One Piece Wiki

Season 1 Box Set

I've been wondering this since FUNimation started releasing the dvd's. Will they be releasing one large complete season 1 box set or have they said anything similar to that?--Kingluffy1 18:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Right now their priority is to release as much as they can as fast as possible, as affordable as possible. which is why they're releasing 13 episodes sets, with 5-8 week intervals, since One Piece is still going it doesn't seem like there are going to be larger box sets until they take a break again, which doesn't seem like it will happen soon unless Toei takes a break releasing new episodes, and even then that would be a good opportunity to catch up. If the smaller sets don't make enough money then they might not ever release bigger boxsets.

I'd say, if you're short on money but still want to buy the DvDs then wait for the prices to drop on each set before you buy it (On Amazon you can get it used as low as $9.50), then if they do release a Season 1 boxset, And you still want to get it for whatever reason, sell Voyages 1-4. That's my plan at least. --Jeshi

Season 2 Third Voyage release date already has a release date [1], should we go ahead and add it --Kingluffy1 21:06, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

How do we know which episodes have commentary?

I've noticed that on the episode lists the episodes with commentary are marked in red. I also noticed that the sets that aren't released yet we don't know the English titles too, yet we somehow know which episodes have commentary?

Could somebody explain how we can know which episodes have commentary but not even what said episodes are named?

Merger proposal

What do you think about merging this page with the main article on Funimation? I think it would improve the page, which and lacks a lot information and has no images. There is no real reason to have this list as a separate article. El Chupacabra 14:19, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

If it makes life easier and strengthens the other article..I don't see why not. One-Winged Hawk 14:21, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
OK, then I'll do it. El Chupacabra 14:44, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

This does not belong on the Funimation page. The Funimation page is supposed to be about the company itself. It isn't supposed to have an episode guide. Drunk Samurai 02:16, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Why Not? The 4Kids page includes their episode list. Their dub is the reason why we have an article about Funimation, and therefore all information about it should be on the Funimation page. El Chupacabra 10:57, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. That article is only supposed to be about the company itself. 4Kids should also have it's own episode guide. This guide also prevents people from putting Funimation titles on the original episode guide. Not to mention you merged it without an consensus. Drunk Samurai 23:57, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

I think it is just logical to put all information about their releases on their page. I also think that it's always better to make a good large article instead of two smaller and crappier. What do you mean when you say that this page "prevents people from putting Funimation titles on the original episode guide" ? do you think that the same list on the Funimation page wouldn't? And as to your last point, before merging I've asked here and [User:Angel Emfrbl|One-Winged Hawk]] has agreed. El Chupacabra 15:07, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

The episode guide page is already a good article so you mean to say 1 large good article and 1 small crappy article. There would be much less of it if it had it's own article. Yes because 1 person agreeing is a consensus. *facepalm* Drunk Samurai 17:43, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

No, it isn't a good article, because it misses the list of episodes aired Cartoon Network and the release of Movie 8. The article on Funimation included a smaller section about the company itself and a larger one about the dub, including the cast. I thought that it's better to have all information about the dub in one article. As to the consensus, well, I've been bold, but now you've undone my edit and started a discussion, and I will not remove anything from this page until we'll have an agreement. El Chupacabra 14:08, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Besides the other issue is that the Funimation episode titles will contentiously expand as more stuff is released on DVD and would make the Funimation page very large unless if preperations are already planned out on what to do about it. -Adv193 18:08, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

The Funimation page is currently 33,532 bytes long, much smaller then the Mythbusters page or the articles about the main characters (which will also expand with the progression of the story). This page is currently 17,071 bytes long, which means that it will always be approximately 15,000 to 20,000 bytes smaller then the combined article, and still quite long. Anyway, I think that a big article containing all information on the Funi dub is better and more reader-friendly then a group of smaller articles on single aspects. El Chupacabra 14:59, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Funi images

I don't know why there is 2 version of the funi images in png and jpg format (Ex [[:File:Funi1.jpg]] [[:File:Funi1.png]]). I propose to remove the redundant pics but the ones currently used are the one of lesser resolution. Shouldn't we change ? Kdom 18:11, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Merge/delete proposal

This page is proposed for deletion or redirecting to FUNimation Entertainment. Reason: All of this information and more are on the FUNimation page. (Originally tagged for deletion by YazzyDream, I support that). Ruxax 22:15, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Note: if you compare contents of this page and contents of FUNimation Entertainment page you will see that unlike the latter this page is unmantained since Dec 2009. That is an additional reason for merging. Ruxax 22:19, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

The Funimation page should be about the company only. Why is it getting treated differently than the Toei or 4Kids articles? SeaTerror 20:05, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

There is an episode list on 4Kids page as well. Ruxax 20:59, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

It shouldn't be there either then. SeaTerror 23:43, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

It also seems that no page directs to this article. However I agree with SeaTerror, the episodes list could be on separate page. Maybe it would be a good idea to have Tabs linking to the 3 episode guides on the Episode_Guide page. Anyway the redundancy shall be suppressed somehow. Kdom 12:13, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
Whatever happens, it must be universal across all similair pages. All I'll say is which the size of the content guys... If its too large, seperation might be the solution. One other idea; list the eps via tabs (a la Luffy page). One-Winged Hawk 13:11, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion of tabbed version

I made some changes. How is it now? If it's OK, I will do the same with 4Kids page; if not then I revert it back. Ruxax 14:25, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Merge it, since it's just like the various types of Haki: instead of three pages for three types, we merged it into one big page, so the same applies for this. Yatanogarasu 15:40, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I think the tab's a pretty good idea. But do you think we can rename it from "Episode Guide" to "DVD Releases" or "Episode Guide and DVD Releases" ? Either way I think DVDs should be mentioned there somehow since half the page is about that. And visiters will wonder where they could find it when they come to this page. --YazzyDream 16:12, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I changed this. Ruxax 17:19, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
Well, maybe I lost the most important part of the discussion, however... I think that merging the page of these DVD with the one of their creator is quite a good idea, of course creating a proper section ;) Aldarinor 18:15, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

If you use tabs for episode list we should do the same for the Voice actors. 4kids, FUNi and Japanese episodes pages should have the same layout.
Tabs: without subpages

  • Company
  • Episode List (and separated tab for the Japanese DVD Releases)
  • Seiyū/Voice Actors

--Tipota 18:51, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. But you think we should seperate the seiyu/voice actor list too? YazzyDream 19:21, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
I agree regarding 4Kids (i wrote that from the very beginning) and I don't mind of tab for voice actors. However, I think that Japanese version has not to not follow strictly such layout. It's place is a bit special. For example, FUNimation's episode list is about how FUNimation presented/released/... One Piece anime, the same for 4Kids, but Episode Guide is about One Piece anime itself, and linkage to a particular company is not so important for it.
For Japanese version I'd rather use One Piece (Anime) as a "main" page, and would not make episode guide subpages (i.e. rename it to One Piece (Anime)/Episode Guide or Toei/Episode Guide). Ruxax 20:34, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Like that: For japanese version:

{{Free Tab Template
|tab1=One Piece Anime |link1=One Piece (Anime)
|tab2=Seiyū           |link2={{Redlink|Seiyū and Voice Actors}}
|tab3=Episode Guide
|tab4=DVD Releases

Well, for the Japanese version wouldn't we use the Toei page as the "Main"? YazzyDream 22:24, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I wrote above that I'd prefer One Piece (Anime) as a "main" page, but seems it's not rather clear. Right now, both pages, One Piece (Anime) and Toei are bad: the first is just a stub, and the second doesn't have a word about One Piece (check it)!
Also, about reception of FUNimation or 4Kids version is written on company's page, but about reception of japanese version on One Piece (Anime). Ruxax 22:39, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
Hm, well then the Toei page will just have to be fixed up. But it would make sense to use that, since for the other's we're using the company as the base. "4kids", "FUNimation", "Toei" etc., etc. YazzyDream 23:52, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
Well, you may use fixed up Toei page, if my arguments don't look convincing, but please don't rename Episode Guide to Toei/Episode Guide. Ruxax 08:35, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

For 4Kids and FUNimation:

{{Parent Tab Template
|tab2=Voice Actors
|tab3=Episode List and DVD Releases

Ruxax 21:24, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I may be wrong but isn't it possible to have 2 tab templates : one on the company and one on the episode guide that both link to the same page ? Well i guess that is complicate since the 2 tab needs to appear somewhere... Kdom 21:01, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Then there would be two rows of tabs (with one identical tab for both) and I can't imagine good layout in such case. Ruxax 21:24, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
maybe using toggling and pagename Kdom 21:56, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Collection Five

Giving you One Piece editors a heads-up! Collection Five has been announced and here's the cover for you guys to update it. I would do it myself, but I don't have an account here to upload a picture. Just wanna help by letting you know.-- 22:33, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

You help has been done. Thou may leave, now. le Nada Troll 00:06, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

Collection Six

The cover for One Piece Collection Six has been announced. I was never good at editing graphs on wiki, so someone please post on the page.--NinjaSheik 21:58, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Can someone update the page with the annoucement of Collection Six? I wanna how many eps it goes up to! 17:18, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

Collection Seven

The cover for One Piece Collection has been announced. I wanna upload the image, but I think it's too small. Does anyone know where I can a bigger image? Amazon doesn't have, since I checked already. Or is the size okay? I know the images on the page aren't big, but I'm just checking just in case.--NinjaSheik 17:55, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

It's wayyy bigger than the other DVD covers, so no worries. sff9 18:49, May 31, 2012

Think so? Well, okay.--NinjaSheik 18:54, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Delete the subbed simulcast section.

This section is fairly pointless because it only says the name of the episode and when it was uploaded, which is the same day as when the episode actually airs. At times dubbed episodes are uploaded temporary before they are released on dvd, and no one marks those dates. The only thing this section is doing is growing a long list of episodes with translated titles. We can just simply say, that starting on August 29, 2009 subbed episodes were uploaded to on a weekly basis, approximately 1 hour after it originally aired in japan. There is no need to list every single episode.DuelMaster93 (talk) 16:52, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

Th article is called "Episode List", so likewise, we would have an episode list. The simulcast being excluded is a serious hindrance, because it literally is a list of FUNimation's episodes. Also, not every episode is included in the simulcast, as they skipped both Toriko episodes. The other episodes aren't listed because they're already listed in the article, and the main simulcast is episode 391 and on. There is a need to list every single episode. uknownada Talk 17:03, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

And aren't Funimation's translated titles different from the ones we use in the articles as well? And like Nada said, we need to note which episodes Funimataion subbed and which ones they did not. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 17:11, September 27, 2012 (UTC)

We can put all the in formation in a paragraph. We can just say that starting from episode 391 onwards, subbed episodes were uploaded to on a weekly basis, 1 hour after it originally aired in japan. There are subbed episodes of episodes 1 to 229, that no one puts up. Not to mention the dubbed episodes that are uploaded temporaraly. If for whatever reason, a episode isn't uploaded, we can just say so and write down the reason (if there is any). If we are to keep this section, I suggest noting the dubbed episodes, as well as the dates for the earlier episodes too.DuelMaster93 (talk) 14:11, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

season 6

Has anyone been able to find season 6 voyage 1? It isn't on Rightstuf or Amazon and if it isn't we should change the release date. Videogamep Talk 00:45, May 14, 2014 (UTC)

Already posted this on the forum discussion. It's been known that it's been delayed since March. They didn't put it in their release list for May back then. Mr. Whatever (talk) 02:22, May 14, 2014 (UTC)

'Season Six: Voyage One' is being released on Amazon on September 30, followed by a general release on November 18. I added this information to the release information, but this was undone because "that information is unnecessary" (leaving the Amazon release date only). I disagree that this information is unnecessary, as leaving only one date implies that the DVD will be available everywhere from September, and to use the general release date would imply that the release will be first available much later than it actually will be. I don't understand why, in a situation where there are two official release dates, that one should be ignored. LostTL (talk) 19:01, July 16, 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to add the Amazon/general dates again then. LostTL (talk) 18:14, August 5, 2014 (UTC)

Collection Box

There are now pictures available for the Collection Boxes 1 and 2. If I may link to this page: 21:46, August 25, 2014 (UTC)

Adding Covers Which Are Subject to Change

DuelMaster93 claims that unless DVD covers are the final versions, then they should not be uploaded and used here. Mr. Whatever and I think that a cover is better than no cover. If they change the cover art, the new version can just be uploaded to replace the old one. This is the same way that sites like Amazon deal with this. I also haven't seen any rule or policy stating that covers subject to change shouldn't be used, so why not use them?

ROBO TALK 19:39,8/30/2014 19:39, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

I never said if they are not the final versions they should no be uploaded. In fact, I had just recently replaced the old cover for season 6 voyage 2 which said art not final on it. The difference is that file and this is that he old cover for s6v2 was an unfinalized image of the box art. These images are just simply posters. It's not there anymore, but for season 6 voyages 1 & 2, Amazon had had a poster of all the straw hats as the placeholder, while funimation's official website had no image. So really, these are just posters that Amazon decided to use. Also, these images were previously uploaded to this page and deleted by Videogamep. I don't see the point in keeping them if they're gonna be deleted once the official covers are out anyway. Placeholders are useless--DuelMaster93 (talk) 19:59, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Leave it. It's official until otherwise. Mr. Whatever (talk) 20:04, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

"If they change the cover art, the new version can just be uploaded to replace the old one." They're not getting deleted. That's how we do it here. SeaTerror (talk) 20:05, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

The page for Season 17 piece 4 also contains a placeholder image on amazon. The reason we have the NoPicAvailable.png is so that we don't have to use placeholder images. Placeholder images are not the official cover art--DuelMaster93 (talk) 20:10, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

No the reason we have NoPicAvailable.png is when there literally is no picture. Like when a character is mentioned but never seen, like Corazon. SeaTerror (talk) 20:12, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

All i am saying is these images are just posters that can be found of various websites. Ammazon usually adds posters and then adds a 3d image of the item. This image isn't 3d, doesn't say Collection or 1-103. It's clearly not the box art. If you really want to use these image, then I suggest you do the same with the japanese DVD's on the Home Video Releases/Seasons 16-20 page.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 20:22, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Amazon has no official ties to One Piece. If Funimation was uploading placeholder images, I'd say keep them. But Amazon has no official ties to OP, and no authority to make any image we should even consider "Official". I mean look at the "Zolo" one! Funimation doesn't even use "Zolo"! How could that possibly be official? JustSomeDude...  Talk | 20:34, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

^Exactly what JustSomeDude... said. Unless they are used by FUNImation, they shouldn't be used by the wikia. Amazon is just a distributor. Amazon usually adds placeholder images, while rightstuf doesn't, so in that case which should we add? But this item is a amazon exclusive, so funimation doesn't have it on their site. I can guarantee you if this was on the funimation website it wouldn't have this image that says 'Zolo'. This is just a poster that amazon uses. Amazon did this with previous One Piece products and no one has ever uploaded the placeholder images--DuelMaster93 (talk) 20:42, August 30, 2014 (UTC).

That makes Amazon the only source and therefore... the valid one. I'm sure "Zolo" will be fixed.. but this is the box art released at the moment so it's best to just leave it as a placeholder. Mr. Whatever (talk) 20:44, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Usually with products that aren't Amazon exclusive are released, only amazon uses a placeholder image. And when that happens no one has ever uploaded the placeholder image. This is not box art, this is a poster found on various websites. Usually all amazon items have 3d images f the item. Since this is not a 3d image, a poster, does not say collection or 104-205 it is not the box art. If it is not the box art we shouldn't upload it. No point uploading it if it's not the official box art--DuelMaster93 (talk) 20:49, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Since when do we even consider things that aren't officially related to One Piece as viable sources in the first place? Even if it's the only source, that does not make it a good one, or one that we should even try to peddle as being such. The fact that it will change later and that Amazon is known to choose seemingly random placeholder images only lessens the reasons why it should be allowed. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 20:54, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Reasons why this is not cover art:
- Does not say collection
- Does not say episodes 104-205
- Is a 2d image rather then 3d image of item.
- It says Zolo
- Not used by funimation
- Poster can be found on various different websites.
- No funimation or toei logos (or any logos for that matter)

If it is not cover art it should not be on the wiki. Placeholders used by distributors (amazon) should not be used because they are not official box art. Only placeholders used by FUNimation should be used.

Reasons why this image shouuld not be used:
- It's a placeholder used by Amazon. Amazon always use random images and posters as placeholders.
- The image is in no way related to funimation
- Amazon has done this with previous One Piece products, and the placeholder images used for those items have never been uploaded to the wiki.
- The image will be replaced by the official image anyway
- No other item or merchandise shown on the wiki has ever used a placeholder image.
- The NoPicAvailable.png is also used as a placeholder image for japanese DVD releases.
- It is pointless unless it is the official cover art--DuelMaster93 (talk) 21:07, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Alright, fair enough. I think that because it is Amazon exclusive, that makes Amazon the official source on this, but whatever the majority decides.

ROBO TALK 21:13,8/30/2014 21:13, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

You shouldn't be using NoPicAvailable.png regardless. It doesn't belong on this article. Also no ROBO. There is no majority. There's 2 vs 2 right now and 3 vs 2 if you still want the images. SeaTerror (talk) 21:18, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Well, in my opinion, they're better than nothing. So if we're taking a vote, put me down for "keeping the images."

ROBO TALK 21:22,8/30/2014 21:22, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Alright then, tell me why the NoPicAvailable.png belongs on Home Video Releases/Seasons 16-20 when there is a placeholder image on amazon, and not this page. The situations are no different--DuelMaster93 (talk) 21:24, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

I don't think the NoPicAvailable.png belongs anywhere, it looks terrible.

ROBO TALK   21:25,8/30/2014 21:25, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Because somebody who doesn't know how NoPicAvailable.png works added it. SeaTerror (talk) 21:28, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

The (multiple) people who have been using the NoPicAvailable.png on the Home Video Releases page (previously known as DVD releases) had been using that image on that page for years and no one has ever said anything.
To my knowledge, there are no rules specifically written rules for NoPicAvailable.png--DuelMaster93 (talk) 21:33, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Well, I just made a new NoPicAvailible.png, you can see it if you check the talk page for it. Regarding this matter, why not just vote on it:

Votes to use these "placeholders:"



Votes to not use these "placeholders:"

ROBO TALK   22:11, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

This is not how it works. You haven't given me any reasons why we should the placeholder images. Look at my list, I have enough reasons why we shouldn't use them. Please give me a list reasons why we should use placeholders. The only reason you have given me is 'it's better then nothing' which is just an opinion.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 22:25, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Well, I think that's how it should work, but whatever.

ROBO TALK   22:40, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

So you think it's fair to just ignore my reasons, and not give any reasons yourself? If You're not gonna give your own reasons, at least dispute mine.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 22:43, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Wait for more opinions. 10 minutes is not enough time to try to call a decision (and if it was, the images would stay because the majority is in favor of keeping the images at the moment.) Don't remove the images from the page either, as that's not what we do during an ongoing discussion.

Your reasons are also opinions Duelmaster, so.... Mr. Whatever (talk) 22:43, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

The reasons I put up have been up for well over an hour. And all i got was 'they're better than nothing' and 'You shouldn't be using NoPicAvailable.png'--DuelMaster93 (talk) 22:51, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

And yet the majority that have participated do not agree with your reasons... therefore by that logic we close this discussion and the images stay?

Wait for more participants or for a significant amount of time to pass (days). Mr. Whatever (talk) 22:52, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Fine. I will wait for one week until someone disputes my reasons or gives reasons of their own. Personally I don't think there will be much more participants in this conversation anyway. FYI, if you actually read my reasons they are all based on factual evidence. If you want to dispute my reasons then please feel free to do so.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 22:58, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Let's be a little more civil please, here. I agree with you on most of your points, DuelMaster, and even I'm annoyed by the way you're trying to argue. People are allowed to have their own opinions, badgering them to mention cite facts can only go so far if your opponents are stubborn. And please, leave the image on the page until the discussion is done, removing it again could lead to your ban. We have a set of rules to try and keep discussions civil, and you're breaking several of those right now.

Also, let's be clear on facts vs. opinions. Amazon's status as having no official connection to One Piece is an example of a fact. "It is pointless unless it is the official cover art" is an opinion.

Why the hell are we even arguing about No Pic Available? It gets used where it needs to be used (empty positions for images on templates) because that's exactly what it exists to be used for. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 23:03, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Ok then, I have added the factuality of my previousy stated reasons.

Reasons why this image shouuld not be used:
- It's a placeholder used by Amazon. Amazon always use random images and posters as placeholders. - This is a fact that JustSomeDude has also stated
- The image is in no way related to funimation - This image has never been used by FUNimation, so fact.
- Amazon has done this with previous One Piece products, and the placeholder images used for those items have never been uploaded to the wiki. - This is a fact. I can't prove it right now because those images have since been updated.
- The image will be replaced by the official image anyway - This is a fact. I had already stated above why this is not the official image
- No other item or merchandise shown on the wiki has ever used a placeholder image. - This is fact to my knowledge (unless someone wants to dispute this)
- The NoPicAvailable.png is also used as a placeholder image for japanese DVD releases. - This is fact. Go check the page yourself
- It is pointless unless it is the official cover art - My opinion, but i would like to hear why it is useful
--DuelMaster93 (talk) 23:14, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

None of that really changes my mind. Nothing wrong with using the placeholder images provided until we have a more solid image (this also applies to the Japanese DVD releases). Mr. Whatever (talk) 20:13, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

Nothing wrong? The fact that image has never been used by funimation and is not the official box art means it shouldn't even be on the wiki on in the first place. We had never used placeholder images before for any other product or merchandise, so I don't see why we should start now. My reasons not good enough? Then let's hear your reasons as to why these placeholder images should be used.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 21:23, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

I've given my reasons as to why they should be used, and will not be repeating myself again, sorry. Mr. Whatever (talk) 21:25, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

Only reason I can see made by you is Amazon is the only valid source. If my reasons aren't good enough, then I don't think that this one reason is a good enough reason to start using placeholder images.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 21:35, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

Considering this was 2 vs 1 against a user who is now banned, I'm gonna go ahead and close this and say no placeholders. That ok? JustSomeDude...  Talk | 13:49, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

No because you miscounted. Without Galaxy it is 2 vs 2. SeaTerror (talk) 17:41, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

Yep, you're totally right. I think I must have only read the later parts of the discussion and totally missed the posts of you and Robo. (I think I also confused Robo and Duelmaster as the same user, for literally no reason.)

But anyways, I noticed the images have all been deleted already. Does this really need to go to poll? JustSomeDude...  Talk | 19:46, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

Then the images need to be restored since they were used on the article. If somebody had removed them then that was vandalism. One thing we absolutely need to do is stop the NoPic from being used on these pages since that's not the way it's supposed to be used. SeaTerror (talk) 19:50, September 22, 2014 (UTC)

Just so you know, the image was removed from the page by Zodiaque. I'm not sure if the image is still on the actual wiki database or not. Before this entire conversation even started the images were initially uploaded by Kamikazi L and then removed by Videogamep. Also, on the most recent episode of the One Piece Podcast, brand manager Josh Korurek stated the images were 'filler images' and is not the official box art. SeaTerror, since the distributors don't always provide a placeholder image for every single item, i personally believe we should continue to use the NoPicAvailable on these pages.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 18:33, September 23, 2014 (UTC)

So it's obvious we need a poll here. I think it's obvious how the placeholder vs. no placeholder should go. But what exactly do you mean about not wanting to use No Pic Available here, ST? Do we need to poll that too? And if so, what's the alternate option? JustSomeDude...  Talk | 15:05, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't belong on articles like this. It's only supposed to be used on templates and mentioned only characters. So the alternative is using nothing. SeaTerror (talk) 16:40, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Well, if we use no image at all, that fucks up the formatting of the page. Do you have any alternative solution that won't fuck up the formatting? If not, I'd say we should just use the damn thing. Doesn't matter what the image is "supposed" to be used on if it has an actual purpose here. We can always change what it's "supposed" to be used on at any time we want. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 16:44, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

I really doubt it will screw up the formatting of the page. SeaTerror (talk) 16:45, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with using the placeholders. uknownada Talk 17:53, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Well, the actual covers came out, so there's no point in continuing this discussion. Closing it. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 17:57, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Alright, well we have official cover art for Box Set 1 and 3 now, with a big fucking green "Zolo" in between them. We know that's not legit. We know it's just an Amazon placeholder. Can we delete it, please? We don't need to have an image there just 'cause. Ryu-Chan•|•Talk 01:32, February 6, 2015 (UTC)

Hopefully if some new people get into the conversation, we can reach a clear majority. My mind hasn't changed with time. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 01:34, February 6, 2015 (UTC)

We're using goddamned posters as covers now? One with large text "ZOLO" in it? Yeah, no thanks. Amazon is clearly using the image as a placeholder, we know it's not going to be the official cover, we know it's a freaking poster, and not even a draft cover, so why would we use it, let even allow it to exist on here?  Jademing  Talk  23:31, February 6, 2015 (UTC)

The image was already replaced when they officially came out. SeaTerror (talk) 02:28, February 7, 2015 (UTC)

You are confused, my friend. The Zolo image is very much on the page and on Amazon. Ryu-Chan•|•Talk 02:45, February 7, 2015 (UTC)

Let's just use "No Pic Available" instead of awful placeholders. Awaikage Talk 17:43, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

Alright, seems like a clear majority to me. Let's close this. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 17:45, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

Image being deleted is fine but the other issue that was raised about no pic available hasn't been solved. They're only supposed to be used for articles and templates where there is literally no image to use. The No Pic Available picture doesn't belong on articles like this. SeaTerror (talk) 19:52, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

There is literally no image to use. We don't have the proper cover yet. Ryu-Chan•|•Talk 19:56, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

So then don't use the No Pic Available image. It doesn't belong. It's only for templates and article infoboxes. SeaTerror (talk) 20:02, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

SeaTerror, As i had stated before, there are no rules specifically written rules for NoPicAvailable.png
I have never heard anyone say it's only for templates and article infoboxes where there is literally no image to use. As stated before, NoPicAvailable.png has been used both this page and Home Video Releases/Seasons 16-20 by multiple editors (some of which were admins) for years (even though there have also been placeholder images on amazon) and no one has ever said a thing until this 'ZOLO' placeholder image popped up.--DuelMaster93 (talk) 23:09, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

Prove it by showing written evidence, ST. We use it all over the place. We use it with the redlink template, we use it on talk pages, we use it all over. If your next post doesn't have a link to show written evidence of a "rule" about that image's use, I'm locking this page. I'm 100% serious on this. No evidence, it's locked.

Since I know you tend to not respond to ultimatums, I'm removing the active discussion template too. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 00:19, February 9, 2015 (UTC)

Here's a line from Buggy's article. "Nevertheless the Mayor's efforts amuse him, but Luffy appears and pulls the hand off Boodle's neck before Buggy can do anything else. Luffy decides to shout out "Hey big nose!" to grab Buggy's attention." There's no image of Buggy reacting to being called big nose nor is No Pic Available being used. Why should these articles be any different? West Blue is an example of an article that has no image therefore is an actual valid use of it. SeaTerror (talk) 18:57, February 9, 2015 (UTC)

The difference between this and that is that on this page, Box 2 is the only DVD without an image. There's an informal template, so to speak. There's really no reason to fight this. Ryu-Chan•|•Talk 19:52, February 9, 2015 (UTC)

Ryu's right, the difference is that this is a table/template. We can use it here. It is not nested into a paragraph.

But you didn't post anything about a rule, so this is getting locked! Also, we have the image now, so discussing this is even more useless than before! JustSomeDude...  Talk | 05:08, February 10, 2015 (UTC)


Given that this page is over 100,000 characters, should we not spilt the episodes and the videos into new subpages if not make the videos into more subpages and when you look at the Chapters and Volumes page it should be spilt into subpages too.--Robertg27 (talk) 17:35, May 25, 2017 (UTC)

I already did that back in Feb 2016, but DuelMaster93 reverted my edit due to some ref problems "Dragonquiz's format creates massive referencing problems." At that time nor today I understand what he meant by that, so if the problem was/has been solved since then I can redo it again. If DuelMaster93 wants to explain what he meant by that that would be helpful as well. Dragonquiz (talk) 19:35, May 29, 2017 (UTC)

You should've asked me what I meant at the time. Go back and look at the edit yourself, and you will see the problem. Dragonquiz's templates caused the references to end up all over the place. It resulted in reference sections under every single template that had a reference, and <no include> kept showing at the end of each of those reference sections. Although Dragonquiz's edit only had 1 reference on the page at the time he edited it, if you were to add more it would result in reference sections with <no include> all over the page. Those templates needs to be fixed if we were to use them. Besides, Dragonquiz's templates aren't really a long term solution anyway, cause even if the byte count is reduced, the page would still be unnecessarily too long. Best thing to do is split dvd releases, tv airings and the simulcast section into further tabs. And if the dvd releases section is still too long, split it further into seasons or types of dvd releases (voyages, collections etc).--DuelMaster93 (talk) 13:14, May 30, 2017 (UTC)


While updating the tab template, I noticed that this page has no content. It seems to me that all its content was split between the other subpages, so what is the purpose of keeping this page? Can we just delete it? {{leviathan_89 | 11:31, 19 December, 2020 (UTC)}}