji also. At this point, he is just looming further in the background than Smoker and the others. It'll be a while before he gets a true role in the story. TTN 18:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Firstly... Wow... Thats a long list... O.o'

Paulie I agree. Warpol, Foxy, Krieg, Kuro I agree without doubt due to a long absence and more or less "finished" part in the story. Gold Roger... Well unless you want to create a page called "Roger Pirates"... Then he is better left untouched. Arlong and Aokiji and Smoker... Those three I'm not sure. Paulie should have been merged the moment we found out about his non-joining status and our creatation of the groups page.

Vivi, I'm not sure. Arlong I'm hanging onto. Enel I'm hanging onto. Same with the Marines. My main concern is the amount of mergers. This is more then we discussed beforehand. I'm still cautious about a mass merger. Wow, I think we'll end up retiring our characters template at this rate. Something I was hoping to avoid, out of respect of the creator. But thats past and if it has to be retired, the general template can take over its job again. Angel Emfrbl 18:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

MR.2 needs his profile cut down... Couldn't do it myself, but I know its possible, I just couldn't work him out. Bellamy was a lot easier. Angel Emfrbl 18:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

To add another comment, Paulie already had enough info there on the Galley-Le page. He just needed to be redirected. Angel Emfrbl 18:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Why hang on to Arlong and Enel when you just merged Crocodile without a second thought? He played a much larger role than those two. I didn't nominate Smoker. I was just using him as an example of a background character. Aokiji has done nothing but act all ominous, and he played a quick role in Robin's past. I would say once the other two admirals are introduced, the possibility of being important would be greater. Roger should probably just be scattered into the wind until the actual character is expanded upon. All we have is a name, a speech, a couple of background notes, and some mysteries. That really doesn't make a character article.

Don't be cautious, Justyn's words have no backing behind them. The only thing that could come from this is more discussions on merging characters of other series, which would be a good thing. It isn't like all of these have to be done in a day or anything either. If you're worried about people disagreeing, don't bother. People will disagree no matter what. Even if it were just one page, someone will come up to complain about it eventually. TTN 18:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah boy... I hate pressure. Okay I'll do them. Except Roger I'll still leave. If we can't place him anywhere elsewhere else, just leave him. BTW, it's not the disagreeing people... Its just that... Well... Erm... Honestly - I'm being completely lazy here. Hey there is a lot more work here then I usually do on wikipedia. XD Angel Emfrbl 18:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

If you want me to deal with the rest, I'll be fine. TTN 19:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Someone needs to just go over the articles with a fine comb and remove repeated info, correct links to characters and so fourth... I've only done a quick merge on the various characters I've done. Okay, Roger and Vivi, if they must be merged just place them on the Minor characters pages. Its not worth hanging onto them if we can't decide what to do with them.  :/ Angel Emfrbl 19:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay I'm done for the day. thats my wikipedia editing exhausted. ^-^' I'll go over the articles if no one does tomarrow and move uneeded info that got transferred over.

Mental note: I'm rethinking Ace's page. I know we where not going to merge that, if me merged Dragon's, Garp's and Whitebeard's... Why leave Ace hanging? Sure he has an important role, but its not really no more important then a lot of others. Same with Shanks. These guys appear every now and again. Buggy also. These guys we say don't merge may actually be worth merging, even if its temporay. Reguardless, its probaberly best to sit on them for now as all of these have important and major plot roles, like the Straw Hats but they ar enot main cast.

Anoter Note: I'm going to look over Brook's section of the minor character page. I just notice, he is aquiring too much info and needs it cut down. Dam it, people are just too keen to add every detail they can. Angel Emfrbl 19:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I quit. You are on your own for the One Piece pages, Angel. And if that jackass wants to burn all of Wikipedia down, let him. I. FUCKING. QUIT. (Justyn 20:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC))

It's not that bad. No information is being erased. Now the characters will have their base information, and various plot sections can reference them. That is the point of character lists, especially if the characters only have plot summaries. TTN 20:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, any futher mergers will have to wait. I think the mass merger was a mistake on morale more then anything because:

1. Justyn is upset
2. I'm uneasy about it

If any futher mergers are to happen - some advice here from me, not this week or next week. Wait a couple of weeks. You can argue otherwise against this, but your on your own TTN with any mergers untiul then, you have the confidence I don't have on merging. So you've either:

1. Go merge the remaining on your own
2. Or wait for 2 weeks for help.

Because I'm sticking by my decision and this time what I say I will do will stay - I'm not doing any more merges for 2 weeks. Maybe I will merge the characters I mentioned in my last comment... Maybe not. Thats a discussion I will decide for myself then (and merge o nly if two people at least supports it, not just one). We seriously needed more people on this. Angel Emfrbl 22:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with the merges.

The number of merges were certainly too great. My question is why merge the articles at all? Is there a limitation to the amount of information storable in Wikipedia? Is merging necessary? I understand that considerable amount of work were done by numerous writers in order to create those merged pages. I understand and appreciate your effort to clean the system. My frustration to this subject is due to personal experience.

4kids ruined my initial impression of One Piece franchise utterly and completely. Only under the pull of curiosity, did I type in: "One Piece" into Wikipedia. While debatable, it is undeniable that Wikipedia is the most popular and generally the most reliable of all online information sources. The pure amount of One Piece related information that I observed in this page was nothing short of astonishment. Considering that I judged One Piece as a worthless 4kids kiddy show, my reaction was justifiable. The wealth of information surround the numerous characters caught my attention and inspired my curiosity. Only thanks to the work of those who contributed to One Piece Wikipedia, did I pick up a Shonen Jump magazine and rethink of my opinion.

Currently, I am a loyal fan to One Piece. I never even considered the notion that any Manga series could possibly be as incredulous as One Piece. Presently, One Piece’s popularity is slowly rising after the fall of 4kids version. Due to that, the demand for One Piece related information is increasing as well. The role which Wikipedia and its contributors are playing is becoming critical. It is my wish that Wikipedia can continue to instigate others such as myself. The diversity of characters and their dissimilar personalities is a critical factor that made One Piece so charming.

It is my wish that someone can restore the main pages so future fans may satisfy their desires. Those characters contributed and created the present One Piece world. Second lastly, I strongly disagree with the notion of migrating Vivi into the minor character page. Her role was great enough to be considered as a Straw Hat. Crocodile’s role in One Piece isn’t over just yet. There is no current explanation of his decision to be willingly imprisoned in Impel Down. Also, Crocodile is my favorite character . So please don’t remove him.

Lastly, now the Main Enemy page has greatly shrunk, if you are so stubborn as to ignore my pleading. Please provide couple links to direct people into related articles where they can find information regarding those main villains (it is bizarre enough that main villains do not possess their separated pages on Wikipedia. I am fairly certain THAT is below Wikipeida standard.). The amount of time I spend on internet is limited, therefore I can not directly interfere with the construction of One Piece Wikipedia itself. That’s one of my great regrets.

Only a bloated plot summary can be provided for most characters. That fails WP:FICT and WP:NOT#IINFO, and is pretty pointless. There is no point in putting unneeded weight at the weakest tip of the tree branch when the base easily holds it (I apologize if that analogy sucks.). TTN 22:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

We have got to make the Wikia more known here on wikipedia: yeah this place

Initally, for greater info on the anime itself, one need only seek this place out and all the info in the world shall be there for you to read. Now I do feel guilt about removing hours of work people have done on the merged pages, but at the same time, if you look back I have pleaded for MONTHS for everyone to stop adding every single piece of info they pick up. The pages should be a introductions (which an encyclopedia is and what Wikipedia strives to be) to explain what a subject is. It does not have to detail everything there is.

Look up the skeleton in any encyclopedia, you'll get a basic guildines, perhaps some bones named and a little talk about various functions and perhaps a brief medical info. Beyond that bitesize introduction, you won't find anything else. It won't go into great detail (unless its a specialist encyclopedia) beyond this. This is what wikipedia is suppose to also be like, but as I said - no one is prepared to sit back and just think "does that really need to be on the page?".

Anyway, merging hasn't really limited the info that go on here, but merely changed how it is laid out. If your smart enough, you can work out how to get the info back in the page... Its actually very easy. But I'm not going to tell you how. Angel Emfrbl 22:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Any chance you can restore just Crocodile's page? Also, I agree it would be benefitable to everyone if One Piece Wikia is better known.Dukelagold 23:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Give it until the 2 weeks is up. Then we'll decide whether Croc should be split again. That when I'll set up a review of the Merger. Angel Emfrbl 23:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

You could say thing for Whitebeard about what you say about Blackbeard. They both will be importnat.

You guy forgot the ever useless Ohm. He has an article.

I also have thought about it for the past few days, and these are the characters that have done enough for articles:

• All Crew Memeber. This includes Brook if he will become a member. If.
• Smoker and Aokiji - Stated above
• Vivi - Probably the most importnat ally the Straw Hats have had aside from Ace. She's one of the series' most important characters (aside from the Crew Memebers and Gol D. Rgoer, of course).
• Buggy, Arlong, Crocodile, Enel, and Rob Lucci - Three of them are already on here, but these five are probably the most important of the villians excluding the Navy. Crocodile has more than sufficed article worthy-ness, while Rob Lucci is the most powerful CP9 and also has done enough for the arcs Water 7, Puffing Tom, and Enies Lobby. (Yes, I consider the Sea Train arc seperate)
• Ace - Stated above
• Blackbeard, Whitebeard, Shanks, and Gol D. Roger - The most important characters that aren't really easy to put in a group of characters. As said, you could say the same for Whitebeard as did for Blackbeard. Shanks is obvious. Roger is the most importnat character, causing all the events in the One Piece world to unfold.

Without him, everything that happened mgiht never have.

Possible:

• Mihawk - Well, he's sure to be doing more soon for the series.
• Brook - Only if he becomes a crew member.

The rest haven't done enough at all and several are just trash characters. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 20:05 (Standard Eastern Time), 19 May, 2007

Finally, another voice of opinion! If only you had been here a week ago though...

Ohm has an article? Not that I can see, just a redirect to the Sky Priests. I just checked that out. Most of the individual articles got redirected to their groups long before we did this merger (Dalton, Mr. 1, 3, etc).

Crocodile I'm actually gonna split his info up like we have with Rob Lucci with CP9 and Galley-le, so his role as Mr.0 and the Shichibukai is on both pages. That way both pages are strengthen by his info (this is what I was aiming to do mergers for in the first place - strength weak articles). With two appearances and scrps of info, Whitebeard doesn't really have enough info to warrent his own page yet. Blackbeard is different, we're being bombarded with info all the time about him. So far his role in the actual story has been significantly different then WB's has.

All the rest I'm on neutral grounds with right now. I'll resolve that come the end of the break from the mergers. Angel Emfrbl 05:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Ohm had an article. OHM! Unless Arlong actually appears in the Fishman Island arc, I'm sure that he'll his artcile destroyed soon. You also forgot pictures of Crocodile and Whitebeard in their moved locations. Vivi plays a far more important role than some characters that already have articles. (Blackbeard, Arlong, Buggy, and Enel, for example) I get where you're at with Whitebeard, because he hasn't done very much, but neither has Balckbeard besides chasing after Luffy and (possibly) killing Ace. (Whitebeard has commanded Ace to kill Blackbeard and fought Shanks, which makes them almost equal) Rob Lucci, well I'm not as sure about him as I'd like. He's pretty mcuh been defeated permanently. Roger is even more importnat than the Straw Hats are. I'm sure Enel will probably go away, though.

Main characters have to get articles. I see no need for an argument.

As for Mihawk and Brook, once it's clear they have done more for the series, they'll probably get articles. (Presumably for Brook if he'll join Luffy) Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 12:33 (Eastern Standard Tiem), 20 May, 2007.

Point with BB and Ace. I'll think about it in 2 weeks time. Croc's info is now split between Shichibukai and BW page. Shichibukai is about his role as Shichibukai and BW is more about his role as Mr.0. Not great at splitting info, but we should be on the look out for people not understanding this system.

Rob Lucci I'm not even considering for page due to his finished part in the story. Heck we don't even know if he is alive, we can presume his is though. Once a character has filled their important role in the story, you can hang to see if a little more info comes out, but you can more or less cut the info down and merge them. This is why Rob Lucci is how he is. I agree Roger is important enough. There is a lot of scraps of info on him, enough to go into detail about what kind of guy he was. I'm definately thinking, when we get to Mihawk in the storyline, he can have his page back. Unless Oda doesn't use his in a big way. Angel Emfrbl 22:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on. Why must you get rid of all of these articles. Things were fine the way they were. --Superneoking 01:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the above. Previously, the One Piece section of Wikipedia was informative, helpful, usefull to people who wanted to learn more about the series. The changes made in merging and condensing have completely destroyed that, instead reducing information about important characters to little more than footnotes. Further, the way this was done was incredibly amateurish and ridiculous. Take Sir Crocodile, the main villain of a huge ark with complex motives, incredible powers, and heavy plot involvement. Now, he has been left with a stub on the Baroque Works page while other less characters have much larger articles on the same page, such as Miss Goldenweek. Now, TTN, since this is your doing, would you explain to the rest of us who is more important to the overall plot, Miss Goldenweek or Crocodile? Hell, even Lassoo was given more text than Crocodile in your revisions.

Frankly, Wikipedia is not a glossary, it is an encyclopedia. The minimalist framework you are going for runs contrary to that goal and removing important information for the sake of brevity only serves to bring down the overall quality of the One Piece section specifically but Wikipedia as a whole. On that note I will be reverting the Sir Crocodile page to a state prior to the damage done by TTN. If you want to merge them you need to a better job of it.Triumviron 03:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't want an edit war... But seriously, its getting annoying that people are reverting. Just leave it under the new system. Sir Croc included. Angel Emfrbl 06:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Edit wars don't bother me and the new system is detrimental to the quality of this topic and Wikipedia as a whole. I will not leave it under the new system. You do not get to unilaterally decide what an article can or cannot have and the fact your changes keep getting reverted by a wide assortment of people should tell you something. Also try reading WP:Fict again, if you do you may note that Noonien Soong, a Character who showed up all of six time in Star Trek, was deemed important enough to be deserving of his own, independent article. Crocodile is far more important to the One Piece universe, as are many of the others you destroyed, than Soong is to the Trek verse. He has sufficient depth and importance, by fiction standards, to get his own article.Triumviron 08:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Other crap exists. That doesn't justify an article. To need an article, a character needs out of universe information. This is impossible for Croc. TTN 18:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It isn't crap, it is a standard for a minor character to be deserving of their own page that the staff of Wikipedia specifically point to as a valid example. Perhaps if you had bothered to read WP:Fict you would know this. Triumviron 20:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is crap. That page is around only because of fans. There may be a possibility of outside information that I don't see, but that page's existence means nothing. Also, note that anyone can edit that page, and add examples. That article can easily be replaced in a second. And note that it isn't really saying everything is crap; it just means that one article's existence doesn't usually define another. Please don't tell me to read WP:FICT if you're still pushing for Croc's page. TTN 20:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't care why it is around, it is the standard the community and the staff agreed to when dealing with minor characters, a standard you are ignoring. I'm going to tell you to read WP:Fict because it explicitly notes that Noonian Soong, a minor character in Star Trek, has sufficient detail to deserve his own page and that that is how you deal with minor character. Crocodile has far more extensive detail to his character than Soong does and is important enough to deserve his own page.Triumviron 20:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It isn't a standard of anything. It was added by a random person to show that some minor characters can have articles. It is edited by anyone, so it doesn't automatically mean anything under that section is accepted. In fact, I removed it just a second ago because it lacks quality as an example. Please read WP:WAX and WP:PTEST. They will explain why this reasoning is wrong. Really, you have no real idea as to what you're talking about, so please just give it a rest. TTN 21:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It trully is a shame you are incapable of debating me with even the smallest shred of honesty. First of all, this passes the Poke'mon test by a mile, Crocodile gets more air time than almost any individual Poke'mon and, he has had millions spent promoting him through merchandise, something which also puts him on par with them. If each inidividual Poke'mon deserves their own page, clearly a major villain from another anime in commercial production and broadcast all around the world, deserves one too.Triumviron 21:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You didn't even read it. The Pokemon test page is against that reasoning. That is the point of its existence, not to act as an actual test. And most individual Pokemon outweigh him by a mile. TTN 21:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Honestly - if you think we've done a bad job merging then improve on what we have... Don't undo what has gone on and been decided. And strickly speaking, Croc has played his part and outside of a few references, is not likely to be mentioned much again. It will be a surpsie (but not a shock) if he turns up again in the series. I merged Croc because I wanted to try to improve either the Shichibukai or BW page. Eventually I split the info.

This is exactly what was done with the Galley-La Company foremen who turned out the be members of CP9. The only difference here is the outcome of Alabasta and mentioning of his status which I could list because he is under "former members". We don't need to list his personnelity, apeparance and other crap or even talk about his Devil Fruit because its on the Devil Fruit list page. Just list Croc's part in the story. Anything else is fancruft anyhow (yeah I'm daring to use that word)... Besides, the BW page more or less just retold a lot of the info on Croc's page anyway. It was better to have all the BW agents together and let their info support each other on one page then to have anyone seperate and weaken the page and retell the same infos. The only one I won't merge amd advise anyone else thinking about it is Nico Robin. Her role is one of the main characters and she is still very much involved with the story.

Besides, if you must tell us why a page should be kept... Least quote wikipedia rules like TTN does (and Justyn if you note). It backs your info up with wikipedia's supporting pages and strengthens your argument against others. If you built up a good argument and dam well back it with wikipedia guidelines and rules, when I run a review in about (a week is it now left?) time of the effects the mergers have had it can be considered a possiblity. Angel Emfrbl 19:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Now you are being dishonest, I specifically cited the rules from WP:Fict for minor characters deserving of their own article due to sufficient depth, as exemplified by Noonian Soong. Again, despite what TTN said, this is not an example of "Other crap exists" but an example that WP:Fict points to as how it is supposed to be done. I am doing it to Wikipedia standards, the pair of you are bringing down the overall quality of both the One Piece section of Wikipedia and Wikipedia as a whole. Stop attempting to force it into a standard until there is a consensus on that standard. It is clear that most people do not agree with where you are taking this so stop touching it. Triumviron 20:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately I am not familiar with Wikipedia rules, nor am I currently willing to study them. My proposal is simple: Keep the main arch-villians' articles from each sagas. Currently, we have 4 sagas concluded: East Blue Saga (main villain Arlong...more or less);Baroque Works Saga (arch-villain Sir Crocodile); Skypiea Saga (arch-villain Eneru); CP9 Saga (arch-villain Rob Lucci/CP9. My argument for keeping those main articles is the mere fact that a constant demand of those related information exists. Those characters fundamentally affected the storyline of One Piece and the Straw Hats. While it may not be the original purpose of Wikipedia, it is undeniable that many uses Wikipedia articles as a source of reference and information. That applies to One Piece fans as well. Those characters are considered to be major. Their information is much in demand. Their respective main pages should be kept for future references. I'm fine with every merges with exception of merges/planned merges of Arlong, Crocodile, Eneru. There is one more thing I desire to point out. Crocodile's role in One Piece is not yet over. He willingly sentenced himself to Impel Down for presently unknown purposes. We can anticipate further actions from this character. Regarding TTN's question about Crocodile's out of universe infos. Crocodile is the longest running arch-villian in One Piece. He succeed in defeating Luffy twice. He hugely impacted the Vivi and Robin's lives. Without Crocodile, Robin would not be in the Straw Hat crew. He was also the first to reveal, then personally relates to the existence of Ancient Weapons and Lost History. It is 100% guaranteed more information regarding the ancient weapons/lost history will be released in the future. As an ex-Shichibukai, Crocodile's existence/defeat greatly impacts the One Piece world. Lastly, Crocodile's role in the series is far from concluded. His replacement is yet to be decided. Due to unfamiliarity with Wikipedia, I can not personally edit much of Wikipedia (all I have done so far is a rewrite of Mihawk's article). However I do believe I have a voice in this issue. My opinions should be considered. Dukelagold 19:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

In-universe information only goes so far. Without outside info (creation, development, reception, ect), an article is no more than a plot summary. Having plot summaries all over the place serves no purpose, and can only draw cruft. Jabba the Hut is what the page needs to look like. At this point, it can only look like Anakin Skywalker, which isn't good enough for this site (note that Anakin's article has a great chance of improvement while Croc's doesn't). See WP:FICT, WP:WAF, WP:NOT#IINFO, and WP:N for rules regarding this. TTN 20:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

To add to the plot just attracting Cruft... Well Look at Luffy's page. This is not a good example of a wikipedia page - Too much cruft filling out into the pages. Lots of unreferenced info is present on the page, there are much uness. info tat wikipedia doesn't need (wikipedia = not a fansite) and despite mine (and many previous editors) efforts made in the past to keep in check with wikipedia all reguards to these things are ignored reglaurly by editors. Eventually, we're going to have to draw the line and put an end to this because it will get on top on the editors.

But for now... Merging uness. pages to cut our work load is esstiental. We need a plan of improvment which I will encourage others to take part in over the summer. I'm looking to bring the pages in line for the August release of the FUNimation version. I'm currently trying to work on our wikia for One Piece also. But uni is in the way (just 2 more weeks... of work left and I'kll get both started ^_^') Angel Emfrbl 20:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Triumviron, are there rules about forcing others to use up their 3RRs just to get your own way? On the note of me monopolising, how are what you doing much better in trying to force a page into how you want it to be? Your forcing something into place after a discussion has taken place which you did not play a part in. All your ending up doing is causing a edit war over one single page. Your not sticking to the "Good faith" rules, in the process forcing others to forget about it too. Angel Emfrbl 20:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Is it my actions that brought you close to the 3R rule? Only in small part. The reason my actions are different is about six other people are doing the reverting as well with only the two of you pushing for the vandalism you seek. The funny thing is the community did not consent to these changes, you just kept repeating yourself and frustrated the opposition into leaving. Triumviron 20:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a vandal, nor am I trying to be one. I've monitored against wikipedia's vandals for a while now. I KNOW the vandal rules if anything at all! I've had to consult them time and time again because of some stupid editors. Excuse me for snapping here, but that for me has cut me out of this argument. I wash my hands of it... I have yet to break the vandal rules, and I'm finding it insulting your are saying it. Angel Emfrbl 20:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Saying that we need to get rid of a page because the character no longer plays a role is confusing. That is like saying the World War I article should be deleted or shortened to a paragraph or two because it is not happening anymore. Should we delete Luffy's article when the series ends since he would no longer play a role in the series?

I agree that the One Piece articles should be improved, but simply merging and deleting articles won't improve the quality. Some of the articles I think are better off gone (like Ohm and Dragon) but others (specifically Crocodile) I believe should stay.

Out of curiosity, has this been discussed anywhere other than here? I checked the discussion logs of several merged/deleted articles and it did not mention why the pages was gone. I didn't see any "this article has been suggested for deletion/merge" things on previous versions of the deleted articles either. Had I not checked Angel's discussion page, I wouldn't have even known why things were changing. --Superneoking 21:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the discussion, you'll see that the main reason is no OOU information can be displayed, so it's just plot summary. That fails WP:FICT and WP:NOT#IINFO, so they go. To improve the articles would require that, not just a clean up. TTN 21:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

English please? I don't speak acronyms or chat speak, so I haven't a clue to what "OOU" is.

Why the hell is Arlong still around if Crocodile isn't? --Superneoking 21:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey... Least spare me this much - read the whole comments section... Arlong will be involved in the Merger review next week. Angel Emfrbl 22:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Out of universe. That would be another benefit of actually reading the discussion as I have referenced it various times. Arlong will be merged after the rest actually settle. TTN 21:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I only saw the term OOU twice in the whole article. Thank you for clearing it up for me, but just because you say something earlier doesn't mean I will automatically get what an acronym stands for. It is sad that you think I haven't read the entire article because I didn't realize what your acronym stood for.

Arlong will be merged later? Okay, then when will Aokji and Smoker be merged? Other than a smile by Aokji when Luffy escaped and a brief scene of Smoker talking to tashigi, the two haven't played a huge role in a while. Might as well remove their articles. Oh, and how about Buggy? Sure Oda likes him and he pops up every once in a while, but he certainly hasn't played a major canon role since the Jaya arc.

I doubt the others will settle, so I guess Arlong is safe. --Superneoking 22:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... Well, that all depends how it goes next week what gets merged, I'm not going to predict how it goes. My major disappointment was the lack of people who took part in the last set of mergers, I knew people wouldn't complain until after about 72 hours. But if they checked talk pages, they'd know whats going on. Even if there are a lot of people supporting seperate pages.

Right now, I'm trying to work out how to get a Project started. I started a preposal plan for everyone to get involved with yesturday, but I'm just reading up stuff this evening (part of why I'm getting more annoyed then usual is I'm sorting this out and dealing with this at the same time, so sorry, I've calmed down now the things about Croc are settling down now).

I'm actually thinking because August is not that way off, by this weekend that needs setting up. With June just around the corner, and only July left after that, there isn't a lot of room for lazing around. (that kinda screws me over, since I'm a lazy editor normally). I've been keen to get this going. The only thing slowly it down right now is the mergers. I can draw up a plan, but I can't get it started while this is going on. (the other reason why I'm getting uptight). I've been looking around at Wikia's lately due to my involvment with the OP Wikia, and at wikipedia... And the reality is our pages look crap and need improving. We start it out last Summer and stopped some point in Decemeber when we were making progress. And as I said above - the longer we leave this, the worst it is just going to get.

I'll be looking for helpers, but this can all wait until I finished reeading things. All I'm saying right now is - as many peeps as possible. Half our problem is due to lack of direction on the One Piece pages are going right now. We have to keep in line with the Anime/manga project thingy at the top, but we're not trying to keep to that. Half of this wouldn't have occured if we did all this back in December (mergers were talked about then but never carried out).

And Superneoking, seriously, I understand where your getting at, but sometimes you've got to considered all angles here. The orginal option had a horrible laid out Croc page with not really any references... Little direction... Repeated infomation from other pages... Much story plot and nothing that wasn't that helpful at all. Ande several other things I will raise when I stuck this plan up. There is a choice - this or make Croc support two other pages that he can help strengthen eventually if done right. But you'll see some of my points made when I put the plan up. After that, well if you still feel the page needs to be there, form a solid argument, get involved with the merger review next week. No whinning though, I've had enough of seeing that. Haven't seen it on the One Piece pages for a few months... And if a project is set up, we can't whine over things, we've just got to go with it or decide not to... No complaints, just democtratic discussions. I'll side with a good argument, I won't side with "just because... it needs it". Outside of Justyn, your the only one so far trying to put wikipedia rules to sense on Croc staying, everyone else is just whining.

If this happened back in Jan when it should have been done... Maybe this reaction wouldn't have happened. But enough of that. Thats my final say on this matter. I'm back to reading things. Angel Emfrbl 22:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Note: I actually can open this up now. I've finished reading the rules and guidelines and adjusted the project preposal to adopt the review (I'm trying to cheat here and link everything together)... Took long enough but its done... I can get it up now if anyone wants it. The review was going to last two weeks. I was actually expecting to take several days but I did it in a matter of hours (its 2 o'clock in the morning, I can't sleep - so why not work on it). The project would have been put up on Thursday and the review on Wednesday.  :/ Angel Emfrbl 00:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I don't quite understand how Sir Crocodile fails notability. Look under the examples: if a character like, say Noonien Soong has enough character depth to merit his own article, then he gets one. Sir Crocodile falls in that intentional vague boundary between major and minor characters, and while he isn't quite on the Straw Hat's level of a major character, he doesn't deserve a minor character's treatment with two paragraphs on the Baroque Works article. Notability (Fiction) even states that the main criterion between major and minor character is how much non-trivial information is available, and being a villain for one of the longest running arcs certainly merits a good deal of non-trivial information. Whatisthespacebar 05:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't people read discussions? This was raised already... Oh forget it. Lets get the project preposal up. *sigh* I hate this much about wikipedia - the debates are often circles because people don't pay attention to the debates. -_-' Angel Emfrbl 07:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)