Clean Up Needed
This page needs cleaning up, possibly rewritten even. Okay, since this is about the show itself, its setting a bad example and lets get it sorted by the end of this week. One-Winged Hawk 12:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Zoriax 23:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC):I want to do a consideration. Gold Roger said that "You must travel the entire world to find it [the One Piece]"...I think that the treasure, the One Piece, is a dream. All the pirates had a dream, and Gold Roger tricked them. I mean, you will really need a treasure when you have fulfilled your dream and travelled all over the world, being a legend? :-)
Hmmm...no...That was a dub quote...Dub Quotes= non-canon. 68.36.166.78 02:02, February 10, 2011 (UTC)
One Piece page to go back to my revisions
I transfered all data from the Manga to here because what it's been talked about in the Manga should be here not there. The One Piece page was suppose to talk about the story, the style and the treasure all togather while the Manga section just list manga related-list so let me revert to my edit and please don't revert my edits anymore. I need you guys to to stick with me on this matter.
Joekido 13:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- DON'T!!!
- One Piece = Treasure
- Manga = One Piece manga!
- They create problems otherwise since its easier to link to One Piece when talking about the treasure then havig to write something lik One Piece (Treasure). And its easier to let the page manga handle the manga side just as we had the page anime handle the anime side. One-Winged Hawk 14:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Well it did the same in Star Wars Wikia so I liked my version better but 'meh'
Joekido 14:18, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- I know SWW is a grest wikia and all, but while wikias will have simulairties they won't be identical. What works in one wikia might not work in another. One-Winged Hawk 14:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- In the Star Wars wikia, War Craft wikia, and any other wikia, they have those type of articles because they explain the franchise of the series. In this wikia, its kinda of a special case.
- One Piece can refer to the series itself, or the treasure
- There are already two such articles explaining the franchise
- For this wikia, to have a page similar to those other wikia, the anime and manga pages will have to be combined and there has to be a distinction between the franchise and the treasure itself. This wikia started out with such a page but over time it evolved a different route. It seems odd but alot less odder than a page that talks about both the series and the treasure almost as if there are one.Mugiwara Franky 08:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Problem
The problem is that in overwhelming majority of pages that link here not a reference to the treasure, but a reference to the series is intended (you can easily be convinced by looking at several pages from "What links here" list). Manually changing them is too much of work (there are hundreds such pages). So, I think, it is better to make One Piece page as a disambiguation page or redirect to One Piece (Manga), and to rename page about the treasure to One Piece (treasure). Ruxax 16:04, May 15, 2010 (UTC)
- I second this; I was actually coming to the talk page to suggest the same thing, but you beat me to it. I think a One Piece (Disambiguation) would be a swell idea. 2xN 08:19, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
Almost all the links are from episode and voice actors pages, I can fix that. I am against the rename of the page to One Piece (treasure) if this is the not default page. If you make the manga page the default we will have the same problem doesn’t change anything and we should fix all the links that redirect here. Whatever we do we should fix hundreds of wrong links. Tipota 10:13, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, if you are ready to fix all the links to this page, then please do it. Apart from episodes and voice actors pages, there are many other cases like in Category:Islands:
- "Most locations in One Piece are islands."
- or in the article Pell:
- and even in the Main Page.
- Two issues arise: 1) where to link here - to One Piece (Manga) or One Piece (Anime)? 2) when one will write something similar in the future, I'm pretty sure he'll not take into account that One Piece is a specific page is about the treasure. Ruxax 10:48, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
So I agree that links from episodes and voice actors pages should be changed to One Piece (Anime). But the default page should be the disambiguation page, imho. And the two reasons for that are: 1) main usage of "One Piece" is name to the series; 2) if link, implied to refer to the series in general (like cases I showed above) would link to the disambig page it would be "less wrong" than if it would link to the treasure page. Ruxax 11:07, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
World Government
Did it ever say that the World Government showing signs that they fear One Piece? Because it seems that way. I'm not trying to make a fourm, but if the World Government truely does fear One Piece and it has been shown, should we put it onto the page and/or put it into the mythbusters?68.36.166.78 01:58, February 10, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about the Government, but acording to Whitebeard, the ones who really fear the One Piece are the Marines, so I think that should be mentioned.GMTails 21:47, February 10, 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, feel free to put in whatever you want. I'm just not sure what to say. 68.36.166.78 21:00, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
first time mentioned?
the first time One Piece was mentioned is during the execution of Roger,right? I understand what he said is "I left everything I own in One Piece", but none of the English translation confirm my suspicion.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.119.96.73 (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~ next time!
That was the 4kids translation, and it's incorrect. He said "I left it all in that place." It was already known as One Piece before he gave up his piracy. uknownada Talk 13:23, May 15, 2013 (UTC)
Looking for source
Does anyone have the source for when Oda apparently said that One Piece is a physical object? Never seen it for myself. Anima40 (talk) 01:43, February 25, 2014 (UTC)
Where exactly did you see that? It's not on this article. It's recommended to throw away socks after a year 10:11, February 25, 2014 (UTC)
I know it's not on the article, it's more something that I've always seen others say but now that I think about it, they never backed it up with a source so I was hoping you guys would know if it exsits or not. Anima40 (talk) 10:29, February 25, 2014 (UTC)
No source = speculation. It's recommended to throw away socks after a year 11:01, February 25, 2014 (UTC)
Joy Boy
|
Hey! Let's talk this out!
This is an active talk page. Please participate if you wish to make changes to the subject at hand. Remember to remain calm and civil throughout the discussion! |
So, after Chapter 967, is it safe to say that the One Piece is in fact not Roger's treasure, but Joy Boy's? That's how I intepreted it, but I didn't want to change it without approval. Timjer (talk) 12:28, December 29, 2019 (UTC)
- It is completely obvious but not confirmed.--Sandwichman2449 (talk) 21:23, December 29, 2019 (UTC)
No. The One Piece could be the sum of Roger and JB's treasure, or the true history itself, or not even JB's treasure but someone before him and JB also followed the Poneglyphs. There are too many unanswered questions that leave the One Piece original owner unknown, but just like any pirate treasure, since Roger is the last person who had access to it, it is his. Rhavkin (talk) 21:57, December 29, 2019 (UTC)
Then I suggest this page should be protected until we find out if Joy Boy really was the true owner because its never officially confirmed yet and it will cause edit wars. ShadowSilverx4 (talk) 19:56, January 19, 2020 (UTC)
Did you read 968? One Piece is the name of Roger's treasure, regardless of its or parts of it former\original owner. The page is fine as is. Rhavkin (talk) 20:07, January 19, 2020 (UTC)
But that's exactly the point and why I added Joy Boy as a former owner: There's only one treasure - the one Joy Boy left behind and Roger found. It wasn't Roger's decision to christen it "One Piece", after all. It was named that by people who had no clue what the Roger Pirates had actually found.
You could see it like this: If I found a dog on the street and named it "Bob", and it turns out that its former owner had died, then that person would still be the former owner of "Bob", even if they maybe called the dog by a different name.
And please don't argue about Roger tampering with the treasure in any way. We don't know that (as I wrote in the article) and it would quickly become a "Ship of Theseus" matter like that. • Seelentau 愛 議 22:37, January 19, 2020 (UTC)
One Piece was clearly described as "everything Roger gained". If I may use an example that is not a living creature:
- If you found a table on the street, and brought it home, it is now your table.
- If you found a broken table on the street, brought it home and fixed it, it is now your table.
- If you found a table top on the street, brought it home, and assemble legs to it, it is now your table.
- If you found a random piece of wood, brought it home, and assemble legs to it, it is now your table.
What ever it was that Joy Boy left behind is part of One Piece, but One Piece as a whole is confirmed in 968 to be Roger's. Rhavkin (talk) 22:56, January 19, 2020 (UTC)
Again: "One Piece" is a term for what Roger gained, given by people who had no idea, as Roger himself noted in chapter 968. What Roger gained was the treasure Joy Boy left behind. Thus, Joy Boy is the previous owner of what came to be known as "One Piece". I don't get where you got this "part" stuff from. Do you think "One Piece" also refers to whatever treasure Roger wanted to give Whitebeard, for example?
And regarding your examples: If all of these items had previous owners, then those previous owners would be, well, previous owners. That's the entire point here. • Seelentau 愛 議 23:11, January 19, 2020 (UTC)
We don't know what part of One Piece is Joy Boy's treasure, and what Roger also had, which is why I gave multiple examples for how a table can be gained. Is it possible that Joy Boy's treasures is exactly the One Piece? Yes. Is it confirmed? No. Hence we can't say One Piece belonged to Joy Boy. Rhavkin (talk) 23:20, January 19, 2020 (UTC)
Yes, we can. Once more: One Piece is the name given by the uneducated to the treasure Roger found on Laugh Tale. The public apparently thinks that Roger left a treasure on Laugh Tale, because, as Roger himself said in the chapter, they don't know what really happened. And he also said that Joyboy left the treasure there. So yes, the treasure that was named One Piece by the public is the same treasure Joyboy left behind. The question if Roger left something there too or took something with him doesn't matter in this discussion. Because, again, Ship of Theseus. • Seelentau 愛 議 07:37, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Where does it say that the name is what was found on Laugh Tale? Until now it was always what was left there, and the person who left it there is Roger. And assuming Roger was referring to what Oden wrote in his log and not what they read in the paper, saying "They have no idea" doesn't necessarily mean "they have no idea that it is not originally mine". Rhavkin (talk) 08:32, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Ah yes, that was my mistake, I actually read Roger's words as a reaction to Oden's logbook, which of course doesn't make sense.
But in any case, your proposal would effectively mean that we have two treasures: One left behind by Joy Boy, the treasure that everyone is looking for and then the One Piece, which is Joy Boy's treasure plus anything Roger might have added, minus anything he might have taken away and on top of that any other treasure he gained over the course of his life, like the treasure he wanted Whitebeard to have in exchange for Oden. This in turn would of course mean that the One Piece doesn't await anyone who reaches Laugh Tale, but only Joy Boy's treasure is. Which we know isn't the case - One Piece lies at Laugh Tale. That's why I'm saying One Piece is Joy Boy's treasure and nothing else. • Seelentau 愛 議 13:50, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Speculations. Rhavkin (talk) 14:15, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Rhavkin, you're the one who proposed that there are two treasures - Joy Boy's (the treasure at LT) and the One Piece (the sum of Roger's treasures). And since it's a fact that the One Piece lies at LT, your proposal would mean that Roger left all his treasures behind, adding it to JB's treasure. But this is - as you so aptly called it - a speculation.
If I made a mistake in this train of thought, please tell me. • Seelentau 愛 議 14:24, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
I never said there are two treasures, just that there is no confirmation that they are the same one. Rhavkin (talk) 15:51, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Of course there is: The people called "Roger's treasures" One Piece => The One Piece lies on LT => The treasure on LT was left there by Joyboy = The One Piece is the treasure left by Joyboy. The only way this wouldn't work is if there were two treasures, but assuming this possibility would be speculation. • Seelentau 愛 議 15:55, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Or that Joy Boy's is part of One Piece. Rhavkin (talk) 16:00, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Do you have proof for this claim? Because again, it would mean that Roger left his treasure at LT. And that was simply never said. • Seelentau 愛 議 16:05, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
If we have two equally possible speculation, it is best to leave the page as is. You can mention in this and Laugh Tale trivia sections that "Joy Boy's treasure was also left at Laugh Tale, but no other connection between the has been confirmed." and I think that is currently the best option. Rhavkin (talk) 16:16, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Which part of what I wrote is speculation? • Seelentau 愛 議 17:06, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
"The One Piece is the treasure left by Joyboy". Rhavkin (talk) 18:11, January 20, 2020 (UTC)
Not really, no. "The treasure on LT was left by JB" and "the treasure on LT is the OP" are both true statements. So as long as there's no other treasure revealed, "The treasure left by JB on LT is OP" is true. • Seelentau 愛 議 11:00, January 21, 2020 (UTC)
That logic is flawed unless you can prove Roger did not have anything else he left of Laugh Tale. Rhavkin (talk) 12:38, January 21, 2020 (UTC)
Please don't strawman me. I never claimed he didn't leave anything there (or that he did). It's not part of my argument, because I can't know. • Seelentau 愛 議 16:06, January 21, 2020 (UTC)
I don't know what "strawman" is, but if saying that they are the same treasure just because they were both left at the same place is a flawed logic anyway you look at it. Rhavkin (talk) 16:29, January 21, 2020 (UTC)
A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. In our case, that would be the argument "Roger didn't leave anything at LT.", which I never presented, but you refuted.
Of course it's not perfect logic, but it's based on all the facts we have without taking any other possibilities into account. And that's what a wiki does, isn't it? Presenting the facts, not possible alternatives. If there's any indication Roger took or left something from or at LT, we will obviously correct the article. But saying that "One Piece is a part of Roger's treasure" directly implies that he left something at LT. Which would be the exact same flawed logic as saying he did not leave anything there. • Seelentau 愛 議 16:39, January 21, 2020 (UTC)