User talk:The Pope

Welcome
Hi and welcome to the One Piece Encyclopedia! Thanks for your edit to the Image:Luffy and Charloss.gif page.

Watermarked
The image of the Luffy punching Carlos animation is watermarked. Sorry, but unless you own the image, you can't have it here. One-Winged Hawk 17:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
For the help in Talk:Monkey_D._Garp, I thought I say it here because there it would be a bit too off-topic there. But you are right about it, well... it was a nice idea in my head, to bad it has to stay in my head. Kraken 04:10, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Shichibukai Vs Warlords of the sea
I don't know if you intended to revert the other stuff AND Shichibukai into "Warlord" but you did just that. I can't speak for the other stuff but please don't revert Shichibukai back into Warlord, see Japanese Vs English names for more details. One-Winged Hawk 18:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh.

Whoops, I didn't mean to do that. I don't even know how in the hell that happened.

Sorry.Buh6173 19:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The Paper of Life
Any particular reason you think it's Biblicard and not Vivre Card? Given that it's known as the Paper of Life and "Vivre" means 'life', please read & respond to the talk page.
 * Kaizoku-Hime 05:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Until Oda himself gives proper Romanization, then it's debatable. One bit of evidence that leans on "Biblicard" is that it may be a reference to the Black Spot from Treasure Island, which were made from sheets of paper ripped from the Bible.

Though vivre meaning life also has meaning.

Like I said, until Oda flat-out gives the proper spelling, it's just as debatable as Juracule/Dracule.Buh6173 06:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's understandable. Then you're gonna have to revert all of the edits Sgamer82 made changing "Biblicard" to 'Vivre Card' in just about every page it was mentioned.
 * Kaizoku-Hime 06:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Done.Buh6173 06:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

B and V are near enough interchangable ('Vivi' was 'Bibi' in early translations), same as L and R. For now, theres no indication which Oda is using. I think its going to be one of those things Oda never reveals. One-Winged Hawk 06:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Shadows
To create shadows you need light. Darkness does not mean there are more shadows. In fact, there are less shadows in the dark then the day. This is something I always cribed about the show "Skeleton Warriors" as at one point this guy who could travel through shadows was told by the villian of the show "Its a shame its a nice bright sunny day, theres no shadows for you to pop into". The lack of shadows in the daylight has nothing to do with brightness, but rather position of the sun in the sky in fact, since shadows change their length over the course of the day and year, with winter producing the longest shadows due to the lowness of the sun. One-Winged Hawk 21:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Brook history division
Can we please talk it out in his talk page before continuing the edit war.Mugiwara Franky 14:54, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Will you please talk it out in Brook's talk page before reverting the headings or anything else. I have locked the page because of the edit war.Mugiwara Franky 15:00, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

I already have.Buh6173 15:01, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well please continue there so that we can resolve this.Mugiwara Franky 15:03, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Extending problem to other pages
Can you please not extend one problem to other pages when the one in the first page isn't resolved yet. The problem in Brook's page is one thing but the problem in Luffy's page is another thing.Mugiwara Franky 15:34, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you having a hard time editing Luffy's page without divisions to aid you? The page is too much for one editor to fix in one go and editing sections with a lot of paragraphs eats up alot of your time.Mugiwara Franky 16:06, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * No, not really.


 * So are you done editing or are you still working? The progress for the Thriller Bark part you did so far maybe good but its no different than what it was before in the overall article. I need to know if you are planning to do the whole page cause its abit of a pain in the waiting department.Mugiwara Franky 16:17, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * If you want to help summarize it, be my guest. All I did was clip out parts that didn't have to do with Luffy; what also needs to be done is for it to be summed up better and not explained in explicit detail.


 * If any more summarizing is gonna be done, some proper divisions are gonna be needed. Some people can't work or navigate between large texts in certain sections. The Arabasta section for example, because of it being one single section, if something happens all the work will be gone.Mugiwara Franky 16:26, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * What, you're saying they should be divided, edited, then combined again?

Yes, for easy editing and navigating. Not everyone can easily edit a super huge section like the Impel Down section and any other section that's gonna be created in the future. Seriously, do you honestly think that this style of division is any better than the one before. Sure, you've split the section of Gaimon away from Kuro but you only created a extremely small section. The rest are extremely large sections that aren't easy to go to from the top.Mugiwara Franky 16:35, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * If you want to summarize them, then be my guest and divide it until you're done. If not, though, then leave it as it is.Buh6173 16:37, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * I and anyone else can summarize them if given the time. We however can't do it all in one go and we certainly can't do it without divisions to lessen the workload per edit.Mugiwara Franky 16:40, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Fine. How about this. Go ahead and divide them back up. In a week's time, I'm going to put them back to one section per arc. That should be enough time to sort it out.Buh6173 16:46, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * It can't work that way Buh. One week is not enough to fix large arcs like Skypiea. Even then if you give just one section for each arc, there will arcs with ridiculous amount of paragraphs and arcs with just few paragraphs. It will not be symmetrically clean and still hard to navigate and edit for others. I myself am having a hard time trying to locate the parts that need fixing.Mugiwara Franky 16:51, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * I've been able to edit and write full sections in one sitting. A week is more than enough time.Buh6173 16:52, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

You maybe able to do it but not everyone can do it. Also, not everyone's computer can handle it.

There's also many variables that are needed.
 * Reference
 * Verification
 * Choosing which situations need to be mentioned or not
 * Finding the right images
 * Making sure there's enough spacing per paragraph

There's also other things that can make one incapable of doing large sections.
 * School
 * Sleep
 * Food
 * Homework

Mugiwara Franky 16:58, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Listen, you maybe be able to navigate and edit large sections but not everyone can do it. I maybe the only one saying this but you really can't have one arc=one section. You can't easily navigate from the top. You can't last long in editing. You just can't do it that way.Mugiwara Franky 17:16, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Title Edit wars with Swg66 and others
Please do not cause edit wars such as what tittle should be used or whether or not a certain amount of images should be used in a section.

For the Edit wars with Swgg66: While your choice of a title for the current events for Luffy's current team is abit dramatic if not decorative, the heading of current events is still slightly acceptable. Considering that a better title will be needed after that part of the story, current events is kinda more appropriate until proper titles for each character's participation in the war can be made. The heading of Current Events can also help readers easily identify which section is about what's happening currently.

For the images: While they are nice, they give some problems which amounts to image overload in some articles.


 * 1) The placement of the images seems more decorative than informative
 * 2) The placement of some of the images is displacing the code for the rest of the page
 * 3) The sizes picked for the images are a bit too big
 * 4) The images being picked are of events too close to one another. An example is a picture of Luffy's escapee gang and a picture of Luffy and Whitebeard. Both are epic pictures, however one might have to be chosen if they are to match the text.
 * 5) While more text from the next chapter might allow for more pictures, they will however be problems. One is that there might be other epic images in the next chapter and two is that the text that will be added will not correspond correctly to the images.

Mugiwara Franky 12:11, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Mass Edit Wars
Due to what apparently is several mass edit wars between yourself and others, I have decided to lock several pages in which you have been involved in. This lock will only last for a week but I suggest that you talk things out with the rest of the community so that all of us can work peacefully together. If not, the consequences would much more severe than simple locks.Mugiwara Franky 16:10, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * The only problems have been the Luffy page and Kizaru. With the image of him arriving, like I stated before (but which Tipota has apparently decided to ignore), what makes the scene important is the insane way that he rides down on a cannonball, not just that "he's there". As far as the Luffy page goes, those images are all significant, and as you've seen with the text from the latest chapter added, the images do not mess up the layout of the page. Buh6173 17:03, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * For the Kizaru pic, I don't think you've made it clear to Tipota to what you want to show. At the very least, there doesn't seem to be a discussion between yourselves.


 * For the Luffy thing, the pics with their size are still overloading. In an encyclopedia or any form of written form of information, text should be supported by images, not the other way around. True, this is a wikia and it can be more versatile than a ordinary encyclopedia, however there is a point when some editing is just being decorative or uninformative. The images are significant indeed, however not every epic image that pops up can easily fit. Images help text, not overshadow them.


 * From what is happening also, there seems to be more than just Luffy and Kizaru that is involved. From what I gather, there are 5 edit wars. Most involve you and Tipota. Though Tipota is just to blame as you, however from what is happening, and what has been happening recently involving you and others including myself, I believe some discussion between you and the community is much needed.Mugiwara Franky 17:29, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * I explained to Tipota on many occasions why it should be the animated GIF, but he wouldn't listen. And again, those images are very significant; think to, say, the Thriller Bark Arc, where there's a whole ton of images, but they're not incredibly significant. Why that flies and the important ones like him arriving in Marineford are left out. As far as the other edit wars go, they were mostly for stupid things, like keeping both of the images with Jinbei in them and both of the images of Mr. 3 fighting Magellan, even when they were on opposite sides of text and not obstructing anything. Buh6173 18:26, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * From your edits, you're not even trying to talk to Tipota directly about the matter. For the Luffy pics and the others, it's not they're significant, its just they're overloading space with their size and placement. Some examples are the Jinbei and Mr. 3 pics. While they do not necessarily obstruct the text, they are being given more space than the corresponding text. The text is being the background for the images rather than the images helping illustrate what is being stated in the text.Mugiwara Franky 18:49, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * I guess the image of Gigant Stamp could be removed, since that's more about Luffy than it is Mr. 3, but both of the Jinbei ones still belong there. Again, if there's enough text, then the images won't just be "in the background".Buh6173 18:54, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * That however is the problem. Images are intended to help support the text. They are the background to the text, not the other way round. In certain cases, especially history sections, text should be the prevalent factor in order to explain history. Only when there is ample space can there be images.


 * A good encyclopedia can be one with little to no images as long as it provides good information. A bad one however is one that has only images and nothing to explain them.Mugiwara Franky 19:04, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, in the cases of less major characters, they're pretty much the only images on the page.Buh6173 19:18, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * For the less major characters, the rules kinda apply to them as well. If the space being occupied can't allow for alot of images, then its best not to overload the space no matter how significant or epic an image maybe.Mugiwara Franky 19:27, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm saying that they do allow for plenty of images, since there's hardly any in there in the first place. Buh6173 19:38, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * If there is space in a particular section of an article that allows for alot of images then that section can have alot of images.


 * If an article has little to no images that doesn't mean that one section of the article should be overloaded with too many images to compensate for the lack of images.Mugiwara Franky 19:58, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, either way, Luffy was fine, and the other pages kept the two images balanced on both sides, so there wasn't an overload.Buh6173 20:10, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

For some like Jinbei's, it's more on size. Setting an image's size too big in some places, creates just as much overload. For others like Mr. 2's, the images were somewhat being repetitive. Placing an image of one situation and placing another image of the same situation only with a different shot is somewhat being repetitive.Mugiwara Franky 20:21, September 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * Mr. 2. I suppose could get the same treatment as Mr. 3; get rid of the image that is less informative. And Jinbei's weren't that large at all; if I recall, they were only about 250 px, max, which given text in between and no other images around it, is nothing. Buh6173 01:11, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

That Quote
Its about Justice, Doflamingo's view of what Justice is. It there belong here. While its true he said it, theres little need to write every memoriable quote on a page. Doflamingo is full of great quotes, and its best to write only a few. Quotes are great, but theres a thing called "over-quote", if your doing that you can hardly say your writing things down in your own words anymore. We're not here to copy script word for word, the quotes are just points of intereast that support a piece of text. I have a simulair crib with the CP9 techniques page, as theres more quotes then any page needs there as it is. One-Winged Hawk 08:22, September 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, call me "son" again and you'll get e-slapped hard; please note my user page. >_< One-Winged Hawk 08:26, September 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * It's a term of phrase. And three quotes isn't "overrquoting". Buh6173 15:21, September 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * Not really going to argue whether the quite should be there or not, however I'm really starting to see a pattern of recent edit wars with you Buh and others. True, they don't seem too violent however I suggest you not to frequently do them as it impedes the development of the articles and the wikia as a whole.Mugiwara Franky 17:08, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Continuing Edit war
Please stop edit warring with Tipota and talk with each other directly. You two have some serious issues with one another that I have to say is disrupting the wikia as a whole. Leaving messages in either edit summaries or article talk pages are not enough. You both have to talk to each other directly.Mugiwara Franky 15:06, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Why is doing it in the talk pages not enough? Different pages have different issues, and talking about edits in general on each other's talk pages won't solve that. Buh6173 15:08, September 28, 2009 (UTC)


 * It is not enough when too many things are involved. If you simply just talk things one at a time, it will be hard to keep track of everything since you're jumping around the place. To simplify things and make your points known, you will have to address each other in your respective talk pages.


 * The recent edit wars are slowly becoming big. Some serious discussion between users will have to take place.Mugiwara Franky 15:14, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

You(Buh7173) ask me to stop edit wars. OK I will stop. End of “discussion”.Tipota 16:32, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry I can’t make it clearer. I will stop edit wars; end of discussion. Do as you wish with the images.Tipota 16:54, September 28, 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh. Well, all right. Can you unlock those pages now, Mugiwara Franky? Buh6173 16:58, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Pacifista
So now you're saying that everything that the anime shows is not cannon unless if it is shown in the manga (not refering to fillers). Its obvious that the intended purpose of the anime having more elements than the manga so that viewers will have a better understanding of the manga. If the anime is not cannon then what is? Oda worked on the anime so that it backs up that of the manga and is a reliable source, with extra bit for better understanding. So just leave it as it is, that the Pacifista facing Kidd and Law was a Pacifista.


 * Are you serious? Yes, more elements are added to the anime sometimes instead of the manga, but those aren't added by Oda, and are therefore not canonical. If something only appears in the anime and not in the manga, that is not canon; that is filler. And even if I were to follow your backwards logic for a few minutes, let me remind you that at the end of the anime-only fight between Law/Kid and the Pacifista, another "Pacifista" appeared to give it the same ambiguous ending that the manga had. In other words, both the manga and the anime intended to leave it blank for the moment whether the two fought the real Kuma or not. Buh6173 05:31, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

NOTE THIS: If it was the real Kuma then he would have been carrying his signature BIBLE, on Chapter 506, Page 04. You're a serious NOOB!


 * That's true. Then again, none of the other Pacifista showed the capability of speech. I'm not saying that it is Kuma, and I'm not saying it isn't; I'm saying that, at the moment, it is unknown until Oda clarifies. Buh6173 05:35, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Quote (frome above): "Then again, none of the other Pacifista showed the capability of speech.". Are you SERIOUSLY that NOOB!!!! I even gave u a reference in the edit. The Pacifista even said Apoo's name "Scratchmen Apoo" when Apoo appeared to attack Kizaru. There you go. another Pacifista showing the "capability of speech" as you call it. Go check it out before you change it again! I'm starting to agree with what Mugiwara Franky 17:08, September 27, 2009 (UTC) said above.


 * Ah, you're right. I missed that.


 * Well, nonetheless, the one that fought Kid and Law did not show his paws and did not fight them, so for now it's still unknown if it was a Pacifista or not. It probably is, but you can't jump to conclusions, otherwise that's a form of speculation and assumption.


 * Oh, and if you don't want to make an ass out of yourself, then please actually spell properly and stop saying "noob". Buh6173 05:57, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Oh and what did I spell wrong now??? Also, from what you said earlier that the "manga is canonical". Alright, if you take that point of yours into account: In regards to Kuma, where ever he goes, he is carrying his signature trademark BIBLE, whether at Mariejois or on Thriller Bark or at Sabaody Archipelago (facing the Straw Hats) or at Marine Headquarters (facing Whitebeard Pirates), he is always carrying his BIBLE in the manga, so therefore "CANONICAL" according to your terms and as global One Piece fans all know.

You made your point that if the Pacifista speaks, it is possibly Kuma himself, right? So why would he for one and both times be missing his BIBLE when facing Kidd and Law & when facing Apoo, Drake, Hawkins and Uroge? Therefore the Pacifista facing Kidd and Law could not have been Kuma (despite not making a move). It's not assumptions, It is FACT! Therefore please stop editing it back because it is already fact the that Pacifista cannot be Kuma, thats it, fullstop.

NOTE: I'll also be checking back in a few days, to see if you've changed it back to your speculation again... and if you persist to revert it then I'll continue to call you "noob"!


 * To the anon, please do not insult editors. For the Pacifista that faced the four supernovas, it is shown that it is not Kuma because it fired lasers from his hands. For the one that faced Kid and Law, it is not known if it is Kuma or not. The manga just shows a cliffhanger. The anime created some filler content but left a similar cliffhanger with the two captains encountering another Pacifista.


 * Filler is not canon in most cases. It is just the anime team making more stuff to make scenes or situations longer.Mugiwara Franky 08:48, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I know that the evidence of him speaking isn't valid due to the case with Apoo, but the thing is, the battle with Kid and Law wasn't shown. We never got to see whether or not he had paws or lasers. Oda purposely left it ambiguous for now. Saying that it was a Pacifista just because he lacked the Bible is jumping to conclusions. So stop reverting it to that. Buh6173 14:03, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Most cases? Since when is filler EVER canon? Drunk Samurai 18:29, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Whitebeard Saga
Thanks for your grammar check friend. I want to ask why did whitebeard saga before thriller bark? Coldhandzz 05:11, October 4, 2009 (UTC)


 * The saga encompasses the other arcs within it, such as Thriller Bark, Sabaody Archipelago, Amazon Lily, etc. Buh6173 05:15, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

During Thriller Bark, the war was building up. The arcs tell the story about the war development and the war itself, that's why.

Joekido 23:02, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Comment on recent edit war
Listen its nice and all that you add images and quotes, however if they are not arranged properly, then they are nothing but decoration.Mugiwara Franky 17:24, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

Grammar
Hey friend can you check my grammar on my recent edits? thnx Coldhandzz 12:35, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Little note
Maybe its not best to sign your name with "The Pope" as it may offend. One-Winged Hawk 21:46, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, it's my username pretty much everywhere else. The Pope 21:53, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm suprised you've gotten away with it on the net then usually names like "IAMJESUS" and stuff gets pulled up by someone. ^_^'  One-Winged Hawk 22:52, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

People get offended by somebody using the name Pope? Drunk Samurai 00:40, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

you'll find people get offended at just about anything, although religion tends to be a more senstive subject, i don't care what he calls himself and i'm catholic, i believe in freedom of expression, even if i might a little less than tastefull it's his right as long as he doesn't use crude or threatening language and doesn't insult people directly--Swg66 02:32, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Marineford Arc
Hello Pope (:-)), I'm currently having a discussion with One-Winged Hawk about the Marineford Arc article (Talk:Marineford_Arc). According to the history, I have the impression that you are one of the major contributor to this page, so it shall be worth to have your opinion on the subject. Thanks Kdom 12:05, October 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and said my thoughts on the arc's talk page. The Pope 17:13, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Kizaru
Next time, take the time to check the chapters before you remove any information. Don't assume your memory is perfect.--24.255.171.220 17:03, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Wikia appearance
Just a little request for some feedback in this discussion since it feels like that this wikia requires more color.Mugiwara Franky 06:20, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Zoro's History page
Can you both please stop, none of you are helping improve the article with your meaningless edit war on what the title of each section.Mugiwara Franky 07:31, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

All of the history articles for every single character on the Wiki is more descriptive than just one word. I'm trying to keep it as it originally was, but his reasoning is "I edited it so it should stay like this". That would be like if I edited a whole bunch of crap into a page that wasn't supposed to be there, but kept adamantly wanting it to stay because "I edited it". The Pope 07:32, November 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * Consistency is indeed an issue and what Coldhandzz is doing is somewhat wrong. However without a proper discussion explaining your case, its just looks like a meaningless edit war.Mugiwara Franky 07:44, November 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * I've been discussing it with him both in the edit notes and on his talk page. However, he's been refusing to listen to reason. And now you've gone and locked the page while it has that Sea Train heading, which is flat-out wrong, as it's not its own arc. The Pope 07:47, November 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * The lock apparently happened just as he was finished editing. In any case, use this time to properly talk to one another.Mugiwara Franky 07:59, November 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * I've tried talking to him about it; he won't listen. The Pope 15:47, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

The Deal with History sections
I believe this is getting to be a real issue among us. While there should indeed be some consistency among the Straw Hats in how their histories should be arranged, not all of their histories are the same. Some Straw Hats have more actions in one arc than others. Some have so few actions that its not enough fill one section. Some have lots of actions that some division is needed so people won't get lost.

There's also the matter of how certain sections are named and the pics within them. Some titles are too long and some titles are a bit wrong. One example of a title that is too long is descriptive title of what happens in Sabaody. Its abit too much in a sense. One example of a title that is wrong is the title of Skypiea that has taking down a God. While this is true, not all of the Straw Hats took down a God. For the pics, its old subject but a bit worth mentioning.

I know what you are doing is in good faith, however as seen with the recent edit war with Coldhandzz, you edit other's edits way too much into yours. I may be guilty of this to a point, however this a matter that I see being made way too much by you.Mugiwara Franky 14:13, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I agree that some of the titles don't need to be as long; however, most of the arc articles don't require division, unless the arc focuses practically solely on them. The Pope 14:19, November 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * When you say focus, do you mean arcs like the Baratie arc which focuses alot on Sanji or the Thriller Bark arc which focuses alot on Brook? If so then why cut the divisions? Also some arc sections have way more content than others that normal readers and editors may find hard to read or edit. Anyway continue this solely in here.Mugiwara Franky 14:31, November 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * You know, changing titles and rearranging sections is not really productive if its the only thing you're gonna do. At most, it only causes edit wars especially what's happening now. If you can't add anything else that contributes to an article other than rearranging stuff then stop. Consistency is good but it can't apply to everyone.Mugiwara Franky 04:36, November 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * That's why I changed the titles so that they actually functioned in a way they were meant to. The Pope 04:46, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

The Promised Cape only lasted one part of Brook's First Life. The Death of the Rumbar Pirates was beyond the Cape. The arrival of Brook on the TB was way beyond the Cape. The only significant mention of the cape is in the first part.

The combining of the other sections is just ridiculous. I tried compromising by combining certain parts but you just want your way. There were three in Sabaody, I made two. You just want one.

The Quest for the Shadow, that only lasted 2 thirds of Thriller Bark. An Incident at Sabaody Archipelago and Destruction of the Straw Hat Crew, a bit too long of a title and descriptive of a title.

Other than that, you don't seem to be adding anything else to the article that could inform or help readers. No pics, no additional research, no references, just your preferences on how the section should be arranged.Mugiwara Franky 04:58, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

That's only the case for the Brook article.

The article should be organized as such: One section for everything leading up to the current timeline, a section for the Thriller Bark Arc, a section for the Sabaody Archipelago arc, and a section for the current arc. The arcs aren't that far into detail enough to split them apart so heavily. The Pope 05:21, November 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * That can't work in some cases. Some arcs have characters doing little to absolutely nothing. An example of this happening is Sanji's involvement in Whiskey Peak where he mostly slept. Some arcs characters have characters doing a whole lot of things. An example is Nami's involvement in Skypiea where her interaction is almost as much as Luffy's.


 * For Brook, it started out like this. A major section that deals with his first life and ends with his second life. The section was split based on major turning points in Brook's first life. The next major section dealt with Brook's experiences with Thriller Bark. It was split based on major turning points involving the island. These included first arrival and meeting the Straw Hats, return, fighting Moria and Oars, and the end and joining with the Straw Hats. After that it was regular Straw Hat section with Sabaody since he officially joined then, and then a section based on separation and cover story.


 * As for details, you should really look more closely at the content that you are rearranging. It's not just a few paragraphs, it's a lot of paragraphs. A long series of paragraphs that get really tiresome for some people to look at. Think of one long paragraph that has more than a 100 sentences. Think of a novel without any chapter divisions. A long series like that is hard to keep track with especially if you don't put any significant markers. Pictures could help but only so much. You need some significant divisions to help people do things like read and edit. I mean a relative small section is easier to read and edit without conflicts with other editors.


 * I know you want the Straw Hats to have a completely uniformed history division based on saga and arc however that really can't work. The Saga and arc division works perfectly for the entire story as a whole. For individual characters especially the Straw Hats, it can't. If applied to each of the Straw Hats, you get completely unbalanced sections. You get sections super small. You get sections super large. You get a History section that doesn't look good in appearance overall.


 * Listen, I wish you would stop placing important content as second fiddle.


 * There's the whole division rearrangement thing you do without adding anything else. A severe case of that problem besides you and me, is the problem you had with Coldhandzz. He may not have been adding anything significant to Zoro's history but neither were you. Both of you weren't making a progress but Coldhandzz was at least trying to make the titles more easier.
 * There's the whole swamping of large ass pics you do with almost no regards to the content beside it. Sometimes it significant, sometimes its repetitive or unnecessary. Pics no matter how epic they are, can not be placed before words especially in a small history section. If you want to swamp a section with pictures that take too much center stage, why not upload the entire manga.
 * There's that argument you had with Angel over one stupid quote in Doflamingo. The quote is epic but like pics you do, it seemed to take center stage over everything else. Angel tried taking it out in order to direct focus to the more important content, however all you did was constantly revert her work without adding anything significant.


 * I am really getting tired of all these problems you cause. Most of them all seem to originate on how you want things to look. There's nothing wrong with that except when it is the only thing you do without adding anything else and it interferes with others, the its too much.Mugiwara Franky 10:49, November 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't mind them at all, Buh has the best of intentions at least, only problem is trying to find a compremise here. MF, perhaps we should stop editing the SHs and come up with a more fesible plan that we can all stick to, like the basic layout we had in the early days of the wikia.  I must admit as of late one of the reasons why I've not set aside time for rereading of old chapters is I'm unsure of the flow of things right now. I note with the SHs, whereas we once had ALL histories identical to each other we now find that the SHs are being set up differently and theres no note to tell everyone how and why they are different.  Its not until now that you and Buh are tearing each others' eyes out I'm reading and starting to understand a little of whats been going on. One-Winged Hawk 11:35, November 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * The thing with the Straw Hats is that the majority of them are poor articles. Most are not up to date. Most are disorganized in a sense. Most are empty. Most have info that isn't exactly together with the main character. As the main major articles of the wikia, some form of editing is required of them so people at least well informed. One way to help them read, navigate, and maybe edit is by the use of relatively medium sized sections. Super long sections and super short sections based on one form of order maybe consistent but it doesn't help. I mean how many times have you experienced editing something only to find out that another person made another edit at the same time that conflicts yours. Super long sections are more prone to this than medium sized ones.Mugiwara Franky 12:30, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Buh is almost like DS. Yeah I know I'm not helping here yet I wanted to say something

Joekido 11:26, November 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * Resemblance huh? well I were here in this case but i have no comment because grammar is wrong. Coldhandzz 12:03, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

If you're worried that that's all I'm doing, then I think you're forgetting that I am single-handedly writing the entire Marineford Arc page. The Pope 14:52, November 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * I see your writing style clearly on the page. Huge pictures and Huge sections. Though it lacks somewhat order, its a contribution. That type of writing style however can't work in a regular character history section. In an article such as a character, it requires some aid for the the readers and editors alike as it is a big article. Some slight navigation for people to use. Some balanced form of writing in the sections for people to say that this wasn't just made by amateurs. Not just random pics and section sizes.


 * Having the Saga and arc division consistency among the Straw Hats maybe good, however the consistency present in the majority of the articles are also very ugly and unprofessional. One example is a part in Chopper's history. The section is consistent but it is very ugly and unprofessional. If I were to research stuff and make it less easier for people to look at and edit, are you gonna say that the almost one huge paragraph section version is better because it is consistent.Mugiwara Franky 15:16, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's not like I wrote the paragraph. I have no problem with it getting split up into smaller paragraphs. The Pope 15:17, November 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes but when those smaller paragraphs become too many and require some smaller sections in order to better maintain them, are you gonna opt for one huge section that is hard to maintain even for a single person or several smaller ones that are easier to maintain for everybody.Mugiwara Franky 15:22, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Vandal on the Brook page
Hold off editing Brook's page for a while, we've got a vandal on there. Lets focus on getting edits in later once he has gone. One-Winged Hawk 19:43, November 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm going to sit back and let the brat vandalise now. His presistance is going to make his punishment worst so might as well let him dig his grave deeper.  Don't undo his edits, let MF find them now. One-Winged Hawk 19:48, November 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay he appears to have stopped, we can continue. If he does it again, stop and let him vandalise, it only gives us more reason to ban him, the more he does it.  One-Winged Hawk 19:59, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Before any edit war begins on Crocodile's page
It's speculation. No where in the series did it say that Crocodile was carefree like Luffy in the past, unless we hear Crocodile say something about hiis past or if it was stated in the Databooks then we'll leave it.

Joekido 05:27, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Marineford Arc or Buh6173 Arc
I don’t care what MF told you but I want to remind you that the article is not YOUR responsibility only. Tipota 05:37, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Fine; if you want to leave that image, then I'll leave it. I just don't want him chewing me out.The Pope 05:39, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Impel Down and Enies Lobby templates
Umm, just a little question. They're great and all but what about the World Gov't template. Impel Down and Enies Lobby are technically directly underneath the World Government? Isn't it abit repetitive to create more than navigational template?Mugiwara Franky 04:49, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

There are some that qualify for Enies Lobby and not the other Cipher Pols, like CP9, and some that qualify solely for Enies Lobby, like Seastone and the Sea Train. The Pope 04:51, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes but the way that you're making some things is kinda breaking conventions. The templates you've added to Water 7 for one thing, the majority of them don't belong there.Mugiwara Franky 04:57, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Well let's see...

- Those civilians all live in Water 7 - Franky Family is based in Water 7 - Tom's Workers were in Water 7 - Galley-La Company is in Water 7

The only one I guess is kinda debatable is the Enies Lobby one, and that's only due to the fact that they're interconnected by the Sea Train.

Actually, what should be done is they should be merged into one main template for Water 7, listing all of the citizens, terminology, Sea Train, etc.The Pope 05:00, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Gimme a bit; I'll merge them myself. The Pope 05:06, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * In Water 7, you placed story arc and saga templates.


 * If your going for one template for all of Water 7, okay I guess that could work. But if that's so, why not one single template for all the WG specific workers?


 * Also I think a proper discussion with the whole community about this is needed before total merging as its breaking conventions.Mugiwara Franky 05:08, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Enies Lobby, being the focal point of an entire arc and one of the major posts of the World Government, is significant to garner its own template. Each and every facet of Water 7 is not. The Pope 05:18, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * The navigational boxes are based on groups not on arcs. In Enies Lobby, there are three separate groups stationed there, Enies Lobby staff, a branch of Cipher Pol, and some Marines. Two thirds of that group are directly under the World Government. Since Impel Down and Enies Lobby have templates, does that mean Marineford should get one too. It kinda breaks convention if it doesn't get one, and it kinda is redundant if it does get one since it will be just a smaller copy of the Marine template.Mugiwara Franky 05:31, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay just stop merging all the Water 7 people until you have a proper discussion with the whole community as to whether they should be merged or not.Mugiwara Franky 05:44, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

What discussion is to be had? On their own, they're all tiny templates, and a lot of them aren't even put together right. This template is based around the city as a whole, encompassing all those within it. It's much more organized that way, and none of the organizations are prevalent enough to require their own templates. The Pope 05:52, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

The difference is that no one is really shown to be stationed specifically at Marineford; everyone who has gathered there are just regular Marines who aren't necessarily assigned to that location like CP9 and the Impel Down staff. The Pope 05:32, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * In Marineford, there are apparently specific Marines such as John Giant stationed there.Mugiwara Franky 05:45, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

That's one character; if it turns out that there are lots of marines stationed there, then maybe a template will help, but Marineford will most likely be either destroyed or abandoned by the end of the arc, so I don't see that happening.

And can you please stop undoing the Water 7 template? You have absolutely no reason to do so, and it's getting annoying. The Pope 05:49, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * You are not putting up a discussion for everyone to participate in. You may want merging, I may want merging, but some people may not want merging.


 * In Marineford, there's also Sengoku, Brandnew, and several Marines stationed there originally before the war.Mugiwara Franky 05:51, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * You may feel that there is no need for a discussion but since it is a major decision, it does require a discussion. There are other people in the wikia.Mugiwara Franky 05:55, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Again, if it's only a few people then it shouldn't have its own template; a Mariejois template, however, may be a different story once it comes into light. The Pope 05:57, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * There maybe a few people in the certain templates but a discussion with the rest of the community is seriously needed about merging is needed.


 * If there is going to be two templates about two thirds of the three major posts, then having three would only be proper. For a Mariejois one, if it's going to be created, then the need for a Marineford will only become more apparent.Mugiwara Franky 06:03, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Fine; if you want to make a Marineford template, then I won't object. Though I'm not sure if you should stick with Marineford-specific people, or include Admirals and whatnot.

And can you put the Water 7 templates back to how they were? The Pope 06:08, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

And the Impel Down character pages? This is getting ridiculous. The Pope 06:09, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * It's getting ridiculous because you are creating multiple problems without as so much as slowing down or discussing things properly.


 * One problem arose however you made it much worse by doing other things while the problem was still being discussed.


 * Right now, there's the colorschemes, navigational templates for WG workers, navigational templates for Water 7 characters, and if I look after finish writing this, you're probably created another one.Mugiwara Franky 06:18, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I'm not touching Kinjishi or Revolutionaries at the moment, but they need to be changed.

If you want to create a Marineford template, then that's fine; I won't object.

Water 7 is one big city, so one template should do to fit them all. It's bad if one character has three templates, all of them focusing around Water 7. The Pope 06:24, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * The Shiki and Revolutionaries are not being edited but because there are discussions going on that are too fast and easily overlooked, there is still a problem.


 * A Marineford one is redundant but required if there are going to be templates for Impel Down and Enies Lobby.


 * While merging some templates maybe needed, a discussion about merging with the whole community beforehand is more needed as it won't step on anybody's shoes. The templates are focusing on groups not on locations or arcs. If a character has three different templates because he belongs to three different groups then find. However, if a character has one template that focuses on one group and another template that is basically a larger scale that includes the first template, then that's abit redundant.Mugiwara Franky 06:37, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Either way, there are bound to be groups within groups. Some of the smaller groups are important enough to mandate their own template. But with the Water 7 sub-groups, the groups were too tiny to be considered for their own templates. And even if they were, the templates were too sloppy.

It's better to have one template concerning the entire city, than a million tiny templates covering every niche within it.The Pope 06:41, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * For the Water 7 templates, that maybe so but merging them all right away without the go ahead of even a third editor is just rude.


 * The navigational templates were made to group certain characters together by group. Making a subdivision template of a bigger template is just as bad or worse than merging characters together. It is making redundancy prevalent.Mugiwara Franky 06:48, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Just stop already and talk
Okay just please stop what're your doing and just talk about making huge changes.Mugiwara Franky 06:06, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Well what else
Well, what else your majesty? Do you want me to revert back all of your procedure breaking edits? Do you want to make every character have your own templates and colorschemes? Do you want every pic you want regardless of quality? Do you want everything towards your preferences regardless of the rest of the community? Say now cause I'll bulldoze the whole wikia just to please a guy like you who likes to jump right ahead and change order.Mugiwara Franky 15:36, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Are you done being a baby?

You sure? All right. Now then...

The color scheme you set the Revolutionaries to doesn't work; it's just as difficult to read.

What we need is one that you can actually read, while still sticking relatively close to Dragon's colors. The Pope 16:59, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I think you need to shut up Buh. Your a pain in our asses.

Joekido 18:42, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

And what do you have to do with anything? The Pope 19:01, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Joekido's expressing his view of you based on what happened. You know, apart from contributing text that happens once every week with every new chapter, the majority of renowned actions, "not edits", you do pushes alot of buttons for an editor or two once in awhile. They're seriously overshadowing what good you do for the community.Mugiwara Franky 23:42, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Well whatever I do, I'm trying to do it for the sake of the Wiki.

Now can we please get the Revolutionary color scheme settled? The Pope 23:44, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * What part are focusing your reading anyway in template anyway, the word "Revolutionaries" only or every single text with the colorscheme? Here's what it originally looks like on an infobox. Then another version. And now this.


 * Anyway, what you do I believe is in good faith. The wrong thing however is that while it maybe in good faith, its not always necessarily good and is often meaningless. Merging a whole bunch of templates immediately without a proper community discussion while the idea was still being made, is at the top of the things I know that that you are guilty of. We spent the whole day arguing about that and nothing significant was really made, kinda like the Donquixote quote and the edit war on Zoro.Mugiwara Franky 00:10, November 18, 2009 (UTC)


 * All right all right all right...


 * And I'm talking about the red text over the green background. It doesn't come out right, and is difficult and straining to the eye to read. The last color scheme I suggested, that with the pale green background and red font, provides for best readability while still fitting in with Dragon's theme. The Pope 00:13, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Okay, now that we've got the Revolutionary color scheme settled...

Can you put the Water 7 citizens back to having the Water 7 template? It is all confined in one "group": the city of Water 7.

If you really thing that Galley-La, Tom's Workers, Franky Family, and the ordinary citizens should all get their own templates, then I suggest you clean up the templates they have, because right now they're a mess.

I say "you", because I know that if I do it, you'll go into a fit. The Pope 15:19, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Categories
A page should be included in a category only if it isn't already in a sub-category; e.g. all articles on pirate crews should be included into Category:Pirate Crews, but not in the Category:Pirates or the Category:Organizations since the Pirate Crews is a catwegorized in these two categories. Otherwise, these categories will become overloaded. It cannot depict more then 200 articles on one page, so it's not helpful for the reader. On the other hand, If we would categorize the pages directly, the Category:Pirate Crews would become superfluous. El Chupacabra 14:19, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily; it's all right for a category to have all of the things about it listed within there. However, if you really wanna get this solved, take it up with Mugiwara Franky; whatever he says, goes.

I just want to handle it like on wikipedia. they try to categorize pages into more specific categories and then categorize these categories into more general, for example most articles about pirates are listed not in the main Category:Pirates but in its sub-categories, and as far as I know this wikia has more or less the same policies and formal gides as Wikipedia. El Chupacabra 16:03, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Manga -> Anime images
Unfortantely, the image as depicted in the manga doesn't always match the animes version. Twice now you've replaced an image with the anime version but either your removing all but the essential upper half or your not picking the perfect matching image. Either way, read the image purposes closely and think before you replace.

Also, since you brought this up yourself, yes, we do prefer full images where possible; Image Guidelines.

Half an image in the profile section is only half the details. BTW, I don't suppose you want to comment do you here?. No one's alerted you to this discussion, which you are the subject of and personnelly, I think thats unfair. We're all entitled to our own opinions of each other and we're also allowed to defend each other don't you think. Other then conflicts of image intereasts recently I've had nothing to crib with you over, other then the revolutionary argument between you and MF getting a bit out of hand, so I'm abstaining from that page discussion. One-Winged Hawk 00:13, November 19, 2009 (UTC)