Talk:Story Arcs

Duval & Shabondy Archipelago
I was just wondering: considering that certain short arcs, including the Morgan arc at the beginning, are considered separate arcs, should we split the Duval section and the Shabondy Archipelago sections or leave them together? -StrangerAtaru 23:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think it's better to keep it there because they were near Shabondy and Duval may play an important role in that arc.

Joekido 23:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, now that those arcs are far behind us, I must bring up the question again on if they should be separate arcs.

Even though the events of the "Duval/Flying Fish Riders" arc do tie in to those of the Sabaody Archipelago arc, plenty of arcs tie into each other as well (Water 7 and Enies Lobby, Impel Down and Marineford, etc.). This arc has closure, which means that it would be perfectly fine as its own arc.


 * The thing with Duval and his gang, it didn't seem much of an arc. True it had the formula that makes an arc but it was just not exactly enough. It seemed too short and not exactly separate from Sabaody. With Water 7 and Enies Lobby, Impel Down and Marineford arc, and others, the arcs are somewhat more separate as separate arcs.


 * Water 7 was about the Straw Hats adventuring in a Venice-like city and dealing with a conspiracy. Enies Lobby was about them trying to rescue Robin in everlasting day judicial island. First part was mystery and drama, while the second was invasion.


 * Impel Down was about Luffy trying to save Ace in an underwater prison with a Hell theme. Marineford is about the massive war between Whitebeard and the Marines. First part was about going through hell, while the second is a massive turn of events.


 * The situation with Duval is about the Straw Hats trying to get to Fishman Island by helping a mermaid. Sabaody is about them trying to get to Fishman Island but end up helping the same mermaid again. First part is about getting to an underwater island, while the second part is just continuing the quest with no real difference in setting and plot.Mugiwara Franky 17:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Well yeah, of course that would work if you worded it that way.

However, the "Duval" arc is centered more around rescuing Hatchan and putting Duval's hatred of Sanji to rest, whereas the Sabaody Archipelago is more focused on the Tenryuubito and what happens if you step out of line.

And if we're talking "short" arcs, yeah, the early arcs in the series were plenty short. Length shouldn't matter as long as the arc has a general "beginning middle end".


 * Umm, don't forget to sign with four tildes ( ~ )


 * The thing with the Duval situation was to the original and foremost problem was to get to Fishman Island. The problem that the Straw Hats had in the beginning was to find a way to get to Fishman Island. In the search for the solution to that problem, they encountered the problem of Keimi. In exchange to show the Straw Hats a way, they have to help her rescue Hatchan. They rescued Hatchan and solved Keimi's problem but the original problem they originally had was still there. Going by the events with Duval, between the time Keimi's problem was concluded and before the Straw Hats went to Sabaody, the Straw Hat's still didn't know a way to go to Fishman Island. They were promised to be shown a way but without the fulfillment of that promise, the problem is still there.


 * In retrospect, the Duval thing seemed more like a sidequest than an actual quest. It felt more like a means to an end than an actual goal. It kinda felt like when the Straw Hats were searching the St. Bliss in hopes of finding answers to get to Skypiea.


 * With the Sabaody thing, it kinda continued with the original problem the Straw Hats began with. They continued looking for a way to go to Fishman Island. In the process of looking for Rayleigh, Keimi got kidnapped and Luffy punched a noble. Despite the whole auction house deal, they nonetheless found Rayleigh. In the end the Straw Hats solved their original problem with Rayleigh promising to coat their ship. Though they paid heavily at the end and caused another problem for themselves, their original problem of finding a way to Fishman Island was pretty much solved.Mugiwara Franky 18:27, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

New Arc Name
Why the heck are we calling this "Amazon Lily" arc? This arc is not defined yet and seems to be an arc based around the Straw Hats being separated and eventually reunited. You're not saying we're calling each separate island that each one is on a different arc from the last? If this was a long arc on Amazon Lily, I could get it but as it stands right now, this is just one of several islands we're going to between now and the time the Straw Hats reunite and finally go to Fishman Island. -StrangerAtaru 02:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I would call this the Breakup arc

Joekido 03:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hehe StrangerAtaru, it seems Amazon Lily is now a better name than "Straw Hats Separation". We need also a better overview for this arc, actual one is a bit strange. RougeFleur 21:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You know what: now we're on Impel Down and the whole arc was pretty much just Amazon Lily (outside the one scene with the other SHs location), I realized that I can't read Oda's mind. If you want to change the previous arc back to the "Amazon Lily arc" (though it was sort of shortish akin to, say, the Morgan arc), that is fine by me. -StrangerAtaru 11:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Red Line Saga?
I think the Red Line Saga should be considered over... And everything since Luffy landed in Amazon Lily a new one. Ideas for names though; I'm thinking something to do with the start of the new age of piracey coming, or just the coming of the war. Everything from Amazon Lily, to most likely the start of Fishman Island is going to be in this saga now by the looks of it. One-Winged Hawk 17:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

12th Mini-Arc?
In chap 543, ther's new mini-arc cover story about Sanji in Kamabakka Kingdom, it's written "短期集中連載弟12弾" (tanki shūchū rensai dai 12 dan, Short-Term Focused Series No12). I check mini-arc about Eneru, its number is 9, and about CP9, is 10. How about 11? Oda-sensei skipped 11th, didn't he? Or I missed something?--RobertTheodore 09:33, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Aw... Nobody notice this... I put the cover's picture... Check this... And nobody think about but it (new mini-arc) in to this article?

--RobertTheodore 16:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

The Whaling Debate
Can someone please do something about 24.190.39.143 and the anon's edit war against Drunk Samurai with the Laboon arc? DS has warned him/her about the vandalism, twice. But he/she continues to do it and doesn't even give a reason why.
 * GODKING OF ICE CERBERUS WERE-GARURUMON seems to have a few wars against DS too, but let's deal with this one first. Kaizoku-Hime 07:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Its obvious the person is a vandal. They keep removing valid information without giving any reason. Drunk Samurai 11:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Why do we lock a normal page that everyone can help to edit because a meanless edit war? I can access to write new mini-arc about my <3<3<3<3<3 Robin. Admin, please reconsider your choose, it's not reasonable!


 * Forgot it, if I can't edit, Can everyone write it for me. This is new mini-arc 12: Robin's "How Terrible You Are?" (ロビンのひどい事つるわ Robin no hidoikoto tsuru wa)--RobertTheodore 03:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

why is this page locked? >=[. Someone add Robins "How Terrible Your People Are." Oathkeeper of oblivion 08:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

wow whoever created robins arc page messed up the name. theres no question mark at the end. its "How Terrible Your People Are" 64.129.15.2 19:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Uhh..?
Why is this page locked? There might have been editing wars between TWO people, but there are many of us who can ACTUALLY make GOOD contributions. And maybe if whoever locked the page didnt lock it, Robin's title on her mini arc page wouldnt be messed. Oathkeeper of oblivion 23:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Guess who's back...24.190.39.143...Instead of locking the Story Arcs page (again), I suggest we do something about the anon, just look at his/her contributions!
 * Kaizoku-Hime 22:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ditto to that, he has already recieved one warning from DS
 * --Kingluffy1 22:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Explanation of user's actions found here on User talk page.Mugiwara Franky 02:48, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

One Piece Stage Division
I was thinking about this a while ago, One Piece has reached it's middle stage and I think we should divide One Piece story line in 3 differant stages.

Most fans would commonly call East Blue as an early stage of the story but Oda appears to laid the stages in a simple pattern so here is a list on what stages that each arcs belong too. I remamber Oda said that Jaya was a half way point but I would put the event when they arrive at the Red line as a middle stage.

Early Stage

1. Captain Morgan arc

2. Buggy the Clown arc

3. Kuro arc

4. Don Kreig arc

5. Arlong arc

6. Louge Town arc

7. Reverse Mountain arc

8. Whiskey Peak arc

9. Little Garden arc

10. Drum arc

11. Arabasta arc

12. Jaya arc

13. Skypiea arc

14. Davy Back Fight arc

15. Water 7 arc

16. Enies Lobby arc

17. Post-Enies Lobby arc

18. Thriller Bark arc

Middle Stage

19. Saboady Archipelago arc

20. Amazon Lily arc

21. Impel Down arc

22. Marineford arc

Late Stage

I think this stage is still far off at this time because we have not even reached to that point yet. So in conclusion, what do you guys think?

Joekido 09:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * One Piece appears indeed to be at the middle part of the story. While the labeling maybe a bit off, I generally agree with the setup if the story was divided into three parts. However, it maybe too early to be dividing the story into such stages as we don't know yet everything.Mugiwara Franky 11:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Joekido's Early-Middle-Late setup, but I also agree with Mugiwara Franky about it being too early to set it up that way. We know there will be a Marineford and a Fishman Island arc, that much is certain. But we don't know how many more there will be once they reach the New World. It may be as long as the first half of the Grand Line, but most likely be longer. Oda originally planned for One Piece to last for 5 years...it's been twice that long. So he probably doesn't know how long the series will be himself.
 * Kaizoku-Hime 20:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Kanji
I was wondering if anyone knows where I can find the kanji version for This Week's Franky is No-Good? Thanks =)Oathkeeper of oblivion 21:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Added Marineford arc
Impel Down arc pretty much over and done with, so I figured might as well make a new section. Course if the story turns out different, please don't be afraid to change the title of the arc as well. Retro7 19:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Getting names
I understand how the arcs are named, based on the location the Straw Hat Pirates visit and main location the arc focuses on, but how are the sagas named?


 * Fans making things up. However, with the release of Green, we now currently have two sets of "Official" names and Designations for the Sagas. Oda's/Shueisha's and Viz's.


 * Here's Viz's:
 * East Blue
 * Baroque Works
 * Skypiea
 * Water Seven
 * Thriller Bark
 * Impel Down
 * The Paramount War


 * Here's Oda's from Green, complete with Chapter designations:
 * Episode 1 - 冒険の夜明け - The Dawn of Adventure - 1-95
 * Episode 2 - 偉大なる航路「グランド・ライン」への挑戦 - The Challenges of the Grand Line - 96 - 216
 * Episode 3 - 天空の黄金卿 - The Golden Lord of Heaven [Heavenly Sky] - 217 - 318
 * Episode 4 - 麦わらの一味対世界政府 - The Straw Hat Crew vs. The World Government - 319 - ４４１
 * Episode 5 - ゴースト島「アイランド」の冒険 - The Adventure on Ghost Island - 442 - 513
 * Episode 6 - 進入！　大監獄！！ - Break In! The Great Prison!!　- 514 - 549
 * Episode 7 - 史上最大の決戦 - The Great Decisive Battle [The War on the Summit/ The Paramount War] - 550 - 597


 * Every "Official" version designates Thriller Bark and Impel Down as their own separate Sagas. I say we change the wiki to ahere to what Green says.DemonRin 03:10, November 5, 2010 (UTC)

Well, if he went out of his way to denote those as arcs, then I guess we should go with his word

The question is, do we keep the old names or go with these names?

Though...I find it kind of odd that his clumps go 95 chapters, then 121, 102, 123, then suddenly down to 72, 36, and 48. Just feels a tad too laser-focused at the end, there. The Pope 03:17, November 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * Go with Oda's names, definitely. We have two official arc names now, one from Viz and One from Oda. The "Sagas" as the Wiki currently has them are actually closer to Viz's than Odas, so all of you who like to run away from "Official English" names would probably be happy to switch to Oda's so you aren't using the same as Viz anymore for East Blue, Baroque Works, and Skypiea at least.


 * Also of Note: Oda includes the Davy Back Fight as part of the same Saga as Skypiea (incidentally, Toei made sure the DBF Arc was lumped in with the G8 Arc, and don't count it as Part of their "Water Seven" Chapter either.)
 * Oda marks the "Straw Hat Crew Vs. The World Government" Saga as beginning right on the chapter when they first meet Aokiji.
 * He also denotes the War as beginning a whole two chapters later than the Wiki currently does. Basically, it appears that as long as Magellan and Impel Down are still appearing in Chapters, its not the WB War yet!DemonRin 03:29, November 5, 2010 (UTC)

Woah, this is actually a good point. Why aren't we using the databook names? It will rid us of conjectural articles. 14:02, April 1, 2013 (UTC)

SOOOOOOO...when are we going to start revamping? This article has been sitting as a stub for a while now, and far as I know, there hasn't been anything done to improve it to this. Also finally. Thriller Bark is realized as its own Saga. Though, speaking of calling it "Sagas", are we still going to refer to it as sagas or "Episodes"?

Giant Shy Guy (talk) 18:31, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Didn't know about this. It should be taken there: Forum:Saga Official Names. @Giant Shy Guy: we will start revamping (or not) when discussion on the aforementioned forum is over!

Concern
I don't mean to speculate, and this is sord of a "what if" question or something we should prepare for, but if the Straw Hat Pirates end up visiting Marine HQ in the New World, since we already have a Marineford Arc, what would we call this possible future arc? (68.36.166.78 00:46, December 18, 2010 (UTC))


 * There's always a possibility, in that case we would have to think about it, just like Sabaody Return Arc.GMTails 20:32, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

3 ideas for more accurate saga/arcs
1) The Whitebeard War arc is way too large and unfocused. The Ice Hunter, Thriller Bark and Sabaody Archipelago arcs take up a considerable chunk of the story, and they have nothing to do with Whitebeard. Also, the entire straw hat crew being defeated and scattered across the world at the end of Sabaody feels signifigant enough to be a change into a new saga. I think the fifth saga should be everything after Enies Lobby, up to and including Sabaody (maybe even put the Post-Enies Lobby arc in here, the viking funeral of the Going Merry at the end of the Enies Lobby arc was signifigant enough to be the end of the CP9 saga, but that's up to you). As for a name, how about the Florian Triangle saga? the crew certainly spends a lot of time there, and Sabaody is just what happens immediatly after the Florian Triangle. Then Amazon Lilly until the time skip should be the sixth saga, the Whitebeard War saga, and it will cover all the time Luffy spends away from his crew, trying to save Ace :(

2) The Post-War arc feels like two smaller arcs stuck together. Luffy's history and backstory (episodes 493-505) should be seperate from the crew trying to get back to sabaody, then seeing the message in the newspaper, then deciding to train for 2 years (episodes 506-516). How about calling them something like the "Three Brothers Arc" and the "3D2Y Arc"?

3) Calling the new saga the "New World Saga" doesn't make any sense. The crew isn't even in the new world yet. Fishman Island is just the gateway into the new world. Everything after Fishman Island will (probably) be in the New World. Besides, doesn't the entirety of the second half of One Piece after Fishman Island happen in the new world? Putting the entire second half into one saga doesn't make any sense. How about calling it the "Deep Sea Saga" or "The Abyss Saga" or even just the "Fishman Saga"

This of course is assuming that you guys just made up where the arcs/sagas are and what their names are. If these are official then ignore me. Sorry for the wall of text -_-

Sausageandwaffle 07:00, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

The Whitebeard War Saga starts from the time Ace and Teach had their battle until chapter 597. Flashbacks aren't considered their own arcs. As for the arcs, they are broken up based on the main location visited. 22:10, October 22, 2011 (UTC)

I never even noticed this. Remove all the filler arcs from the sagas since they are not canon. I also don't count the post-Enies lobby as its own arc. It was still part of the previous arc. SeaTerror 21:53, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

No need. It's an all inclusive page and the filler arcs are noted further down. 03:24, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

This is supposed to be about the manga more than it is the anime that is why they should be removed. Just leave them in the other section. SeaTerror 04:38, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Just because we give preferential treatment to the manga doesn't mean we should ignore when and where filler happens in the anime story line. The setup right now gives the complete storyline in both the anime and the manga, making sure to separate filler from canon. 04:49, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Length of Arc Pages
Ok, I have addressed this issue before, but I think it is something that at least needs to be considered. The arc pages seem way too long to me. For someone just kinda skimming through the arcs, trying to find something, do you want to read through the wall of text? I don't. I think we should cut down the arc pages to the main points and not much else. Leave the detailed descriptions of everything to the chapter pages, where we specifially have "Long Summary" sections. Looking here, I see a tiny scroll bar and a ton of grammar mistakes. I would go through and fix them myself, but I think that we should discuss this first, in case we do decide to do something. That is all. (I dont really know if this was the right place to bring this up, but I didn't want to write this on all of the arc pages, because all of the ones I have seen have this problem.)  PX15 | What's up? |5:16 25/Nov/2011 UTC

No. These are summaries of the arcs which require a lot of text. SeaTerror 06:48, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

SeaTerror is right. There are some articles that simply have to be lengthy like the arc pages. Doing anything with it would either take out important details or make a tedious substructure that's more complicated than it needs to be so in the end it's just best to leave it as is and grin and bear it. 07:19, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

This article really needed?
I don't think this article is as consistent as the other two big release articles, which is the Episode Guide and the Chapters and Volumes list. It's kind of obsolete and seems very redundant. Almost seems like a copy of the other two articles.

Bump.

Divide the 2 Parts
Since it has been anounced the One Piece is divided into 2 halfs and Oda said the first was called Super Rookies and that the 2nd was called The Sea of Survival i think they should have pages, the series as a whole is divided into 2 parts, each part is divided into sagas and each saga is divided into story arcs. Adriano1995 (talk) 00:57, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

Announced where? Sounds like a bunch of BS to me. Give me an official link and then I'll believe you. 99.106.137.236 19:35, February 6, 2013 (UTC)

New special announced
Toei has officially announced a Dream 9 one hour special - coming up on April 7th:

Part 1: 走れ最強軍団！トリコとルフィと悟空！ Part 2: 史上最強コラボＶＳ海の大食漢

Toriko, One Piece, and Dragon Ball Z together. -- [ defchris ] · [ Diskussion ] · 16:12, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

spoiler summary
Hey, guys, I think maybe some of the synopses for the story arcs are a bit spoileriffic. Escpecially for the Punk Hazard Arc. The fact that "Joker" is actually Donquioxte Doflamingo is a pretty big reveal that took place somewhere in the middle of the arc. Perhaps this should be changed?Son of God-Enel (talk) 09:02, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

If people didn't want spoilers, they wouldn't be reading a summary of the current chapter content. 09:14, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

No, not the actual summaries on the individual arc or chapter pages. I'm talking about the synopses--not summaries--of the arcs on the broader Story Arc pages. There really shouldn't be mid-arc spoilers on an arc's synopsis. Could you imagine going to buy a movie DVD, looking on the back to read what it's about, and seeing a mid-movie plot reveal thrown right onto the back of the case?Son of God-Enel (talk) 13:11, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Probably time to add the "Caesar Retrieval Arc" if thats what were calling it.91.125.113.87 06:43, January 7, 2014 (UTC) FenrisCain

We give warnings about spoilers on here. If people are still too dumb to realize what they're getting into when they start reading the summaries, then that's their problem. 07:50, January 7, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but I'm not talking about the chapter summaries. I'm talking about the synopsis on the Story Arc page, which is like reading the back of a DVD case. There really shouldn't be any spoilers there, regardless of what spoiler warnings are on the site. Son of God-Enel (talk) 13:16, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

There's a massive big spoiler warning right on the main page. Can't miss it. And why would anyone read an Arc summary if they didn't know what happened in the arc, and not expect there to be spoilers?

13:43, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Only stupid people go to a wiki and expect not to get spoiled. SeaTerror (talk) 15:16, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Spoilers just come with the territory here. Either we spoil, or we sound vague and dodgy. 15:50, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

But we aren't talking about the arc summary in that arc's page. We're, or at least I'm, talking about the Story Arc page's synopsis (synopses, synopsises, I don't know). Again, it's like the summary on the back of a DVD case. No, mid-arc spoilers don't go there. Read the other synopses, then see why the Doflamingo spoiler shouldn't go on the Story Arc page. Of course it should go in the Punk Hazard Arc summary, but we aren't talking about the Punk Hazard Arc page; we're talking about the Story Arcs page. The synopses, not the full detailed summaries. There should not be mid-arc spoilers in there. Read the synopsis on the back of a DVD case to see what I mean. The reveal that Doflamingo is Joker is definitely something that should on the Punk Hazard Arc page's summary, but not on the synopsis for the Story Arc page. That spoiler--one sentence--should be removed.

Does everybody get what I'm talking about? NOT an arc's full detailed summary on its own page. I'm talking about the synopses on the Story Arc page itself. There should not be spoilers there because they do not belong there, no matter how many spoiler warnings you throw on the main page.Son of God-Enel (talk) 19:12, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

despite what you think they do belong there and your whining isnt going to change that-- 19:15, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

every think in the wiki is a spoiler that's there is warning in the main page Lord Gaimon (talk) 19:18, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Nobody's whining. I'm stating a case that a mid-arc spoiler should be removed from an area that it doesn't belong.

And they don't belong there.Son of God-Enel (talk) 23:30, February 5, 2014 (UTC)

Says only you. SeaTerror (talk) 23:55, February 5, 2014 (UTC)

This is literally the first thing on the main page:

"Please be aware, before progressing any further on the One Piece Encyclopedia, that this site contains heavy SPOILERS."

They're totally fine the way they are. 00:59, February 6, 2014 (UTC)

Is the term "Saga" official?
Are the Sagas officially called Sagas, or it's made up from fans? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 20:57, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

Oda does split many parts of the story into "sagas", as he names them in databooks. Plus, I believe Viz uses them as well. The term "arc" isn't official, but it's a basic term when used for story-telling. 21:56, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

Where's 3D2Y?
Someone add the newest special "3D2Y: Overcome Ace’s Death! Luffy’s Vow to his Friends" because it is not in the list. I can't do it because I don't know how to do so...Norman Fong Ochoa (talk) 02:56, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Little East Blue Arc
Why isn't the Little East Blue Arc included in the table at the top of the page? Instead, its episodes are included as part of the Straw Hat's Separation Serial for some reason. 72.200.179.31 17:46, March 26, 2015 (UTC)

Because that arc is anime filler, and happened in the middle of the Impel Down arc. It's in the list based on release date.

17:51, March 26, 2015 (UTC)

Yonko Saga
We need to add new section for Yonko Saga / Whole Cake Island arc and maybe move Zou too, depending on polling results. Jakisuaki (talk) 16:11, April 21, 2016 (UTC)

yeah we know :) 16:15, April 21, 2016 (UTC)

Names of arcs by official French publisher
I've noticed this year that my regular book shop received bookmarks from the manga's French publisher, Glénat. Those are to be inserted between volumes on the store's shelves to mark story parts in the series, with indication of the volumes covering them. I'm thinking they're given to retailers to help clients who want to buy whole arcs. I have no idea if other publishers did the same, so I wouldn't call these official. I'm still posting this here in case it can help as reference and if other international publishers of the manga did the same kind of marketing operation.


 * East Blue (v.1 -> 12)
 * Alabasta (v.12 -> 23)
 * Skypiea (v.24 -> 32)
 * Water Seven (v. -> 46)
 * Thriller Bark (v.46 -> 50)
 * "Guerre au sommet" (Summit War) (v.50 -> 60)
 * "Nouveau monde" (New World) (v.61 -> 62)
 * "Île des hommes-poissons" (Fishman Island) (v.62 -> 66)
 * Punk Hazard (v. 66 -> 70)
 * Dressrosa (v.70 -> 80)
 * Zo (v.80 -> 82)
 * "Île Tougato" (Whole Cake Island) (v. 82 -> __ )

I took photos of them, in case there's a need for a visual reference.

Pauolo (talk) 21:32, November 12, 2018 (UTC)

Viz did a similar thing for the English releases, and printed their arc titles on the covers as part of the logo: LostTL (talk) 19:47, November 13, 2018 (UTC)
 * East Blue (Volumes 1-12)
 * Baroque Works (12-24)
 * Skypea (24-32)
 * Water Seven (32-46)
 * Thriller Bark (46-50)
 * Sabaody (50-54)
 * Impel Down (54-56)
 * Paramount War (57-61)
 * New World (61 onward)

Arc Names
The only confirmed names for the Japanese sagas are for the first half while the only ones for the second half are from VIZ Media. What are the sources for the other sagas, or the arcs for that matter?--Rgilbert27 (talk) 13:14, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

Various interviews and sources like magazine covers and previews. Rhavkin (talk) 13:25, January 22, 2019 (UTC)
 * And also fan names if an official wasn't given. Rhavkin (talk) 13:26, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

Well sources should be added to said pages and/or why they are named, officially and non-canon wise, because if there story arcs we need to know if they have, and when they change, names.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 14:20, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

It'll be hard since most interviews are translated by semi-official sources. Just look in each arc and\or saga talk page for the name source. Rhavkin (talk) 17:12, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

The arc names have typically been fanmade. "Yonko Saga" was used in Shonen Jump while Fish-Man Island and Dressrosa Saga are currently fanmade and thus have the Conjectural Name template on them. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 17:40, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

Still this has been going on for too long. While the anime has the Thriller Bark Saga split between three arcs the manga has just the arc and the official sites, both Japan and VIZ, have Nico Robin listed as part of the crew no later than the Sky Island Saga.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 17:55, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

What does that have to do with the names? Rhavkin (talk) 17:59, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

That it comes from an official source is cause for confusion and that we need to archive our sources when they come out.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 18:46, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

What I meant was, why would the number of arc in the TB saga, or Robin's joining has to do with the arc/saga name? Rhavkin (talk) 19:23, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

Because the official source doesn't name arcs, just list parts.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 19:59, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

The arc names came from Shounen Jump. If they didn't then we would still be using fan names on them all including the saga names. SeaTerror (talk) 21:07, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

Provide your source.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 21:54, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

Forum:Saga Official Names SeaTerror (talk) 22:24, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

That was a discussion, 5 years old it seems, not a source for the names that came out then or even now. Without a source, the names for the arcs that makeup the sagas for the first half of the series are conjectural at best and there's little confirmation for those of the second half. The only official confirmation is from Japan's site and VIZ's covers, so from now on when an arc's name has an official source a link should be provided to verify the name and if the link is dated we archive it.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 20:25, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

I still don't see what the problem is here. To clear things up, "saga" and "arc" are the same word in Japanese. We create pages for arcs and put them under the umbrella of larger sagas to help with navigation and prevent bloat. So while we do try to base saga names on official sources as much as possible, there's a more leniency in terms of naming arcs - typically, their names are fanmade by default. So it is not a massive problem for an arc article to have a fanmade name, unless an official source provides a different one to consider (such as Whole Cake Island Arc). You are more than welcome to search for arc names from official sources and cite them, but the fate of the arc articles do not depend on it. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 21:04, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

Like Kaido said, look for yourself. If you can find an official source, we'll gladly take it. But instead of always asking other people for their sources, you should do a little legwork and find one of your own. 21:36, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

Maybe saga is the same as arc in Japanese but the sagas on the site above are split into "parts" not "arcs" and the only proof of arc names I see are from scanlation chapters. The only arc to be given a name in the story so far is the Wano Country Arc and even it is split into parts, (i.e. acts). I don't know where the admins get there magazine images from but if they get there arc names from that, then maybe a way to backtrack shouldn't there.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 22:17, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

What Noland said, look it up and find actual evidence for official names. Then it can be discussed.

22:55, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

I'm not the one who can translate, the others in the discussion seem to be the ones who can.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 23:06, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

In this discussion? None of us can translate. Maybe in the other one, but you should try to find a translated source or a translator. Until you post a new source, this will go nowhere. 23:24, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

The problem is the arcs/sagas that do have official names don't have sources to back them up.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 23:45, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

They're provided in the forum that ST linked. Again, I fail to see how this is an issue. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 02:30, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

Again, that forum is from 5 years ago. It doesn't have any of the arcs that came out since then or whether arcs like:


 * Romance Dawn Arc
 * Reverse Mountain Arc
 * Jaya Arc
 * Long Ring Long Land Arc

are conjectural or official and for arcs that may have names revealed in the magazine are not given a source to confirm that it is official.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 03:22, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

I already explained the differences between arcs and sagas, the situation for post-timeskip sagas and how arcs don't need a source for pages to be made. If you wish to find and add sources for names, go ahead, but our current system has been discussed plenty already and this is not of high importance. And please do not keep re-adding the Active Discussion template, not every discussion needs it especially one where there is nothing to discuss and where it's you against 5 people. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 03:58, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

Your wrong. The only arc with a source is Wano as mentioned above. The only sagas with a source on there page are the first half. The only source on the names for the second half are from VIZ Media's covers, which has merged the first two along with most of the third, that lists two. The sub-headliners, or whatever, on the magazine's chapters are the only source I've found for arc names. Now whether this is conjectural from the scanlation group that scans the chapter or not is unknown to me but to the users that can translate the chapters/upload the cover images before the tankōbon's release could say otherwise. There is an issue and it needs to be discuss.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 19:16, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

You fail to understand it before so let me try again:
 * Yes, some arcs and sagas has no "official" source (VIZ is the official English translation so it is somewhat official)
 * 1) Those cases names are determined by the community, and can be altered as was done on the Totland arc -> Totto Land arc -> Whole Cake Island arc.
 * 2) If you can't provide an official source, nor have enough support for a community change, the names stay as is.
 * 3) *To change the community's mind, you would have to provide a good enough reason for the change.
 * 4) *Until you find and official source/have enough support, you do not have any ground to ask for a change.

Rhavkin (talk) 19:50, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

You just don't get it. You have the power, along with the other users who did discuss or the ones who will read this after and also have the power if not more that I can't now to do it. All I can offer is scanlations while you all could use the file histories of past chapter cover images as a starting point. I can't translate Japanese and that's sad. You just don't get it.--Rgilbert27 (talk) 20:37, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

No, You don't get it. No single user has the power to make that call, and the way they are named now is what the community has decided, and you hadn't provide any reason to change anything. And FYI, I do not speak, read, nor write Japaneses, my understanding of any raw source starts and end with Google Translate, with the rarely this. And do you really think that if at any point there was an official source in whichever language that provide a different name, we wouldn't have already discussed it? Right now you have two options:
 * 1) Accept how things are, and move on.
 * 2) Go the each arc and saga pages and ask for a source individually.

This is a page for the story arcs in a whole, not for questions that while relevant to several separate sagas and arcs, can not be discussed as a whole. Rhavkin (talk) 20:56, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

I second everything Rhavkin said. Additionally, I don't know what you mean when you say that we "have the power." Kaido and I are mods, but that doesn't give us any more say that anyone else in a discussion. I also use Google Translate, but through my own research I have found at least 2 dozen undocumented, named characters. If anyone "gets it," it' me. Like we all said before, do the legwork, if there is even anything to find that we don't already know about. 21:12, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

Like I said I can't translate Japanese, you have the power to translate I don't even know how to arrange characters. As far as I can see those arcs without a source have as much right to be on this wikia as all the other people, places and things in the series but lack a source. With sources not only come names but also length, I mean one of the arcs is over hundred each red flags anyone. We can agree that all the arcs without a source are conjectural right? So could we please just make a new template for arcs that are from the other conjectural pages?--Rgilbert27 (talk) 21:56, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

No need. According to wiki rules, unless an official source contradict it, databook info is acceptable, and if you can't find something like that, Vivre Card gave us the arcs names. Rhavkin (talk) 23:01, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

Please stop adding the active discussion template. You have three other people telling you to at least try to find sources, but you keep adding the template. At this point, Rgilbert, you're being counterproductive. 23:33, January 24, 2019 (UTC)

The template is suppose to let other users know there is a discussion right? If Vivre Card gave us names where is the reference?--Rgilbert27 (talk) 00:10, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

If you want to discuss it further, make a forum. This has gone on too long for an article talk page and is going nowhere.

20:51, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

Regarding the new Story Arc Template
I added the new (Template:Story Arc) to all of the East Blue and Alabasta Saga Arcs. Of course, I am a one man army so it can get time consuming to do stuff like this, so I hope everyone joins in to continue what I established. This new template should allow for more easy and detailed Chapter & Episode navigation + information. Many other anime Wikis have this type of template and One Piece should also follow in the same direction.

MisterLoki (talk) 19:35, July 18, 2020 (UTC)

You need to start a discussion before doing major edits. As for the template itself, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with it, but the template need major edits like including the saga color scheme, include the key plot points, and links to the categories Category:Chapters by Arc and Category:Episodes by Arc, maybe create a "Volume by Arc" category, knowing that some volumes will be be parts of two or more arcs and even sagas. And what exactly is "Anime Volumes"? Rhavkin (talk) 19:49, July 18, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that, probably should of done a dicussions beforehand. Now all the things you mentioned can be added manually again without problems. Regarding "Volume by Arc" category, I don't think it would be possible, since I have never seen something similar to that appearing on Wikis that use the same template. Anime Volumes refers to situations like Volumes 1 and 2, where Episode 5 contains content from Chapter 8 from Volume 1 and Chapter 9 from Volume 2. I noticed you reverted the changes, I will revert them back but keep the Categories for Chapters by Arc and Episodes by Arc. That is all.

MisterLoki (talk) 20:56, July 18, 2020 (UTC)

Do not revert the edits until the discussion is ovre. Anime volumes are unnecessary and confusing, and the volume by arc doesn't need to be something that was done elsewhere, we can make our own categories as we see fit. Rhavkin (talk) 21:02, July 18, 2020 (UTC)

I reverted it so the actual Content Moderators get an idea on how it would look like. I agree with the statement about making our own categories, I am not skilled in editing templates so having someone else more skilled do it is good. I guess I was a bit salty when I saw a hour of work reverted. I am also at fault for not discussing this beforehand. Lets see what the mods and admins say about this though. --MisterLoki (talk) 21:15, July 18, 2020 (UTC)

They can see it in the page history like this. Rhavkin (talk) 03:27, July 19, 2020 (UTC)


 * Well, I did some edits, but I can't seem to have the color scheme to work. Rhavkin (talk) 04:29, July 19, 2020 (UTC)

Isn't the color scheme working fine? 13:42, July 19, 2020 (UTC)

Well it didn't worked for me at first. Maybe it is the time delay for colorschemes. Anyway, unless someone has something to add to it, we can discuss on whether we use it or not. Rhavkin (talk) 15:02, July 19, 2020 (UTC)

It seems fine to me. 17:31, July 19, 2020 (UTC)

I don't think the new template works with the page's layout. Also, most of the template's space is devoted to the chapter and episode lists which are unnecessary information for the page. Dragonus Nesha (talk) 21:52, July 19, 2020 (UTC)

Special Box Sets
Hello, I'm writing this post since it can be considered as an official definition of the One Piece sagas. Since last year, Shueisha has been releasing in Japan (and soon Glénat in France as well) Special Box Sets dividing the manga in groups of volumes. I'm using this thread on the Arlong Park forums as reference btw, since I don't speak Japanese myself. The division of the manga in box sets is as follows:


 * Episode 1: Episode of East Blue (vol. 1 -> 12, 12 volumes)
 * Episode 2: Episode of Alabasta (vol. 13 -> 23, 11 volumes)
 * Episode 3: Episode of Skypiea (vol. 24 -> 32, 9 volumes)
 * Episode 4: Episode of Water Seven (vol. 33 -> 45, 13 volumes)
 * Episode 5: Episode of Thriller Bark (vol. 46 -> 53, 8 volumes)
 * Episode 6: Episode of Marineford (vol. 54 -> 61, 8 volumes)
 * Episode 7: Episode of Fish-man Island (vol. 62 -> 70, 9 volumes)
 * Episode 8: Episode of Dressrosa (vol. 71 -> 80, 10 volumes)
 * Episode 9: Episode of Wholecake Island (vol. 81 -> 90, 10 volumes)

The difference I can see with the way the wiki defined each saga is that:
 * Shueisha divided the Summit War and Dressrosa sagas in order for the Thriller Bark and Fish-man Island box sets to not be too small.
 * they divided the Four Emperor saga into at least 2 parts in order to not have a 20+ volumes box set.

For the other sagas, it pretty much follows how the wiki defined them. So do what you want of this information. Maybe it'll give editors something to chew over on the debate of the Four Emperors saga's definition. Pauolo (talk) 10:35, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I think there have already been published story arc divisions that roughly match what the wiki's using. The website, for example, uses similar divisions to the box sets but splits the series into smaller arcs. As you say, they've presumably combined smaller arcs to make the box sets a consistent size, so they're going to be a less accurate source of where each "saga" starts. LostTL (talk) 11:32, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

New Official Saga/Arc Listing
Recently the official OP 25th anniversary website posted a list of sagas/arcs. This list goes:
 * 1) East Blue Saga
 * 2) Arabasta Saga
 * 3) Sky Island Saga
 * 4) Water 7-Enies Lobby Saga
 * 5) Thriller Bark Saga
 * 6) Summit War Saga
 * 7) Fish-Man Island Saga
 * 8) Punk Hazard Saga
 * 9) Dressrosa Saga
 * 10) Zou Saga
 * 11) Whole Cake Island Saga
 * 12) Wano Country Saga

Before we rush to change anything, though, we should keep these in mind:
 * Japan makes no distinction between sagas & arcs like we do, the placement of smaller arcs into overarching sagas is mainly a fan convention.
 * The term for "saga" (編 hen) has referred to everything from a 100+ chapter long story spanning multiple islands to a three episode filler arc.
 * Given that lack of distinction, we already had gotten names for the WCI and Wano "sagas" years ago, but had translated them as "arc" instead.
 * This is not the only official arc/saga guide that has been released, and there have been differences & inconsistencies between these sources.

"Four Emperors Saga" comes from a Weekly Shonen Jump promotion. While some fans have claimed that this is a fan term, it was approved and printed in the official magazine so I don't see why it shouldn't be considered official. That being said, I do think this website and the other official guides easily supersede it. Thus, I would be in favor of getting rid of "Four Emperors Saga"; what to change it to, on the other hand, is where it gets a bit tricky.
 * We could make things simple and follow the official website verbatim, splitting Punk Hazard off from Dressrosa and splitting the Four Emperors Saga in three.
 * We could keep Punk Hazard & Dressrosa together, but split Whole Cake Island & Wano into two sagas (with Zou being with WCI and Levely being with Wano)
 * We could keep the current Four Emperors Saga as-is and rename it to Wano Country Saga, which would allow it to be more consistent with the other saga names.

Personally I support the third option but would be willing to accept the second option as well. Based on our saga layout currently, I just don't think it makes any sense to treat Punk Hazard & Zou as standalone sagas. I prefer keeping WCI & Wano in the same saga just because of how they are both closely connected with Zou and how a lot of the Big Mom plotlines were resolved in Wano, but given how Wano is treated in the manga I can also understand having it as a standalone saga. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 12:34, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with either option 1 or 2, as both are more in line with the official material than our current system. I think option 1 is likely how they're going to divide the sagas going forward, even if bundling some of them together would make sense. I oppose option 3. If we're not going to split the Four Emperors Saga, then it should retain its current name. Placing Zou and WCI under "Wano Country Saga" would be confusing and even further apart from the official material. 14:06, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

So no official source use the term "Arc"? If we go be official and the series is divided by sagas alone it more then just this page, or the sagas/arcs pages, it also include changing characters intro paragraph which labels them as arc antagonists, the antagonist page, our usage of the term arcs in cover stories, etc.. Can you be more specific about what changes would be needed in option 1 and 2? Rhavkin (talk) 16:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I believe Kaido is only proposing changes to the saga division. Arcs would simply be redistributed under the new sagas. 16:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)