5,409 Pages

Forums: Index → Site Problems →  Page Issues
Note: This topic has been archived because the discussion is considered solved.
Do not add to it unless it really needs to be reopened. Consider creating a brand new forum instead.

Welcome to the Page Issues, where, hopefully, miscelaneous issues that do not fall in to blanket categories may be resolved. If there is a page you think violates the rules/ is uneeded, please go here One Piece Wiki:Vote for Deletion . If you think a page is in need of aditional information/images, please go here [[Pages in need of atention]] If you have any issues with personal members, do not bring them here. Please try to resolve these issues on their respective user talk pages, and if that does not work, report it to User:Mugiwara Franky ,our moderator.

The only time when you can bring individual user actions here are if they constitute a mass amount of rule violation , for instance mass amounts of page violations/ repeated spaming/ spam creation of pages. If the problem is not of this magnitude, please report it to a moderator and or nominate the respected page for deletion. You can request page protection from Mugiwara Franky .

Issue # 1: One Piece Mugen

Note, I do not nominate the article for deletion, but I just wish to know how it could be improved to make it not look like someone advertising themselves.Basicly, it would need a general re write, but I wonder if anyone else thinks so.

--New Babylon 00:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm unsure. Their not offical, so don't count as anything. Mugen games in general are in most cases not referenced on wikis. They are made up, unoffical, etc, etc. It saves a lot of time if you don't write anything up on them. Plus, they pretty much are "fan fiction" as such in my books and we have guidelines advising against them. Its pretty much a simulair situation as with "dub piece" which also had made an article here. Plus, mugen games can end up being remade several times, thus its impossible to track all the versions. One-Winged Hawk 01:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Another point is, they voilate copyright rules and the wiki staff are against illegal activies. We have a link straight to that Beta, which must be removed ASAP without question. We have only passed the rules once on this sort of thing; our main page, which safely counts as we have strick warnings on the contents of other sites. We cannot link to Bittorents, so we like wise, cannot link to betas for illegal copy right infringment based games. Mugenitself has been questioned since day dot of its legalness. One-Winged Hawk
Fair enough. --New Babylon 01:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 2: Wording Creativity

Can we have some sort of consensus upon not being too "creative" with forming sentences and paragraph headings? Im talking about "Dark conspiracy", a former name for a paragraph on Robin's article, or "death to all in the way" (yes, MY FAULT, please, I was hyped, forgive me). We realy should try to aim for a more encyclopedia-esque wording, or we will end up looking not to professional. --New Babylon 01:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I think its fine so long as its:
  1. Related to the paragraphs content
  2. Not over the top (e.g.: super, duper, ultra, mega important event)
  3. Not opinion based (The beautiful and sexy Girl)
We're fans of the series making a encyclopedia for fans of the series. We can have a little fun every so often... But yes, aside from that note I do agree 100% on everything. One-Winged Hawk 09:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 3: 3rd Class Clumsy Man

Now this isnt a nomination for deletion, but more a request for confirmation and referencing, seeing the nature of the page and that I never herd of it.

--New Babylon 18:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

He is in the blue data book... From what I can make out, thats what he is referred to. I'll put his info box up later. One-Winged Hawk 22:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 4: Uncategorised pages

Just noting there's alot. Will hopefully take care of it. --New Babylon 18:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah every few months this gets a problem. Tomorrow if I get time I'll sort out some of those pages. All our pages should be catergorised. One-Winged Hawk 21:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Ive set to do it. I already did some, most of which were your pages (glares evily) --New Babylon 22:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 5: Chapters amd Episodes

Okay this ticked me off... It seems unless I do the chapters nothing gets done - this should never happen! Everyone should be playing a role in bring into the sit something, so why does this wikia need to rely on one person to do 500+ chapters and thas without 380+ episodes.

On top of that, once again I rise the concern after naming chapters on titles and not purely on "chapter XXX". I had a hell of a job to find out chpater 42 was the last one I did in numerial order. Our search engine played silly buggers with me three times before I found the chpater to begin with. In the end I struck lucky and typed in "40" and it directly took me there. Sigh of relief... Its not just this, but someone has gone around a lot of the pages and swapped [[Chapter 42]] into [[Luffy Beats Croc|42]]. Stop! Your making it harder for everyone. This is creatin issues finding chapters! I've asked several times can we drop this; titles have several translations and it does us no favours to favour one translated title over others, it might not even be the correct on! One-Winged Hawk 20:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I only used to combine them ("Chapter X-Name") because that was the system with the original articles. --New Babylon 18:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I've complained about it several times. No sensible reason has ever been given to mefor doing it this way. One-Winged Hawk 21:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 6: Un-identifiable characters

Can we please have a rule that if you make a character article, you should either include a picture of the character, or at the very least to reference the character and describe them so that someone else can go and find a picture. Im talking about things like this:

[1] Koppu

A pain in the ass ththis, in terms of picture finding, let me tell you. --New Babylon 18:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Ditto... The worst ones are DESCRIPTIVE names of people who did small things like pick their noses in the background or something stupid... Would you have me write up a "new pag criteria" guidelines tomorrow? I recently had to write out a image guideline, I'll leave the fine detailing to others but I can get a "basic" outline up. One-Winged Hawk 21:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Not all unnamed articles are bad. There was the Gold Roger Bartender for example. Or Tom's Judge. I say people who have done something and have an own design are liable for an article, even without a name. These can be found through links of individual pages/ subjects related to them. Again, this doesnt handle very small BG characters, but those that did something. This is a problem mainly in filler episodes . Damn you, directors. I say let me know if you find a problem in a page, let me know and I will put individual input on it.
--New Babylon 22:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 7: Common things articles we shouldn't have

Common things like Axes or Cutlasses. We shouldn't copy the wikipedia, but just link there, we have enough of our own worries. --New Babylon 19:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah... Things like the real life pirates, we can get a nice little book out of the library and read all about them... But these things are much harder...Some of these were done when wikipedia direct linking wasn't there. They should all have what ties them into this wikia at the very least. I agree we shouldn't copy wikipedia, but what we should have is ou own researched version of the pages. Wikipedia somtimes also, while it provides information, its not written per how we would want it. That is my only note. One-Winged Hawk 21:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, things and weapons named in the series I of coursde suport. But do we realy need to store information on what is an "axe" ? --New Babylon 13:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 8: Possible copyright trouble

Moulin Rouge

I say, I don't think this is right. The page could get us into serious trouble, because it literaly is just a copy of the original lyric's and someone's translation. We can't even be sure it's not taken from another site. --New Babylon 13:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

All the songs are going to end up coming from someone else's site... There is no way around it. We can just have a info page rather then lyrics, however the only trouble with that is there isn't a lot to discuss on some songs. One-Winged Hawk 23:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Fair Use. It's not illegal to have the lyrics and translation. Drunk Samurai 00:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 9: Reviews

I saw some flying around here and there stil we realy need them? One, their , of course, kind of fanishly writen most of the tim, but do we realy have the priority of hosting them ? Not including the fact no one ever reads them/ looks them up, so we host them for no reason anyway. --New Babylon 13:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I tried to make use of them NB when Joekido created them. But I couldn't be bothered in the end. Orginally when he wrote Episode 1 of the anime, he included a review on the page. I did delete it off that page (no choice). At the time of those reviews creataion, I was trying to fed the fat chick worms. We were in the midst of trying to control the (then) problematic Joekido, fortunately he did get better eventually. ^_^' One-Winged Hawk 23:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 10: Hawke525


The poor sod's maken an article about himself. I sugest we move this as his user page and then nominate it or deletion. --New Babylon 00:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Again in support... This should have been on their user page. Just delete the page, the person never came roundto the wikia anyway again. One-Winged Hawk 23:39, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Issue # 11: Full body images/cleared images

This has been bugging me for a while . Usualy , we have a small picture , up to the shoulders at most, of the character heading the infobox on a respective article . However, at times , there apear articles with a full body picture with a cleared background in the infobox instead . This can cause layout problems, as well can be slightly messy to look at . The infobox is there to show how the character looks like, which primarily means the facial part . Compare these two versions of the Mr. 2 article for example :

and the restored version more or less established as it is by me . Ironicaly, the full body version makes the face and general apearance much harder to view in the article without going to the larger image itself, and the infobox should be there so one shouldn't have to .

A prety good example of this is Kuro's page .

While we sort of see his whole body, the details of the face are rather indiscernable , while the image is more fitting for the "apearance" section .

Another problem is the white background and the fact this doesn't seems to have been taken from the manga or anime or to have been edited otherwise . I just think a clear rule about infobox image size and maybe some mention of sticking with the manga/anime and not third party images (games and such are offshoots from the anime mostly, and this "descends" from the Manga, so that is quite a stretch indeed ) could save us lots of trouble . --New Babylon 21:04, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Recently I created the pageImage Guidelines, because there are soe confusions over decent and undecent images. BTW those full body images came from the Grand Battle Games... In note, the full body Mr.2 fulls under the problem "Dramatic Pose" and therefore is unsuitable for useage. I'll back NB on this one until a better image can be foud. One-Winged Hawk 21:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
No, you misunderstood . This curent version of the Mr. 2 page is okay , the other was a former version . The one I meant that stil needed was Kuro's page (which has been looking like it does now as far as I can remember) . --New Babylon 22:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
No misundersatanding from me NB, I'm commenting on the Mr.2 dramatic pose pic here and noting the Image Guidelines. ;-)
I actaully couldn't be bothered to look at the Kuro pick... Okay sheepishness aside... Yeah in agreement with you on that anyway so have nothing to add. One-Winged Hawk 23:24, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

There were a lot of bad ones that I changed back. There are also ones like the Buggy image that needs to be replaced. I noticed the Kuro one but there isn't another one we can use for it yet. I can go and take some anime screenshots if needed. Drunk Samurai 22:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Some of them aren't so bad, the Luffy one isn't so bad... I didn't want to get too involved on Coldhandzz, had to after his/her alternative account got spotted being used for vandalism. On a side note, I noticed the new introduction has led to some nw replacements. Okay, how hard should we push the "fll body" perference? One-Winged Hawk 23:27, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Full body images tend to show a more detailed view of a character that mugshots can't. However they shouldn't be pushed too much if a full body image is bad.
For the images that Coldhandzz uploaded, while they come from the games, from what I see I believe they are the colored renders of the anime's settei pre images. Not all of them are good but a good number of them show great detail of the characters.Mugiwara Franky 13:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
As an addition to my above statements, a full body image can be useful for some characters as it can cut down the number of images. The problem with having just a mugshot in the infobox for some characters, is that they would really require a full body image somewhere in the page as well. This is especially true for characters who have unique body shapes. For characters like them, a mugshot would be just half the picture. So instead of having a mugshot and a full body pic, a good full body pic is the more desirable one. This however applies if there is a good full body pic and doesn't necessarily have to be a forced norm for all articles. An example of this is the Oars article, there is a mugshot and a somewhat full body view. This can be allowed because the mugshot shows his face clearly and the full body view shows his size difference.Mugiwara Franky 13:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.