Talk:Use of Literary Techniques in One Piece/Archetype

Deletion
Please discuss.Mugiwara Franky 01:08, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Not really a useful page, since it doesn't connect to the storyline of One Piece. That's what the wikia is for, not for literary devices. All literary devices should be deleted, as they are not things like poison, flintlock, bounties, all of which are more necessary than literary devices. Yatanogarasu 01:14, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

This is a trivia page and I prefered for a page like this to be here. If other wikia has pages like this, why can't we? The whole point of this wikia was to be creative, not be limited like Wikipedia.

Joekido 01:19, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

What other wikias have pages like this? Yatanogarasu 02:02, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

That's exactly the point. It has no relation to One Piece and doesn't belong on the wikia. SeaTerror 17:07, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Lostpiea has a page like this but I firmly believe that a page like this should exist here. I mean people out there may have thought that Archetype don't exist in One Piece and every literary device page like Foreshadowing, Plot Twist, Coincidance, etc, etc was to prove that One Piece is full of them. No one questions that we have a Flashback page so why should we question this? The whole point of this wikia was to focus on every detials that is found in One Piece. There is nothing wrong with having a fan-like pages or pages that many fans are discussing. Hell we should have a Luffyko page, a Death page, a Pirate Summit page and all that. That is the entire point of the wikia. If you don't like it, here's a quote: "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the oven!"

Joekido 07:14, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

Why are you guys only focusing on One Piece story. This is not the wiki about One Piece story this is the wiky about Everything about one piece. So this page definitly needs to be kept. Thank you Joekido btw for bringing them on. You can discuss about the content if you disagree with his analysis Kdom 07:39, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

The how about we just merge all of this stuff into one page? Easier to keep track and takes up less space. Yatanogarasu 07:41, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

Except these articles don't have any real relation to One Piece. They are only there to up the article count. SeaTerror 17:55, September 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Making a literary analysis of one piece is much more interesting than all of the plot articles. If we want to know about the story, it's easier to read the manga than come to this wiki. Whereas this article provide information about what inspired Oda. The fact that he was inspired by Dragon Ball is proheminent for those who wants to understand his works. The arcs and chapters articles are make much more counter up articles than this one.
 * And the only thing that is wrong is that these page are isolated, instead of deleting them, we should diswuss where we could create links to them. Kdom 19:46, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

They are pointless. These articles have no REAL relation to One Piece. We should continue to discuss for deletion since they do not belong here. SeaTerror 06:53, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

No, they are not pointless, it's just you being close-minded. This wikia should be open to any pages as long as they are related to One Piece. Look at Star Trek Wikia that has many pages like headaches or whales or whatever. Why can't we? This wikia is not only about the plot, it's also everything related to One Piece and it's more fun to have an analyzis pages then a plot pages. Come on, One Piece Wikia, open your mind and create as many One Piece related pages as you can.

Joekido 08:13, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Actually they are pointless. These pages are not related to One Piece. You only created them to have a higher article count. SeaTerror 16:01, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, if we add these pages that are virtually unrelated to the Wikia, then we'd be overloading it with unnecessary information. Just like the Harry Potter Wikia, they create a page that has virtually nothing to do with the storyline, just because it made at least one very small cameo. Do we really want to end up like that? I say: No. Yatanogarasu 16:34, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Seaterror
Stop labling the article for delete, it's going nowhere.

Joekido 18:11, October 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually... This I agree on... One-Winged Hawk 18:19, October 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * You agree for this page to be deleted?

Joekido 18:21, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

We already gave why the articles are not needed. You're just too stubborn to acknowledge it. Also, its not like I'm actually replacing the content of the page with the delete tag. SeaTerror 17:05, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Please discuss
Please discuss things please, instead of creating an edit war. The deletion tag on top is just that, a tag. It does not always mean a page will be deleted. It means that the page is a candidate for deletion. Discussing about it and giving a proper and strong defense for it is all that is needed to save it. Removing the tag back and forth is not discussing things. At the very least, its a poor way of defending the page.

However, if there is no strong defense for it to be kept. Then whatever has to come has to come.Mugiwara Franky 06:14, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

So you lock it and Joekido hasn't come around to defend the article? I already said what I wanted to say in the previous section and have nothing to add to it currently. 17:49, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

I was hoping that you'll say nothing Sea, I'm tired of your subborness and I already said the reason that this page was not to be deleted. I already said why it should be kept and you guys don't want to open mind so theofore this page is to be kept and I want you to shut up and back off.

Joekido 17:55, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * You may have stated your reason, but you have not been defending the article properly other than that and some edit wars. You did not counter to certain comments like Yatanogarasu's for instance and the zero response/defense could be taken as acceptance to the deletion or etc. At the very least, you should have started defending the page more in the discussion the moment I locked it rather than sit still and do nothing.Mugiwara Franky 18:23, October 9, 2010 (UTC)