Template talk:One Piece

About the colours

Ahem... Yes, I know their aweful... Lol. But that can be changed after Its been completed right? Angel Emfrbl 12:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I know mine look awful, but I'm trying to edit, because I find very difficult to use all the tags. I'm just trying to have something like Naruto, but OP has so more characters and things... Anyway No problem. Cuttyflam 12:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Finally, i made all the changes that I wanted to do: I set the width at 80%, to avoid the template being to height. It seems that ahs got any thng from OP, but I think it will be better if we can improve together. Cuttyflam 13:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Ask yourself... Is your verison better? No. Prettier... But not better... I do not like the idea of scrolling to see half the links. I don't want a edit war here, can't you just adjust this but keep it the way it was? Unless the verison is better it should stay the same... And your verison just looks sloppy. Angel Emfrbl 13:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

For the color scheme, perhaps making the top bar yellow, with the other bars being sky blue. The "One Piece" on the top bar will be dark blue, while the words on the other bars are orange. I don't know the codes for the colors, so can anyone else do this? Sigmasonic X 22:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Cutty Flam is sorting that out... Would orange be better then yellow though? The brightness of the yellow... Burns your eyeballs out. Lol. Also the blue text I think needs to be darker to make it more visable against the blue background. It looks better then the dull grey and black it had before. Angel Emfrbl 09:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the yellow is too shiny. We can try orange for the bar, but for the text I think dark blue it's better. Cuttyflam 09:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... Have you the code for a paler orange? That one isn't much better then the yellow. We also loose the word for making it reappear after being hidden because the text for it is the same colour. :O Angel Emfrbl 10:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

A useful list of color:

• Orange: #FFA000
• Yellow: #FFFF00
• Dark Blue: #0000C8
• Sky Blue (Cornflower Blue): #6495ED

[General] Cuttyflam 10:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Wait a sec... Lets try all the backgrounds blue. Angel Emfrbl 10:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

On second thought... Ignore me thats too boring. O.o' Angel Emfrbl 10:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem :). I think it's better to leave so, now, waiting for other people opinions. Anyway, now it lokks good and clear to me. Cuttyflam 10:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Some minor, disputed changes.

I edited the template yesterday with some minor changes. Angel Emfrbl reverted it. Since I really don't want to start an edit-war, I've put it up for discussion. got Whiskey Peak, Little Garden, etc, etc. Like the original list on the old main page.

A. Main Character to Straw Hat Pirates. Duh, they're the main characters.

B. Editing Lucci and Spandam out, the entire CP9 in.

C. Villians to Enemies. Buggy and Wapol can hardly be called evil. Neither does Gedatsu and some others, but that's D.

D. Re-entering BW, CP9 and Skypiea's Priests in the Enemies part. Crocodile is merely the enemy in Arabasta, you've still got Little Garden and Whiskey Peak, both in which BW were the enemy, just not Croc. Like the original list, where you had "Baroque Works, Sir Crocodile", "Skypeia's Priests, Eneru" and just the CP9 near the end of the list.

Objections?

A I second this point.

B I suggest to take off Lucci from the villains, since, though he is the strongest in Enies Lobby arc, he'c not the leader of the opponents, being Spandam the head of the "villains".

C I think it's better to leave "Villains", beacuse they were all villains in their respective arcs, no matter what happend then. Note: also strahats can be considered villains from the World Government, since they are pirates, so it's diffucult to say who really is good or bad.

D The same for above, expecially for Cp9, who is not really evil, since it follows WG's orders. I think it's better to leave the name of the main villain for arc then to list all the pirate crew. It's better readable.--Cuttyflam 20:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

If we include every enemy, it'll get quite crowded. Only the main villains should be included, just like how the Character List used to be. If you mean just putting, for example, Cipher Pol under the Villains section, then that would be pointless, because they are already under Other Factions.Sigmasonic X 01:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

^ Thats my reason for revert, as stated by Sigmasonic X.

A - Pointless. Sure the main characters ARE the straw hats but still pointless. In future we might get characters who become the main characters and are not the straw hats. Then what would we do? Leave it as it is and have the template be inncorrect?

B. Leave that bit alone I say. Its fine the way it is. Mr Steal the Light is fine where he is, at least for now. I say wait until the end of the Arc before changing.

C. Buggy and warpol aren't evil hey...? Buggy held a town hostage and destroyed their buildings... He also tried to kill Luffy out of revenge... And Warpol was a selfish king. Are they evil? Go figure. Not the most evil characters but they still are evil. But then again I don't care on the name of enemies Vs villians... It won't matter to the template anyway. I agree with the name change. Actually when I reverted I forgot it had been changed and meant to change it back. Sorry. ^-^'

D. No, no, no. Leave them in the FACTIONS part. All agents + members link to those pages so... Yeah... Why both removing the pirate crews? Thats the most pointless thing I've heard. We already had the red-haired pirates and the whitebeard pirates before I even did this template and they were just floating around aimlessly on the 'other' section on the previous template we used. The whole point in the Factions part is so you can see the major players in the series and know who belongs with whom without having to go through 100 pages looking around them. Organise the factions section better... Yes... Remove it?

My 2 cents. I just like finding pages easy without having to search for them. Why I constructed this template in the first place. I don't care what happens to it so long as its improved in a sensible manner and not messed up. Angel Emfrbl 08:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Angel Emfrbl,

• A. Then we'll change it when that time comes. Although I really doubt something such as that happening, even if it will, then we'll just change it back. The electric-online-encyclopedia has a bit more advanced features than writing on rocks.
• B. The entire CP9 is the enemy, not just Lucci and Spandam. Not changing it means it's only half-way true, same thing as incorrect.
• C. Then even if they're not evil, what seems evil to one may not be the same for another. The one thing that is for sure? they are the enemies in some part of the series.
• D. I'm not suggesting to enter links for every single agent of BW.

I'm not suggesting removal of the section, just slight modification. Hardly noticeable. Kurigiri 21:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

A. I know that wikipedia has advanced features. Do what you want, as I said, I'm not bothered if you change the template so long as its improved. But I was trying to point something out to you. Another thing. Say you have a complete noob looking at the template, he might not know the 'straw hats' are main characters... But he'll know 'Main characters' are the main characters... (And if he/she doesn't... Well lets not discuss that lol).  ;)

B. Yeah but saying that, we have CP9 on the list... Your missing the point there, why have it TWICE. It doesn't matter. This not argue over that. Whoever listed them orginally was just listing the major foes from CP9 which was Lucci and Spandam, and I'm agreeing with them.

C. Again point made. In Warpol's case he is one of those characters that turns good. In Buggy's case its not so. Okay as I said though, I was gonna change it back so do what you want.

D. Hmmm... I still disagree, but I'm not gonna stop you at this point. We have the deletetion thing on I say try your idea for a few days at least. If it doesn't work so well we fall back on the orginal idea and say we'vew tried it and that it doesn't work. This template is one of the things suggested for deletetion so right now, any ideas are worth trying out.

In the meantime have a cookie. Angel Emfrbl 06:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I think we should just have the leaders of the organizations in the "Enemies" section. Afterall, if we include "Baroque Works" along with "Sir Crocodile" there, why shouldn't we include "Bellamy Pirates" along with "Bellamy" and so on? I feel it would make the template too top heavy, so I think it would be best for the leader and the organization to be kept seperate. Or, alternatively, we could simply forgo the leaders' articles and place the crews in the "Enemy" section, though this would make the "Pirate Crew" section practically useless. Sigmasonic X 15:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Baroque Works is a faction so should really be in that section... It looks odd now its in the enemies section, it seems just so out of place. Angel Emfrbl 20:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The edits I made to the Enemies section was only in order for it to match the original list from the past version of the main One Piece article. Still, because during the BW saga, croc is only the enemy in arabsta, and you've still got two islands without no enemy. Very not OP-like. Kurigiri 20:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think BW should be there though. Its a faction, I would think though Croc really counted for the whole of the Laboon - Alabasta arcs anyway since he was in charge of everything. Even in Little Garden, that was his doing, not percifically BWs, those agents were just following orders. The real enemy was always Croc. Angel Emfrbl 21:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Factions section

I have a suggestion for the factions section... Why not have it:

• Pirate crews
• World Govenemnt (including Ciphor Police, Marines, Shichibukai etc.)
• Other Important factions

Or is this suggesting too much??? Angel Emfrbl 09:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Console games added back in

Well I set up the basics of this page today so added it back in (can't say I'm proud of my effort... Because I didn't know how to approach it). Hmm... Everyone agree with it on whether its okay to replace that? It was removed previously. Angel Emfrbl 10:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

This template needs to be made smaller

Ack! I'm trying to save a dozen pages related to One Piece now because someone stepped in. One of the changes he has noted is the size of the template compared to some of the pages. I don't think its worth going back to two different templates, so anyone any ideas how to strink this. Man all this is making my head spin thinking about it. Ideas anyone? >_<' Angel Emfrbl 12:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Starting from the assumption that OP is one of the bigger manga ever, with arcs and characters, and will be bigger and bigger further, we can have a template with only the mdia information, the bigger arcs, the strw hats and the main pirate crews, taking off the villains and other people. I know, Naruto and Bleach templates are saller, but they have a few characters compared to OP.--Cuttyflam 16:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Better we can have a link to a general Category One Piece page, with two main links to charcters, sorted by crew or land, with the name only, and to story arcs. For arcs and characters we just have two templates.

Been there done that... It worked but not as well as this one. Which is the problem, its easy to use this template, despite its size you can access EVERYTHING in the series via one link or another.  :/ Angel Emfrbl 05:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so then "Better is Enemy to Good": let's leave the template big, but clear, than small and unclear.--Cuttyflam 10:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

< I like how you summed it up as "Better is Enemy to Good". Its not so much as that, its 'why settle for a good template when you can have better!", More words but better describes the situration with our template here. Lol. :p

BTW.... Before I forget... News update though: The guy who preposed deleting the template has been told by a few people he is wrong about the size. Until the discussion is finished though, lets keep all this in mind and keep discussing changes to it. Angel Emfrbl 12:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Might be kinda late, saying it a few months afterwords, but maybe we could just.. make the text smaller? Kurigiri 22:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Temporay Name

Most of the early translations are putting it down as '4 Emperors', so for now its what I can only write it as. Angel Emfrbl 10:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Needless spoilers

Is it really neccesary to have Garp's and Dragon's full name in the template? it's just spoilers. We could write just "Garp" and "Dragon". right? Kurigiri 22:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think they even deserved their own pages yet. Take a look, there isn't enough info to supply those pages. They SHOULDN'T have been created with that amount of info. Angel Emfrbl 22:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

New Navi Templates

I wanted to bring up the idea of designs of new templates for the One Piece articles. The Templates look like this: Story Arcs, Related Articles, Factions , Characters. Each Navi Template has a link to the other Templates, and as you can see, are smaller and neater but still allow easy movement through the articles.

Also the change to the General will look like this; As you can see "general" has been split into five separate templates, each to be placed on the pages featured in the template. RecklessFire 21:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

One Piece
Information Characters Related Articles Story Arcs		General One Piece Media Eiichiro Oda | Early One Piece | Manga Guide | Anime Episode Guide | Related Music | Console Games | Side Comics Story Arcs East Blue Saga | Baroque Works Saga | Skypiea Saga | CP9 Saga English adaptations Manga | Anime

If worst comes to worst RecklessFire, give it a trial run this Sunday and see how it goes for the next week. Say Sunday - Sunday. Nothing stopping you doing that at least. If it works, we can keep. If not we revert and you can have a second attempt at something else (if that is your wish). Though I still don't like the idea of seperate little templates, I don't have cribs with anyone doing. So how does that idea sound? At the end of the week, everyone voices an opinion as to how it went (if we get anyone I add -_-' ). Angel Emfrbl 23:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW you were missing one |} on that table here. I've put it in. Angel Emfrbl 23:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

That works. RecklessFire 15:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I only don't like the color pink there. The current colors seem better. - Tekoteko 08:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Considering its a Shonen manga, not the girlie manga types... Tekoteko has a point! XD Angel Emfrbl 10:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes well, that can be changed. I'm going ahead with the trial run. RecklessFire 18:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

My only problem is that breaking the template up would mean that in order to get to a different section whoever wants too would have to click on another link to get to the link they want to. And I'll correct the character template's mistakes... (Justyn 05:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC))

We can run a vote on the new template system next week to see how everyone was with it. My main crib right now is the left hand side of each template is a confusing mess... Its not OBIVOUS the words "characters" and other led to the other templates. Angel Emfrbl 07:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Explaination on Changes

Sunday I reverted the templates back to the orginal. Reason being is the same as the discussions we had a long time ago... Everyone prefers one single template (according to the discussion on the Main One Piece Talk Page).

For now though, the characters template has also been removed as per discussion on how to improve things. The characters now are only accessable on the main template via their factions pages. Then you can acess other characters by the Character Template. The trouble if we put the character back onto this template is that its likely to led to the same old "template too big" problem. In short we are going to have to accept things as they are until we can think up something better. Its sutiable have their links accessed via the factions pages, this is generally a standard and acceptable layout on other anime (or otherwise) wikipedia pages so we shouldn't have any problems with it here.

Other changes include the removal of the sagas section. This was because they are gone now (deleted + merged into one article). Otherall, the template is now smaller and essentially a lot more suitable to wikipedia. The character template needs tweaking, we'll have a discussion on that later.

Any further suggestions anyone has, feel free to bring them up. We can't touch the English adpations bit for now due to a cirrent discussion. Otherwise, this is the state of the template as of my signing this comment. Angel Emfrbl 09:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

season 11

The template does not appear to be displaying season 11 on my machine, despite clearing cache and giving the template a decent amount of time to update.じんない 04:06, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

That's because I haven't added season 11 yet. :) -- Goodraise (talk) 04:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

There you are. -- Goodraise (talk) 04:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

oi, season 10 is too big it needs to be broken up. Like at the archipelago arc on to the current episodes should be season 11, instead of merging it together with the thriller back arc - saiyo (November 13 2009)

The place to suggest that would be Talk:List of One Piece episodes (season 10). Regards, Goodraise 22:37, 13 November 2009 (UTC)