![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Why there is no article for other straw hat crew members? -- 2001:1970:5E94:6900:85E9:B68B:387C:67A7 ( talk) 05:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Tintor2 By this standards why characters like sanji, usop, rubin and other strawhats members can’t pass notability, and characters like zoro and nami pass this and had their articles -- 2001:1970:5E94:6900:95D8:4BBF:170D:17FA ( talk) 02:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Other characters like Sanji also have big reception and popularity, so what difference? and also they many versions on other languages -- 2001:1970:5E94:6900:C568:EC47:68F7:3996 ( talk) 02:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
To decrease the size of the page, perhaps a good option would be to create a page titled "List of pirates in One Piece" or "List of One Piece pirates", since those who occupy the page the most are the pirates. Adding the pirates of the series, with the exception of the protagonists (who would most appropriately stay on this page), in the sections "Four Emperors", "Seven Warlords of the Sea" and "Other pirates". -- BrookTheHumming ( talk) 00:49, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
I think splitting the significant pirate crews into their own pages is certainly a good idea. One Piece definitely passes the Notability guidelines for more character pages. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. There is a neutral point of view imbalance that needs to be corrected. In a section below I suggested the entire Straw Hats, Roger, Buggy, Ace, Akainu, Trafalgar Law, and five Four Emperors get their own pages. But I agree with BrookTheHumming and Rtat3 that the significant crews should get their own section. It would make sense to do something like this:
I think Smoker and Garp deserve their own pages. I do not think the Foxy Pirates qualify for their own page, but I do believe they should be a on a separate page for pirates. But I do think Crocodile and Doflamingo qualify for their own pages, perhaps Gecko Moria should have a page as well. I’ve continued this discussion below for further ease. -- Plumber ( talk) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I have noticed that there are anchors in the headings detailing some of the characters listed there. I was wondering if we can have the anchors placed before the character names so that the anchors can take the players there. How the anchors are feels like a big mess. Right? Also, should we have the members of the Pirates, the Navy, and other characters bulleted with their voice actor information added as well if it would help out the former? I'm just making a suggestion here. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 21:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
There are several characters here who definitely merit their own pages based on Wikipedia Notability guidelines. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. But unlike those franchises on Wikipedia, only Luffy, Zoro, Nami, Sanji, and Robin have their own character pages. This is a severe imbalance of neutral point of view standards. I would suggest the entire Straw Hat Pirates, Roger, Buggy the Clown, Ace, Akainu, Trafalgar Law, and the five Four Emperors get their own pages as a starting point. -- Plumber ( talk) 05:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Then be bold, write sandboxes with real world information especially with positive and negative commentary. Just because a series is popular doesn't mean the characters are Tintor2 ( talk) 18:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
For sure, starting off by restoring the Straw Hat Pirates pages and Shanks since they are in the intro to every volume. We can work from there. --
Plumber (
talk)
21:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@
Plumber: Reverted edits. The characters feel more like actually copypasted sections with refs included. Notability is not about the popularity of the series but more about how the media received the characters. See the recent GA
Yuta Okkotsu which has a lot of commentary about how the character was created and received by the media after working on it in a sandbox. The articles you created lacked this type of information need to pass the actual notability guidelines.
Tintor2 (
talk)
23:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
When I said be bold, I also said write first in your sandbox. The "articles" still completely fail notability so they shouldn't just be used like this. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
I think that these articles definitely needs better source and improves in their overall structures. I'm sure that there must be various reliable websites that, at least, can improve the reception of section of the characters, but, for example, what does make this website a reliable source? It doesn't seem more than a self-published website and the other sources are mostly citing the own manga, not that that is intrinsically bad, but more secondary sources are definitely needed. I agree with Tintor2. The articles need a lot of improvements before moving them to mainspace. The fact that the series is popular doesn't mean that automatically any article about their characters should be created and kept regardless of their awful shape. - Xexerss ( talk) 05:22, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
I completely agree the articles need to be improved. However we need to start somewhere — I am using the Luffy, Zoro, Nami, Sanji, Robin and Yuta Okkotsu pages as a model. -- Plumber ( talk) 22:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@ Plumber: You keep dodging the point I made twice. We first make a sandbox until it is suitable for an appropiate article. See Wikipedia:Drafts among other guidelines. We first make drafts of character article until it is approved. These two characters were so rushed that had to be reverted. Second, while Chopper seems to pass guidelines the writing is quite lazy as it's just filled with rather than paragraphing. You also copypasted the entire information from the section, citation style included rather than using proper references. The whole abilities, personalities and descrtiption are not suitable at all in Wikipedia considering it's pretty much WP:fancruft. Shanks is pretty much worse than Chopper as it uses one single third party source three times so I don't think it passes such guidelines. Don't make more reverts until checking the guidelines and reaching a consensus. Tintor2 ( talk) 22:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the link to Wikipedia:Drafts, it is most helpful — you may remember it is also voluntary. Your point on Chopper is unclear, I am not sure what “filled with rather than paragraphing” means, but it was already mentioned the other Straw Hat pages were used as a model. Feel free to improve those pages for any fancruft violations. As for consensus, multiple editors are improving the Shanks article while only you are reverting it. @ Yujoong: made a point to reach out to me and said they would keep working on it. I agree with you that there needs to be more sources on Shanks’ critical reception. -- Plumber ( talk) 23:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Guys, for the last time. Read before editing. The guideline Wikipedia:Consensus explains this is not voting but applying to the guidelines. You are only being annoying when attacking other users rather than attempting to constructive. I already told another user how notability works and he just ignored me. Tintor2 ( talk) 02:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
This comes from above discussions but I’ve moved it here for ease of access. To reiterate, One Piece definitely passes the Notability guidelines for more character pages. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. This is a neutral point of view imbalance that needs to be corrected by creating pages for more significant characters and I agree with the IP address in 2020, @ BrookTheHumming:, @ Rtkat3: that the Straw Hats should get their pages as well as other significant characters, and important crews should get their own section. Here is an above proposal formatted more clearly:
List of pirates in One Piece
|
---|
|
Straw Hat Pirates
|
---|
|
Roger Pirates
|
---|
|
Four Emperors (One Piece)
|
---|
|
Seven Warlords of the Sea
|
---|
|
World Government (One Piece)
|
---|
|
List of One Piece characters by location
|
---|
|
What’s the consensus here? -- Plumber ( talk) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
So here’s a road map for expanding the amount of One Piece articles:
According to
Wikipedia:Splitting, pages over 100 kB "Almost certainly should be divided."
An analysis finds this page is 206.58 kB, more than double that! Clearly this page should be divided, it's just how.
A TL;DR of my above proposal is to split this article into these constituent parts:
That's it, now time to see what the consensus is. -- Plumber ( talk) 23:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
This proposal is focused on splitting this List page which is over 100 kb of prose into constituent pages. Let's not get distracted here. Two are in favor of this proposal:
Two more favor the split in regard for a page for the Straw Hats specifically, but have not commented on the other articles. -- Plumber ( talk) 02:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I imagine something like this:
List of One Piece characters
List of One Piece pirates
BrookTheHumming ( talk) 14:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@ Haleth: About the Straw Hats, there are free pictures in wikicommons about Merry that could be used as some sort of context section if the article is created. Tintor2 ( talk) 22:14, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Here is an update. I have sorted the locations on the page by their respectful oceans. Other split section tags have been added so that we can see if more people will voice their opinions in this ongoing section-splitting discussion. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 01:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
I'm been thinking of restructuring in this page by having characters and groups fall under ether the Straw Hat Pirates (protagonists), supporting characters (Straw Hats' allies and others), and antagonists. My problem is that people who are not very familiar with One Piece may know that the main cast makes up the Straw Hats, but not necessarily know or remember what roles other characters and groups fall into. Plus, I don't really see the point alphabetize the index since no other battle Shonen manga/anime does this especially the big ones.-- ExplorerX19 ( talk) 06:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
List of One Piece characters has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
auhority = authority 2603:8000:D300:D0F:AD67:3F25:9890:86C9 ( talk) 03:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
i am Available pirates 41.116.173.167 ( talk) 10:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
List of One Piece characters has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In Yasopps page, add that he is played by Stevel Marc in the One Piece Live Action adaptation series. GalactiicGalaxyy123 ( talk) 22:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Why there is no article for other straw hat crew members? -- 2001:1970:5E94:6900:85E9:B68B:387C:67A7 ( talk) 05:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Tintor2 By this standards why characters like sanji, usop, rubin and other strawhats members can’t pass notability, and characters like zoro and nami pass this and had their articles -- 2001:1970:5E94:6900:95D8:4BBF:170D:17FA ( talk) 02:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Other characters like Sanji also have big reception and popularity, so what difference? and also they many versions on other languages -- 2001:1970:5E94:6900:C568:EC47:68F7:3996 ( talk) 02:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
To decrease the size of the page, perhaps a good option would be to create a page titled "List of pirates in One Piece" or "List of One Piece pirates", since those who occupy the page the most are the pirates. Adding the pirates of the series, with the exception of the protagonists (who would most appropriately stay on this page), in the sections "Four Emperors", "Seven Warlords of the Sea" and "Other pirates". -- BrookTheHumming ( talk) 00:49, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
I think splitting the significant pirate crews into their own pages is certainly a good idea. One Piece definitely passes the Notability guidelines for more character pages. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. There is a neutral point of view imbalance that needs to be corrected. In a section below I suggested the entire Straw Hats, Roger, Buggy, Ace, Akainu, Trafalgar Law, and five Four Emperors get their own pages. But I agree with BrookTheHumming and Rtat3 that the significant crews should get their own section. It would make sense to do something like this:
I think Smoker and Garp deserve their own pages. I do not think the Foxy Pirates qualify for their own page, but I do believe they should be a on a separate page for pirates. But I do think Crocodile and Doflamingo qualify for their own pages, perhaps Gecko Moria should have a page as well. I’ve continued this discussion below for further ease. -- Plumber ( talk) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I have noticed that there are anchors in the headings detailing some of the characters listed there. I was wondering if we can have the anchors placed before the character names so that the anchors can take the players there. How the anchors are feels like a big mess. Right? Also, should we have the members of the Pirates, the Navy, and other characters bulleted with their voice actor information added as well if it would help out the former? I'm just making a suggestion here. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 21:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
There are several characters here who definitely merit their own pages based on Wikipedia Notability guidelines. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. But unlike those franchises on Wikipedia, only Luffy, Zoro, Nami, Sanji, and Robin have their own character pages. This is a severe imbalance of neutral point of view standards. I would suggest the entire Straw Hat Pirates, Roger, Buggy the Clown, Ace, Akainu, Trafalgar Law, and the five Four Emperors get their own pages as a starting point. -- Plumber ( talk) 05:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Then be bold, write sandboxes with real world information especially with positive and negative commentary. Just because a series is popular doesn't mean the characters are Tintor2 ( talk) 18:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
For sure, starting off by restoring the Straw Hat Pirates pages and Shanks since they are in the intro to every volume. We can work from there. --
Plumber (
talk)
21:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@
Plumber: Reverted edits. The characters feel more like actually copypasted sections with refs included. Notability is not about the popularity of the series but more about how the media received the characters. See the recent GA
Yuta Okkotsu which has a lot of commentary about how the character was created and received by the media after working on it in a sandbox. The articles you created lacked this type of information need to pass the actual notability guidelines.
Tintor2 (
talk)
23:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
When I said be bold, I also said write first in your sandbox. The "articles" still completely fail notability so they shouldn't just be used like this. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
I think that these articles definitely needs better source and improves in their overall structures. I'm sure that there must be various reliable websites that, at least, can improve the reception of section of the characters, but, for example, what does make this website a reliable source? It doesn't seem more than a self-published website and the other sources are mostly citing the own manga, not that that is intrinsically bad, but more secondary sources are definitely needed. I agree with Tintor2. The articles need a lot of improvements before moving them to mainspace. The fact that the series is popular doesn't mean that automatically any article about their characters should be created and kept regardless of their awful shape. - Xexerss ( talk) 05:22, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
I completely agree the articles need to be improved. However we need to start somewhere — I am using the Luffy, Zoro, Nami, Sanji, Robin and Yuta Okkotsu pages as a model. -- Plumber ( talk) 22:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@ Plumber: You keep dodging the point I made twice. We first make a sandbox until it is suitable for an appropiate article. See Wikipedia:Drafts among other guidelines. We first make drafts of character article until it is approved. These two characters were so rushed that had to be reverted. Second, while Chopper seems to pass guidelines the writing is quite lazy as it's just filled with rather than paragraphing. You also copypasted the entire information from the section, citation style included rather than using proper references. The whole abilities, personalities and descrtiption are not suitable at all in Wikipedia considering it's pretty much WP:fancruft. Shanks is pretty much worse than Chopper as it uses one single third party source three times so I don't think it passes such guidelines. Don't make more reverts until checking the guidelines and reaching a consensus. Tintor2 ( talk) 22:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the link to Wikipedia:Drafts, it is most helpful — you may remember it is also voluntary. Your point on Chopper is unclear, I am not sure what “filled with rather than paragraphing” means, but it was already mentioned the other Straw Hat pages were used as a model. Feel free to improve those pages for any fancruft violations. As for consensus, multiple editors are improving the Shanks article while only you are reverting it. @ Yujoong: made a point to reach out to me and said they would keep working on it. I agree with you that there needs to be more sources on Shanks’ critical reception. -- Plumber ( talk) 23:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Guys, for the last time. Read before editing. The guideline Wikipedia:Consensus explains this is not voting but applying to the guidelines. You are only being annoying when attacking other users rather than attempting to constructive. I already told another user how notability works and he just ignored me. Tintor2 ( talk) 02:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
This comes from above discussions but I’ve moved it here for ease of access. To reiterate, One Piece definitely passes the Notability guidelines for more character pages. One Piece is a higher-grossing media franchise than The Lord of the Rings and has sold more comics than Batman. This is a neutral point of view imbalance that needs to be corrected by creating pages for more significant characters and I agree with the IP address in 2020, @ BrookTheHumming:, @ Rtkat3: that the Straw Hats should get their pages as well as other significant characters, and important crews should get their own section. Here is an above proposal formatted more clearly:
List of pirates in One Piece
|
---|
|
Straw Hat Pirates
|
---|
|
Roger Pirates
|
---|
|
Four Emperors (One Piece)
|
---|
|
Seven Warlords of the Sea
|
---|
|
World Government (One Piece)
|
---|
|
List of One Piece characters by location
|
---|
|
What’s the consensus here? -- Plumber ( talk) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
So here’s a road map for expanding the amount of One Piece articles:
According to
Wikipedia:Splitting, pages over 100 kB "Almost certainly should be divided."
An analysis finds this page is 206.58 kB, more than double that! Clearly this page should be divided, it's just how.
A TL;DR of my above proposal is to split this article into these constituent parts:
That's it, now time to see what the consensus is. -- Plumber ( talk) 23:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
This proposal is focused on splitting this List page which is over 100 kb of prose into constituent pages. Let's not get distracted here. Two are in favor of this proposal:
Two more favor the split in regard for a page for the Straw Hats specifically, but have not commented on the other articles. -- Plumber ( talk) 02:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I imagine something like this:
List of One Piece characters
List of One Piece pirates
BrookTheHumming ( talk) 14:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@ Haleth: About the Straw Hats, there are free pictures in wikicommons about Merry that could be used as some sort of context section if the article is created. Tintor2 ( talk) 22:14, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Here is an update. I have sorted the locations on the page by their respectful oceans. Other split section tags have been added so that we can see if more people will voice their opinions in this ongoing section-splitting discussion. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 01:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
I'm been thinking of restructuring in this page by having characters and groups fall under ether the Straw Hat Pirates (protagonists), supporting characters (Straw Hats' allies and others), and antagonists. My problem is that people who are not very familiar with One Piece may know that the main cast makes up the Straw Hats, but not necessarily know or remember what roles other characters and groups fall into. Plus, I don't really see the point alphabetize the index since no other battle Shonen manga/anime does this especially the big ones.-- ExplorerX19 ( talk) 06:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
List of One Piece characters has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
auhority = authority 2603:8000:D300:D0F:AD67:3F25:9890:86C9 ( talk) 03:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
i am Available pirates 41.116.173.167 ( talk) 10:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
List of One Piece characters has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In Yasopps page, add that he is played by Stevel Marc in the One Piece Live Action adaptation series. GalactiicGalaxyy123 ( talk) 22:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)