FANDOM

5,591 Pages

We need to fill these inEdit

I mean, yeah, it's good that there's a lot of pagesthat has the proper layout inthem, but they're practically worhtless without theinfo. I can only dop so much, you know. Someone has to workon these, along with me.

I usually dothemost recent ones, or the ones Ihave (which are the VIZ versions. So, any volenteers?

I think part of the problem is due to their being far too many pages seeking attention. Chapters seem to have been the last thing on everyone's mind. I can do the early Viz ones, but only up to chpater 5... The UK is waaaaay behind the US. I think they are only up to 6. One-Winged Hawk 23:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, no. XD Everyone else seems to care so much about fixing everything else, so I decided to do the chapter pages; you can see that I already did the first manga, as well as the basics for up to... volume 17, I believe. But I had to stop to do other things; now that I have time again, though, I plan to come back and finish what I started. First I need to finish that "Grand Times" translation (I'm almost done, but episode 293 came in the middle of me translating, and I needed to get it translated fast for our soft-sub speed-sub), then I'm gonna finish my personal project I started (going through every page to fix all spelling/grammar problems, since nobody else seems to notice/care/have time to fix/something, as well as categorizing them all appropriately; I finished most of the A pages, but I need to finish the rest still. XD). After that, I plan to come back and finish these off, it should be pretty easy. ^^
Although, if somebody else has the time to, I can't do the full chapter summaries. I really hate doing that kinda thing, you can see it's the only thing left on Chapter 1. XD So, I can't do that, but I can do the short summaries, characters introduced, quotes, notes, and the stats of the chapter (volume, pages, that kinda thing). --Murasaki 23:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Lol I haven't checked which chapters have been done and have not. I'm busy with other stuff on the site. XD'
That mistake cost me there, all those who think I'm a bumbling fool, raise your hand. Lol. One-Winged Hawk 23:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay a favourEdit

Can someone complete this. I am putting in some more chapter adjustments and this needs sorting a little. The chapters need to be put in and redirected.

And seriously... You guys must know by now how I am doing this... I could use a little help here. No one is adding pictures and the older chapters need their template removed. Inccidently, with the adding of this layout, the ISBN no. can come off that template now. Which is why I added. Plus we now have the dates! Something... I couldn't find. Yet to find for individaul chapters, but volumes we now have.

Wikipedia has its uses... Being on a free public domain thingy. And us really needing to put some work into this page. In time, I'll adapt this stuff to make it different to wikipedia's version, but for now, here we go. :) One-Winged Hawk 11:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Edit

Sorry for the revert, having to rip the chapter page from Wikipedia is not a good idea(Wow, why do I always don't like something? Lol) and the page was sloppy. In my version is much clearer and well-laided.

Joekido 11:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know which was sloppier but I'm pretty sure the one with the table looked more professional and informative than the huge list.Mugiwara Franky 12:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Joekido... Don't do that. I told you with time I'd change it. For now I wanted it because of its professionism which is what I trying to add to the wikia. At least give me a few days to add the needed links.
You can't just keep reverting things all the time Joekido, its not going to get things done. You did this with the main page (yeah I know this is going to get me to do it faster, but its bloody dam annoying! Lol.), don't do it. At least give me a full report as you why you don't like it other then "its sloppy"...
I know you don't like stuff being ripped from wikipedia, but its in a free domain so we can. And if its helpful to our cause, they why not. All I have to do is add the right chapter stuff... And Away we go. I can alter/remove stuff as time goes by. So give me a chance to at least. -_- One-Winged Hawk 20:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Chapter Table Edit

Okay before I do anything, would something like this be acceptable. It looks nothing like the one in wikipedia and may add something more or less. Any thought?Mugiwara Franky 04:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

new chapter titles Edit

when it says "released chapters only or else it's spoiler"; what are we defining as released? like the chapter's out in Japan but so far only the chapter title has been translated, can the title be posted or what? get what i'm asking? Kingluffy1 01:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Released, as per Spoiler Rules, would be those chapters that aren't just spoiler pics that look like they've been taken illegally. Chapters not even translated can be but if they predate the even Japanese market, then it's a spoiler.Mugiwara Franky 11:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Just reposting some old info.
  1. Spoilers come out Tuesday/Wednesday
  2. Scan comes out Thursday/Friday
  3. Release date for the actaul chapter is the following monday
Basically, we shouldn't see anything surfacing before Thursday/Friday whatever the case. One-Winged Hawk 21:53, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thank you that makes it more clear. Kingluffy1 00:30, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Summaries Edit

For some volumes, there are summaries. For the rest, there is nothing. Should the summaries stay so rest can be filled out or should they be taken out to follow the rest.Mugiwara Franky 02:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I vote for remmoval. Reasons are: they are user generated and thus may be inacurate, the low level of completition and more importantly the fact that the same info is present (or should be) in the chapter's page and the page itself is called Chapters and Volume, not Summary version of One Piece. I say that if we need to add summaries that we use official ones that are on the books. FusionFaller 02:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

There is no reason to remove them. Removing them because all of it is not done is a stupid thing to do. Also using Viz summaries is a horrible idea. Drunk Samurai 02:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

There is a reason to remove them because with them it makes the page incomplete. It has been a long time for more summaries to be added and none have actually made any progress. It maybe lazy to just remove unfinished work instead of finishing it, however it is lazier to leave unfinished work instead of finishing it, which has been the case for a long time.
Summaries could be placed in depending on the answer of the rest of community, however they may require FusionFaller's template for easier editing.Mugiwara Franky 03:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


They are volume summaries. Not chapter summaries. His reasoning that volume summaries get added to the chapter numbers makes no sense. I doubt he even read them. Its also much more lazy to remove them completely. It reminds me of Wikipedia deletionists. Drunk Samurai 03:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure he's read them enough to make his claim.Mugiwara Franky 03:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The article proves otherwise. If he actually read the summaries then he would realize how stupid it is to say to put them on the actual chapter pages. Drunk Samurai 03:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The majority of the chapters are empty and require some summaries.Mugiwara Franky 03:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm talking about the volume summaries not chapter summaries. Putting volumes summaries on a chapter page is stupid. Drunk Samurai 03:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

And he's not saying that. He's saying that the info found in a volume summary should be found in more detail in a set of chapter summaries.Mugiwara Franky 03:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

That's only you assuming that. If that was true then he would still leave the volume summaries because they SUMMARIZE the volumes. This is the proper page for it. Drunk Samurai 03:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't made myself clear. My idea was exactly what Mugiwara Franky understood, that a better summary can be offered chapter by chapter instead of trying incorrectly to summarize 10 or so chapters in 6 or 7 lines. If the community decides to keep them the template is easy to modify to do so. I didn't liked how Wikipedia started deleating much of it's content, but I do agree that if official text exist it should be used, instead of leaving fan generated summaries that may mislead or miss important plot points. FusionFaller 04:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

One small summary for volumes is not hurting the page. This is the correct page for those. Removing them is pointless. Also I doubt you actually read them if you think it "misleads" people who are reading them. Drunk Samurai 06:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Drunk Samurai. The summaries were fine, and should've been left there. Also, just because something is user-generated doesn't make it less accurate than something that is from Viz. Sure, the chapters provide more information but the purpose of the volume summaries is to provide a vague outline about what the volume is about if someone doesnt want to check all the individual chapter information. Oathkeeper of oblivion 18:50, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

5 Volumes a month! Edit

Can I just say, HOORAY! I didn't believe it at first! but now "I'm so excited, that I just can't hide it" Wohoo! CELEBRATE! --Kingluffy1 15:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

For those of you who are wondering what Kingluffy1 is talking about...read this article.
Kaizoku-Hime 03:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

next Edit

when is the next volume gonna be release? who would be the cover?Rainelz 10:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Temporary alert noticeEdit

Right now the release dates posted on Amazon and Rightstuf's release dates for the upcoming releases of the manga volumes 39-49 are contradicting each other have each posted April 6th (Amazon), or 10th (Rightstuf) for 39-43, and May 4th (Amazon), or 10th (Rightstuf) for volumes 44-49, so no one should post any of these dates until something more accurate is confirmed. -Adv193 18:21, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

English titles Edit

The english titles are incorrect, as are some of the chapter titles. They should match the actual english title unless they rereleased each volume with altertions. Can someone just please explain to me why, for example Vol. 2 went from "Buggy the Clown" to "Versus the Buggy Pirates" or somethin, or Vol. was "Don't get Fooled Again" and now is "Thing that can't be faked",what is going on,did i miss something? i am so confused! --Kingluffy1 17:40, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

I have vol. 20 with me and it clearly says "Utopia" not "Ideal Nation" --Kingluffy1 17:50, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Volume 56 Edit

Volume 56 is out, but I've no idea how to put it in the page... (I'm sorry, I'm a total dummy with computers). I'll upload the cover pic, so can someone put it in its place? ^^

The ships Edit

The Going Merry was considered a member of the crew and, by extension, a character. As I haven't gotten to the Thousand Sunny (getting there though, it's a long road to play catch up on), I can't say the same is true, but I assume it is. As such, why aren't they listed with the other cover characters? Rauj13 12:54, December 24, 2009 (UTC)

References? Edit

Okay folks, looking at chapter 540 after noticing there are references being put on indivdaul chapter pages...

Why?

I hate to say it, but the chapters are the exception to the rule of referencing. It seems silly to referencing chapter 540 and so forth when the whole page is talking about the chapter. Its not like you're discussing the powers of the DF and you NEED to link to a chapter for reference because these are the chapters.

Actually this was discussed a few years ago and agreed to, I missed what was going on. One-Winged Hawk 21:01, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Volume 0

Volume 0 Tankobon Edit

I uploaded the cover for chapter 0 tankobon that was specially released with the movie. Should it be included in this page (does it count since it's only the one chapter in book format?) or should I replace the image for the chapter page? Or is it something else entirely? If it's the first feel free to include it, I'm not sure how to go about doing so myself... --YazzyDream 07:13, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

As Volume 0 redirects to this page, it ought to at least be mentioned. (Either that or change Volume 0's target to point to Chapter 0.) --173.49.245.57 10:08, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Viz Cover Art Edit

Shouldn't we have the Viz cover art here as well? Sables 10:43, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

It's the same art isn't it? Just a shine on the covers and English Text? No point of adding it then, we could mention major differences if art was modified but :/ 92.12.59.214 00:23, July 14, 2010 (UTC)

Vol.60 Edit

Just an FYI: http://onepiece.rdside.com/spoilers/manga-spoilers/2010-10-20/the-cover-page-of-vol-60-leaked.html If we wanna trust this, can someone who knows what they're doing update the volume list. If what this site says is true; the graphic novels won't be seperated by the time skip. --Kingluffy1 21:42, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

Could someone try to add the cover for Vol. 60? I tried and just could not get it to work. Ddog892 02:07, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

Saga Title After Whitebeard War Saga is New World Saga? Edit

Not sure where I read this but I think it is call New World Saga. Soulreaper1234 18:28, December 3, 2010 (UTC)

SorryEdit

I don't know if i was supposed to do it, but i deleted the chapers that was in Volume 61 from the "Chapters not yet in tankobon format" list, and since the volume isn't released yet, maybe it was too early to do that? I would have fixed it, but i'm not able to. I'm sorry for being too eager if it was wrong, and if it was, maybe someone could be super helpful and fix it. Again i'm sorry. Sopkvazzt 21:53, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Well, if i'm not mistaken, Volume 61 wasn't released yet, so I don't think you did anything wrong. And when you think you did something wrong, and want to fix, just check the Article's history (right bellow it's name), there you can see all the changes done, and even undo them. GMTails 22:07, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
Huh, didn't think about that, thanks a lot! Sopkvazzt 18:31, January 26, 2011 (UTC)

more info Edit

Do you think the little note that Oda writes on a cover of a Volume should be shown? (if you know what I mean)

like this one:

Volume 61 Author's Note

I think i'll manage to get all the pictures. JapaneseOPfan :: Talk 21:25, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Also, should the volumes with covers that are different from their paper cover be mentioned? (like volume 52 with the easteregg cover under it's paper cover) JapaneseOPfan :: Talk 21:29, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Hm... I'd like for those information to be mentioned... but the question is, where? I think it would bog down the Volume/Chapter list if we put it on this page. Maybe on the SBS pages? Would that be weird?  YazzyDream  Talk  Admin    23:22,3/4/2011 
Oh, that's funny, I was thinkin' of that too. (SBS) but SBS only starts from Vol. 4 so.. that wouldn't necissarily work... Should there be some new page for it? And if so, what should it be called... "Random Oda Quotes" or "Cover Quotes" or... (guh those sound really bad!) JapaneseOPfan :: Talk 23:31, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
Maybe, "Author's Notes"? Or "Other Volume Information"? It could be tabbed to this page.  YazzyDream  Talk  Admin    01:00,3/5/2011 
I think more people should get involved in the convo. before I make a move and get everything deleted; should there be a forum? JapaneseOPfan :: Talk 01:03, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
Maybe...? You can copy+paste/move this convo to a new forum if you want.  YazzyDream  Talk  Admin    01:13,3/5/2011 
  • After a failed attempt* Nevermind, if I copy/paste this, our sigs look crazy and the image doesn't show up. Preview mode really saves my life! JapaneseOPfan :: Talk 01:31, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Warning: Chapter 626 Edit

I'm not a experct of code and other, but there is a probably error in the code of this page. the chapter 626 in the volume 63 isn't visible even if is present in the above-mentioned code. Someone that know how do it correct please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayleigh92 (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~ next time!

The template supports only 11 chapter at maximun, I'll fix it. leviathan_89 14:54, 5 August, 2011 (UTC)

Chapter SummariesEdit

I noticed that half of the One Piece chapters have been completed while the other half is not. I wonder: Is it possible to make a One Piece Manga Summary project in order to complete the summary on all One Piece chapters. It happened on Bleach Wikia and now, all the manga chapters summaries have been completed on Bleach Wikia. What do you think of this idea ?

Ichigo kurosaki1979 14:46, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

We have that. It's called the LETCA Project. It's in the forums.DancePowderer Talk 15:30, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Volume 66 DetailsEdit

Why has volume 66 been put up already?

No official details about how many and what chapters it contains have been posted anywhere.

If you had checked the reference link that you'd of seen that they have announced it here.   Kuro      Ashi   06:02, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

^^

I did, it didn't take me to that site though, my mistake.

Upper Case English Titles Edit

Currently, the Chapter 667 title (COOL FIGHT) is the only one on the page in capital letters, because 'that's the way it is on the cover page'. That would be fine, but then the titles for Chapters 1, 15, 16, 30, 55, 67, 82, 91, 149, 178, 199, 204, 252, 276, 312, 313, 335, 343, 445, 471, 593, 596, 601, 654, 665 and 666 would all have to be changed as well, given that the cover pages on all of those have upper case English. Which option would everyone prefer? Zodiaque 15:26, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

I personally think we should follow our internal rules of capitalization. If only one or two titles with English in them were in caps, it would be different. But early all such titles are in caps. sff9 15:52, May 27, 2012
I say capitalize them too.. LPKWhat?22:25,5/27/2012

Table navigation Edit

Should the table of every chapter by arc have the links to the arcs just go to the lists of the chapters on this page? That's what we do on the episode guide. Currently, these pages go to the actual arc articles, which I don't see as useful. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 23:23, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

It's fine keeping the arc links the way they are. The links on the episode guide page are different to those on the list of chapters because the layout of the episode page is such that the episodes are separated based on the arc they're in, whereas the Chapters and Volumes page is organised by Volume instead, so there are no arc sub-headings on the page that can be linked to. (Also, I tend to use those arc links fairly regularly, so I like them as they are).

If possible, I would instead suggest changing the arc table so that the all mentions of volumes in it link to the appropriate Volume heading in the chapter/volume list, but I'm not sure how to do that given the way the list is structured (linking to #Volume 1 etc doesn't work). Zodiaque             07:13, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

Tried again and it works if you link to #Volume_1 instead. So linking to Volumes is an option if you think it's OK.. Zodiaque             07:24, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

Volume 69 Cover CharactersEdit

I just wanted to point out since I can't edit this page that Pandaman is on the cover of volume 69. He is under Mocha on the left side of Smoker's forehead.

Viva cmpunker (talk) 09:38, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

Page for volumeEdit

What about creating a page for each volume, with the relative chapters list, characters list, plot and link to sbs? RAYleigh92 @\_/@ talk 14:29, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

We could do that. Lelouch Di Britannia Talk Page  14:29, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

I think so too (since long ago), but wait for now. This is a major change, and people should give their agreement before we proceed. sff9 14:56, May 11, 2013

^Yeah, I agree with Sff9. Lelouch Di Britannia Talk Page  14:59, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

No. That's a terrible idea. We don't need more pointless articles cluttering the wikia. All this info is already on each chapter page and the volume images/notes are on this article. SeaTerror (talk) 17:33, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

I like that idea.  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  18:13, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with SeaTerror. We have this kind of article so we don't have to have dozens of other articles cluttering things up. We can solve the problem by just adding a link to each volume's respective SBS, save for volumes 1-3. We may as well delete this article if we're going through with this idea. The point of having an article like this is to condense information so we don't have 5 to 6 dozen articles we could easily merge. Instead of ruining this article by making 70 1/70ths of an article, expand what already exists. We can easily add the stuff suggested to the current page. We already have the chapter list, we link to each chapter's page, which has the plot and character list. We could save ourselves hell of a lot of trouble if we just add links to each volume's SBS here rather than defeat the purpose of this article with a bunch of pointless pages only being made for the sake of someone having something to do.DancePowderer Talk 00:56, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

i think we should do it Quoth The Raven "Nevermore" 01:05, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Instead of diving right in to a huge waste of time, why not instead look at what we already have?DancePowderer Talk 01:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

This page is much too large, it's long to load and not easy to use. Obviously, if we had one article per volume, this page would be deleted/merged with One Piece (Manga).
One possibility could be to move each SBS page to a Volume page; it would only add a few pages total, and Volume pages would have significant content. sff9 12:48, May 12, 2013

Load time has never been an issue for me, and neither has its usability. I still say we try to fix up what we have rather than embark on something that would be a lot more time consuming.DancePowderer Talk 16:50, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

This doesn't even need to be "fixed". It is fine how it is. This article is basically the manga form of the Episode Guide. SeaTerror (talk) 17:39, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Except it's really different, since the Episode Guide gives a summary of each episode, whereas this page gives information about the volumes, not about each individual chapter. The Episode Guide is only a synthesis, whereas this page contains information not found elsewhere, which is a problem: a huge page like this is fine if it's a synthesis, not if it contains "primary" information.
@DP: how is that time-consuming? We only have to create or move a bunch of pages. We did far worse in the past. Anyway, the ultimate goal is to make the wiki better, not to save energy! sff9 17:58, May 12, 2013

And like I said above, we could easily add a brief synopsis to each volume on here as well as a link to its respective SBS. Much easier than creating a ton of pages.DancePowderer Talk 18:03, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Creating 70 pages is not hard. And what counts is the ease of use anyway. I find it really weird for the One Piece Encyclopedia to not have individual pages for volumes. sff9 18:13, May 12, 2013

That's because we have this page, which is volumes amalgamated.DancePowderer Talk 18:25, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

If every volume has its own page, it's way easier to find information and stuff.  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  18:33, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Sff9 and SHL, we should create pages for the volumes. Awaikage Talk 18:47, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

"Anyway, the ultimate goal is to make the wiki better" Yet you think cluttering up the wikia with redundant pages would make the wikia better. The information already exists and we don't need to clutter up the wikia with useless articles. SeaTerror (talk) 18:50, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Have to agree with Sff. I don't get why people don't want to do work around here. This will obviously make things more efficient and easier.   Galaxy 9000   18:52, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't make anything easier. It would clutter up the wikia with more pointless articles. SeaTerror (talk) 18:53, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

The wiki would not be cluttered up, the pages would not be redundant if we remove this one, and they would not be useless at all, since it would be easier to use. So yeah, I think it would make the wiki better. sff9 18:56, May 12, 2013

Surprised I have to yet again link here. The information already exists on other pages, so creating these volume pages would be redudant and would clutter the wikia with pointless and useless articles. SeaTerror (talk) 18:58, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

That page can be eliminated too, since it's a waste of space and could be put on the volume pages. We'd be getting rid of 2 very long pages that might take users a long time to load.   Galaxy 9000   19:00, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Only the volume pages would be a waste of space since they are completely unneeded. Might as well create a crapload more literacy technique articles while you're at it. Also add an article about sails that might come in handy. SeaTerror (talk) 19:04, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Those are different scenarios.   Galaxy 9000   05:13, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

Redirects. Lots and lots of redirects. We make a redirect page for each volume that directs you to the corresponding section of this page. It makes navigation of this page much easier, and allows for a person to search the wiki for volume information. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 19:43, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Let's take it here.  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  14:38, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Was the discussion moved somewhere else? I always thought we could merge SBS, introduction and UGP to have just volume pages that include them all. leviathan_89 21:08, 31 October, 2013 (UTC)

Forgot about this. We definitely should do this.   Galaxy 9000   21:51, October 31, 2013 (UTC)

One page per volume sounds good, I like that idea. We should do it. FurisuTalk 18:55, November 5, 2013 (UTC)

We shouldn't merge SBS with volumes though.  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  12:37, November 6, 2013 (UTC)

Creating volume pages is a different topic then what to do with this page. I agree with making them, but I don't agree with deleting this page. We still need an index-like page, so that you can easily look for the chapter volumes you want. It's quite useful, it's not the first time I've used it to look for a specific volume/chapter I didn't remember. With just volume pages, you have to play the guessing game and in the end I don't see the harm of keeping it. leviathan_89 18:07, 20 November, 2013 (UTC)

Surprised this got forgotten. This page can still stay, and volume pages can be made as well.   Galaxy 9000   05:26, December 15, 2013 (UTC)

Bumping since a lot of people were in favor of making volume pages.   Galaxy 9000   23:01, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

Reviving this, since it wasn't resolved and a lot of people supported it. Personally I think it's a great idea. It would help de-clutter this awfully long page. Having separate pages would be useful and allow us to present more information. Awaikage Talk 20:51, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

It sounds like a fantastic idea and would greatly reduce the clutter on the article, and I see no problem with having a page for each volume. So I'm all for it. Jademing (talk) 21:15, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

If we make volume pages, we should merge into them SBS, UGP and volume intros as well. How exactly making them would help de-cluttering the page though? This page won't be any different. If you want to declutter it, we need to make other kind of edits, like making the tables collapsible or changing the layout. About making volume pages, I'd suggest making a forum if we need to discuss it more. leviathan_89 21:32, 15 March, 2015 (UTC)

Take it to a forum. We're talking about it affecting much more than just this one page, so we need to discuss it in a more general area of the wiki. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 21:39, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I'll close this and make a forum later. Awaikage Talk 21:47, March 15, 2015 (UTC)

Tabs/TemplatesEdit

Browsing through, I noticed something in YazzyDream's sandbox that seems interesting. Would it be a good idea to help shorten the length of this page by moving a bunch of volumes into tabs? Like every 25 volumes or so? It might be a good idea because this page is VERY long. uknownada Talk 07:44, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

Look at the section above this one. Awaikage Talk 07:50, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

That's a different subject. I'm not saying to make anymore pages, just have tabs in this page. Reduces the length. uknownada Talk 07:13, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

The page is useful because it lists all the volumes in a single page. Splitting it into more would be counter productive and completely unnecessary. MasterDeva (talk) 09:25, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

...I never said anything about putting it in different pages. Look at the sandbox I linked. uknownada Talk 22:10, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, wrong terminology. I meant a single table where the volumes are listed and not the whole page itself. I insist on what I mentioned above, splitting it into multiple parts is more trouble than good. MasterDeva (talk) 19:57, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

We should at least make the thing a template. The length makes it harder to edit.   Galaxy 9000   08:43, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

Bump.   Galaxy 9000   02:57, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Bump. Either a template or tab it off by Sagas.   Galaxy 9000   00:58, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

I think we're better off with one page. I still believe we should have redirects for "Volume X" that take you to the volume on this page, since currently no links for volumes exist. We can't do that with tabs, and I'm not sure about templates. But if we leave as a list and make it so each Volume is under some kind of heading, then you'll be able to link to each volume AND a button to edit each section will appear, greatly lessening the editing difficulty. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 12:48, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

We already have the volume redirects. Zodiaque             16:24, August 14, 2013 (UTC)
Oh... Well, nobody told me that in all the forums and talk pages where I proposed the idea... But still, won't using some kind of parent tab template make the redirects no longer work, like it has for the Rokushiki page? JustSomeDude...  Talk | 16:40, August 14, 2013 (UTC)
It's tabber that's on the Rokushiki page - that's what breaks section links. We could link to the volumes using the parent tab template (where each tab is a completely separate page, like the Straw Hats' individual pages), but I agree with most other people here that it would be best to keep all volumes on the one page. Along the lines of what you said, I suggest putting a Level 3 heading every ten volumes, so people can edit smaller sections. Zodiaque             18:01, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Why don't we do like I did on the Italian Wiki? Try to edit it... I made a section every 10 volume and each section is actually in a subpage transcluded on the main page, hence if you try to edtit a section you will automatically edit the subpage. Like this the pages are WAY lighter and easier to edit. Don't mind the tab, the second tab is for special volumes. leviathan_89 18:26, 14 August, 2013 (UTC)

I like that idea Levi. We should do that.   Galaxy 9000   21:16, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Sounds nice, but will those tabs still work with the redirects? JustSomeDude...  Talk | 13:26, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, because they aren't tabs. They are actually templates. leviathan_89 13:59, 15 August, 2013 (UTC)

I think we should tab them by saga or so.  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  05:47, October 3, 2013 (UTC)

Doing what Levi suggested by Arc would be best, I think. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 14:11, October 3, 2013 (UTC)

By arc, no. That would be too much especially when we have arcs like Whiskey Peak Arc and Buggy the Clown Arc. Tabbing them by saga is the best option.  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  14:39, October 3, 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you misunderstood what I said, but I never suggested to tab them. Simply move them on differente subpages which will be transcluded in the main page. That way the page will look the same but it will be much lighter and easier to edit. See this. leviathan_89 14:54, 3 October, 2013 (UTC)

Bump. Lelouch Di Britannia Talk Page  10:09, October 10, 2013 (UTC)

Either tab them by saga or by every 10 volumes. It's that simple.   Galaxy 9000   00:21, October 12, 2013 (UTC)

Just do it like Levi's done it on the Italian wiki: one page, one collapsible template for every 20 10 volumes. By arc/saga won't work because of overlap issues, and tabbing would defeat the purpose (to list the English/Japanese name of every chapter on one page). Zodiaque             05:16, October 12, 2013 (UTC)

Oh right, I forgot about overlap issues with chapters in volumes. Every 10 is fine then. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 15:06, October 12, 2013 (UTC)

I'm all for doing it like they have done it on the Italian Wiki, it looks good. Sanji in Unlimited AdventureRainbowShifter 17:29, October 15, 2013 (UTC)

Someone start the process.   Galaxy 9000   02:38, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

Here you go peeps, Staw saved the day :D

...

Wtf did i just say -_-  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  10:27, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

Update: I'm sorry to say this, but I fear we need to tab the page. The MediaWiki software has some security limits about using templates, one of them is the "Post-expand include size". On my wiki I recently exceeded this limit and, as you can see on the page, every template after the last section is not rendered anymore. Assuming that One Piece will have about 120 volumes, we are just half way and I already exceeded the limit. On this wiki we still didn't hit the limit, because this page uses less templates then mine, but we are quite near it. You can see in the HTML source code of the page:

<!-- 
NewPP limit report
Preprocessor node count: 28305/1000000
Post‐expand include size: 1650713/2097152 bytes
Template argument size: 720160/2097152 bytes
Expensive parser function count: 0/100
-->

As you can see we have already reached about the 80% of the post‐expand include size, so there is no way we can fit in 120 volumes. I'm looking for a work around, but I fear there is no other solution then split the page. I propose splitting it in two parts: one for the first 60 volumes and the second one with the rest. leviathan_89 21:29, 30 October, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, let's do that then.   Galaxy 9000   01:51, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

Reaching 100% from 80% is still a few years away for us though. There's no telling what other changes could happen in the next two to three years, so changing the page now to stop something that isn't a problem yet seems kinda pointless. When we reach the limit, we can switch to tabs then - it's only a five-minute job, after all. Zodiaque             05:10, November 3, 2013 (UTC)

The tabbing question would disappear if we got rid of this huge page and create one page per volume instead. Would be way better. See previous section. sff9 17:28, November 5, 2013

That is also a smart move, I'll go with that.  Staw-Hat Luffy  Talk  19:41, November 5, 2013 (UTC)

@Sff9: I agree with making volume pages, but I think there still should be an index-like page for all volumes like we have for all the episodes, for example. We can make it more simple, maybe. leviathan_89 22:19, 5 November, 2013 (UTC)

Right, so should we poll this? It was proposed above, and a few people disagreed.   Galaxy 9000   03:34, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think we should poll it. Lelouch Di Britannia Talk Page  03:45, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

No that discussion was from the previous section. It has nothing to with this section so it shouldn't be polled about. SeaTerror (talk) 08:07, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

It's the same talk page, same idea. It all counts in the end.   Galaxy 9000   08:11, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

If you are talking about making volume pages, that has nothing to do with this page. As I said before, we still need a list of volumes. Maybe with volume pages we can "lighten up" the page, but I don't know if that will solve the problem. leviathan_89 12:19, 8 November, 2013 (UTC)

Read the above sections. The idea was proposed, and was discussed on this page. It definitely pertains to this.   Galaxy 9000   06:22, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

As I said, "what to do with this page" and "if we should make volume pages" should be treated as two different topics of discussion. They may be related, but one thing doesn't imply the other. leviathan_89 18:07, 20 November, 2013 (UTC)

It very much does have to do with this page since we'd be moving most of the information. As I said, read the sections above to see that it was discussed.   Galaxy 9000   02:43, December 6, 2013 (UTC)

I'm for leaving it as-is now. As Zodiaque said, if we're only 80% full, we still have a few years before we have to change, and it's very possible Wikia can increase the limit during that time. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 17:29, December 6, 2013 (UTC)

This needs a bump. Does this limit have anything to do with Forum:Template Configuration Changes Coming? If so, we need to resolve this soon before the end of January. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 02:50, January 24, 2014 (UTC)

If the page wasn't listed on the forum, then it isn't concerned. (This not implying that we shouldn't do our best to make loading time as short as possible!) sff9 18:33, January 24, 2014

They are two different kind of limits, one is the "Post-expand include size" (the size of all the templates content after inclusion) which is our problem here, the other is the number of templates calls (forum issue). leviathan_89 18:38, 24 January, 2014 (UTC)

Volume 57 NamurEdit

I was looking for mistakes on this page and I saw something. On volume 57, it says Namur is on the cover, but I looked minitiously and he is not there. I know it's weird that he's the only division commander missing except Ace. Anyway, if he's there, could you please tell where he is before I remove him from the page.

Stingray0097 (talk) 18:42, August 3, 2013 (UTC)

The photo was cropped a little so he got kind of cut off. Look at Rakuyo's right armpit. That's the back of his head.DancePowderer Talk 20:51, August 3, 2013 (UTC)

Volume 73 CoverEdit

Here: http://onepiecepodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/PickupBNR_Comics73_01-590x295.jpg -- Anon.

English Titles for Volumes Not Yet Released Outside Japan Edit

Can't be bothered edit warring over this, so here's the dispute - Sewil undid my edit in which I put the US titles as the VIZ translations of titles of the chapters that were used as volume titles.

Until a few months ago, we used our own translations for the chapter title as a volume title, then changed them to the VIZ title when upon official release in the US.

I feel like my edit is an acceptable compromise, since VIZ has been using the chapter title as they translated it as the title of the volume for every volume since ~11 with the exception of 58 and 59, which were probably due to spoilers.

I don't see anything wrong with using that VIZ chapter title when they're the same 97% of the time. It's better than the alternative of just leaving it blank for the nine months or whatever in between the Japanese and US releases. Zodiaque             06:45, February 23, 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't make much sense to use Viz translations for volume names. Since one of the chapter names is used as the volume's name, changing the names to Viz creates an inconsistency when those two are different. MasterDeva (talk) 11:53, February 24, 2014 (UTC)

Are you talking about all of them, or just the unreleased ones? Zodiaque             13:44, February 24, 2014 (UTC)

I'm talking about all of them. This is not a problem regarding only the unreleased ones. MasterDeva (talk) 17:29, February 24, 2014 (UTC)

I don't really like them myself (I'm not the one who decided to do them this way) - I just changed them a couple days ago because some were VIZ and some weren't. I believe the justification put forward is that since the "US date" in the fourth column is for the VIZ release, the "US name" in the second column should also be the VIZ name. The main problem I see with them is the fact that some of the VIZ names don't match the Japanese names at all (Okama in Hell → Ray of Hope being the most obvious example outside of the first 10 volumes).

As far as the inconsistency goes, that could be solved by putting the VIZ chapter names in the final parameter of the Nihongo template (the one where we usually put literal meanings of things), if anyone can be bothered taking the time to do it. Would probably be a good idea regardless, since the page is meant to be a comprehensive list of all chapter titles. Zodiaque             06:57, February 25, 2014 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. I'll try it as soon as I find some free time and report here if it works or not. MasterDeva (talk) 12:35, February 25, 2014 (UTC)

After thinking about it some more, I've come to the realization that changing the column name from "US" (for the volume title) to "English" would solve our problem. That way we wouldn't have to use the translations from Viz. I'll need that some feedback though before going on with the change. MasterDeva (talk) 14:47, February 26, 2014 (UTC)

Is it right to assume that there are no objections to the above? MasterDeva (talk) 13:31, February 27, 2014 (UTC)

This is why I came up with the proposition to create a third column for our own translation, kind of like in the episode infobox, but yes, what you said Deva would also work. Sewil 9:00, 28/2/14

Right, I'll change them back then. Zodiaque             06:07, March 1, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. I think it is safe now to remove the Active Discussion template. MasterDeva (talk) 06:40, March 1, 2014 (UTC)

Release dates and references Edit

Where are people getting the U.K. release dates from, other than amazon? Because I can't find them anywhere, and I'm not sure if amazon is a trustable source.

Also, all the links to VIZ in this article are dead. JapaneseOPfan :: Talk 05:09, June 12, 2015 (UTC

Was just about to make a talk for this myself. The Viz links are fubar and the UK dates are either nonexistent or unsourced.  Fanta Talk  12:36, July 1, 2016 (UTC)

I fixed up the viz links. What's the point of the uk release these days, is it even still applicable?  Fanta Talk  13:28, July 1, 2016 (UTC)

Chapter 795 missingEdit

Where is chapter 795 in this list tho?    Profile   /   Talk     23:39, July 31, 2015 (UTC)

Current Saga Title Edit

Why don't we call this saga the Kaido saga since it has been hinted since punk hazard he was going to be the main villian for this chain of events. Also now that we can take Zou into consideration it is very prevalent that Kaido will be fighting the SHs in the next 1-2 arcs.

420pirate (talk) 07:51, December 20, 2015 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.