Forum:Saga Official Names

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We should use the official. names and make thriller bark a saga since Oda has labelled it a saga. 18:30, April 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * We don't know whether it's Oda… but whatever.

There's also the databook saga names, as presented here. 18:40, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Oi. For the lazy butts, I'll just repost it here. VIZ and One Piece Green's (by Oda)
 * 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

So Thriller Bark and Impel Down are its own sagas. Nothing on Fishman Island or Pirate Alliance (yet), but ah. So yeah. Though I ask, do we put them as Episodes instead of Sagas now? Also, another thing, a saga doesn't necessarily mean multiple arcs. I don't know where people got that from.

EDIT: From what I see, Thriller Bark Saga is composed of Thriller Bark Arc and Sabaody Archipelago. (Doesn't really make sense, but it's Oda's way of dividing it) and Impel Down Saga is Amazon Lily Arc to Impel Down Arc (note that it ends at Chapter 549, not 548 for Impel Down). Skypiea Saga ends at Davy Back Fight Arc (note it's at Chapter 518, not 521), so anything Kuzan is part of the Water 7/CP9 Saga.

Giant Shy Guy (talk) 18:57, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Oda's word seems much better than the official site, but I wonder something. Are we still going to keep the "arcs" as a sub-category of sagas? Arcs aren't official, but it would be a serious down-grade if we remove that from the encyclopedia. 23:14, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Oh by the way, which one of these are easier for our readers to understand? Remember, we're an encyclopedia. If our information changes this drastically, it can cause a problem. This will certainly cause some confusion among the fanbase. 23:47, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Well, I go with Oda's Green databook. Website comes second, and our fanbase names are third. 06:35, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

Then let's use Oda's names. 06:41, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

Alrught let's stuff all the arcs and sagas into one, and then break them down to the seven listed above accordingly. Any disagreements? 07:05, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

Go ahead. 07:16, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

Looking at the Green list, it seems the only real change is that Thriller Bark & Sabody arcs will be made into the "Thriller Bark Saga", and Amazon Lily & Impel Down will be made into "Impel Down Saga". Everything else is more-or-less the same. 07:38, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

I guess we can wait a few days to hear some opinions in case someone protests. 07:53, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

Well,it's stupid to start a poll so if there are no objections,let's change them. 17:47, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

I personally believe we've been waiting for opinions long enough. Go go go! Giant Shy Guy (talk) 21:46, April 16, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, if DP won't change back for "no discussion" then we can start! Any volunteers for this little project? 05:43, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

I volunteer!~ Though, should we simply say the saga name, or should we add the "Episodes"? Giant Shy Guy (talk) 17:29, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

NEVERMIND. My skills aren't that great for this yet D: Giant Shy Guy (talk) 17:58, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Just pointing this out, this means Loguetown Arc is not part of the East Blue Saga. Something tells me Oda doesn't quite know how to organize his own story... 19:28, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it kinda does make sense with that. The whole premise of taking over the East Blue ended in Arlong Park Arc. Loguetown Arc marks the first appearance of Smoker, who tails Luffy upto Alabasta, where he reappears. The only one that does make sense is the Thriller Bark Saga: Thriller Bark Arc and Saboady Archipelago Arc. Giant Shy Guy (talk) 19:33, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

I would guess it's because Saboady doesn't quite fit in Impel Down because nothing in that Arc effects anything in the latter. 19:50, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Actually Saboady fits a lot with Impel Down, since it's the arc where Luffy gets sent to Amazon Lily. But in any case, I started renaming and reordering stuff with the first saga. Can someone tell what the romaji for these saga names are? Also 4kids episodes are a pain. I don't know what episode 4kids started the Loguetown arc. Giant Shy Guy (talk) 21:17, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

This is a major change, not many people participated in this discussion, and it's not straightforward to implement, so let's remain cold-headed and wait for more input. Remarks:
 * names from Green are not really Oda's. They are probably more official than those from the website, but Oda does not write the databooks—or at least not entirely. For all we know, he merely approves of the content.
 * "Magellan is the main antagonist of the 'Break In! The Great Prison!!' saga". Seriously? Everybody's OK with this?
 * What is the Japanese word used in Green for those pseudo-sagas? "Episode" is likely to be confusing on the wiki…
 * All this ruckus makes me think that we probably miss an article about official (and unofficial?) "sectionings" of One Piece.

These names are pretty terrible. I agree with Sff on all those points. It seems like this is more referring to overall arcs, not the sagas. 22:03, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

In any case, though the names are wordy for my tastes, I don't think that is a valid reason not to change to the names. And what do you mean about "referring to overall arc, not sagas"? Giant Shy Guy (talk) 22:17, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * How are we sure this specific part are "not really Oda's" then?
 * Magellan IS the main antagonist though. I don't know you were trying to get there.
 * Pseudo-sagas? All of the official sources name Thriller Bark and Impel Down as their own sagas. Nothing of "psuedo-sagas", if that's what you're referring to.
 * What do you mean?

The website seems to be referring to what we define as a saga, while the green databook is just collecting arcs together and giving them a name. 22:20, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Collecting arcs together and giving them a name sort of IS how we define sagas... 22:27, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

@Giant Shy Guy: I should have used numbers… Hope it's clearer, sorry for my sloppy English!
 * 1) That's the problem: we can't be sure. My point was that the argument "we must use these names because they're Oda's" is invalid. (Which does not mean we shouldn't use them, though.)
 * 2) The sentence sounds ridiculous. The wiki will be full of such sentences if we use these names.
 * 3) Check what you cutpasted: they are labeled as "episodes", not sagas.
 * 4) I mean that we should have an article about the various "official" sagas/episodes/whatever that we have found so far.

Ah, how about the official site then? From what it seems, Impel Down isn't listed as its own saga, though it is listed as one in VIZ and One Piece Green. Gah - conflicting sources >.>

Chapter 1: East Blue

Chapter 2: Baroque Works(?)

Chapter 3: Sky Island(?)

Chapter 4: Water 7(?)

Chapter 5: Thriller Bark(?)

Chapter 6: Paramount War(?)

Chapter 7: -

Chapter 8: -

Though, a part of me thinks the "Stories" in the Chapter pages at the site is actually the arcs, but that's another thing I guess. :v  Giant Shy Guy (talk) 22:37, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Considering the fact these arcs and sagas exist purely to organize different parts of the story, why don't we just leave it as it is? I can understand renaming them, but completely reorganizing it can confuse our readers. 22:59, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

If you mean no make Thriller Bark it's own saga, I don't agree with that, since all official sources list is as one. :u Giant Shy Guy (talk) 23:32, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

^^ 07:55, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with what we have now since the names fit and Thriller Bark is only one arc and that isn't enough to be its own saga. 02:59, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Well what's "wrong" with ours are they aren't official, while these are. 03:00, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

It's not like these "official" names have any direct influence on the story. It's not really speculation; it's just organization. 03:08, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Honestly, the website seems fine organization wise. It doesn't use crappy names, and the only difference is Thriller Bark. 03:10, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't say our names are crappy. Honestly, since nearly the entire "Baroque Works Saga" concerns Baroque Works, or nearly the entire "CP9 Saga" concerns CP9, the names fit well. But they're only names, so I don't have much of a problem with them being changed. Thriller Bark being changed is a bit of a big deal, though. It's like we're reorganizing the whole story. This will also confuse readers as we've pretty much convinced everyone, and ourselves, that "Whitebeard War Saga" begins with Thriller Bark. I highly doubt anybody is going to change their whole thought on it, and I doubt anybody is going to start organizing the arcs in their own retrospect based on ours. This just feels like something where it doesn't need to be "official" because arcs and sagas don't really exist to begin with. 03:42, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't talking about our names being crappy, I meant the green databook. I'd say we use our own thing though, and put Thriller Bark with paramount war. 03:49, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Bumping this, since Yata seems impatient to change the names.

Nah, I just lost track of where this was going... But yeah, some impatience did riled me up here. 20:06, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

We're supposed to finish discussing before a poll happens. Not to mention the length is supposed to also be discussed. SeaTerror (talk) 18:07, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Since nobody was bothering anymore even after waiting so long, it was just a standstill. 18:29, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Then discussion should have resumed. SeaTerror (talk) 18:50, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Well, nobody was joining anymore even after a bump. Not much left to say, anyways. 19:29, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

It is unclear what the second option is about. It's the same as the first one, with Thriller Bark added, right? Also, no option for the Green names?

I think the "removing category" means renaming, because the names will no longer be conjectural. 19:32, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

I know, I was talking about the second option, not the third.

Poll
Since the talk seems inconclusive and halted, let's just go to the polls to resolve the entire thing once and for all.

''This poll will decide how we name the sagas. To vote you must have 300 edits and be a registered user for at least 3 months. The poll is now open and the options are below. The poll will end in one week, on June 6 at 12:00 UTC.''

Rename the Sagas as the five above

 * 18:25, May 28, 2013 (UTC) (I may change it to the third one if I decide to.)
 * 18:25, May 28, 2013 (UTC) (I may change it to the third one if I decide to.)
 * 18:25, May 28, 2013 (UTC) (I may change it to the third one if I decide to.)
 * 18:25, May 28, 2013 (UTC) (I may change it to the third one if I decide to.)

Rename the Sagas with Thriller Bark Saga added

 * 1)  16:00, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2)  16:05, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 16:09, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 17:33, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 17:38, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 22:11, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Klobis (talk) 03:44, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 13:43, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 17:46, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 6:20, May 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * 6:20, May 31, 2013 (UTC)

Keep them as they all are (but remove "Conjectural" category)

 * 18:52, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) SeaTerror (talk) 18:56, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 20:03, May 28, 2013 (UTC) (Our current system is easier and more organized than the "official" one.)
 * 22:51, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 23:12, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * 13:21, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 13:26, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1)  (no option is really "official", better keep our own scheme.)
 * 2)  19:24, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 3)  19:00, June 1, 2013 (UTC) Ours make more sense. (Sabaody as part of Thriller Bark?!) Conflicting "official sources" make me warry of "official soures" on this issue.
 * 4)  05:11, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * 20:04, May 28, 2013 (UTC)