FANDOM

5,737 Pages

WelcomeEdit

Wiki

Hi and welcome to the One Piece Encyclopedia! Thanks for your edit to the [[:Image:Luffy and Charloss.gif]] page.

Watermarked Edit

The image of the Luffy punching Carlos animation is watermarked. Sorry, but unless you own the image, you can't have it here. One-Winged Hawk 17:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Edit

For the help in Talk:Monkey_D._Garp, I thought I say it here because there it would be a bit too off-topic there. But you are right about it, well... it was a nice idea in my head, to bad it has to stay in my head. Kraken 04:10, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Shichibukai Vs Warlords of the sea Edit

I don't know if you intended to revert the other stuff AND Shichibukai into "Warlord" but you did just that. I can't speak for the other stuff but please don't revert Shichibukai back into Warlord, see Japanese Vs English names for more details. One-Winged Hawk 18:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh.

Whoops, I didn't mean to do that. I don't even know how in the hell that happened.

Sorry.Buh6173 19:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The Paper of Life Edit

Any particular reason you think it's Biblicard and not Vivre Card? Given that it's known as the Paper of Life and "Vivre" means 'life', please read & respond to the talk page.

Kaizoku-Hime 05:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Until Oda himself gives proper Romanization, then it's debatable. One bit of evidence that leans on "Biblicard" is that it may be a reference to the Black Spot from Treasure Island, which were made from sheets of paper ripped from the Bible.

Though vivre meaning life also has meaning.

Like I said, until Oda flat-out gives the proper spelling, it's just as debatable as Juracule/Dracule.Buh6173 06:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

That's understandable. Then you're gonna have to revert all of the edits Sgamer82 made changing "Biblicard" to 'Vivre Card' in just about every page it was mentioned.
Kaizoku-Hime 06:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Done.Buh6173 06:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

B and V are near enough interchangable ('Vivi' was 'Bibi' in early translations), same as L and R. For now, theres no indication which Oda is using. I think its going to be one of those things Oda never reveals. One-Winged Hawk 06:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Shadows Edit

To create shadows you need light. Darkness does not mean there are more shadows. In fact, there are less shadows in the dark then the day. This is something I always cribed about the show "Skeleton Warriors" as at one point this guy who could travel through shadows was told by the villian of the show "Its a shame its a nice bright sunny day, theres no shadows for you to pop into". The lack of shadows in the daylight has nothing to do with brightness, but rather position of the sun in the sky in fact, since shadows change their length over the course of the day and year, with winter producing the longest shadows due to the lowness of the sun. One-Winged Hawk 21:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Brook history division Edit

Can we please talk it out in his talk page before continuing the edit war.Mugiwara Franky 14:54, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Will you please talk it out in Brook's talk page before reverting the headings or anything else. I have locked the page because of the edit war.Mugiwara Franky 15:00, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

I already have.Buh6173 15:01, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Well please continue there so that we can resolve this.Mugiwara Franky 15:03, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Extending problem to other pages Edit

Can you please not extend one problem to other pages when the one in the first page isn't resolved yet. The problem in Brook's page is one thing but the problem in Luffy's page is another thing.Mugiwara Franky 15:34, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Are you having a hard time editing Luffy's page without divisions to aid you? The page is too much for one editor to fix in one go and editing sections with a lot of paragraphs eats up alot of your time.Mugiwara Franky 16:06, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
No, not really.
So are you done editing or are you still working? The progress for the Thriller Bark part you did so far maybe good but its no different than what it was before in the overall article. I need to know if you are planning to do the whole page cause its abit of a pain in the waiting department.Mugiwara Franky 16:17, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
If you want to help summarize it, be my guest. All I did was clip out parts that didn't have to do with Luffy; what also needs to be done is for it to be summed up better and not explained in explicit detail.
If any more summarizing is gonna be done, some proper divisions are gonna be needed. Some people can't work or navigate between large texts in certain sections. The Arabasta section for example, because of it being one single section, if something happens all the work will be gone.Mugiwara Franky 16:26, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
What, you're saying they should be divided, edited, then combined again?

Yes, for easy editing and navigating. Not everyone can easily edit a super huge section like the Impel Down section and any other section that's gonna be created in the future. Seriously, do you honestly think that this style of division is any better than the one before. Sure, you've split the section of Gaimon away from Kuro but you only created a extremely small section. The rest are extremely large sections that aren't easy to go to from the top.Mugiwara Franky 16:35, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

If you want to summarize them, then be my guest and divide it until you're done. If not, though, then leave it as it is.Buh6173 16:37, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
I and anyone else can summarize them if given the time. We however can't do it all in one go and we certainly can't do it without divisions to lessen the workload per edit.Mugiwara Franky 16:40, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
Fine. How about this. Go ahead and divide them back up. In a week's time, I'm going to put them back to one section per arc. That should be enough time to sort it out.Buh6173 16:46, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
It can't work that way Buh. One week is not enough to fix large arcs like Skypiea. Even then if you give just one section for each arc, there will arcs with ridiculous amount of paragraphs and arcs with just few paragraphs. It will not be symmetrically clean and still hard to navigate and edit for others. I myself am having a hard time trying to locate the parts that need fixing.Mugiwara Franky 16:51, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
I've been able to edit and write full sections in one sitting. A week is more than enough time.Buh6173 16:52, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

You maybe able to do it but not everyone can do it. Also, not everyone's computer can handle it.

There's also many variables that are needed.

  • Reference
  • Verification
  • Choosing which situations need to be mentioned or not
  • Finding the right images
  • Making sure there's enough spacing per paragraph

There's also other things that can make one incapable of doing large sections.

  • School
  • Sleep
  • Food
  • Homework

Mugiwara Franky 16:58, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Listen, you maybe be able to navigate and edit large sections but not everyone can do it. I maybe the only one saying this but you really can't have one arc=one section. You can't easily navigate from the top. You can't last long in editing. You just can't do it that way.Mugiwara Franky 17:16, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Title Edit wars with Swg66 and others Edit

Please do not cause edit wars such as what tittle should be used or whether or not a certain amount of images should be used in a section.

For the Edit wars with Swgg66: While your choice of a title for the current events for Luffy's current team is abit dramatic if not decorative, the heading of current events is still slightly acceptable. Considering that a better title will be needed after that part of the story, current events is kinda more appropriate until proper titles for each character's participation in the war can be made. The heading of Current Events can also help readers easily identify which section is about what's happening currently.

For the images: While they are nice, they give some problems which amounts to image overload in some articles.

  1. The placement of the images seems more decorative than informative
  2. The placement of some of the images is displacing the code for the rest of the page
  3. The sizes picked for the images are a bit too big
  4. The images being picked are of events too close to one another. An example is a picture of Luffy's escapee gang and a picture of Luffy and Whitebeard. Both are epic pictures, however one might have to be chosen if they are to match the text.
  5. While more text from the next chapter might allow for more pictures, they will however be problems. One is that there might be other epic images in the next chapter and two is that the text that will be added will not correspond correctly to the images.

Mugiwara Franky 12:11, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Mass Edit Wars Edit

Due to what apparently is several mass edit wars between yourself and others, I have decided to lock several pages in which you have been involved in. This lock will only last for a week but I suggest that you talk things out with the rest of the community so that all of us can work peacefully together. If not, the consequences would much more severe than simple locks.Mugiwara Franky 16:10, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

The only problems have been the Luffy page and Kizaru. With the image of him arriving, like I stated before (but which Tipota has apparently decided to ignore), what makes the scene important is the insane way that he rides down on a cannonball, not just that "he's there". As far as the Luffy page goes, those images are all significant, and as you've seen with the text from the latest chapter added, the images do not mess up the layout of the page. Buh6173 17:03, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
For the Kizaru pic, I don't think you've made it clear to Tipota to what you want to show. At the very least, there doesn't seem to be a discussion between yourselves.
For the Luffy thing, the pics with their size are still overloading. In an encyclopedia or any form of written form of information, text should be supported by images, not the other way around. True, this is a wikia and it can be more versatile than a ordinary encyclopedia, however there is a point when some editing is just being decorative or uninformative. The images are significant indeed, however not every epic image that pops up can easily fit. Images help text, not overshadow them.
From what is happening also, there seems to be more than just Luffy and Kizaru that is involved. From what I gather, there are 5 edit wars. Most involve you and Tipota. Though Tipota is just to blame as you, however from what is happening, and what has been happening recently involving you and others including myself, I believe some discussion between you and the community is much needed.Mugiwara Franky 17:29, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
I explained to Tipota on many occasions why it should be the animated GIF, but he wouldn't listen. And again, those images are very significant; think to, say, the Thriller Bark Arc, where there's a whole ton of images, but they're not incredibly significant. Why that flies and the important ones like him arriving in Marineford are left out. As far as the other edit wars go, they were mostly for stupid things, like keeping both of the images with Jinbei in them and both of the images of Mr. 3 fighting Magellan, even when they were on opposite sides of text and not obstructing anything. Buh6173 18:26, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
From your edits, you're not even trying to talk to Tipota directly about the matter. For the Luffy pics and the others, it's not they're significant, its just they're overloading space with their size and placement. Some examples are the Jinbei and Mr. 3 pics. While they do not necessarily obstruct the text, they are being given more space than the corresponding text. The text is being the background for the images rather than the images helping illustrate what is being stated in the text.Mugiwara Franky 18:49, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
I guess the image of Gigant Stamp could be removed, since that's more about Luffy than it is Mr. 3, but both of the Jinbei ones still belong there. Again, if there's enough text, then the images won't just be "in the background".Buh6173 18:54, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
That however is the problem. Images are intended to help support the text. They are the background to the text, not the other way round. In certain cases, especially history sections, text should be the prevalent factor in order to explain history. Only when there is ample space can there be images.
A good encyclopedia can be one with little to no images as long as it provides good information. A bad one however is one that has only images and nothing to explain them.Mugiwara Franky 19:04, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
Well, in the cases of less major characters, they're pretty much the only images on the page.Buh6173 19:18, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
For the less major characters, the rules kinda apply to them as well. If the space being occupied can't allow for alot of images, then its best not to overload the space no matter how significant or epic an image maybe.Mugiwara Franky 19:27, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
I'm saying that they do allow for plenty of images, since there's hardly any in there in the first place. Buh6173 19:38, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
If there is space in a particular section of an article that allows for alot of images then that section can have alot of images.
If an article has little to no images that doesn't mean that one section of the article should be overloaded with too many images to compensate for the lack of images.Mugiwara Franky 19:58, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
Well, either way, Luffy was fine, and the other pages kept the two images balanced on both sides, so there wasn't an overload.Buh6173 20:10, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

For some like Jinbei's, it's more on size. Setting an image's size too big in some places, creates just as much overload. For others like Mr. 2's, the images were somewhat being repetitive. Placing an image of one situation and placing another image of the same situation only with a different shot is somewhat being repetitive.Mugiwara Franky 20:21, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Mr. 2. I suppose could get the same treatment as Mr. 3; get rid of the image that is less informative. And Jinbei's weren't that large at all; if I recall, they were only about 250 px, max, which given text in between and no other images around it, is nothing. Buh6173 01:11, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

That Quote Edit

Its about Justice, Doflamingo's view of what Justice is. It there belong here. While its true he said it, theres little need to write every memoriable quote on a page. Doflamingo is full of great quotes, and its best to write only a few. Quotes are great, but theres a thing called "over-quote", if your doing that you can hardly say your writing things down in your own words anymore. We're not here to copy script word for word, the quotes are just points of intereast that support a piece of text. I have a simulair crib with the CP9 techniques page, as theres more quotes then any page needs there as it is. One-Winged Hawk 08:22, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Also, call me "son" again and you'll get e-slapped hard; please note my user page. >_< One-Winged Hawk 08:26, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
It's a term of phrase. And three quotes isn't "overrquoting". Buh6173 15:21, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
Not really going to argue whether the quite should be there or not, however I'm really starting to see a pattern of recent edit wars with you Buh and others. True, they don't seem too violent however I suggest you not to frequently do them as it impedes the development of the articles and the wikia as a whole.Mugiwara Franky 17:08, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Continuing Edit war Edit

Please stop edit warring with Tipota and talk with each other directly. You two have some serious issues with one another that I have to say is disrupting the wikia as a whole. Leaving messages in either edit summaries or article talk pages are not enough. You both have to talk to each other directly.Mugiwara Franky 15:06, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Why is doing it in the talk pages not enough? Different pages have different issues, and talking about edits in general on each other's talk pages won't solve that. Buh6173 15:08, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

It is not enough when too many things are involved. If you simply just talk things one at a time, it will be hard to keep track of everything since you're jumping around the place. To simplify things and make your points known, you will have to address each other in your respective talk pages.
The recent edit wars are slowly becoming big. Some serious discussion between users will have to take place.Mugiwara Franky 15:14, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

You(Buh7173) ask me to stop edit wars. OK I will stop. End of “discussion”.Tipota 16:32, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I can’t make it clearer. I will stop edit wars; end of discussion. Do as you wish with the images.Tipota 16:54, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
Oh. Well, all right. Can you unlock those pages now, Mugiwara Franky? Buh6173 16:58, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Pacifista Edit

So now you're saying that everything that the anime shows is not cannon unless if it is shown in the manga (not refering to fillers). Its obvious that the intended purpose of the anime having more elements than the manga so that viewers will have a better understanding of the manga. If the anime is not cannon then what is? Oda worked on the anime so that it backs up that of the manga and is a reliable source, with extra bit for better understanding. So just leave it as it is, that the Pacifista facing Kidd and Law was a Pacifista.

Are you serious? Yes, more elements are added to the anime sometimes instead of the manga, but those aren't added by Oda, and are therefore not canonical. If something only appears in the anime and not in the manga, that is not canon; that is filler. And even if I were to follow your backwards logic for a few minutes, let me remind you that at the end of the anime-only fight between Law/Kid and the Pacifista, another "Pacifista" appeared to give it the same ambiguous ending that the manga had. In other words, both the manga and the anime intended to leave it blank for the moment whether the two fought the real Kuma or not. Buh6173 05:31, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

NOTE THIS: If it was the real Kuma then he would have been carrying his signature BIBLE, on Chapter 506, Page 04. You're a serious NOOB!

That's true. Then again, none of the other Pacifista showed the capability of speech. I'm not saying that it is Kuma, and I'm not saying it isn't; I'm saying that, at the moment, it is unknown until Oda clarifies. Buh6173 05:35, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Quote (frome above): "Then again, none of the other Pacifista showed the capability of speech.". Are you SERIOUSLY that NOOB!!!! I even gave u a reference in the edit. The Pacifista even said Apoo's name "Scratchmen Apoo" when Apoo appeared to attack Kizaru. There you go. another Pacifista showing the "capability of speech" as you call it. Go check it out before you change it again! I'm starting to agree with what Mugiwara Franky 17:08, September 27, 2009 (UTC) said above.

Ah, you're right. I missed that.
Well, nonetheless, the one that fought Kid and Law did not show his paws and did not fight them, so for now it's still unknown if it was a Pacifista or not. It probably is, but you can't jump to conclusions, otherwise that's a form of speculation and assumption.
Oh, and if you don't want to make an ass out of yourself, then please actually spell properly and stop saying "noob". Buh6173 05:57, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Oh and what did I spell wrong now??? Also, from what you said earlier that the "manga is canonical". Alright, if you take that point of yours into account: In regards to Kuma, where ever he goes, he is carrying his signature trademark BIBLE, whether at Mariejois or on Thriller Bark or at Sabaody Archipelago (facing the Straw Hats) or at Marine Headquarters (facing Whitebeard Pirates), he is always carrying his BIBLE in the manga, so therefore "CANONICAL" according to your terms and as global One Piece fans all know.

You made your point that if the Pacifista speaks, it is possibly Kuma himself, right? So why would he for one and both times be missing his BIBLE when facing Kidd and Law & when facing Apoo, Drake, Hawkins and Uroge? Therefore the Pacifista facing Kidd and Law could not have been Kuma (despite not making a move). It's not assumptions, It is FACT! Therefore please stop editing it back because it is already fact the that Pacifista cannot be Kuma, thats it, fullstop.

NOTE: I'll also be checking back in a few days, to see if you've changed it back to your speculation again... and if you persist to revert it then I'll continue to call you "noob"!

To the anon, please do not insult editors. For the Pacifista that faced the four supernovas, it is shown that it is not Kuma because it fired lasers from his hands. For the one that faced Kid and Law, it is not known if it is Kuma or not. The manga just shows a cliffhanger. The anime created some filler content but left a similar cliffhanger with the two captains encountering another Pacifista.
Filler is not canon in most cases. It is just the anime team making more stuff to make scenes or situations longer.Mugiwara Franky 08:48, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I know that the evidence of him speaking isn't valid due to the case with Apoo, but the thing is, the battle with Kid and Law wasn't shown. We never got to see whether or not he had paws or lasers. Oda purposely left it ambiguous for now. Saying that it was a Pacifista just because he lacked the Bible is jumping to conclusions. So stop reverting it to that. Buh6173 14:03, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Most cases? Since when is filler EVER canon? Drunk Samurai 18:29, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Whitebeard Saga Edit

Thanks for your grammar check friend. I want to ask why did whitebeard saga before thriller bark? Coldhandzz 05:11, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

The saga encompasses the other arcs within it, such as Thriller Bark, Sabaody Archipelago, Amazon Lily, etc. Buh6173 05:15, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

During Thriller Bark, the war was building up. The arcs tell the story about the war development and the war itself, that's why.

Joekido 23:02, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Comment on recent edit war Edit

Listen its nice and all that you add images and quotes, however if they are not arranged properly, then they are nothing but decoration.Mugiwara Franky 17:24, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

Grammar Edit

Hey friend can you check my grammar on my recent edits? thnx Coldhandzz 12:35, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Little note Edit

Maybe its not best to sign your name with "The Pope" as it may offend. One-Winged Hawk 21:46, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's my username pretty much everywhere else. The Pope 21:53, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
I'm suprised you've gotten away with it on the net then usually names like "IAMJESUS" and stuff gets pulled up by someone. ^_^' One-Winged Hawk 22:52, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

People get offended by somebody using the name Pope? Drunk Samurai 00:40, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

you'll find people get offended at just about anything, although religion tends to be a more senstive subject, i don't care what he calls himself and i'm catholic, i believe in freedom of expression, even if i might a little less than tastefull it's his right as long as he doesn't use crude or threatening language and doesn't insult people directly--Swg66 02:32, October 10, 2009 (UTC)


Marineford ArcEdit

Hello Pope (:-)), I'm currently having a discussion with One-Winged Hawk about the Marineford Arc article (Talk:Marineford_Arc#Inflation in the arc article). According to the history, I have the impression that you are one of the major contributor to this page, so it shall be worth to have your opinion on the subject. Thanks Kdom 12:05, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and said my thoughts on the arc's talk page. The Pope 17:13, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

KizaruEdit

Next time, take the time to check the chapters before you remove any information. Don't assume your memory is perfect.--24.255.171.220 17:03, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Wikia appearance Edit

Just a little request for some feedback in this discussion since it feels like that this wikia requires more color.Mugiwara Franky 06:20, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Zoro's History page Edit

Can you both please stop, none of you are helping improve the article with your meaningless edit war on what the title of each section.Mugiwara Franky 07:31, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

All of the history articles for every single character on the Wiki is more descriptive than just one word. I'm trying to keep it as it originally was, but his reasoning is "I edited it so it should stay like this". That would be like if I edited a whole bunch of crap into a page that wasn't supposed to be there, but kept adamantly wanting it to stay because "I edited it". The Pope 07:32, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Consistency is indeed an issue and what Coldhandzz is doing is somewhat wrong. However without a proper discussion explaining your case, its just looks like a meaningless edit war.Mugiwara Franky 07:44, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
I've been discussing it with him both in the edit notes and on his talk page. However, he's been refusing to listen to reason. And now you've gone and locked the page while it has that Sea Train heading, which is flat-out wrong, as it's not its own arc. The Pope 07:47, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
The lock apparently happened just as he was finished editing. In any case, use this time to properly talk to one another.Mugiwara Franky 07:59, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
I've tried talking to him about it; he won't listen. The Pope 15:47, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

The Deal with History sections Edit

I believe this is getting to be a real issue among us. While there should indeed be some consistency among the Straw Hats in how their histories should be arranged, not all of their histories are the same. Some Straw Hats have more actions in one arc than others. Some have so few actions that its not enough fill one section. Some have lots of actions that some division is needed so people won't get lost.

There's also the matter of how certain sections are named and the pics within them. Some titles are too long and some titles are a bit wrong. One example of a title that is too long is descriptive title of what happens in Sabaody. Its abit too much in a sense. One example of a title that is wrong is the title of Skypiea that has taking down a God. While this is true, not all of the Straw Hats took down a God. For the pics, its old subject but a bit worth mentioning.

I know what you are doing is in good faith, however as seen with the recent edit war with Coldhandzz, you edit other's edits way too much into yours. I may be guilty of this to a point, however this a matter that I see being made way too much by you.Mugiwara Franky 14:13, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I agree that some of the titles don't need to be as long; however, most of the arc articles don't require division, unless the arc focuses practically solely on them. The Pope 14:19, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

When you say focus, do you mean arcs like the Baratie arc which focuses alot on Sanji or the Thriller Bark arc which focuses alot on Brook? If so then why cut the divisions? Also some arc sections have way more content than others that normal readers and editors may find hard to read or edit. Anyway continue this solely in here.Mugiwara Franky 14:31, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
You know, changing titles and rearranging sections is not really productive if its the only thing you're gonna do. At most, it only causes edit wars especially what's happening now. If you can't add anything else that contributes to an article other than rearranging stuff then stop. Consistency is good but it can't apply to everyone.Mugiwara Franky 04:36, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
That's why I changed the titles so that they actually functioned in a way they were meant to. The Pope 04:46, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

The Promised Cape only lasted one part of Brook's First Life. The Death of the Rumbar Pirates was beyond the Cape. The arrival of Brook on the TB was way beyond the Cape. The only significant mention of the cape is in the first part.

The combining of the other sections is just ridiculous. I tried compromising by combining certain parts but you just want your way. There were three in Sabaody, I made two. You just want one.

The Quest for the Shadow, that only lasted 2 thirds of Thriller Bark. An Incident at Sabaody Archipelago and Destruction of the Straw Hat Crew, a bit too long of a title and descriptive of a title.

Other than that, you don't seem to be adding anything else to the article that could inform or help readers. No pics, no additional research, no references, just your preferences on how the section should be arranged.Mugiwara Franky 04:58, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

That's only the case for the Brook article.

The article should be organized as such: One section for everything leading up to the current timeline, a section for the Thriller Bark Arc, a section for the Sabaody Archipelago arc, and a section for the current arc. The arcs aren't that far into detail enough to split them apart so heavily. The Pope 05:21, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

That can't work in some cases. Some arcs have characters doing little to absolutely nothing. An example of this happening is Sanji's involvement in Whiskey Peak where he mostly slept. Some arcs characters have characters doing a whole lot of things. An example is Nami's involvement in Skypiea where her interaction is almost as much as Luffy's.
For Brook, it started out like this. A major section that deals with his first life and ends with his second life. The section was split based on major turning points in Brook's first life. The next major section dealt with Brook's experiences with Thriller Bark. It was split based on major turning points involving the island. These included first arrival and meeting the Straw Hats, return, fighting Moria and Oars, and the end and joining with the Straw Hats. After that it was regular Straw Hat section with Sabaody since he officially joined then, and then a section based on separation and cover story.
As for details, you should really look more closely at the content that you are rearranging. It's not just a few paragraphs, it's a lot of paragraphs. A long series of paragraphs that get really tiresome for some people to look at. Think of one long paragraph that has more than a 100 sentences. Think of a novel without any chapter divisions. A long series like that is hard to keep track with especially if you don't put any significant markers. Pictures could help but only so much. You need some significant divisions to help people do things like read and edit. I mean a relative small section is easier to read and edit without conflicts with other editors.
I know you want the Straw Hats to have a completely uniformed history division based on saga and arc however that really can't work. The Saga and arc division works perfectly for the entire story as a whole. For individual characters especially the Straw Hats, it can't. If applied to each of the Straw Hats, you get completely unbalanced sections. You get sections super small. You get sections super large. You get a History section that doesn't look good in appearance overall.
Listen, I wish you would stop placing important content as second fiddle.
  1. There's the whole division rearrangement thing you do without adding anything else. A severe case of that problem besides you and me, is the problem you had with Coldhandzz. He may not have been adding anything significant to Zoro's history but neither were you. Both of you weren't making a progress but Coldhandzz was at least trying to make the titles more easier.
  2. There's the whole swamping of large ass pics you do with almost no regards to the content beside it. Sometimes it significant, sometimes its repetitive or unnecessary. Pics no matter how epic they are, can not be placed before words especially in a small history section. If you want to swamp a section with pictures that take too much center stage, why not upload the entire manga.
  3. There's that argument you had with Angel over one stupid quote in Doflamingo. The quote is epic but like pics you do, it seemed to take center stage over everything else. Angel tried taking it out in order to direct focus to the more important content, however all you did was constantly revert her work without adding anything significant.
I am really getting tired of all these problems you cause. Most of them all seem to originate on how you want things to look. There's nothing wrong with that except when it is the only thing you do without adding anything else and it interferes with others, the its too much.Mugiwara Franky 10:49, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
I don't mind them at all, Buh has the best of intentions at least, only problem is trying to find a compremise here. MF, perhaps we should stop editing the SHs and come up with a more fesible plan that we can all stick to, like the basic layout we had in the early days of the wikia. I must admit as of late one of the reasons why I've not set aside time for rereading of old chapters is I'm unsure of the flow of things right now. I note with the SHs, whereas we once had ALL histories identical to each other we now find that the SHs are being set up differently and theres no note to tell everyone how and why they are different. Its not until now that you and Buh are tearing each others' eyes out I'm reading and starting to understand a little of whats been going on. One-Winged Hawk 11:35, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
The thing with the Straw Hats is that the majority of them are poor articles. Most are not up to date. Most are disorganized in a sense. Most are empty. Most have info that isn't exactly together with the main character. As the main major articles of the wikia, some form of editing is required of them so people at least well informed. One way to help them read, navigate, and maybe edit is by the use of relatively medium sized sections. Super long sections and super short sections based on one form of order maybe consistent but it doesn't help. I mean how many times have you experienced editing something only to find out that another person made another edit at the same time that conflicts yours. Super long sections are more prone to this than medium sized ones.Mugiwara Franky 12:30, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Buh is almost like DS. Yeah I know I'm not helping here yet I wanted to say something

Joekido 11:26, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Resemblance huh? well I were here in this case but i have no comment because grammar is wrong. Coldhandzz 12:03, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

If you're worried that that's all I'm doing, then I think you're forgetting that I am single-handedly writing the entire Marineford Arc page. The Pope 14:52, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

I see your writing style clearly on the page. Huge pictures and Huge sections. Though it lacks somewhat order, its a contribution. That type of writing style however can't work in a regular character history section. In an article such as a character, it requires some aid for the the readers and editors alike as it is a big article. Some slight navigation for people to use. Some balanced form of writing in the sections for people to say that this wasn't just made by amateurs. Not just random pics and section sizes.
Having the Saga and arc division consistency among the Straw Hats maybe good, however the consistency present in the majority of the articles are also very ugly and unprofessional. One example is a part in Chopper's history. The section is consistent but it is very ugly and unprofessional. If I were to research stuff and make it less easier for people to look at and edit, are you gonna say that the almost one huge paragraph section version is better because it is consistent.Mugiwara Franky 15:16, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's not like I wrote the paragraph. I have no problem with it getting split up into smaller paragraphs. The Pope 15:17, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yes but when those smaller paragraphs become too many and require some smaller sections in order to better maintain them, are you gonna opt for one huge section that is hard to maintain even for a single person or several smaller ones that are easier to maintain for everybody.Mugiwara Franky 15:22, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Vandal on the Brook page Edit

Hold off editing Brook's page for a while, we've got a vandal on there. Lets focus on getting edits in later once he has gone. One-Winged Hawk 19:43, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to sit back and let the brat vandalise now. His presistance is going to make his punishment worst so might as well let him dig his grave deeper. Don't undo his edits, let MF find them now. One-Winged Hawk 19:48, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
Okay he appears to have stopped, we can continue. If he does it again, stop and let him vandalise, it only gives us more reason to ban him, the more he does it. One-Winged Hawk 19:59, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Before any edit war begins on Crocodile's page Edit

It's speculation. No where in the series did it say that Crocodile was carefree like Luffy in the past, unless we hear Crocodile say something about hiis past or if it was stated in the Databooks then we'll leave it.

Joekido 05:27, November 11, 2009 (UTC)


Marineford Arc or Buh6173 ArcEdit

I don’t care what MF told you but I want to remind you that the article is not YOUR responsibility only. Tipota 05:37, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Fine; if you want to leave that image, then I'll leave it. I just don't want him chewing me out.The Pope 05:39, November 12, 2009 (UTC)


You reverted edits without a reason. Bad or good edits I it seems that doesn’t matter for you the only thing you do is to customize the article to your preferences.

What is your problem with images now? I believe the images are significant. Multiple images are good for a page detailing an entire arc, especially this one where so much occur (by your own arguments). Tipota 18:41, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Impel Down and Enies Lobby templates Edit

Umm, just a little question. They're great and all but what about the World Gov't template. Impel Down and Enies Lobby are technically directly underneath the World Government? Isn't it abit repetitive to create more than navigational template?Mugiwara Franky 04:49, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

There are some that qualify for Enies Lobby and not the other Cipher Pols, like CP9, and some that qualify solely for Enies Lobby, like Seastone and the Sea Train. The Pope 04:51, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Yes but the way that you're making some things is kinda breaking conventions. The templates you've added to Water 7 for one thing, the majority of them don't belong there.Mugiwara Franky 04:57, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Well let's see...

- Those civilians all live in Water 7 - Franky Family is based in Water 7 - Tom's Workers were in Water 7 - Galley-La Company is in Water 7

The only one I guess is kinda debatable is the Enies Lobby one, and that's only due to the fact that they're interconnected by the Sea Train.

Actually, what should be done is they should be merged into one main template for Water 7, listing all of the citizens, terminology, Sea Train, etc.The Pope 05:00, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Gimme a bit; I'll merge them myself. The Pope 05:06, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


In Water 7, you placed story arc and saga templates.
If your going for one template for all of Water 7, okay I guess that could work. But if that's so, why not one single template for all the WG specific workers?
Also I think a proper discussion with the whole community about this is needed before total merging as its breaking conventions.Mugiwara Franky 05:08, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Enies Lobby, being the focal point of an entire arc and one of the major posts of the World Government, is significant to garner its own template. Each and every facet of Water 7 is not. The Pope 05:18, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

The navigational boxes are based on groups not on arcs. In Enies Lobby, there are three separate groups stationed there, Enies Lobby staff, a branch of Cipher Pol, and some Marines. Two thirds of that group are directly under the World Government. Since Impel Down and Enies Lobby have templates, does that mean Marineford should get one too. It kinda breaks convention if it doesn't get one, and it kinda is redundant if it does get one since it will be just a smaller copy of the Marine template.Mugiwara Franky 05:31, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
Okay just stop merging all the Water 7 people until you have a proper discussion with the whole community as to whether they should be merged or not.Mugiwara Franky 05:44, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

What discussion is to be had? On their own, they're all tiny templates, and a lot of them aren't even put together right. This template is based around the city as a whole, encompassing all those within it. It's much more organized that way, and none of the organizations are prevalent enough to require their own templates. The Pope 05:52, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

The difference is that no one is really shown to be stationed specifically at Marineford; everyone who has gathered there are just regular Marines who aren't necessarily assigned to that location like CP9 and the Impel Down staff. The Pope 05:32, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

In Marineford, there are apparently specific Marines such as John Giant stationed there.Mugiwara Franky 05:45, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

That's one character; if it turns out that there are lots of marines stationed there, then maybe a template will help, but Marineford will most likely be either destroyed or abandoned by the end of the arc, so I don't see that happening.

And can you please stop undoing the Water 7 template? You have absolutely no reason to do so, and it's getting annoying. The Pope 05:49, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

You are not putting up a discussion for everyone to participate in. You may want merging, I may want merging, but some people may not want merging.
In Marineford, there's also Sengoku, Brandnew, and several Marines stationed there originally before the war.Mugiwara Franky 05:51, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
You may feel that there is no need for a discussion but since it is a major decision, it does require a discussion. There are other people in the wikia.Mugiwara Franky 05:55, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Again, if it's only a few people then it shouldn't have its own template; a Mariejois template, however, may be a different story once it comes into light. The Pope 05:57, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

There maybe a few people in the certain templates but a discussion with the rest of the community is seriously needed about merging is needed.
If there is going to be two templates about two thirds of the three major posts, then having three would only be proper. For a Mariejois one, if it's going to be created, then the need for a Marineford will only become more apparent.Mugiwara Franky 06:03, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Fine; if you want to make a Marineford template, then I won't object. Though I'm not sure if you should stick with Marineford-specific people, or include Admirals and whatnot.

And can you put the Water 7 templates back to how they were? The Pope 06:08, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

And the Impel Down character pages? This is getting ridiculous. The Pope 06:09, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

It's getting ridiculous because you are creating multiple problems without as so much as slowing down or discussing things properly.
One problem arose however you made it much worse by doing other things while the problem was still being discussed.
Right now, there's the colorschemes, navigational templates for WG workers, navigational templates for Water 7 characters, and if I look after finish writing this, you're probably created another one.Mugiwara Franky 06:18, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I'm not touching Kinjishi or Revolutionaries at the moment, but they need to be changed.

If you want to create a Marineford template, then that's fine; I won't object.

Water 7 is one big city, so one template should do to fit them all. It's bad if one character has three templates, all of them focusing around Water 7. The Pope 06:24, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

The Shiki and Revolutionaries are not being edited but because there are discussions going on that are too fast and easily overlooked, there is still a problem.
A Marineford one is redundant but required if there are going to be templates for Impel Down and Enies Lobby.
While merging some templates maybe needed, a discussion about merging with the whole community beforehand is more needed as it won't step on anybody's shoes. The templates are focusing on groups not on locations or arcs. If a character has three different templates because he belongs to three different groups then find. However, if a character has one template that focuses on one group and another template that is basically a larger scale that includes the first template, then that's abit redundant.Mugiwara Franky 06:37, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Either way, there are bound to be groups within groups. Some of the smaller groups are important enough to mandate their own template. But with the Water 7 sub-groups, the groups were too tiny to be considered for their own templates. And even if they were, the templates were too sloppy.

It's better to have one template concerning the entire city, than a million tiny templates covering every niche within it.The Pope 06:41, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

For the Water 7 templates, that maybe so but merging them all right away without the go ahead of even a third editor is just rude.
The navigational templates were made to group certain characters together by group. Making a subdivision template of a bigger template is just as bad or worse than merging characters together. It is making redundancy prevalent.Mugiwara Franky 06:48, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Just stop already and talk Edit

Okay just please stop what're your doing and just talk about making huge changes.Mugiwara Franky 06:06, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Well what else Edit

Well, what else your majesty? Do you want me to revert back all of your procedure breaking edits? Do you want to make every character have your own templates and colorschemes? Do you want every pic you want regardless of quality? Do you want everything towards your preferences regardless of the rest of the community? Say now cause I'll bulldoze the whole wikia just to please a guy like you who likes to jump right ahead and change order.Mugiwara Franky 15:36, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Are you done being a baby?

You sure? All right. Now then...

The color scheme you set the Revolutionaries to doesn't work; it's just as difficult to read.

What we need is one that you can actually read, while still sticking relatively close to Dragon's colors. The Pope 16:59, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I think you need to shut up Buh. Your a pain in our asses.

Joekido 18:42, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

And what do you have to do with anything? The Pope 19:01, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Joekido's expressing his view of you based on what happened. You know, apart from contributing text that happens once every week with every new chapter, the majority of renowned actions, "not edits", you do pushes alot of buttons for an editor or two once in awhile. They're seriously overshadowing what good you do for the community.Mugiwara Franky 23:42, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Well whatever I do, I'm trying to do it for the sake of the Wiki.

Now can we please get the Revolutionary color scheme settled? The Pope 23:44, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

What part are focusing your reading anyway in template anyway, the word "Revolutionaries" only or every single text with the colorscheme? Here's what it originally looks like on an infobox. Then another version. And now this.
Anyway, what you do I believe is in good faith. The wrong thing however is that while it maybe in good faith, its not always necessarily good and is often meaningless. Merging a whole bunch of templates immediately without a proper community discussion while the idea was still being made, is at the top of the things I know that that you are guilty of. We spent the whole day arguing about that and nothing significant was really made, kinda like the Donquixote quote and the edit war on Zoro.Mugiwara Franky 00:10, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
All right all right all right...
And I'm talking about the red text over the green background. It doesn't come out right, and is difficult and straining to the eye to read. The last color scheme I suggested, that with the pale green background and red font, provides for best readability while still fitting in with Dragon's theme. The Pope 00:13, November 18, 2009 (UTC)


Okay, now that we've got the Revolutionary color scheme settled...

Can you put the Water 7 citizens back to having the Water 7 template? It is all confined in one "group": the city of Water 7.

If you really thing that Galley-La, Tom's Workers, Franky Family, and the ordinary citizens should all get their own templates, then I suggest you clean up the templates they have, because right now they're a mess.

I say "you", because I know that if I do it, you'll go into a fit. The Pope 15:19, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Please don't take that tone with me. For the Water 7 citizens, I'm actually going in favor for one template. The problem is that these massive choices need to be discussed with the whole community and not only just between two editors.
For the Impel Down and the Enies Lobby templates, the Impel Down I can compensate a little but the Enies Lobby one is somewhat more redundant. The Impel Down one could be as it lists both staff and prisoners. The Enies Lobby one on the other hand, seems very redundant. Except for a few minor things, there's nothing really significant to make it any different than a watered down subdivided version of the World Government template.Mugiwara Franky 04:25, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
Well, discuss the Water 7 template with other people; maybe link them to its talk page or something.
As for the Enies Lobby template, I guess I'm okay with you getting rid of it.
Oh, and when I changed the color scheme of Impel Down characters to the new scheme, you undid that. Can you put it back? The Pope 06:04, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Categories Edit

A page should be included in a category only if it isn't already in a sub-category; e.g. all articles on pirate crews should be included into Category:Pirate Crews, but not in the Category:Pirates or the Category:Organizations since the Pirate Crews is a catwegorized in these two categories. Otherwise, these categories will become overloaded. It cannot depict more then 200 articles on one page, so it's not helpful for the reader. On the other hand, If we would categorize the pages directly, the Category:Pirate Crews would become superfluous. El Chupacabra 14:19, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily; it's all right for a category to have all of the things about it listed within there. However, if you really wanna get this solved, take it up with Mugiwara Franky; whatever he says, goes.

I just want to handle it like on wikipedia. they try to categorize pages into more specific categories and then categorize these categories into more general, for example most articles about pirates are listed not in the main Category:Pirates but in its sub-categories, and as far as I know this wikia has more or less the same policies and formal gides as Wikipedia. El Chupacabra 16:03, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Manga -> Anime images Edit

Unfortantely, the image as depicted in the manga doesn't always match the animes version. Twice now you've replaced an image with the anime version but either your removing all but the essential upper half or your not picking the perfect matching image. Either way, read the image purposes closely and think before you replace.

Also, since you brought this up yourself, yes, we do prefer full images where possible; Image Guidelines.

Half an image in the profile section is only half the details. BTW, I don't suppose you want to comment do you here?. No one's alerted you to this discussion, which you are the subject of and personnelly, I think thats unfair. We're all entitled to our own opinions of each other and we're also allowed to defend each other don't you think. Other then conflicts of image intereasts recently I've had nothing to crib with you over, other then the revolutionary argument between you and MF getting a bit out of hand, so I'm abstaining from that page discussion. One-Winged Hawk 00:13, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Got it; if it's related to a certain aspect of the image, I'll lay back.
I was a little worried about the John Giant one, since I saw the caption after I uploaded the image and was worried there'd be problems. If you want to keep it as the manga one, then I'm fine with that. As for the Kaashii image, I had no idea that it was being used on a page other than his own; that's why I made two separate images, an anime one for his profile and left the manga one for that article it was originally on.
Usually I try to replace manga images with anime ones (namely a lot from the Impel Down and Amazon Lily arcs so far), but I'll try to be more careful in the future to see whether or not the image is being used for a purpose other than display. The Pope 01:53, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
You really try hard and you did it again you remove the comparison image. Can you really be more careful next time? Tipota 23:31, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Water 7 group templates Edit

A proposal to merge the navigational templates that kinda should have been made by Buh prior to a recent edit war.Mugiwara Franky 11:53, November 20, 2009 (UTC)

stuff Edit

The Water 7 template debate still looks like its going as others have expressed their reasons why not to implement the template. The last person to leave an opinion maybe for the template however that doesn't mean that there is a consensus.

The color you chose for Shiki. What's it called again?

The Impel Down color scheme, what did you based it on again may I ask?Mugiwara Franky 03:21, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Why couldn't this have stayed in your own talk page?
The color scheme for Shiki matches his coat (while still retaining readability), while the one for Impel Down matches the color of the walls of the interior of the building. The Pope 04:21, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
The name of the brown color specically for Shiki's if you know. For the Impel Down colorscheme, do the Impel Down staff really have to be a separate color from the other World Government workers? It's not like they're loyal only to their base.Mugiwara Franky 04:31, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
I don't know the name; I just got the exact color of his coat. I'd probably call it pale orange, or something. And the workers at Impel Down are primarily working at Impel Down, just as Hancock is primarily a Kuja, Crocodile is primarily a member of Baroque Works, Moria is primarily a denizen of Thriller Bark, etc. The Pope 05:26, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Yes the Impel Down workers primarily work in their base but their base primarily works for the World Government. The Kuja are a group of women who are only allied through the World Government through Hancock, they are primarily independent from the World Government. Baroque Works and Thriller Bak are Shichibukai created organizations that serve their own goals. Baroque Works is a criminal organization illegal to the World Government. Thriller Bark at most is unknown and against basic World Government allegiances as Moria had stolen some shadows from the Marines while still operating in the Florian Triangle.Mugiwara Franky 05:32, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
At any rate, there are lots of characters who belong in multiple templates, but should have color schemes based on their predominate ones. If we're going to have an Impel Down template, then the staff who works there should be coded in the same manner. I really don't think you can say that the Sphinx and Manticores are exactly "working for the World Government"; they're just beasts of Impel Down. The Pope 05:51, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Indeed the beasts don't exactly work for the World Government but they belong to staff that specifically work for the World Government.Mugiwara Franky 06:02, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Impel Down works for the World Government in the same way the Marines do; while they are an extension of the World Government, they're important enough to be recognized as their own group. The Pope 06:07, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

The Marines are a major international group that governs the peace and justice of the world. They are a major group which has thousands of members. They work for the World Government but are considered as one of the three pillars of the world. Impel Down is a prison that focuses only on keeping prisoners. They have a significant number of people to maintain the prison but are relatively smaller in number to the Marines. They maybe as important to the World Government, however in retrospect they're no different than a bunch of World Government agents stationed to protect an island.Mugiwara Franky 06:14, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

A sub-organization is a sub-organization; if they're important enough to have their own template, then their color scheme should match that template. The Pope 06:20, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Indeed there are sub organizations but the question is whether or not the suborganization should follow the colorscheme of the main organization or its own. Impel Down indeed is an important organization but does it really stand out as an organization separate from the World Government as much as the Marines and the Shichibukai.Mugiwara Franky 06:32, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
It's just a color scheme; all it would say would be "these people work for Impel Down"; that helps simplify things. The Pope 13:58, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
But it kinda breaks convention with other characters.Mugiwara Franky 14:17, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Again, that's not the case, since there are plenty of other characters who belong to different groups or sub-groups and have their color scheme based on the most specific and significant one. The Pope 14:18, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
But Impel Down significantly falls under the World Government group.Mugiwara Franky 14:26, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Yes. It's a sub-group. Like many others. The Pope 15:45, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Yes it's a sub group but the group isn't exactly a big time group completely separate from the World Government. It's not like the Marines or the Shichibukai.Mugiwara Franky 15:52, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

They are significant enough to be considered their own faction of the World Government; as such, their color scheme should represent that. The Pope 15:59, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
What exactly again makes them any more significant than cipher pol, enies lobby staff, or any other regular world government employee. Most of the direct world government employees so far have equal amounts of importance within the story and the OP world.Mugiwara Franky 16:03, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Cipher Pol 1-8 really hasn't had any significance whatsoever. As for the Enies Lobby Staff, I would be up for them having their color schemes coded to that of Enies Lobby, since they're just as significant as Impel Down. The Pope 16:09, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
You know, why is it so necessary to break up subgroups within a large organization that have clear loyalties and idealogies. The Marines may serve the World Government but they are more towards being soldiers who serve under justice, for some Marines their view of justice often conflicts with the goals of the World Government. The Shichibukai maybe allied with the World Government but they serve their own goals most of the time. The direct Government workers on the other hand follow the goals of the World Government directly and practically without question.
Cipher Pol consists of agents that implement the World Government's ideals. The 9th secret division executes the ideals via illegal means and though some are psychotic, most of them believe in what they are doing. Enies Lobby is a institution that deals with the laws set by the World Government directly regardless the corruption. Impel Down imprisons prisoners that violate the laws set by the World Government and totally believe what they are doing is correct.Mugiwara Franky 16:23, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

They're still sub-sections of the World Government large enough to have their own templates and color schemes. If someone goes to their article, they should be able to immediately say "this guy works at Enies Lobby" or "this guy works at Impel Down", not just "oh, this is another one of the millions of people who work for the World Government". The Pope 16:27, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

If that's how you want it why not just vote for the decommission the World Government colorscheme and vote for three separate colorschemes. As far as the World Government goes, there are so far three main government branches, Cipher Pol, Enies Lobby, and Impel Down. CP9 may have their base at Enies lobby but they don't work exclusively there like the rest of the EL staff. In fact, according to them, their meeting in Enies Lobby was the first in a long time.Mugiwara Franky 16:38, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
Just another related question, if a prisoner like say Roche Tomson is indentified and he doesn't belong to any other group like Blackbeard's or the Revolutionaries, are we gonna give him Impel Down colors? If that's so then that would mean he's a government worker and not a prisoner.Mugiwara Franky 16:46, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Hmm...well, the color scheme could just tailor to inhabitants of Impel Down. I dunno at this point.

Also, CP9 does primarily work at Enies Lobby; the employees stated that they're the main reason why Enies Lobby had never been broken into. The Pope 16:53, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

That kinda makes a problem. Considering most of the Impel Down staff have this colorscheme and most of the known prisoners have different colorschemes, it isn't farfetched for a person to immediately think that a certain prisoner works as an employee for the World Government upon seeing the colors. Most of the colorschemes throughout the wikia show which group an individual is most allied to.
For CP9, apart from them mostly being James Bond-like assassins and Enies Lobby being mostly judicial staff, if CP9 is indeed primarily an Enies Lobby organization then that means all CP9 members past and present are part of Enies Lobby. One major example would be Spandine, Spandam's father. He was the director of CP9 years. By reasoning that would mean that he was also apart of Enies Lobby. That reasoning however is somewhat flawed as there isn't exactly definite evidence showing that Spandine was stationed in Enies Lobby. Then there is Nero, a new member to CP9 who may or may not have a room in Enies Lobby.
There are also the other agents in Enies Lobby. Assuming that the only CP9 agents in Enies Lobby are Spandam and crew, those other agents stationed in Enies Lobby must be from CP1-8. With that in mind, it's kinda possible that Wanze was probably stationed in Enies Lobby. He may have been fought in the sea train but that doesn't mean he was stationed in sea train. True that doesn't mean he is definitely stationed in Enies Lobby, but that also doesn't mean he isn't. In fact, considering the number of agents encountered in Enies Lobby, the idea of the entire Cipher Pol organization being stationed there is not far-fetched, unprovable but not far-fetched.Mugiwara Franky 05:21, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Fine, fine; this is going no where and I'm sick of talking about it.

What about the Water 7 template? The Pope 05:38, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

While I maybe a bit inclined to a point, others however have expressed their opinions in the discussion to not allow it. One even asked for its deletion. You may have to convince them as to why the idea of merging all the templates is a good one.Mugiwara Franky 05:44, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

The unwritten rule; the right over to edits others' comments. Edit

Forum:Index/Site Problems

Well attentions been raised and a argument concerned so best to get everyone involved as much. One-Winged Hawk 22:53, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Note: Edit

Theres no point in the argument "Brittish Vs. American", this was the rule at wikipedia and I've always maintained it myself here. I've never corrected folks when they've changed my "colour" to "color" and things like that. But don't get in an edit war over this okay? Its not good, if theres a problem; go to MF for help this time, or post a linkie to our forum to discuss this proper. One-Winged Hawk 18:29, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Psst, that random IP adress: is it the same guy? make that a YES. One-Winged Hawk 19:37, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
He is a troll... Lucky us, our first one. I reveal my IP to him in a way he can't deny and he still accuses me of being american. There you go, our problem is resolved without the IP check... Now to wait for MF. One-Winged Hawk 20:09, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Brittish Vs Amercian spelling Edit

Forum:Index/Site Problems

Title explains itself. One-Winged Hawk 19:03, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Pole Votes Edit

You need to inform more people you've got less then a doen notified for the voting. Enel's talk page has all the usual people who vote if you need to find voter names. One-Winged Hawk 23:59, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Voting Edit

Forum: index/Site_Problems

Voting time to close issue of the editing of others' comments. One-Winged Hawk 17:54, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Okay Edit

Sanji: "Who are these guys, compared to the others their Super Strong."

Words of Sanji on just 1 of the Just 11, but in this case it didn't matter; Sanji beat one with ease as he was stronger. Plus as pirates compared to what else we've seen their nothing. WB we've not seen too much of but I'd say he lucky has it. I'm trying to think of a case we saw it for him, but I'm tired I fell asleep for 3 hours accidently and just woke up and only woke up cause of my budgies had a panic fit. One-Winged Hawk 18:06, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Sanji calling someone strong doesn't automatically entitle them to Super-Human Strength. As to Whitebeard, he managed to slam down a giant with one hand, as well as go toe-to-toe with another. The Pope 21:24, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


Trivia Page TopicEdit

Hello, We have a discussion with Angel about the Trivia Page here. Everyone opinion his worth to have Kdom 09:51, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Poll on whether to lift DS's ban or not Edit

Due to circumstances, there is a discussion as to whether to lift DS's ban or not.Mugiwara Franky 10:23, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Broo-Hoo! Edit

Your new picture of Hattori was good, but so was Xmattox's. You (both) should've uploaded it as a completely different picture, since uploading it as Hattori's portrait disrupts the Galley-Lamembers and WorldGovernmentSagaCharacters templates it's on.

Kaizoku-Hime 00:15, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks... Edit

...for clearing up that watermark. I couldn't find any way of doing a satisfactory job myself, so... --Reikson 21:50, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

One Piece UpdateEdit

Hello. May I know where did you get all these One Piece updates? Thank you. I'll be checking back for answers a few days later.



Thanks again in advance!



~A curious user

What exactly do you mean?

Also, sign your posts with ~~~~.

Image tagsEdit

I've noticed that Image: is used more in the wiki than File: and they work the same (the image appears still) so why revert it!? MasterDeva 08:12, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

There is virtually no difference between the two so please stop "reverting" my edits. The same can be said for thumb or thumbnail that reduces the size of the images displayed. MasterDeva 08:20, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

One Piece Updates Edit

I see you're the editor who frequently add new information into the Marineford Arc. May I know where did you get those information? When every new chapter is introduced, you're always the first one to update. This amazes me.



115.132.198.191 12:48, January 22, 2010 (UTC)



Is there any point in signing when I'm just a random IP user?

Yes, there is.

Also, if you're gonna talk on someone's talk page, continue it under the same heading; don't start a new one every time you post.

And I usually get the info from OneManga or MangaStream. The Pope 14:47, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

File/Image edit wars Edit

This goes out to the both of you, knock it off already! Its getting annoying to see. One-Winged Hawk 15:12, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Gaps on the "Hito Hito no Mi" page. Edit

Because some of the images on the page are pretty much stacked on top of one another, there's a gap between the name of a form and the paragraph describing it when an image is place in between them. Should we make the images smaller to reduce the gaps?

Kaizoku-Hime 01:50, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Chapters 133-136 Edit

Volume 15 TOC Tipota 17:11, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

  • That is either a typo, or the chapters were published out of order; click on the links to the chapters and see for yourself. The Pope 18:20, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
The tankōbon listing is final Buh6173, stop reverting it back! Tipota is right!! MasterDeva 19:08, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
Chapter 133; Chapter 134; Chapter 135; Chapter 136 (from Volume 15) If you have the original Weekly Sounen Jump chapters with alter titles upload an image of the cover pages. And we will put a note about this on their chapter pages. Tipota 19:14, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
That's the proper thing to do, now that's an idea Tipota! ;-) MasterDeva 19:22, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Images Edit

If you can’t upload a proper image then let someone else to do this. Also don’t upload duplicated images or low quality or images with wrong aspect ratio. For more information read Image Guidelines.00:31, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Take it up on Inazuma's talk page. The Pope 00:32, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Help... Edit

I just uploaded the Meigō image to Akainu's page.

Can you do me a favor and remove the watermarks? --Reikson 22:40, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Well another solution is to be a little patient and wait until Scanlation without watermark are provided. Using watermarked images is clearly against our Image guideline, and removing the watermark is completely disrespectfull wrt Mangastream. Kdom 22:54, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

About Blackbeard and Boa Hancock have a crew Edit

Now about Moria having Absolom and Hogback is true and I forgot about them but Donflamingo has anbandoned his crew back after Straw Hats came back from Skypia. It was shown that he has offically left the crew as their captian and left that responsibilty to someone else on the crew. But Blackbeard and Boa Hancock (and maybe Moria) have a crew while holding the status of Shichibukai. JonTheMan 21:33, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Those weren't his crew. They were just his followers. The Pope 21:36, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

So if they were his followers than it should be no problem if I edit it to say Blackbeard, Boa Hancock and Moria then should it cause they have a crew that we currently know of. At least we can say that Blackbeard and Boa Hancock do. So would it be a problem if I put it as that under the Shichibuaki page instead of all three? JonTheMan 21:46, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

It's only notable trivia if it were one or two who had a crew. However, three, maybe four, do; that makes it not notable enough to leave on the trivia page. You could go on and on with trivia that encompasses all of them like that. The Pope 00:31, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

new imagesEdit

please, when a new chapter/episode comes out, can you check in the Special:NewFiles page that the image has not already been uploaded. Jasonryu did not upload Catarina Devon correctly but you duplicated Abalo. Kdom 23:40, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know where he had put it, but when I went to Abalo's page, I saw no image other than the one used for templates. The Pope 01:27, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Some user upload images and do not use them immediatly. Don't ask me why, I don't understand either. But last week Blackbeard pirates were upload 3 times... Since when a chapter comes out there is a lot of activity, it's safer to check the recent image page. Kdom 06:27, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

El really wants your opinion and others Edit

Here's a little thing, El Chupacabra wants some opinions in this discussion regardless what has been stated by others on the matter. He is kinda demanding your and others opinions and will not apparently stop until he is responded to.Mugiwara Franky 14:53, March 11, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah Edit

I just reread chapter 489 quickly to double check on it on Stephen's translations, since back then "Mermaid Princess" was translated. Yet we didn't know of her existance until later chapters. :-/ One-Winged Hawk 16:19, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

what I suppose you knew Edit

Well I supposed you knew our Image guideline, especially when I put note to prevent that on pages you update regurlarly. I don't know what I should do anymore so people stop using scanlations that are written do not use it on every of their page. Kdom 22:35, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

spa island images Edit

Their being uploaded for eye candy reasons only hence why I disappove. But they don't really follow the spirit of what the gallery is intended. Funny thing is... If they want a biniki out up for Nami at least - water 7 was the only one counted as 'offical'. I'm half tempted to upload it myself to keep these happy peachy. Though to be honest, Nami has a "biniki" outfit on the page already in the merchandise section and a picture of her bathing frm the Logue town novel (and I think Thriller Bark's bathing scene is up too). Theres a whole wikia for that thing called something like "animebathtime" or something dedicated to bathing and biniki beauties so we don't really have to cover it. One-Winged Hawk 15:42, April 10, 2010 (UTC)

stop deleting my edits! Edit

Dude, stop editing the marineford arc page whenever i add images!

That image is too small to show anything significant. It would only belong on the Marineford page anyway. The Pope 15:29, April 12, 2010 (UTC)


then why delete the whitebeard assult picture when thats not small.

What are you talking about? The image of Whitebeard getting attacked by everyone is still up there. The Pope 15:28, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

Kaidou and Big Mom Edit

Please stop changing the images we dont know for sure who is big mom and who is kaidou!!!!!!

One's a male, one's a female. It should be pretty obvious who is who from there. The Pope 23:32, April 14, 2010 (UTC)


Well...Edit

  • Big Mom: How you know who is who in the picture? Oda artwork is not clear to reveal gender Moria also has similar face to this one.
  • God of Skypiea: Do not make assumption. The one is Human and Yama is Bilkan.
  • Blackbeard/Hannyabal image: Next time upload the whole episode is more detailed. Tipota 23:57, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
One has a mustache. One doesn't. Like I said, there's a difference between speculation and common sense. As for Yama and the God of Skypiea, that's fine, but you can't deny that there's a similarity. And on Blackbeard/Hannyabal, don't be a smartass. The Pope 01:08, April 15, 2010 (UTC)


  • Common Sense, it is assumed it is believed by whom? Fans? Do you remember what happened with Ace bloodline? Smartass.
  • "Mustache" sorry my imagination is not as good as yours is.
  • God of Skypiea: maybe for you they are similar to me they are very different.
  • Images: the image is good only for Yami Yami no Mi page in the scene we need only Hanyabal and Blackbeard smartass. Also in Impel Down arc, how many images did you plan to upload the article looks terrible? Luffy and Blackbeard , Luffy hit Blackbeard what next Luffy bitten by Blackbeard you really overdid with all those "Epic" Images. We are not image gallery smartass. Tipota 14:42, April 15, 2010 (UTC)
With the Ace thing, it's not like we saw an image of the person beforehand and were expected to guess who it was; with the last Yonkou, one is obviously a man, one is a woman. Whether the one on top is female or not is debatable, but the one on bottom is undoubtedly a male; Oda doesn't use those kinds of angles for drawing male characters. After 10 years, it just doesn't work like that. And both the God of Skypiea and Yama have similar hairstyle and body shape. I'm obviously not the only person that thinks so, since someone else (I forget who) had also noted on it on his page. And it's just one image with the two; relax. The Pope 14:58, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

About the Skypiean God Edit

Please do not make comparisons between characters . Nice edit of the page overall , just don't do this type of thing , it realy just clogs the page with subjective "information" nobody wants to read about anything to begin with . --New Babylon 19:00, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

Normally I would agree, but the similarity between the two is too uncanny to be coincidence. I'm not the only one who agreed. The Pope 19:00, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

Hydra Gif Edit

I noticed you uploaded a new version of my gif...but a question, is there really any diference? I don't see any, unless it's that bug that takes years to fully upload an image. GMTails 23:45, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Your version ran ridiculously slow; the version I uploaded runs at the speed of the anime. The Pope 00:02, April 19, 2010 (UTC)
Ok, so it's the bug, because I see no diference, but thanks for making it better. GMTails 00:05, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, now there is something wrong. The last one I uploaded is half-framed, and to me it seems faster then your version, could you check again if it really is slower? Maybe it was slow because it was the first time you saw it, and it was still loading. GMTails 01:43, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

I waited for it to load, and it was slower. The Pope 02:17, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Mythbusters Edit

Due to the unexpected size of the Mythbusters page, I think its time to consider to rethink it. I don't want to loose the insightful and often VERY useful reference information held on it, but its getting too big for its boots. I'd like to hold a discussion that will help handle it better without loosing half the data on the page. For more See here. One-Winged Hawk 08:34, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

/* Diary of Coby-Meppo */ Edit

Why do you keep removing that picture I added to Garps section for!


Genocyber 06:20, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

It's noncanon. The Pope 13:52, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Blackbeard's picture Edit

We need a better pic for BB, yes, but we need a full image. At this point in the storyline, its not excusable that he hasn't got one. Trouble is, finding a DECENT one. One-Winged Hawk 06:28, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

That is true. However, for the time being, a shot of his face is more important than his full body. The full body shot is useless is his face can be barely seen. The Pope 15:08, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

File categoriesEdit

When you suppress a file from a page, can you delete the categories if there are any. Thanks Kdom 20:23, April 30, 2010 (UTC)

Ryūsei Kazan Edit

Hi! Just wondering how come you deleted the Ryūsei Kazan pic from Akainu's page? Alice81764

Because with attack images, it pays to not be redundant; we already see his ability to make giant flaming fists with the Daifunka image, and Ryusei Kazan is just that times a hundred. The Pope 01:21, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. All I wanted to know. Thought it was a waste at first, but I get it. Alice81764

which ch. and page number is this. Edit

hey i was checking out the article abt perona and zoro on a deserted island and i came across this pic


http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/File:Zoro_sidestory_vol_1.jpg


and unfortunatly i was unable to find it in th e manga ch. i know he landed there in ch. 524 but i am looking for the above stated scene so if u could help me out by giving me the exact ch. and page where this scene/pic/page is i would really appreaciate it.


Tigerman123 04:13, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Page 1 of 559. The Pope 04:23, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Rob Lucci Edit

I saw this picture of Rob Lucci as a kid but in which episode did it appeared? I kinda wanna see that episode.

I am talking about the picture of young Lucci training martial arts and the coloured version XD

Thanks for reading anyway

A fellow OP fan

Try to remember to sign your posts with ~~~~.
The image is from the Episode 0 OVA, based off of Chapter 0. The Pope 13:27, May 4, 2010 (UTC)

 ? Edit

dude don't delete my writing for no reason, there was nothing wrong with it.

editting Edit

dude don't delete my edits without a reason, i put in relevant information, so don't delete it.


Bloodmannequin90210 19:56, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Turn A Gundam Edit

Turn A Gundam started in 1999. One Piece started in 1997 and Whitebeard may have been planned already back in that year. Also there is no comment by Oda on whether he based Whitebeard on the Gundam or vice versa. It maybe true but without confirmation by either Oda or the Gundam creators, it's kinda speculation.Mugiwara Franky 06:23, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

All right. It should still be in trivia, though. The Pope 15:06, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Nakama Discussion Edit

Based on the current discussion, it seems to be getting quite heated. While some of DemonRin's comments have been somewhat aggressive, she has a point to a certain degree. It might be worthwhile to consider a compromise of sorts. Also it might not have been a good idea to use a poll to decide the outcome of the discussion. The comments clearly show no consensus and the poll doesn't seem to reflect it.Mugiwara Franky 10:12, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

Kdom suggested the compromise of leaving most of them as "Nakama" but translating the ones that don't really fit, like Gaimon and the like. I'm fine with that. The Pope 15:03, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

Nakama translation Edit

Thanks for inviting me in, and I already posted my opinion. GMTails 23:45, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

No problem; I'm glad you posted your thoughts (especially due to the fact that you're on my side on the matter). The Pope 04:48, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, do I post it right here or back in the Nakama translation page? GMTails 04:11, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Here. The Pope 04:32, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Picture historicalEdit

I would like to keep as much as possible the historical of the char box pictures, and it is easier if we keep the same image name when it is a correct one. So if you want to change it upload the existing one. You can upload the current version of her impel down outfit under another name. Also I'm not sure it is interesting to change when you admit yourself that there is no good version of her amazon lily outfit. Maybe it is worth to wait more of her apparition in the next episodes to see if there is a better version. Kdom 21:12, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

What I'm thinking of is, don't the video games usually have official art in them, or something? If so, I'd think that there'd be something of Hancock with Gigant Battle. The Pope 21:14, August 12, 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I can't help you on that subject Kdom 22:03, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

Anime/Manga pictures Edit

STOP removing manga images from char boxes. This new feature was especially introduced so that we can have both anime and manga pics. There were a discussion, and several people have found it useful, and nobody declared against. Wikia standards have changed a bit, if you like to hear it. And then come you and change everything the way YOU like. If you don't like the new feature, you can tell it at the discussion page and wait for reply, but don't start an edit war. Ruxax 16:35, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

I took it up in the discussion page. And only five people voted, and amongst those what makes you think none of them were anonymous? The only people discussing it were you, Kdom, and GMTails. Though MF did say "a lot of potential here", though that wasn't really a statement in either way about it. But whatever, I posted my reasons on there. You can debate it there. The Pope 16:41, August 13, 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Seriously, stop it. Or to quote you, "At this point he's really starting to piss me off. If I keep trying to put the pages back the way they were, then he'll just keep reverting them; I have no choice but to wait until MF gets the notice I placed on his talk page and takes care of this." Ah, sweet irony. Bastian964 16:43, August 13, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah. Except the difference is, I'm explaining myself. Kind of a big stretch between those two. The Pope 16:48, August 13, 2010 (UTC)
Except the difference is your trying to overrule majority vote, whereas the anon user was doing the right thing. Bastian964 16:52, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

I have made a test here about Inazuma in order to display both his male and female picture in the char box and it seems to works fine. Kdom 18:59, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Anon Edit

The anon kinda has a point to an extent, also it might worth looking at Template:Strawhat.Mugiwara Franky 16:44, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

I suppose...but if they're going to be listed in the template as an ally, why not put them in the page as well, since they're in the template? They should either have their own template, not be in it at all, or be listed along with them.
I at least think that the traveling companions, such as Johnny and Yosaku, Vivi, etc. should be listed, considering that they were on the ship for a considerable amount of time. The Pope 16:48, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Char Box debate Edit

You won't like what I wrote, but I have replied to the topic now. One-Winged Hawk 20:58, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

The discussion set my mood for my choice. Not a happy bunny = no vote from me.
The things causing it are;
  1. vote held without announcement (I used to drop everyone editing a line),
  2. no regard for whats in image guidelines (1 link to the page would have kept me happy 1 mention would have surpassed). Those guidelines are open to be edited by anyone, but I wrote them orginally so I like to see them acknowledge once in a while... One-Winged Hawk 12:58, August 14, 2010 (UTC)
  3. more work being created then need (1 image will tell you who they are, the rest goes in appearance why create more work for editors?),
  4. a week of discussion has happened before but always on minor issues and with more votes... This time however was something that effected a number of pages. Things like galleries problems, are simple fixes to a page and are fine to be decided upon quickly because you've got that to resolve, this is a addition to the info box and not a fix.
  5. It invites further arguments. Honestly, we get enough arguments between 1 images, you want 2 for everyone to argue over?
  6. It is generally being handled sloppily... No one is doing the usual "lets sum up the points" routine they usually do.
I have a number of more arguments about this, some bigger and others smaller... I'm waiting for people to acknowledge a few things first. I put a few notes down, people have discussed them, but they've not given solutions, like they usually do. Their still discussing the idea further. While tweaks to the idea are starting to come out now, no one is bothering to ackowledge theres more then just a comprimise involved here. Yeah, the topic isn't my favourite one I've seen here... In fact this is now one of my least favourite ideas just because of the way it was handled. Honestly, people have the choice to back out of a idea if their invited, if not invited, then they feel insulted when it happens and they weren't invited and I might not have been involved orginally beyond "Please make sure you got the guidelines right". One-Winged Hawk 12:58, August 14, 2010 (UTC)

DeletionEdit

Forum:Deletion of talk pages. Kdom 11:07, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

ForumEdit

I think you should give your opinion on this Forum since you care about the lisibility of this wiki. Kdom 20:18, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Several talks Edit

Could you express opinion on

Ruxax 11:48, August 26, 2010 (UTC)


Boa HancockEdit

  • Her qipao never colored in the manga so this does not belong to the 'Anime and Manga Differences'.
  • Also, read this discussion and don't add random categories.

Do not forget you can always read old messages on the page history. Tipota 03:33, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Manga and Anime Pics Edit

Umm, can you please not switch good colored manga images with slightly substandard anime images. Part of it is kinda contributing to this mess.Mugiwara Franky 04:53, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Please Respond Edit

Forum:Image Guidelines

After all the arguments over images, and clear notes that we need image issues to be adressed... I opened up the image guidelines to be discussed and the lack of response and interest is beginning to notice. I'm putting up this message to everyone, unless I see some response, then the guidelines are fated to remain the same. One-Winged Hawk 17:12, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Tabs on characters pagesEdit

If you have something to say about tabs and splitting of character pages (like now Monkey D. Luffy's page) - i.e. to apply this to other Strawhats? In what variant? Or don't you like the idea at all? Other comments? - please express your opinion here. Ruxax 13:43, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

your last edit Edit

Why did you take a pic I uploaded and then reupload the exact same one and unmark mine? I had to friggen download that episode to get that picture. Seems abit of an ass thing on your part man. At least give me a good reason when you do that
Genocyber 03:06, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Because you uploaded a new picture, and we're supposed to update the old ones, not keep adding new ones. The Pope 03:09, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

I uploaded a new one because their wasn't a previous existing picture of that. You fail to answer me properly!
Genocyber 05:13, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

I don't even know what image you're talking about at this point. The Pope 05:14, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
Come now Buh6173, don't bite the newcomers. What he was trying to explain to you, Genocyber, is that when you upload a new image you must first check if there is a previous version of it already exists. If there is (be it a manga image or a anime image) you must update that one instead of uploading the new image under a different name. I hope I was clear enough. MasterDeva 05:24, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

I am talking about this picture: http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/File:Whitebeard_war.jpg

There was not a previous existing picture of it. I uploaded it and made sure to put it in the correct spot and label it and you uploaded the exact one again,and unmarked that picture.

Why? Why couldnt you just have used what I put up instead of uploading the same exact picture again.

Genocyber 05:38, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't see that. Sorry.

Anyway, when talking in a Talk Page, just edit into the same section; don't make a new one every time you talk in it. The Pope 05:44, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Arc Name Edit

Hi, umm I'm here to discuss our current edit war over the name of the currently titled "Return to Saboady Arc", which you refuse to include the word "reunion" in, even after I tried to find a compromise between both mine and your idea for a name.

I don't want to keep reverting pages over and over again so I decided to talk to you directly. Your reason for the last re-edit, if I may quote you, is "Most of the other pages still have it listed as "Return to Sabaody". The arc's already over, so just drop it.)".

1. When I changed the name, I made sure to change all the other pages too. Your the one who keeps undoing my changes so your first point is invalid. 2. Even if the arc is over, does that mean we cannot edit or change the article? No it doesn't. 3. This is a free wikia that anyone can edit. I don't see how you have the right to tell me to "drop it". Am I vandislisng? No. Am I putting some random thing that has nothing to do with the page? No. I respected your opinion to include the location, so I do not understand why you cannot respect mine. 4. I was willing to compromise with you, so I found middle ground between both of our names. Maybe I was wrong, since I did not contact you first before making the change, but if you thought that it wasn't working, you could've contacted me before changing it. Instead, you refuse to include the word "reunion" for a reason I do not currently understand, without a valid reason.

I just believe "reunion" is a better word than "return", in that context.

Maybe you can enlighten me on your viewpoint. Thanks. Oathkeeper of oblivion 00:57, October 31, 2010 (UTC)

They're returning to the archipelago. Reuniting is secondary to the location, which is how just about all the other arcs have been named. This was a very weird case, in that it was a very short arc that took place on a previously visited location, so the name will be a little weird. If you really feel that strongly about it, take it up on the talk page. If more people support what you want, then you can change it; until then, leave it. The Pope 04:06, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, if you checked the history, I did include the location in the title of the arc before you changed it. And I did check the talk page, and two people supported "Reunion on Saboady" so I changed it. Oathkeeper of oblivion 06:22, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
That was back when it was still called "Straw Hats Return Arc" or something. It was before the name change, so nobody was in support of changing it away from its current name. The Pope 06:36, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
I have no idea what you're talking about? I'm talking about the newest name I changed it to, "Saboady Reunion Arc". I changed it to this after looking at the talk page, so I don't know if you even read the title before you changed it. Oathkeeper of oblivion 18:41, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
Like I said, you changed it to that after that talk page had happened, so your point is moot. The Pope 19:17, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
Well obviously? I checked the talk page to see what other people thought, before I changed it to "Saboady Reunion." What are the heck are you talking about? Honestly, I am so lost. Oathkeeper of oblivion 19:24, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
The talk page happened while the article was still called "Straw Hats Return" arc or something like that. It had nothing to do with whether or not the page should be changed from "Return to Sabaody". The Pope 19:28, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
Maybe you should check the talk page. You were the only person who commented before I changed it to "Straw Hat Reunion" arc. After I changed it on October 24th, there were multiple comments regarding the name on October 25th. Some of these said "Saboady Reunion" since it was combination of both the action and the location so I changed it to that.Oathkeeper of oblivion 20:02, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
Initially it was "Straw Hat Reunion". People wanted it changed to "Sabaody Reunion" because it had the location name. I changed it to "Return to Sabaody", and nobody except you has complained since. The Pope 20:12, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
No, initially it was "Straw Hat Return Arc" when the page was created on Oct. 8th. I changed it to "Straw Hat Reunion" on the 24th. Then you changed it "Return to Saboady" on the 25th. AFTER you changed it, people on the talk page commented and two people said that we should include "reunion" in it. So i changed it to "Saboady Reunion" and for some reason that you still haven't explained, you changed it back to "Return to Saboady." Oathkeeper of oblivion 21:22, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
The only people who said it should include "Reunion" after it were DancePowderer an some anons. And frankly, the words of anonymous users means diddly squat, since it's easy for someone to impersonate an anonymous user by staying logged out. If it's that big of a deal to you, you can make a vote or something and take it up on that talk page. The Pope 00:16, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
Hi, sorry, some real life situations kept me from replying for awhile. Anyways, all I know is that at least some people said that "Reunion" should be in it; opposed to just you who supports "return", and for a reason you STILL have not explained to me, you are so against "Saboady Reunion". I know that anonymous wasn't me so it doesn't really matter. Anyways, I changed it Straw Hat Reunion arc first, so if its that big of a deal to you, YOU should create a vote/discussion. Sorry if I'm sounding rude, but all I was asking you in the first place was what was wrong with Saboady Reunion. I didn't ask you about talk pages or edit history or anything, I'm asking why you keep reverting my edits. Oathkeeper of oblivion 22:22, November 4, 2010 (UTC)

Username Edit

Don't really know how myself. I guess you could start another account under a different name.Mugiwara Franky 05:19, November 3, 2010 (UTC)

Eh...I wouldn't want to give up all of my edits and contributions. The Pope 13:38, November 3, 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Edit

Hi! My name is Christine and I'm a new member here in one piece wiki, I have no idea how to use the site and I cannot find instrustions anywhere. I understand that you maybe don't have much time for me, but I will really appreciate it if you help me a bit. Here is my e-mail: opium_and_poison_damaged_rose@hotmail.com. I won't interrupt you again, but please (!!!!!!!!!) give me some instrustions.


mikikira_ace/ one piece-fan

Well, what do you need help with?
Also, for future reference, when making posts on talk pages, be sure to sign at the end with ~~~~.The Pope 22:25, December 14, 2010 (UTC)
Oh, really?... I didn't know this.. Now I'm feeling like a fool :S... Anyway, yesterday I tried to post some pictures but i didn't know how to post them in a specific link. Would you mind telling me how to do this? In addition, it will be really helpfull if you tell me what can I do in this site except from reading informations and posting pictures.

Mikikira_ace 10:33, December 15, 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you want to add information, that always helps. As for pictures, you just go to a place where you want to add in the picture, and type in the code [[File:'''PictureName'''.jpg|thumb (if you want it to be a thumbnail)|'''width'''px|A description to go under the image.]] For instance, [[File:One day.png|thumb|350px|Luffy and Ace.]] will come out as
One day

Luffy and Ace.

The Pope 15:14, December 15, 2010 (UTC)









Thank you so much!!!!! This really helped me!

Mikikira_ace 12:43, December 16, 2010 (UTC)

Inconsistencies Major Cleanup Edit

Can you please take part in the Forum:Inconsistencies Major Cleanup, and try to invite others to help out? I appreciate it. Yatanogarasu 23:24, January 9, 2011 (UTC)

There's no a vote on this. I think you would be interested in it so I'm leaving you a comment you let you know. SeaTerror 21:54, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Admin Voting Edit

We are currently holding a forum to decide who should be the new admins. If you wish to nominate anyone, please visit the forum within the week. Voting will begin the week after.DancePowderer 05:49, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

New Forums help Edit

Please comment and contribute, as well as invite others, to these forums: Literary Technique pages: delete, Whitebeard's Powers Gallery, Characters' Real Name and Characters infobox pictures. Yatanogarasu 01:32, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

Luffy vs. Blackbeard Edit

Hey man! I've created another blog, to follow up my Strawhats vs. Blackbeards. Here's the captain battle:

http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Yountoryuu/Luffy_vs._Blackbeard

If you've already commented, its complete now. I finalised it. Would you please comment (again) and rate?

Thanks Yountoryuu

Saga prediction : One year ago !! Edit

Can u please check out : User_blog:Roranoa_zoro/Saga_prediction_:_One_year_ago_!!

Thank u!!Roranoa zoro 12:20, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Gifs Edit

Dude , Since u tell that u r good @ makin' gifs : can u make "Akainu-punching-Ace" for me ! Roranoa zoro {^_*} 06:49, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Eh...the scene is pretty drawn-out. There isn't really any one part I could make into a GIF. The Pope 17:26, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Nakama TranslationEdit

The nakama translation debate might be coming around again if you want to participate. SeaTerror 17:28, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

Sigh...where? The Pope 17:34, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

The same forum. Some people were undoing the edits to the new episode with nakama in the title. SeaTerror 18:58, September 10, 2011 (UTC)

Can you link me to it? The Pope 19:22, September 10, 2011 (UTC)

Its here   リ チ ャ ー ド   Strong Fist «ℑ» «ℜ» «✩» «☯» Mornin'! ™19:31&9b35p;10/Sep/2011 (UTC) 

Is That So?Edit

Well then, let's have DancePowder settle this, shall we? Eddy1215 03:11, December 2, 2011 (UTC)

HeyEdit

How come you don't edit much anymore? You helped out back with the nakama translation and the wikia in general. You should edit more often. SeaTerror 04:26, December 2, 2011 (UTC)

Will You Stop That?!Edit

SeaTerror is the one who returned it to its original form, therefore, others beside me think that the page is fine without you changing it. If you want your version approved permanently, take it up with DancePowder, otherwise, cut it out! Eddy1215 03:44, December 7, 2011 (UTC)

I told you to talk about it on your talk page, not mine. Second, SeaTerror reverted a separate edit I made where I put the last two paragraphs into one large one. I rectified that by splitting it into two paragraphs, and he hasn't made any objection since. The whole reason I'm doing this is to keep the introduction organized. The first paragraph details his abilities and relationships, the second paragraph details his deeds, and the third his bounties. The way you want it, it's all jumbled together. Now if you actually give me a considerable reason you want to keep it "your way", aside from "it's fine", then you can bring that up on your talk page, where I started this discussion two days ago. Otherwise, leave it alone. The Pope 04:17, December 7, 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but I decided the only way to get through to you was to come to you. Anyway, it's not the way I want it, It's the "official way". It's been the other way for along time now and no one has objected. As far as I see, you're vandalizing it. Like I told you, take it up with DancePowder if you want your way made official. Until then, stop messing with it.Eddy1215 04:27, December 7, 2011 (UTC)
If Buh's way is more organized, then his edits should be fine.DancePowderer Talk 05:08, December 7, 2011 (UTC)
Fine, you win Buh. Eddy1215 05:16, December 7, 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, DancePowderer.
And on a final note, since you're new here, Eddy, you should know that there is no "official way". If someone makes an edit to something that's been the same way for a long time and it's an improvement, then that should be encouraged. Stagnation of mediocrity out of fear of change shouldn't be strived for. The Pope 14:17, December 7, 2011 (UTC)

I edited the wrong part which is why I didn't "object" you were removing valid information which I put back in. SeaTerror 18:51, December 7, 2011 (UTC)

How Luffy got his bounties is crucial information. People announcing them are not. Keep Black and Hody talking about his bounty in the actual page; put too much information in the introduction, and it gets cluttered. The Pope 23:12, December 7, 2011 (UTC)

Image Guidelines changes Edit

Just letting you know that there have been changes to the Image Guidelines recently that require images to be uploaded with the proper sourcing, licensing, and categories added to the image, or else they will be deleted. Also, we don't allow images from an scanlations, even those in other languages like Chinese. Thanks. JustSomeDude...  Talk | 17:45, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

Croc Image Edit

It's from Movie 8.   Galaxy 9000   05:03, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

Jpgs vs. Pngs Edit

Can you please upload all your future images (and possibly reupload your latest image) as png? Jpgs tend to compress in thumbnails, and ultimately result in great quality loss.   Galaxy 9000   06:02, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

Fine.The Pope 06:06, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

re:Kin'emon info Edit

http://apforums.net/showthread.php?t=35030&page=25&p=2802140&viewfull=1#post2802140 I got it from these pictures posted on Arlong Park. They're the event books from the two One Piece Ten events. The only other bit (that I saw) worth noting is that it called the Shichibukai the Seven Warlords of the Sea, about which we are having a discussion here.DancePowderer Talk 03:16, February 3, 2013 (UTC)

"New World" Vote Edit

Just to let you know, you accidentally voted three times on [[Talk:New World Saga#Poll|the New World poll]]. I removed your votes since it is unfair, but you can still vote again. Just this time, vote for one. You're only supposed to vote for one. uknownada Talk 17:27, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

It's back!Edit

http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Nakama_Translation SeaTerror (talk) 20:08, February 24, 2013 (UTC)


Image Guidelines

Hey there! Sorry, we don't mean to scare you, but you are not allowed to upload any of the following:

  • Fanart of any kind.
  • Pictures not related to One Piece.
  • Duplicate images.
  • Videos of any kind, including videos from Youtube or similar sites.
  • .jpg, .JPG, or .JPEG image formats. .png is the preferred format.
  • Images with no source provided.
  • Images with no licensing or images without proper licensing.
  • Images that have not been categorized or images without proper categories (Including categories for the source, such as Category:Chapter Images or Category:Episode Images).
  • Images with poor file names that do not reflect the content of the picture. Random numbers and letters should not be used in file names.
  • Scanlation or translated images with English text.
  • Images that are not used for an article on this wiki (user pages and blogs are not considered articles).
  • Any images that violate any of the additional rules listed in the complete Image Guidelines.

For tips on how to upload a picture for the wiki correctly, check out this step-by-step instruction.

If you want to use pictures in your profile or blogs please use those that are already on the wiki or upload your images on another wiki. (See this blog for more details on how to do this).

Please read the Image Guidelines before uploading any more images to the wiki. If you have any questions about these rules, don't hesitate to ask. Thank you. Videogamep Talk 23:07, February 12, 2014 (UTC)


Image Guidelines

Hey there! Sorry, we don't mean to scare you, but you are not allowed to upload any of the following:

  • Fanart of any kind.
  • Pictures not related to One Piece.
  • Duplicate images.
  • Videos of any kind, including videos from Youtube or similar sites.
  • .jpg, .JPG, or .JPEG image formats. .png is the preferred format.
  • Images with no source provided.
  • Images with no licensing or images without proper licensing.
  • Images that have not been categorized or images without proper categories (Including categories for the source, such as Category:Chapter Images or Category:Episode Images).
  • Images with poor file names that do not reflect the content of the picture. Random numbers and letters should not be used in file names.
  • Scanlation or translated images with English text.
  • Images that are not used for an article on this wiki (user pages and blogs are not considered articles).
  • Any images that violate any of the additional rules listed in the complete Image Guidelines.

For tips on how to upload a picture for the wiki correctly, check out this step-by-step instruction.

If you want to use pictures in your profile or blogs please use those that are already on the wiki or upload your images on another wiki. (See this blog for more details on how to do this).

Please read the Image Guidelines before uploading any more images to the wiki. If you have any questions about these rules, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Lelouch Di Britannia Talk Page  08:44, December 12, 2014 (UTC)

Multi-Panel Issues Edit

Hey Buh6173, can you respond to the discussions in Forum:Multi-Panel images and [[File talk:Gomu Gomu no King Kong Gun.png]]? I'd like to get those resolved sooner rather than later. Thanks! JustSomeDude...  Talk | 20:19, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

That's not my name. Also, I've already said my piece. Using gifs is fine, but the current Kong Gun image is impossible to make out in its current size.The Pope 18:47, July 23, 2015 (UTC)

Account Name Edit

Hey Pope, sorry about the recent confusion surrounding your name. Did you know that you can request for staff to rename your account? It's pretty easy from what I understand, staff will just use a bot to handle everything a few days after the request goes through. You can only do it once, but if don't want to be "Buh6173", you might want to go though with this. Hope this helps! JustSomeDude...  Talk | 15:16, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

Re:Devil Fruits Category Edit

I personally don't have an answer as of yet. But whatever it is, I think it should be phrased as well enough as possible to get the point clearly across. "Physically Seen Devil Fruits" is rather clunky, as is "Shown Devil Fruits". Sorry if you don't like me removing the categories, but it's really important to put a lot of thought into new categories before adding them because if they're phrased poorly they're a pain to remove/rename. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 05:48, June 25, 2020 (UTC)

And in general, the best practice for handling disputed categories is to discuss it first, rather than "testing" new category names and cluttering the activity further. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 05:49, June 25, 2020 (UTC)

I attempted to discuss it on your profile. You never responded. I'm not sure why you then decided to post on my page, but fine. Then what would you want to go with, then? The Pope 05:04, June 27, 2020 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.