Forum:Saga Official Names

According to the Official One Piece Website, each saga of the first half of the series has been officially named as such: Click [Show] to see references.
 * 1) East Blue Saga (“東の海” 編)
 * 2) Alabasta Saga (アラバスタ編)
 * 3) Sky Island Saga (空島編)
 * 4) Water 7 Saga (ウォーターセブン編)
 * 5) Summit War Saga (“頂上戦争”編)

As you can all see, they have been clearly sourced, and even the images in the info-boxes themselves bear the names. Instead, we're still using the fan-made names for the second-to-fifth sagas:
 * 1) (East Blue Saga, fine)
 * 2) Baroque Works Saga
 * 3) Skypiea Saga
 * 4) CP9 Saga
 * 5) Whitebeard War Saga

When I tried to change it, with the sources given, DancePowderer was against it, simply because he said "there was no discussion about it". So here you are, let's start a discussion about this issue: should we change the names to the more official, or just keep the current (unofficial unless sourced) ones? 04:13, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion starts here
I agree, although I have no problem with the old names either (they kind of fit better, but whatever). 04:17, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

I don't really have a problem with using the offical names. But, wasn't it a thing awhile ago that the series has been "offically" split into two "Sagas" with something like the "Super Rookie Saga" being the first half of the series? So if those are official, and they are "Sagas", what are these story divisions called? 04:19, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

Well, since the first half "Super Rookie Saga" has been all officially named in the site, but the second half has yet to be properly named... We should just wait. 04:20, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

"Parts" of the series I guess. Also Yata, Oda named the second half too. 04:20, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

So he named "Pirate Alliance" and "Fishman Island" sagas, or the second half of the series as a whole? 04:21, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

He called it The Final Sea: The New World Saga" or whatever we have as a page. Those two sagas are unnamed so far. 04:23, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

There's a bit of a problem too, since the site counts Thriller Bark as a saga. http://www.j-onepiece.com/chapter05/menu.html 04:24, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

Then why not just add that sub-saga? As for the two unnamed sagas, we just keep them as so until it has been named. 04:25, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

I guess we could... but a Saga usually consists of more than just one arc.. 04:27, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, ignoring Thriller Bark Saga/Arc, should we change the other four to make it more "official" and "not-fanon"? 04:29, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

I definitely agree.The official names must be used. 19:06, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

If we are to use the official stuff, then we have to make Thriller Bark a saga. We can't stop halfway. About the two "super-sagas": is it the same word in Japanese? It's confusing to have two completely different things called the same…

So is it to have five unofficially named saga than to make a "Thriller Bark Saga"? The site is official, so we really should follow it. We can't really keep the unofficial ones, can we? 19:56, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

I'm fine with renaming the sagas as official (while most people probably wouldn't use it, it's not a very big deal) but I can't say I really agree with making Thriller Bark its own saga. I understand it's the official site, but I feel we mostly have the Sagas and Arcs and such to easily organize chapt about the about the ers and episodes. Speaking of which, does the official site say anything about "Arcs"? 20:00, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

@Yata: I don't really care, the names are only as official as a website can be. We have no idea at which point Oda is involved. But since we have nothing else, I don't mind the change, as long as we stay consistent with their choices.

I say we rename, and do it the consistent way as Sff9 said. Problem would be Thriller Bark, Arc or Saga? I'd say Saga, since some sagas in other series can be pretty short as well. Who knows? 21:12, April 11, 2013 (UTC)