Talk:List of fights

Needs a lot of work that I can't do by myself and an important addition to the wikia Sables 17:50, April 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Before your start, we should really discuss if this is needed. The page Events which was similar has been deleted because it was obsolete and full of red link. This has high potential to finish in the same way : a lot of one line stub articles.
 * Also there is already a battle category which has similar purpose (for such purpose categories are better than list articles), and the detail of the fights can be found in the character pages.
 * Kdom 18:24, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think this is really needed. It has potential to clear up some things if combined with a filter so people know what is filler and what was canon. After all not all fights went the same in the anime, however this can also repeat a lot of things like mentioned by Kdom. I think the fights are covered enough between Character pages, episodes, chapters, bottom of character pages (already split into filler and canon), Anime and Manga Differences, Fighting Styles (which notably tell you PLENTY of story information as well as function) and all. I am pretty interested in how it could be done. The Oars vs Straw Hats would probably be ungodly long (to the point where reading the Arc page will be better).

I guess in additional I can say... This Wikia out of the few (probably just over ten) anime wikia I have been to is special. It seems to be focused on the manga, with trivia in the right place and smart informed users everywhere. Few adverts (none in the main body text) and such. It also seems to be streamlined, it doesn't repeat itself by giving related techniques a separate page for example. We only started slipping now as the Straw Hats have a long backstory and it gets copied and spaced to all members. We shouldn't really have anything that can't work on it's own and as a part of everything. Just means more pages to update. --One Piece Of Romance Dawn 19:38, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Pretty much everything I have to say about the page has been said before I got out of bed for the day... One-Winged Hawk 08:39, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Gonna have to agree with several points made against this page. The page is gonna be a list but unfortunately it may not become much more than that. It could be decorated but not that much more in terms of usefulness that could be found in other pages.Mugiwara Franky 09:58, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Why not to keep this page just as a list of all fights? Ruxax 10:57, April 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Its bad enough we have a few other lists, but lists aren't encyclopedic and are too trivia. This page serves little purpose in giving ut serious facts, it just lists fights. It doesn't even give the chapter or details on HOW the fight went... Just a list. It can't be linked to only linked FROM, thus is a "dead end" link. One-Winged Hawk 16:34, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

One of the focal points of One Piece are the battles/fights that take place between characters. Why then does this wiki have a Luffy vs. Laboon fight page, yet the idea of creating pages for the other and more important battles are forgotten? Particular fights are not well enough summarised in other other larger articles especially such examples as 'Luffy first used gomu gomu bazooka against Buggy' to be used as a defining source for battle information. I argue that everyone who visits this wiki would want to see pages discussing fights and this list is the seed to sow the writing of others. Information would not be reiterated but clarified in article form. Sables 14:12, April 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * We do have some techniques on devil fruits and other pages, listing also when and how they were used. They give out far more information then this is. And with chapter pages around, there isn't a need at all for this page. :-/ One-Winged Hawk 16:35, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

the luffy vs laboon page was part of the Events page which has been deleted. Now it is only link to one of Angel test page. Hence it shall be deleted either or redirect to the chapter it occured. Also what are we going to do with Marineford fights ? Most of them are just cameo fights that lasted 2 pages. Kdom 16:47, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

The idea of creating fight pages would clarify in depth the certain techniques, attacks and items etc that were used by characters. This gives the reader a faster chronological index as to characters physical, intellectual & emotional fighting development. The fights should be broken down into sub-sections for organisation 1. Normal Fights - these being fights that have enough length or story to write a decent article. 2. Short Fights - these being fights that last very briefly (Marineford) which should contain facts rather than writing and will be compiled into a larger article with other short fights. Sables 17:44, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

If the initiator is ready to write not stub articles for at least about half the battles, I think we should allow this project. Ruxax 19:05, April 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * You see, to me, Luffy vs Coby didn't deserve an article. It's not even a fight it is just a dispute. A table like the List of canon characters may have some added value wrt to a simple list. It could contain some simple information like the winner and the first time a attack is used. But I'm against separate articles for fights. Kdom 20:16, April 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed, not a single fight deserves a page of its own, when chapters and character pages.. Arc pages and saga pages... All cater for this. If we have pages referencing fights, we should just loose them, we don't link TO them hardly and their value is pointless. How many times must we repeat the same facts over and over again? No one is likely to look up individaul fights, but they will characters and chapters. One-Winged Hawk 21:52, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

I'm just gonna agree further with what's been against the pages. All I can I add I guess is that repetition of stuff found in other pages greatly depends on the pages being presented. Saga, Arc, and Chapter pages maybe repetition but they are pages that people would most likely look at. The list of fights and the individual fight pages on the other hand are a different story. They're not exactly pages people would first look at in order to learn about a certain fight. The first pages they would be looking at would be character or chapter pages.

There's also indeed the very small skirmishes between characters to point out. This so called fights aren't exactly major battles per say and really shouldn't be noted down. Hitting a person with one or few blows can't always be instantly called a major battle. If it was like that, then all the small fights like comedic ones between Sanji and Zoro would be noted down since they too fall under the circumstances.Mugiwara Franky 03:00, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

It would be simple to decide which fights should be classified as such eg. Luffy vs. Coby by deciding on a system as to what is considered legitimate. Fight pages would not be valueless as they chart the chronological growth of characters. The articles would not be repetitions of chapter etc. pages as they would describe in detail the interaction between characters, past experiences they may share and other such matters which provide more information and a deeper insight to the reader. Rather than thinking that these articles would be re-hashed writing, they would be sources for an in depth summary further reaching than chapter, arc etc. pages that deal with the historical and cultural impacts of the event. These pages would not be dead links and unpopular with readers as they would be linked from character, technique/devil fruit, chapter, arc etc. pages where there is a relevance and/or writing on the event. Fights in one piece are often major turning points and exemplify the storyline, character development and major themes as with most shonen manga and as such they deserve solitary articles. Sables 13:44, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Can we decide the fate of this page already, editors continue to waste time editing it while it lives on an uncertain future.One-Winged Hawk 22:07, April 28, 2010 (UTC)