Talk:The Three Great Powers

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Layout

How you like it now? New Babylon

This should be a listing of the Three Great powers,equivalent ,at least partly,lets say List of monarchies .It also sumarizes the contents of several diferent pages and partialy gives brief information,that one could find within those separate articles. It has it's origin in the words of a Gorosei in episode 151,where he says "If the Three Great Powers were to collapse,the world itself would fall apart",so I believe the existence of this page is justified. New Babylon

I'd like to point out we have much better pages that cover everything on this page... Thus rendering it complete unneeded. That these pages do the job of explaining the 3 powers well, they contain greater and high quality detail. In other words... Why bother with this page at all? Why do we need such a page of sumarizes then with these pages:

• Shichibukai
• Yonkou
• Navy (One Piece)

This is badly orgainsed... Its been improved since I put the deletation template up... But its still below teir. You need to get others onto this page to help with it. You are struggling with this page it seems to me to get it together. Stop doing a one man job and go to the One Piece Main page and ask for help. Others will come (eventually). Ideally, you could have also linked this to your user page and instead of just setting it up, created a test page first and then reframed from creating an offical page until you got things together..

And if its 3 Great powers, why are there 4 groups on this page? This group isn't amongst the 3 great powers, but merely concerned about the balance of the three: World Government (One Piece)

My 2pence. Take it or leave it... But I think I've pointed out some good issues here that you really need to think over Babylon. Angel Emfrbl 19:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Removal of the 'delete' template

Can we NOT remove the template! We haven't discussed to get rid of it, and until we do I'm insisting it be kept. This is a worthless page... The other full pages have more detail. If you REALLY want this page to be kept, then discuss its reasons here.

Deleting the template will only result in me putting it back until we have a formal, proper discussion... Or the page gets considered its right to be deleted by the wikipedia guys, which ever comes first. Angel Emfrbl 20:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I suggest this page to be delete. It's useless since we have three other pages describing the three great powers. Cuttyflam 13:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

This page has been sitting here for a month now without a flickered of discussion from anyone except me and Cuttyflam... Disappointment all round. Angel Emfrbl 19:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Increditable... This page was open up for a bigger debate, but it lasted abotu 24 hours, maybe a little more or less. I'm disappointed since all the previous debates I've come across have all lasted at least a week, giving plenty of time for serious discussions and all sides to express opinions. On top of that, most people reconned the page should be deleted and yet it was kept. Something just isn't right here. Angel Emfrbl 10:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Copied from WP:DRV: The AfD was open for 10 days, longer then the 5 day minimum that is required and proper noticed was placed on the article[1] and WP:AfD[2]. The AfD was also listed on the anime and manga's deletion sorting page on the 22nd[3]. Lack of knowledge about an AfD is not a legitimate grounds to reopen the debate if the debate has been properly noted on the article and WP:AfD. --TheFarix (Talk) 16:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Things still don't seem right because this is a unwanted and uneeded article. It feels wrong that the whole debate was closed, just when the main stuff was beginning to happen on that page. I myself only just found out this page was AfD. I'm still disappointed this page exists, while I respect the outcome and those who took part I don't like that the page wasn't really discussed proper. If I had known it was about to close, I would have gone into far more detail as to why it should be deleted... Never mind. Too little too late. Angel Emfrbl 23:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Confused

isn't the three powers are the revolutionarys, Shinkinabi, and the younkou, ALso isn't the navy and Shincinabi are in the same team.

Its Shichibukai, Marines and Yonkou. ^-^' Angel Emfrbl 20:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Preposal

I'm preposing we shorten the Navy article and merge it here alongside the Shichibukai and Yonkou articles. This way we can ditch the seperate articles and loose those articles. We then can write in more detail about the balance of the 3 powers and loose the World Government section on here.

This would make this article more important then a pointless short-hand explaination page. Angel Emfrbl 12:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

We could just write about the balance without removing the information.(Justyn 18:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC))

Its a little more then just that. If all three sides are on the page then we can write the 3 powers into sinc with each other eaiser. Even if we talk about the three powers here, if you'd care to notice this is a WEAK article. I want to strengthen this page, but we can't do that without repeating info from the other pages anyway. Since this page got a no action vote when it was put up for deletetion we have to deal with it now. I don't see any way possible to do this while the infomation is seperate. Angel Emfrbl 20:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it would make way too long of a page, and all three groups are very seperate. keep seperate pages.

This article is rather difficult to deal with... Can we put it up for deletation again? If we do that though, we have to incite strong support for or against it. The end result of no consenus was a rather boring outcome. My second suggestion is delete it for now and recreate it when we have more info to build it up with at a later date. However there is a problem with being allowed to do that here on wikipedia.

Anyone else any suggestions? I'm all out, we have two tags on the main article page currently. If we come to no conclusion with any of this we should at least discuss how to loose them.  :/ Angel Emfrbl 21:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I think separated it's better: united the page would be too long. Cuttyflam 19:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

exactly. Besides, the Navy page is too long to be merged, and It can't and mustn't be shorten because as long as it is, it has the right amount of information. Blame Oda for creating a crazy number of characters XD —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.56.159.241 (talk) 00:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

Abotu characters... Outside main and reglaurs and a few other notable faces... You don't actually need to mention them. We have a lot of one chapter/panel characters on that page that can be dropped. No other page refs that character. Angel Emfrbl 07:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I want and proposing to keep it the way it is. At least do not delete it, if administrator wants to delete it merge it at least with the three great powers article. User: Aiord88 23:15, 30 July 2007

Should Monkey D. Dragon be referenced as one of the big powers? He is listed as the most wanted man in the world with undefinable bounty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.216.217.239 (talk) 15:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

There are three world powers, not four or five. We've listed them all. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 17:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Crocodile

Since he was stripped of his Shichibukai status, shouldn't he fall under a "Former Member" category beneath the member listing. This is further proved by Blackbeard assuming his place, yet he's still listed as a member. I'm just going to go ahead and edit it since I'm not deleting anything. If anyone objects, dont hesitate to reverse it and we can discuss if further. Ditch88 (talk) 11:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah! This was brought up before but you wasn't around for it... What ws the reason again? I'm actally guessing we should remove him entirly and just have him on the Baroques page since he isn't a member here. As Ditch states, he shouldn't be on the membership at all, but then agan, it does state in the text he is stripped of rank again. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 12:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well if you're gonna merge him with the Baroques works page then I agree, and we should remove his Shichibukai entry. Like you said Angel it says he was stripped of his rank, so someone reading the entry from the Baroques page will know he was once one. Its almost like putting Blackbeard under the Blackbeard pirates page and the Whitebeard pirates page. He doesn't need to be under both, especially since he's no longer part of the latter. Just like with Blackbeard you could link Crocodile to his Baroques page, but its kinda messy as things are now.

Heres an idea, in Blackbeards section of the shichibukai he has a link to the Blackbeard pirates page. Well add a link to Crocodile's pages where is says "replaced Sir Crocodile." That way he's still mention on the page and give reader the link to find out more about his character.

Furthermore, though its not about Crocodile. Blackbeard is currently listed under Whitebeard Pirates. Couldn't we do the same for that, add a link to Blackbeard Pirates' page under Ace? just some suggestions.Ditch88 (talk) 12:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

First, lets discuss Croc...

Heres an idea, in Blackbeards section of the shichibukai he has a link to the Blackbeard pirates page. Well add a link to Crocodile's pages where is says "replaced Sir Crocodile." That way he's still mention on the page and give reader the link to find out more about his character.

That sounds like a plan. I don't know what everyone else would agree on, but this to me sounds like our best option here.

BB is difficult, while he shouldn't be on the WB pirates page, he definately should be on either the shichibukai page or the BB pirates page. I'm suggesting BB piurates only to keep the crew + captain together... But truthfully he belongs to this page. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 13:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well since the idea for Crocodile involves BB staying on the Shichibukai page. I'm for keeping him on this page as well as the BB pirates page, while removing from the WB pirates page and just adding a link under Ace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ditch88 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

All I can say is give it a go. So long as you don't muff it up it should be fine. Worst comes to worst, voice it here: Talk:List of One Piece characters. We seem to be using that page now for voicing ideas.  :/ Angel Emfrbl (talk) 15:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Blackbeard is on the Whitebeard pirates page because he was a member of the Whitebeard pirates, and it's a notable part of his history. That section redirects to BB pirates anyway. I don't think it matters where Croc is, he can be on the BW article or this one, just not both. If he goes to BW, put a redirect under his header here, with a short snippet about him being stripped of his title. We can't put him under "former members" because there's no such thing as a former shichibukai when we speak in an out-of-universe perspective. We can't describe fictional events in past tense, it hurts the encyclopididity (Yohoho, made-up word) of the article. Ark (talk) 12:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

He should not be labled as former member, because that is writing from an in-universe perspective. At some point in the story, he is a member and therefore should be listed. (Keep in mind, that we are not at the end of the story looking back, but looking at the whole of the story from an OUTside perspective.) Saying, that he was stripped of the title during the course of the story is another matter. --Goodraise (talk) 22:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Jimbei

As far as I know Jimbei [Arlong's former captain] is still considered a Shichibukai, so is there a reason why he's not listed? Flaming Mustang (talk) 01:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Noted and fixed. Seems like we might also consider adding a spot for the 7th, yet unnamed Shichibukai, since the Yonkou section has the same thing.Kosenki (talk) 02:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

4th yonkou

Someone added Hancock to the list of yonkou, so i was wondering, is he really a yonkou or is it just vandalism or something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.99.105 (talk) 21:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Its gone, note left... We should keep it off the page. She was stated to be an emperess, but a yonkou she was not. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 23:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Crocodile's Name

Why is he listed as having Sir as his name? I recall sir was only his title in Alabasta. Why is it listed as his name? Gune (talk) 09:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Its been used even outside of Alabasta. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 12:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

What about explaining what the Gorousei is?

This trailing is the trailing sentence of the leading section of the article: The Gorousei express fear that if this balance of power is disrupted, the world itself could collapse around them.

No clue on what the Gorousei actually is; I assume it is a Japanese name that is usually translated into some of the other names used in this article, but this should be clarified in the opening section all the same. Luis Dantas (talk) 05:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The Gorousei are actually the five elders that lead the world government. I don't believe it's necessary, but i'll wait for other's opinions before i make a full desicion. (BTW, how do i sign?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.98.58 (talk) 22:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

7th (8th) Shichibukai?

If there were seven members of the Shichibukai, and Crocodile was replaced with Teach, should there not be an eigth person listed? Original seven plus Teach equals eight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.81.135 (talk) 21:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The World Government in One Piece has a limit of 7 Shichibukai, meaning there will never be an eight one. Also, Shichibukai means Seven Military Seas so there can't be an eight one. Krupted Soul (talk) 13:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Broken Links

Several Shichibukai (such as Mihawk) have character links, but these links just link back to this page, which has no information on them. Can this be fixed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.217.105 (talk) 01:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC) Okay, now only Sir Crocodile and Gecko Moria have this issue.74.193.217.105 (talk) 01:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

It seems you caught me there in the middle of a rather radical edit session. Everything should work again now. -- Goodraise (talk) 02:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I went on ahead and redirected Sir Crocodile to Baroque Work's page.74.193.217.105 (talk) 02:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

A bunch of pointless edits to an already perfectly good article. Quit doing things how YOU see fit and have a consensus, Goodraise. Gune (talk) 04:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

There has been a long discussion on the topic of merging characters and oranizations, mainly here and partly here. I am not alone. -- Goodraise (talk) 15:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

You didn't ask anybody else and went ahead and did it. You are not the only editor and this page was perfectly fine. Regardless if there was any discussion there was no consensus to do this. Gune (talk) 17:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I really hate to make this technicaly, but as you keep throwing the word "consensus" at me, consider this quote from the lead of WP:Consensus: "Consensus is typically reached as a natural and inherent product of the wiki-editing process; generally someone makes a change or addition to a page, and then everyone who reads the page has an opportunity to either leave the page as it is or change it." Consensus isn't established by asking everyone's oppinion and then do what everyone can agree upon, but the exact opposite way around. (Which is exactly what I am doing.) - "You didn't ask anybody else and went ahead and did it." That is precisely the way Wikipedia works. -- Goodraise (talk) 17:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Honestly I don't care about most of the pages but this page was perfectly fine. It was already too late too change anything anyway. This page should never have been merged. You even put characters in the wrong spots. Donquixote Doflamingo is not a member of Bellamy's crew. Jimbei is also not a member of Arlong's crew. Gune (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, as a single page it was quite all right. But looking at all those pages that you "don't care about", one can't but notice in what a chaotic state the One Piece articles are. That is what I am trying to fix. (Even if the steps in between are even worse.) If you found a mistake I made, great! Fix it, point it out, or do whatever you like. :) -- Goodraise (talk) 19:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

This page itself was fine how it was. You are actually making it far worst than it was. Your edits are ridiculous. Not only this page but to the Baroque Works page. None of that should have been changed at all. Gune (talk) 21:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Let's move this discussion over here. There I explained how I see the bigger picture. Go ahead and state your oppinion. -- Goodraise (talk) 00:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.